Incidental Takes of Marine Mammals During Specified Activities; Marine Seismic Survey in the Arctic Ocean, August to September, 2010, 60174-60203 [2010-24335]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60174-60203]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24335]



[[Page 60173]]

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

Part II





Department of Commerce





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



National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration



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



Incidental Takes of Marine Mammals During Specified Activities; Marine 
Seismic Survey in the Arctic Ocean, August to September, 2010; Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2010 
/ Notices

[[Page 60174]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XW05


Incidental Takes of Marine Mammals During Specified Activities; 
Marine Seismic Survey in the Arctic Ocean, August to September, 2010

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental take authorization.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) 
regulations, notification is hereby given that NMFS issued an 
Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to the U.S. Geological Survey 
(USGS) for the take of small numbers of marine mammals, by Level B 
harassment, incidental to conducting a marine seismic survey in the 
Arctic Ocean during August to September, 2010.

DATES: Effective August 11, 2010, through October 21, 2010.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the IHA and application are available by writing 
to P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation, and Education 
Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 or by 
telephoning the contact listed here.
    A copy of the application containing a list of the references 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 be viewed, by appointment, during regular business hours, at 
the aforementioned address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Howard Goldstein or Jolie Harrison, 
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 301-713-2289.

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 (Secretary) to allow, upon request, 
the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine 
mammals by United States (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.
    An authorization for incidental taking of small numbers of marine 
mammals 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, 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 United States can apply for an authorization 
not to exceed one year to incidentally take small numbers of marine 
mammals by harassment. 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''].

16 U.S.C. 1362(18)
    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 for 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.

Summary of Request

    On March 9, 2010, NMFS received an IHA application and a draft 
Environmental Assessment (EA) from USGS for the taking, by Level B 
harassment only, of small numbers of several species of marine mammals 
incidental to conducting a marine seismic survey in the Arctic Ocean 
during August to September, 2010. NMFS received a revised IHA 
application on June 1, 2010, and a final EA on August 6, 2010.

Description of the Specified Activity

    USGS is conducting a marine geophysical (seismic reflection/
refraction) and bathymetric survey in the Arctic Ocean in August and 
September, 2010 (see Tables 1 and 2, and Figure 3 of the IHA 
application). The survey is being conducted from the Canadian Coast 
Guard (CCG) vessel CCGS Louis S. St. Laurent (St. Laurent) which will 
be accompanied by the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter (USCGC) Healy, both of 
which are polar-class icebreakers. Descriptions of the vessels and 
their specifications are presented in Appendix A of the IHA 
application. The two vessels operate in tandem in the presence of ice 
but may diverge and operate independently in open water. Some minor 
deviation of the dates is possible, depending on logistics and weather 
(i.e., the cruise may depart earlier or be extended due to poor 
weather; there could be extra days of seismic operations if collected 
data are of sub-standard quality).
    One CCG helicopter is available for deployment from the St. Laurent 
for ice reconnaissance and crew transfers between the vessels during 
survey operations. Helicopter transfer of crew from the Healy is also 
planned for approximately one day during a ship-to-shore crew change at 
Barrow, Alaska at the end of the survey. The helicopter operations in 
Barrow will be conducted under Department of Interior (DOI) contract. 
Daily helicopter operations are anticipated pending weather conditions. 
Spot bathymetry will also be conducted from the helicopter outside U.S. 
waters.
    Acoustic sources onboard the St. Laurent include an airgun array 
comprised of three Sercel G-airguns and a Knudsen 320BR ``Chirp'' pulse 
echosounder operating at 12 kHz. The St. Laurent also tows a 3 to 5 kHz 
sub-bottom profiler while in open water and when not working with the 
Healy. The airgun array consists of two 500 in\3\ and one 150 in\3\ 
airguns for an overall discharge of 1,150 in\3\. Table 2 of the IHA 
application presents different sound pressure level (SPL) radii of the 
airgun array. Acoustic sources being operated on the St. Laurent are 
described in detail in Section VII and Appendix B in the IHA 
application. The seismic array and a hydrophone streamer towed from the 
St. Laurent operate under the provisions of a Canadian authorization 
based on Canada's environmental assessment of the proposed survey while 
in Canadian or international waters, and under the provisions of an IHA 
issued to the USGS by NMFS in U.S. waters. NMFS cannot issue an IHA 
directly to a non-U.S.

[[Page 60175]]

citizen, however, the Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) has written a 
Categorical Declaration stating that ``while in U.S. waters (i.e., the 
U.S. 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone), the GSC will comply with any 
and all environmental mitigation measures required by the U.S. NMFS 
and/or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.'' The St. Laurent follows 
the lead of the Healy. The Healy breaks and clears ice approximately 
1.6 to 3.2 km (1 to 2 miles [mi]) in advance of the St. Laurent. In 
situations where the array (and hydrophone streamer) cannot be towed 
safely due to ice cover, the St. Laurent may escort the Healy. The 
Healy uses a multi-beam echosounder (Kongsberg EM122), a sub-bottom 
profiler (Knudsen 3.5 kHz Chirp), and a ``piloting'' echosounder (ODEC 
1500) continuously when underway and during the seismic profiling. 
Acoustic Doppler current profilers (75 kHz and 150 kHz) may also be 
used on the Healy. The Healy's acoustic systems are described in 
further detail in Section VII and Appendix B of the IHA application.
    In addition to the hydrophone streamer, marine sonobuoys are 
deployed to acquire wide angle reflection and refraction data for 
velocity determination to convert seismic reflection travel time to 
depth. Sonobuoys are deployed off the stern of the St. Laurent 
approximately every eight hours during seismic operations with as many 
as three deployments per day. The sonobuoy's hydrophone activates at a 
water depth of approximately 60 m (196.9 ft) and seismic signals are 
communicated via radio to the St. Laurent. The sonobuoys are pre-set to 
scuttle (i.e., deliberately sink) eight hours after activation.
    The program within U.S. waters consists of approximately 806 km 
(500.8 mi) of survey transect line, not including transits when the 
airguns are not operating (see Figure 1 and Table 1 of the IHA 
application). U.S. priorities include another 997 km (619.5 mi) of 
survey lines north of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), for a 
total of 1,804 km (1,121 mi) of tracklines of interest to the U.S. 
Table 1 of the IHA application lists all U.S. priority tracklines; 
Figure 1 of the IHA application includes all U.S. priority tracks and 
the area of interest to Canada near the proposed U.S. tracklines. Water 
depths within the U.S. study area range from approximately 1,900 to 
4,000 m (6,233.5 to 13,123.4 ft) (see Figure 1 of the IHA application). 
There may be additional seismic operations associated with airgun 
testing, start-up, and repeat coverage of any areas where initial data 
quality is sub-standard. The tracklines being surveyed in U.S. waters 
include the southern 263.8 km (164 mi) of the line that runs North-
South in the western EEZ, the southern 264.5 km (164.4 mi) of the line 
that runs North--South in the central EEZ, and 277.7 km (172.6 mi) of 
trackline that connects the two (see Table 1 here and in Figure 1 of 
the IHA application). The IHA application requested the authorization 
of incidental takes of marine mammals for activities within U.S. 
waters. The survey line nearest to shore in U.S. waters is 
approximately 116 km (63 nmi) offshore at its closest point.

Table 1--U.S. Priority Tracklines for USGS and Geological Survey of Canada (GSC) 2010 Extended Continental Shelf
                              Survey in the Northern Beaufort Sea and Arctic Ocean
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Time  (Hour
           Location               End point 1      End point 2       Kilometer     Nautical mile  [hr])  @ 4 nmi/
                                                                       (km)            (nmi)            hr
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NS in central EEZ (south)....  71.22[deg]        72.27[deg]                  118              64              16
                                North;            North;
                                145.17[deg]       145.41[deg]
                                West.             West.
NS in central EEZ (north)....  72.27[deg]        73.92[deg]                  183             100              25
                                North;            North;
                                145.41[deg]       145.30[deg]
                                West.             West.
Central-western EEZ connector  73.92[deg]        71.84[deg]                  317             171              43
                                North;            North;
                                145.30[deg]       151.82[deg]
                                West.             West.
NS in western EEZ............  71.84[deg]        74.32[deg]                  281             152              39
                                North;            North;
                                151.82[deg]       150.30[deg]
                                West.             West.
South Northwind Ridge........  74.32[deg]        74.96[deg]                  239             129              32
                                North;            North;
                                150.30[deg]       158.01[deg]
                                West.             West.
Northwind Ridge connector....  74.96[deg]        76.30[deg]                  161              87              22
                                North;            North;
                                158.01[deg]       155.88[deg]
                                West.             West.
Mid-Northwind Ridge..........  76.30[deg]        75.41[deg]                  274             148              37
                                North;            North;
                                155.88[deg]       146.50[deg]
                                West.             West.
Northwind Ridge connector....  75.41[deg]        76.57[deg]                  129              70              17
                                North;            North;
                                146.50[deg]       146.82[deg]
                                West.             West.
Mid-Northwind Ridge..........  76.57[deg]        76.49[deg]                  102              55              14
                                North;            North;
                                146.82[deg]       150.73[deg]
                                West.             West.
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Totals...................  ................  ...............           1,804             976             245
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The two vessels operate cooperatively during the seismic survey. 
The St. Laurent conducts seismic operations using an airgun array and 
also operates a 12 kHz Chirp echosounder. The St. Laurent also operates 
a 3 to 5 kHz sub-bottom profiler in open water when not working with 
the Healy. The Healy normally escorts the St. Laurent in ice cover, and 
continuously operates a bathymetric multi-beam echosounder, a 3.5 kHz 
Chirp sub-bottom profiler, a piloting echosounder, and two acoustic 
Doppler current profilers.
    The St. Laurent accessed the survey area from Canada and 
rendezvoused with the Healy on approximately August 10, 2010; the Healy 
approached the survey area from the Bering Straits. The St. Laurent 
deploys a relatively small airgun array comprised of three G-airguns 
and a single hydrophone streamer approximately 300 m (984 ft) in 
length. The airgun array consists of two 500 in \3\ and one 150 in \3\ 
airguns for an overall discharge of 1,150 in \3\. The St. Laurent 
follows the lead of the Healy which operates approximately 1.9 to 3.8 
km (1 to 2 nmi) ahead of the St. Laurent. In ice conditions where 
seismic gear cannot be safely towed, the St. Laurent escorts the Healy 
to optimize multi-beam bathymetry data collection. If extended open-
water conditions are encountered, Healy and St. Laurent may operate 
independently. After completion of the survey the St. Laurent will 
return to port in Canada, and the Healy will change crew at Barrow via 
helicopter or surface conveyance before continuing on another project.

Vessel Specifications

    The CCGS St. Laurent was built in 1969 by Canadian Vickers Ltd. in 
Montreal, Quebec, and underwent an extensive modernization in Halifax, 
Nova Scotia between 1988 to 1993. The St. Laurent is based at CCG Base 
Dartmouth in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. Current vessel activities involve 
summer voyages to the Canadian Arctic for sealifts to various coastal 
communities and scientific expeditions. A description of the St. 
Laurent with vessel specifications is presented in Appendix A of the 
IHA application and is available online at: https://www.ccg-

[[Page 60176]]

gcc.gc.ca/eng/Fleet/Vessels?id=1111&info=5&subinfo.
    The Healy is designed to conduct a wide range of research 
activities, providing more than 390.2 m \2\ (4,200 ft \2\) of 
scientific laboratory space, numerous electronic sensor systems, 
oceanographic winches, and accommodations for up to 50 scientists. The 
Healy is designed to break 1.4 m (4.5 ft) of ice continuously at 5.6 
km/hour (three knots) and can operate in temperatures as low as -45.6 C 
(-50 degrees F). The Healy is a USCG icebreaker, capable of traveling 
at 5.6 km/hour (three knots) through 1.4 m (4.5 ft) of ice. A ``Central 
Power Plant,'' four Sultzer 12Z AU40S diesel generators, provides 
electric power for propulsion and ship's services through a 60 Hz, 
three-phase common bus distribution system. Propulsion power is 
provided by two electric AC Synchronous, 11.2 MW drive motors, fed from 
the common bus through a Cycloconverter system, that turn two fixed-
pitch, four-bladed propellers.
    The science community provided invaluable input on lab lay-outs and 
science capabilities during design and construction of the ship. The 
Healy is also a capable platform for supporting other potential 
missions in the polar regions, including logistics, search and rescue, 
ship escort, environmental protection, and enforcement of laws and 
treaties, and will also serve as the platform from which vessel-based 
Protected Species Observers (PSOs) will watch for marine mammals before 
and during airgun operations. Other details of the Healy can be found 
in Appendix A of the IHA application.
    NMFS believes that the realistic possibility of a ship-strike of a 
marine mammal by the vessel during research operations and in-transit 
during the proposed survey is discountable. The probability of a ship 
strike resulting in an injury or mortality of an animal has been 
associated with ship speed; however, it is highly unlikely that the 
proposed seismic survey would increase the rate of injury, serious 
injury, or mortality given the St. Laurent and Healy's slow survey 
speed.

Acoustic Source Specifications--Seismic Airguns and Radii

    The seismic source for the seismic survey is comprised of three 
Sercel G-airguns with a total volume of 1,150 in \3\. The three-airgun 
array is comprised of two 500 in \3\ and one 150 in \3\ G-airguns in a 
triangular configuration (see Figure B-1 in the IHA application). The 
single 150 in \3\ G-airgun is used if a power-down is necessary for 
mitigation. The G-airgun array is towed behind the St. Laurent at a 
depth of approximately 11 m (36.1 ft) (see Figure B-2 in the IHA 
application) along predetermined lines in water depths ranging from 
1,900 to 4,000 m (6,233.6 to 13,123.4 ft). One streamer approximately 
232 m (761.2 ft) in length with a single hydrophone is towed behind the 
airgun array at a depth of approximately 9 to 30 m (29.5 to 98.4 ft).
    A square wave trigger signal is supplied to the firing system 
hardware by a FEI-Zyfer GPStarplus Clock model 565, based on GPS time 
(typically at approximately 14 to 20 sec intervals). Vessel speed is 
approximately 10.2 km/hour (5.5 knots) resulting in a shot interval 
ranging from approximately 39 to 56 m (128 to 183.7 ft). G-airgun 
firing and synchronization are controlled by a RealTime Systems 
LongShot fire controller, which sends a voltage to the airgun solenoid 
to trigger firing with approximately 54.8 ms delay between trigger and 
fire point.
    Pressurized air for the pneumatic G-airguns is supplied by two 
Hurricane compressors, model 6T-276-44SB/2500. These are air cooled, 
containerized compressor systems. Each compressor is powered by a C13 
Caterpillar engine which turns a rotary screw first stage compressor 
and a three stage piston compressor capable of developing a total air 
volume of 600 SCFM @ 2,500 pounds per square inch (PSI). The seismic 
system is operated at 1,950 PSI and one compressor could easily supply 
sufficient volume of air under appropriate pressure.
    Seismic acquisition requires a watchkeeper in the seismic lab and 
another in the compressor container. The seismic lab watchkeeper is 
responsible for data acquisition/recording, watching over-the-side 
equipment, airgun firing and log keeping. A remote screen permits 
monitoring of compressor pressures and alerts, as well as communication 
with the compressor watchkeeper. The compressor watchkeeper is required 
to monitor the compressor for any emergency shut-down and provide 
general maintenance that might be required during operations.
    Sound level radii for the proposed three airgun array were measured 
in 2009 during a seismic calibration (Mosher et al., 2009; Roth and 
Schmidt, 2010). A transmission loss model was then constructed assuming 
spherical (20LogR) spreading and using the source level estimate 235 dB 
re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) 0-peak; 225 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) from the 
measurements. The use of 20LogR spreading fit the data well out to 
approximately 1 km (0.6 mi) where variability in measured vales 
increased (see Appendix B in the IHA application for more details and a 
figure of the transmission loss model compared to the measurement 
data). Additionally, the Gundalf modeling package was used to model the 
airgun array and estimated a source level output of 236.7 dB 0-peak 
(226.7 dB [rms]). Using this slightly stronger source level estimate 
and a 20LogR spreading the 180 and 190 dB (rms) radii are estimated to 
be 216 m (708.7 ft) and 68 m (223.1 ft), respectively. As a 
conservative measure for the proposed safety radii, the sound level 
radii indicated by the empirical data and source models have been 
increased to 500 m (1,640.4 ft) for the 180 dB isopleths and to 100 m 
(328 ft) of the 190 dB isopleths.
    The rms received levels that are used as impact criteria for marine 
mammals are not directly comparable to the peak or peak-to-peak values 
normally used to characterize source levels of airguns. The measurement 
units used above to describe the airgun source, peak or peak-to-peak 
dB, are always higher than the rms dB referred to in much of the 
biological literature. A measured received level of 160 dB (rms) in the 
far field would typically correspond to a peak measurement of about 170 
to 172 dB, at the same location (Greene, 1997; McCauley et al., 1998, 
2000). The precise difference between rms and peak or peak-to-peak 
values for a given pulse depends on the frequency content and duration 
of the pulse, among other factors. However, the rms level is always 
lower than the peak or peak-to-peak level for an airgun-type source.

[[Page 60177]]



 Table 2--Distances to Which Sound Levels Greater Than or Equal to 190, 180, and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) Could
 Be Received in Deep (Greater Than 1,000 m) Water During the Survey in the Arctic Ocean, August 7, to September
                                                     3, 2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Tow depth                            Predicted received RMS distances (m)
          Source and volume             (m) ice/         Water depth      --------------------------------------
                                       open water                             190 dB       180 dB       160 dB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single Mitigation Airgun (150 in\3\)       11/6-7  Deep (>1,000 m).......           30           75          750
Three G-airguns (1,150 in\3\).......       11/6-7  Deep (>1,000 m).......          100          500        2,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Acoustic Source Specifications--Multibeam Echosounders (MBES), Sub-
Bottom Profilers (SBP) and Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (ADCP)

    Along with the airgun operations, additional acoustic systems that 
are operated during the cruise include a 12 kHz Chirp echosounder and a 
3-5 kHz SBP from the St. Laurent. The Healy operates a 12 kHz Kongsberg 
MBES, a Knudsen 320BR profiler, a piloting echosounder, and two ADCPs. 
These sources are operated throughout most of the cruise to map 
bathymetry, as necessary, to meet the geophysical science objectives. 
During seismic operations, these sources are deployed from the St. 
Laurent and the Healy and generally operate simultaneously with the 
airgun array deployed from the St. Laurent.
    The Knudsen 320BR echosounder provides information on depth and 
bottom profile. The Knudsen 320BR is a dual-frequency system with 
operating frequencies of 3.5 and 12 kHz, however, the unit functions at 
the higher frequency, 12 kHz, because the 3.5 kHz transducer is not 
installed.
    While the Knudsen 320BR operates at 12 kHz, its calculated maximum 
source level (downward) is 215 dB re [mu]Pa at 1 m. The pulse duration 
is typically 1.5 to 5 ms with a bandwidth of 3 kHz (FM sweep from 3 kHz 
to 6 kHz). The repetition rate is range dependent, but the maximum is a 
one percent duty cycle. Typical repetition rate is between \1/2\ s (in 
shallow water) to 8 s in deep water. A single 12 kHz transducer (sub-
bottom) array, consisting of 16 elements in a 4x4 array will be used 
for the Knudsen 320BR. The 12 kHz transducer (TC-12/34) emits a conical 
beam with a width of 30[deg].
    The 3-5 kHz chirp SBP is towed by and operated from the St. Laurent 
in open water when the St. Laurent is not working in tandem with the 
Healy. The SBP provides information about sedimentary features and 
bottom topography. The chirp system has a maximum 7.2 kW transmit 
capacity into the towed array. The energy from the towed unit is 
directed downward by an array of eight transducers in a conical 
beamwidth of 80 degrees. The interval between pulses is no less than 
one pulse per second. SBPs of that frequency can produce sound levels 
200 to 230 dB re 1 [mu]Pa at 1 m (Richardson et al., 1995).
    The Kongsberg EM 122 MBES operates at 10.5 to 13 (usually 12) kHz 
and is hull-mounted on the Healy. The transmitting beamwidth is 1[deg] 
or 2[deg] fore-aft and 150[deg] athwartship. The maximum source level 
is 242 dB re 1 [mu]Pam (rms). Each ``ping'' consists of eight (in water 
greater than 1,000 m deep) or four (less than 1,000 m) successive fan-
shaped transmissions, each ensonifying a sector that extends 1[deg] 
fore-aft. Continuous-wave (CW) pulses increase from two to 15 ms long 
in water depths up to 2,600 m (8,530 ft), and FM chirp pulses up to 100 
ms long are used in water greater than 2,600 m (8,530 ft). The 
successive transmissions span an overall cross-track angular extent of 
about 150[deg], with 2 ms gaps between pulses for successive sectors.
    The Knudsen 320BR hydrographic SBP provides information on 
sedimentary layering, down to between 20 and 70 m (65.6 to 229.7 ft), 
depending on bottom type and slope. The Knudsen 320 BR is a dual-
frequency system with operating frequencies of 3.5 and 12 kHz; only the 
low frequency is being used during this survey. At 3.5 kHz, the maximum 
output power into the transducer array, as wired on the Healy (where 
the array impedance is approximately 125 ohms), is approximately 6,000 
watts (electrical), which results in a maximum source level of 221 dB 
re 1 [micro]Pa at 1 m downward. Pulse lengths range from 1.5 to 24 ms 
with a bandwidth of 3 kHz (FM sweep from 3 kHz to 6 kHz). The 
repetition rate is range dependent, but the maximum is a one percent 
duty cycle. Typical repetition rate is between \1/2\ s (in shallow 
water) to 8 s in deep water. The 3.5 kHz transducer array on the Healy, 
consisting of 16 (TR109) elements in a 4x4 array, is being used for the 
Knudsen 320BR. At 3.5 kHz the SBP emits a downward conical beam with a 
width of approximately 26[deg].
    The piloting echosounder on the Healy is an Ocean Data Equipment 
Corporation (ODEC) Bathy-1500 that provides information on water depth 
below the vessel. The ODEC system has a maximum 2 kW transmit capacity 
into the transducer and has two operating modes, single or interleaved 
dual frequency, with available frequencies of 12, 24, 33, 40, 100, and 
200 kHz.
    The 150 kHz ADCP has a minimum ping rate of 0.65 ms. There are four 
beam sectors and each beamwidth is 3[deg]. The pointing angle for each 
beam is 30[deg] off from vertical with one each to port, starboard, 
forward, and aft. The four beams do not overlap. The 150 kHz ADCP's 
maximum depth range is 300 m (984.3 ft).
    The Ocean Surveyor 75 is an ADCP operating at a frequency of 75 
kHz, producing a ping every 1.4 s. The system is a four-beam phased 
array with a beam angle of 30[deg]. Each beam has a width of 4[deg] and 
there is no overlap. Maximum output power is 1 kW with a maximum depth 
range of 700 m (2,296.6 ft).

Acoustic Source Specifications--Icebreaking

    Icebreaking is considered by NMFS to be a continuous sound and NMFS 
estimates that harassment occurs when marine mammals are exposed to 
continuous sounds at a received sound level of 120 dB SPL or above. 
Potential takes of marine mammals may ensue from icebreaking activity 
in which the Healy is expected to engage outside of U.S. waters, i.e., 
north of approximately 74.1[deg] North. While breaking ice, the noise 
from the ship, including impact with ice, engine noise, and propeller 
cavitation, will exceed 120 dB (rms) continuously. If icebreaking does 
occur in U.S. waters, USGS expects it will occur during seismic 
operations. The exclusion zone (EZ) for the marine mammal Level B 
harassment threshold during the proposed seismic activities is greater 
than the calculated radius during icebreaking. Therefore, if the Healy 
breaks ice during seismic operations within the U.S. waters, the 
greater radius, i.e., that for seismic operations, supersedes that for 
icebreaking, so no

[[Page 60178]]

additional takes have been estimated within U.S. waters.

Dates, Duration, and Specific Geographic Area

    The seismic survey is being conducted for approximately 36 days 
from approximately August 2 to September 6, 2010. The approximately 806 
km (501 mi) of tracklines within U.S. waters will be surveyed first. 
These survey lines are expected to be completed by approximately August 
19, 2010. The seismic vessel St. Laurent departed from Kugluktuk, 
Nunavut, Canada on August 6, 2010 and returned to the same port on 
approximately September 15, 2010. The Healy departed from Dutch Harbor, 
Alaska on August 2, 2010, to meet the St. Laurent on August 10, 2010. 
After completion of this survey, the Healy is changing crew through 
Barrow via helicopter or surface vessel on September 6, 2010 (see Table 
3 of the IHA application). The entire survey area will be bounded 
approximately by 145[deg] to 158[deg] West longitude and 71[deg] to 
84[deg] North latitude in water depths ranging from approximately 1,900 
to 4,000 m (6,234 to 13,123 ft) (see Figure 1 and Table 1 of the IHA 
application). Ice conditions are expected to range from open water to 
10/10 ice cover. See Table 3 of the IHA application for a synopsis of 
the 2010 St. Laurent and Healy Extended Continental Shelf expeditions 
in the Arctic Ocean, August 2 to September 15, 2010.
    Icebreaking outside U.S. waters will occur between the latitudes of 
approximately 74[deg] to 84[deg] North. Vessel operations and ice 
conditions from similar survey activities and timing in 2008 and 2009 
were used to estimate the amount of icebreaking (in trackline km) that 
is likely to occur in 2010. USGS expects that the St. Laurent and the 
Healy will be working in tandem through the ice for a maximum of 23 to 
25 days while outside of U.S. waters. The average distance travelled in 
2008 and 2009 when the Healy broke ice for the St. Laurent was 135 km/
day (83.9 mi/day). Based on the 23 to 25 day period of icebreaking, 
USGS calculated that, at most approximately 3,102 to 3,372 km (1,927.5 
to 2,095.3 mi) of vessel trackline may involve icebreaking. This 
calculation is likely an overestimation because icebreakers often 
follow leads when they are available and thus do not break ice at all 
times.

 Table 3--Projected 2010 Icebreaking Effort for USGS/GSC 2010 Extended Continental Shelf Survey in the Northern
                                          Beaufort Sea and Arctic Ocean
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Two-Ship        Two-Ship
                                                                    operations      operations        km/day
                                                                      (days)           (km)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008............................................................              19           2,469             130
2009............................................................              27          37,744             140
Average 2008 to 2009............................................              23           3,122             135
Projected 2010..................................................           23-25     3,102-3,372  ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments and Responses

    A Notice of Receipt of the USGS application and proposed IHA was 
published in the Federal Register on July 8, 2010 (75 FR 39336). During 
the comment period, NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal 
Commission (Commission), the North Slope Borough (NSB) Office of the 
Mayor, and the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission (AEWC). The public 
comments can be found online at:  https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. The following are their comments, and NMFS's responses.
    Comment 1: The Commission recommends that NMFS approve the 
requested IHA, provided NMFS ascertain who will be responsible for 
operating the Canadian vessel and the airguns and other instruments 
deployed from the St. Laurent and issue an IHA for these activities 
only if a U.S. agency or U.S. citizen(s) will be conducting those 
operations.
    Response: USGS's EA has clarified the roles and responsibilities of 
the Canadian vessel St. Laurent while operating within and outside U.S. 
waters:
    ``The activity that the USGS is funding and undertaking in both the 
U.S. waters (maritime zones) and the high seas is to collect multi-
beam, associated chirp sub-bottom data, and possibly sediment and rock 
samples both within and outside the 370.4 km (200 nmi) limit, as well 
as to break ice for the St. Laurent during operations in ice-covered 
area. The St. Laurent is a vessel entitled to sovereign immunity under 
international law, operated by the CCG with a seismic system owned and 
operated by Natural Resources Canada, and therefore not under the 
jurisdiction of U.S. laws or regulations outside the U.S. maritime 
zones where the U.S. has exclusive rights and jurisdiction. The USGS is 
acting as the responsible agency for MMPA, ESA, and NEPA for the St. 
Laurent while the St. Laurent is collecting seismic data within the 
U.S. EEZ. The operators of the seismic equipment on the St. Laurent 
have written a Categorical Declaration that, for operations in U.S. 
waters (i.e., within the U.S. EEZ), they will comply with any and all 
environmental mitigation measures required by NMFS and/or the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (see Appendix C of the EA). There are no 
U.S. Federal funds that are supporting the costs of operating St. 
Laurent, or its seismic gear'' (see p. 2 to 3 of the EA).
    The GSC is collecting seismic data in U.S. waters at the request of 
the U.S. and would not otherwise be operating in U.S. waters. Dr. 
Jonathan Childs, USGS liaison aboard the St. Laurent, will be 
responsible for establishing the start and end points of the lines 
within U.S. waters and for compliance with conditions of the IHA. The 
Categorical Declaration from Natural Resources Canada, United Nations 
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) Program (see p. 116 in 
Appendix C of the EA) further states:
    ``While in U.S. waters (i.e., the U.S. EEZ), the GSC operators will 
comply with any and all environmental mitigation measures required by 
the NMFS and/or USFWS. A NMFS approved PSO and a U.S. liaison aboard 
the St. Laurent will be responsible for ensuring that all mitigation 
measures required by NMFS and/or USFWS are implemented while the St. 
Laurent operates in U.S. waters.''
    ``While operating in U.S. waters, the GSC operators of the seismic 
profiling system categorically consent to comply with all applicable 
U.S. laws, including the MMPA and the ESA, as well as any terms and 
conditions that may be required under an IHA issued by NMFS and any 
measures that may arise from

[[Page 60179]]

ESA consultations with NMFS and/or USFWS. Operation of the seismic 
profiling system includes conditions under which the system will be 
turned on and operation continued or ceased in the presence of marine 
mammals (including polar bears), and the diversion of scientific 
tracklines for avoidance of observed wildlife. This declaration should 
in no way be constructed to influence or alter the safe operation of 
the vessel which is at the sole discretion of the CCG and its 
Commanding Officer.''
    Comment 2: The Commission recommends that NMFS approve the 
requested IHA, provided NMFS work with the applicant to re-estimate 
exposures for ice-breaking activities based upon the total area that 
may be exposed to sound levels greater than or equal to 120 dB re 1 
[mu]Pa (rms).
    Response: The Commission's concerns are that the USGS application 
states that an area of water 4,109 km\2\ (1,586.5 mi\2\) will be 
exposed to sound levels >=120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) but that the marine 
mammal ``takes'' are estimated using a larger number of 5,137 km\2\ 
(1,983.4 mi\2\) to allow for turns, repetition of certain tracklines 
because of poor data quality or minor changes in survey design (this 
larger number represents an uncertainty estimate of approximately 20 
percent). A critical clarification is that the 4,109 km\2\ and 5,137 
km\2\ numbers are for estimating the area of takes within U.S. waters 
based on seismic operations, using a radius of approximately 2,500 m 
(8,202 ft) (see page 69 of the EA) for the >=160 dB re 1 [micro]Pa 
(rms) isopleths, and not on the area ensonified by continuous noise of 
icebreaking at >=120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms). This approach was taken 
because the area of take for the seismic source >=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa 
(rms), estimated at approximately a 2,500 m (8,202 ft) radius was 
greater than that estimated for >=120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) of 
continuous sound from icebreaking, estimated at 1,750 m (5,741.5 ft) 
radius (see page 213 of the EA). The estimated area ensonified for 
icebreaking outside of U.S. waters is 11,802 km\2\ (4,556.8 mi\2\) (see 
p. 213 of the EA).
    A point of confusion in this clarification is that the original 
request from NMFS was to estimate takes from icebreaking, rather than 
the total area exposed to sound levels >=120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms). The 
addendum on icebreaking (see Appendix J of the EA) only estimated takes 
for the Healy breaking ice outside of U.S. waters because there would 
be no additional takes for the sound of icebreaking within U.S. waters 
beyond those estimated for the seismic source.
    One can calculate the area of potential icebreaking within U.S. 
waters by using the estimated track length (approximately 806 km [500.8 
mi], page 69 of the EA) and the >=120 dB [mu]Pa (rms) radius, estimated 
at 1,750 m (5,741.5 ft) (see page 213 of the EA), to get an ensonified 
area of 2,821 km\2\ (1,089.2 mi\2\), which, with an additional 
uncertainty estimate of 20 percent totals 3,385 km\2\ (1,307 mi\2\). 
This number is still smaller than either the 4,109 km\2\ or 5,137 km\2\ 
numbers cited in the comments from the Commission.
    It is important to also clarify that (a) the USGS estimated 
icebreaking assuming that maximum noise of icebreaking would occur 
along the total length of tracklines. The preferred strategy operating 
in the ice is to follow leads whenever possible, which reduces the 
total icebreaking effort. Canadian and U.S. ice observers and analysts 
are aboard both vessels to select paths through the ice to minimize 
icebreaking; (b) for some part of the cruise, depending on ice 
conditions, the St. Laurent will be leading Healy so that high-quality 
multi-beam data can be collected, further reducing the amount of 
icebreaking the Healy will be doing (and therefore reducing the area of 
ensonfication for >=120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa [rms]). The estimates of the 
area of ensonification in the EA and IHA do not include a correction 
for this type of data acquisition. Hence the area of ensonification is 
likely to be overestimated; (c) the tracklines are laid out to enable 
flexibility in where the ship may navigate through the ice, maximizing 
the opportunities to follow leads and reduce the requirement for 
icebreaking and therefore minimize the noise of icebreaking. Under 
international law as reflected in Article 76 of UNCLOS, the ECS outer 
limit points are to be no more than 111.1 km (60 nmi) apart. The cruise 
tracks are planned 92.6 km (50 nmi) apart or less so that the vessels 
can deviate approximately 18.5 km (10 nmi) either side of the track to 
follow leads; and (d) based on the latest ice imagery for August 3, 
2010, there will probably be no need to break ice within U.S. waters.
    As of August 3, 2010, http;//arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/NEWIMAGES/arctic.seaice.color.000.png shows the ice extent in the area 
north of the Alaska coast to be mostly open water. The PSOs aboard the 
Healy will be monitoring actual takes from icebreaking during the 
cruise, which can be compared with takes estimated and authorized in 
the IHA.
    Comment 3: The Commission recommends that NMFS approve the 
requested IHA, provided NMFS advise the applicant to consult with the 
USFWS regarding the need for a separate incidental taking authorization 
for walruses and polar bears.
    Response: On May 7, 2010, USGS requested that the USFWS review the 
operations for the summer 2010 Arctic Ocean geophysical experiment for 
potential impacts on Pacific walruses and polar bears. Given the 
USFWS's understanding of polar bear and walrus distribution, the 
planned travel routes and locations of the activity, the USFWS believe 
that it is unlikely the proposed studies will result in any major 
disturbances or impacts to individual polar bears or walruses. 
Considering the relatively low likelihood of encountering polar bears 
or walruses, along with the limited impact and anticipated responses of 
affected animals that would likely ensue from an encounter with either 
or both vessels, the USFWS has determined that an incidental take 
authorization is not necessary for this project. See the USFWS's 
informal ESA Section 7 consultation letter regarding walruses and polar 
bears in Appendix E of the EA (p. 128 to 132).
    Comment 4: The Commission recommends that NMFS approve the 
requested IHA, provided NMFS provide additional justification for its 
preliminary determination that the planned monitoring program will be 
sufficient to detect, with a high level of confidence, all marine 
mammals within or entering the identified exclusion zones (EZs). At a 
minimum, such justification should (1) identify those species that it 
believes can be detected with a high degree of confidence using visual 
monitoring only, (2) describe detection probability as a function of 
distance from the vessel, (3) describe changes in detection probability 
under various sea state and weather conditions and at night, and (4) 
explain how close to the vessel marine mammals must be for observer to 
achieve the anticipated high nighttime detection rate.
    Response: NMFS believes that the planned monitoring program will be 
sufficient to visually detect, with reasonable certainty, most marine 
mammals within or entering identified EZs. This monitoring, along with 
the required mitigation measures, will help ensure the authorized 
taking effects the least practicable adverse impact on the affected 
species or stocks and will have a negligible impact on the affected 
species or stocks.
    Until proven technological advances are made, nighttime mitigation 
measures during operations include combinations of the use of PSOs and

[[Page 60180]]

night vision devices (NVDs). Should the airgun array be powered-down, 
it is believed that the operation of a single airgun continues to serve 
as a sound source deterrent to marine mammals. In the event of a 
complete shut-down of the airgun array, for mitigation or repairs, 
airgun operations are suspended until nautical twilight-dawn (when PSOs 
are able to clear the EZ). Airgun operations do not begin until the 
entire EZ radius is visible for at least 30 minutes. In all likelihood 
there will be no nighttime start-ups for the time that the seismic data 
are collected in U.S. waters (mid-August), when 24 hour daylight is 
still occurring.
    Comment 5: The Commission recommends that NMFS approve the 
requested IHA, provided NMFS clarify the meaning of the qualifiers 
``when practical,'' ``if practical,'' and ``when feasible'' to indicate 
how often and under what specific conditions the applicant expects to 
use (1) two Protected Species Observer (PSOs) to monitor the EZ for 
marine mammals during daytime operations and nighttime start-ups of the 
airguns, (2) crew members to assist PSOs in detecting marine mammals 
and implementing mitigation requirements, and (3) PSOs during daytime 
periods to compare sighting rates and animal behavior during times when 
seismic airguns are and are not operating.
    Response: The St. Laurent and Healy will carry trained, NMFS-
qualified and experienced PSOs for the seismic study involving the use 
of airguns and icebreaking for the upcoming proposed project. PSOs are 
appointed by USGS with NMFS concurrence. USGS will utilize vessel-based 
PSOs to watch for and monitor marine mammals near the icebreaking and 
seismic source vessels during all daytime airgun operations and before 
and during start-ups of the airguns day or night. PSOs will have access 
to reticle binoculars and NVDs to scan the area around each vessel. 
PSOs will alternate between binoculars and the naked eye to avoid eye 
fatigue. During all monitoring periods, PSOs will be on duty from 
observation locations that allow for optimal monitoring capabilities. 
During meal times and restroom breaks it is sometime difficult to have 
the full complement of PSOs on effort, but at least one PSO will be on 
watch during those brief times. The complement of PSOs rotates shifts, 
with duty shift lasting generally one to four hours.
    Regarding the Commission's sub-comment (1), the intention and 
requirement is for two PSOs to stand watch during all seismic 
operations in U.S. waters, including cold start and ramp-ups. Only one 
PSO is on watch during daylight non-seismic operations. Two U.S. PSOs 
will join the St. Laurent before seismic operations begin in U.S. 
waters so that there will be five PSOs aboard the St. Laurent for all 
seismic data collected in U.S. waters. The restriction on the U.S. PSOs 
not standing watch for more than four hours at a time and the as yet 
unknown schedules of the Canadian watches makes actual schedules at 
this time unknown, hence the qualifiers ``when practical,'' etc., are 
used to account for this uncertainty. There may also be short periods 
of time, for example during mandatory fire and boat safety drills, when 
the PSOs on watch must leave their observing stations. It is the 
responsibility of the U.S. liaison aboard the St. Laurent working with 
the Canadian counterparts to develop a watch schedule consistent with 
the requirements of the IHA, especially for the ramp-ups, whether 
during the day or night. In all likelihood there will be no nighttime 
start-ups for the time that the seismic data are collected in U.S. 
waters (mid-August), when 24 hour daylight is still occurring.
    Canada will follow its own permitting requirements for watches and 
start-ups when operating outside of U.S. waters. The two U.S. PSOs 
aboard the St. Laurent during the time the St. Laurent is in U.S. 
waters will return to the Healy after the U.S. waters portion of the 
survey is completed and stand watch on the Healy to aid in sighting 
marine mammals and alert the PSOs aboard the St. Laurent of their 
sightings during the two ships' operations.
    Regarding the Commission's sub-comment (2), the qualifiers to this 
condition refer to the situations in which (a) other members of the 
ship's or scientific crew on either vessel notice a marine mammal near 
the vessel and report it to the bridge or the PSOs; (b) the bridge 
watch can assist in marine mammal observations during the night when 
the PSO is not required to be on the bridge; or (c) the bridge watch 
aboard the Healy (in the steering station above the bridge, which is 
the highest and best vantage point for making observations) sees marine 
mammals. It is impossible to predict the frequency that these 
situations will occur, only that many more eyes are available to spot 
marine mammals than those of the PSOs, and that these additional eyes 
should be used whenever possible, practical, or feasible. It is not the 
intention in any of these situations for the crew or the bridge to 
implement mitigation requirements because that authority is with the 
PSOs. However, the bridge often acts as a central point of 
communication among science crew, ship's crew, and PSOs, and therefore 
plays a vital role in ensuring that the PSOs can implement appropriate 
mitigation procedures at the appropriate times.
    Regarding the Commission's sub-comment (3), the U.S. PSOs aboard 
the Healy (or when aboard the St. Laurent) will be on watch collecting 
marine mammal observation data whether the airguns are operating or 
not. When the Healy is operating independently of the St. Laurent 
(e.g., steaming north from Dutch Harbor or for operations at the 
beginning of the survey when in open water--and therefore independently 
surveying), the data collected by the PSOs is baseline data. For the 
seismic survey within U.S. waters, the St. Laurent will be steaming to 
the start of the tracks from the east and will have the U.S. PSOs 
aboard to record baseline observations during the steaming time. Both 
U.S. and Canadian observers will be recording baseline information for 
at least 30 min on site prior to initial start-up and ramp-ups of the 
airgun operations during the survey. If the St. Laurent is operating 
independently in either international or Canadian waters, it is the 
responsibility of the Canadian Chief Scientist, using the conditions 
set forth in the Canadian permits to determine whether the Canadian 
observers will stand watch to collect baseline information. When the 
ships are operating together in international or Canadian waters, the 
PSOs aboard the Healy will be making observations either in front of 
the St. Laurent (during seismic operations) or behind the St. Laurent 
(during multi-beam operations). It is neither practical nor economical 
to pre-survey all tracks for the presence of marine mammals (and 
baseline behavior) prior to conducting seismic operations because of 
the huge area covered by the joint expedition, so the most likely 
baseline information to be collected will be at breaks in lines for 
repair or maintenance of the seismic gear and at the start of the 
survey. Using the experience of 2008 and 2009, halts in seismic 
acquisition for equipment maintenance generally occurred every 48 to 72 
hours and lasted from 6 to 48 hours. Marine mammal observations made 
aboard the Healy cruise will allow the PSOs to collect baseline 
information whenever the seismic equipment is not operating.
    Comment 6: The Commission recommends that NMFS approve the 
requested IHA, provided NMFS propose to USGS that it revise its study 
design to collect meaningful baseline data on sighting rates for marine 
mammals. Such information is essential for a

[[Page 60181]]

realistic assessment of impacts from the proposed activities and 
recovery from those impacts.
    Response: NMFS is unclear about the Commission's recommendation 
regarding the revision of USGS's ``study design.'' Please clarify if 
you are referring to USGS overall study design or more specifically to 
the monitoring plan required under the MMPA. The purpose of the USGS's 
project is for marine geophysical research, not to conduct a dedicated 
marine mammal research survey. Extending the survey is not practicable 
from an operational standpoint for the applicant. Due to the remote 
location of the survey and the length of time needed to conduct the 
requested science experiment, there may be little time left for the 
vessel to operate without the need for refueling and servicing.
    During the cruise, there will be significant amounts of transit 
time pre- and post-survey during which PSOs will be on watch (e.g., 
prior to and after the seismic portions of the survey). The collection 
of this observational data by PSOs may provide meaningful baseline data 
for marine mammals, but it is unlikely that the information would 
result in any statistically robust conclusions for this particular 
seismic survey. See NMFS responses to comments above.
    To augment detection and baseline observations, the U.S. liaison 
aboard the St. Laurent will request that prior to the start of seismic 
activities in U.S. waters, the GSC operators deploy a sonobuoy that can 
be monitored through an audio channel for the presence of whales for at 
least the 30 min time period that the vessel is on site before 
commencing seismic operations. Detected vocalizations can be used to 
augment visual observations. The sonobuoy audio information is only 
intended to be used to identify the presence or absence of animals 
because the relative direction and distance to vocalizing animals 
cannot be determined from these sounds. The sonobuoy information is not 
intended to be used for mitigation purposes. As stated in the IHA, 
seismic operations will not begin if any bowhead whales are seen or 
heard. Use of sonobuoys is contingent upon concurrence by GSC 
operators, who are generally supportive of collecting additional data 
in support of marine mammal observations.
    In addition, USGS proposes that the sonobuoy data from the 
refraction part of the experiment will be made available to an 
appropriate biologist or acoustician for analysis for the presence of 
marine mammals. The data is recorded continuously for approximately 
eight hours, and the sonobuoy records sounds not only from the airguns, 
but ambient noise and any other sounds long after the vessel has left 
the area. Although no noise trains that might be interpreted as marine 
mammal sounds have been definitively identified on the sonobuoys 
examined during 2008 and 2009 joint expeditions (Chian, pers. comm.), 
the sonobuoys are a source of information available for closer 
scrutiny.
    Comment 7: The Commission recommends that NMFS approve the 
requested IHA, provided NMFS require the applicant to collect 
information to evaluate the assumption that 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) is 
the appropriate threshold at which harassment occurs for all marine 
mammals in the survey area. This assumption can and should be tested 
using in-situ measurements of sound propagation concurrent with 
observations of the responses of marine mammals exposed to such sounds. 
Such tests should be conducted using species-specific data, and test 
results should be used to inform decision makers regarding the 
applicability of the 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) threshold for specific 
species and to improve future mitigation measures.
    Response: Behavioral responses to sound are context specific and 
can vary by species and other factors. However, there are not currently 
enough species-specific data showing how marine mammals respond to 
sound to support the development of separate harassment thresholds for 
every species. Therefore, NMFS uses the best available applicable data, 
which includes studies of several different species, to predict at what 
levels marine mammals are likely to be harassed and NMFS believes that 
the 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) threshold remains appropriate for the 
species in this project area.
    Regarding testing these behavioral harassment assumption, NMFS 
primarily relies on scientific research advances, and applicable 
monitoring results (where appropriate) to inform them. Behavioral 
response field studies that are able to definitively track what an 
animal is doing for some period of time (a baseline), expose it to a 
known received sound level, and record its behavior afterwards until it 
goes back to baseline are expensive and challenging to execute and 
while a few are currently underway, relatively few have been completed. 
Separately, in required monitoring measures, PSOs are required to make 
behavioral observations during seismic activities, however, while they 
can very effectively detect a marine mammal, identify it, and record 
its behavior at the surface for the moments that it is within view of 
the moving vessel--this information is typically not enough to support 
the development of a harassment threshold. Alternatively, there has 
been one longer-term (i.e., associated with a five year rulemaking) 
monitoring study that has generated numerous data of a robust and 
measureable nature through the deployment of an extensive hydrophone 
array.
    Regarding bowhead whales specifically, some published articles 
indicate that they may avoid seismic vessels at levels below 160 dB 
(rms), NMFS does not believe that these responses rise to the level of 
a take. Miller et al. (1999) indicated that some bowhead whales may 
have started to be deflected from their migratory path at 35 km (21.7 
mi) from the seismic vessel, during migration, however, as described in 
MMS' 2006 Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA), this 
response has not been seen at other times of the year and during other 
activities. To show the contextual nature of this minor behavioral 
modification, recent monitoring studies of Canadian seismic operations 
indicated that feeding, non-migratory bowhead whales do not move away 
from a noise source at an SPL of 160 dB. NMFS therefore continues to 
estimate ``takings'' under the MMPA from impulse noises, such as 
seismic, as occurring at 160 dB (re 1 [mu]Pa [rms]).
    Comment 8: The Commission recommends that NMFS approve the 
requested IHA, provided NMFS require the applicant to make observations 
during all ramp-up procedures to gather the data needed to analyze and 
report on their effectiveness as mitigation. As it has noted in past 
correspondence, the Commission would be pleased to discuss with NMFS 
the collection and analysis of such data and the design of such 
experiments to promote a better understanding of the utility and 
shortcomings of ramp-up as a mitigation measure.
    Response: The IHA requires that PSOs on the St. Laurent and Healy 
make observations for 30 min prior to ramp-up, during all ramp-ups, and 
during all daytime seismic operations and record the following 
information when a marine mammal is sighted:
    (i) Species group size, age/size/sex categories (if determinable), 
behavior when first sighted and after initial sighting, heading (if 
consistent), bearing and distance from seismic vessel, sighting cue, 
apparent reaction to the airguns or vessel (e.g., none, avoidance, 
approach, paralleling, etc., and including responses to ramp-up), and 
behavioral pace; and

[[Page 60182]]

    (ii) Time, location, heading, speed activity of the vessel 
(including number of airguns operating and whether in state of ramp-up 
or power-down), Beaufort wind force and sea state, visibility, and sun 
glare.
    One of the primary purposes of monitoring is to result in 
``increased knowledge of the species'' and the effectiveness of 
monitoring and mitigation measures; marine mammal reactions to ramp-up 
would be useful information in this regard. NMFS has asked USGS to 
gather all data that could potentially provide information regarding 
the effectiveness of ramp-ups as a mitigation measure. However, 
considering the low numbers of marine mammal sightings and low number 
of ramp-ups, it is unlikely that the information will result in any 
statistically robust conclusions for this particular seismic survey. 
Over the long term, these requirements may provide information 
regarding the effectiveness of ramp-up as a mitigation measure, 
provided animals are detected during ramp-up.
    A study investigating the efficacy of ramp-up has been jointly 
funded by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and 
Enforcement (BOEMRE) and the Joint Industry Programme (JIP). Post-
cruise monitoring reports for numerous seismic surveys are currently 
available on the NMFS MMPA Incidental Take Program Web site should 
there be interest in further analysis of this data by the public.
    Comment 9: The NSB and its residents as well as the AEWC are 
concerned about potential health impacts to the environment associated 
with offshore development (i.e., industrial and commercial activities) 
on the North Slope. Activities allowed by the proposed authorization 
pose direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on species (especially 
marine mammals) that are critical to the subsistence harvesting 
villages the AEWC represents and the NSB people's subsistence harvest.
    Response: NMFS is unclear about the specific meaning of the term 
``health impacts'' as used in the public comments. The USGS and NMFS 
are making every effort to minimize the direct, indirect, and 
cumulative impacts through the federal NEPA, MMPA, and ESA process, as 
well as consulting with the Native communities. Cumulative impact 
assessments are USGS and NMFS responsibility under NEPA. The revised EA 
has addressed concerns about potential impacts using the best available 
science. In evaluating the severity of the impacts, it is important to 
realize that the proposed seismic activity within the U.S. EEZ is more 
than 100 km (54 nmi) offshore in a region well away from the main 
migration routes of the bowhead whale and will occur at a time prior to 
the bowhead whales beginning their fall migration from the Canadian 
Beaufort. Although a single individual bowhead whale has been 
identified in this region from tagging, there is little evidence to 
suggest that the location or timing of the survey overlaps with or 
interferes with bowhead whaling activities. As noted in the EA, 
``available information * * * does not indicate that marine and seismic 
surveys for oil and gas exploration activities has had detectable long-
term adverse population-level effects on the overall health, current 
status, or recovery of marine mammal species and populations in the 
Arctic region. For example, data indicated that the Bering-Chukchi-
Beaufort (BCB) bowhead whale population has continued to increase over 
the timeframe that oil and gas activities have occurred. There is no 
long-term displacement from habitat (although studies have not 
specifically focused on addressing this issue) * * * monitoring studies 
indicate that most fall migrating whales avoid an area with a radius of 
about 20 to 30 km (12.4 to 18.6 mi) around a seismic vessel operating 
in nearshore waters (Miller et al., 2002). USGS