Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Marine Geophysical Survey in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean, October Through November 2010, 64996-65005 [2010-26547]
Download as PDF
64996
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices
Each sector must be adequately
represented, and the intent is to have a
group that, as a whole, reflects an
appropriate and equitable balance and
mix of interests given the
responsibilities of the HMS AP. Criteria
for membership include one or more of
the following: (1) Experience in the
HMS recreational fishing industry; (2)
experience in the HMS commercial
fishing industry; (3) experience in
fishery-related industries (e.g., marinas,
bait and tackle shops); (4) experience in
the scientific community working with
HMS; and/or (5) representation of a
private, non-governmental, regional,
national, or international organization
representing marine fisheries; or
environmental, governmental, or
academic interests dealing with HMS.
Five additional members on the HMS
AP include one member representing
each of the following Councils: New
England Fishery Management Council,
the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management
Council, the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, the Gulf of
Mexico Fishery Management Council,
and the Caribbean Fishery Management
Council. The HMS AP also includes 22
ex-officio participants: 20
representatives of the coastal states and
two representatives of the interstate
commissions (the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission and the Gulf
States Marine Fisheries Commission).
NMFS will provide the necessary
administrative support, including
technical assistance, for the HMS AP.
However, NMFS will not compensate
participants with monetary support of
any kind. Depending on availability of
funds, members may be reimbursed for
travel costs related to the HMS AP
meetings.
C. Meeting Schedule
Meetings of the HMS AP will be held
as frequently as necessary but are
routinely held twice each year in the
spring and fall. The meetings may be
held in conjunction with public
hearings.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Dated: October 15, 2010.
Emily H. Menashes,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–26478 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Oct 20, 2010
Jkt 223001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Background
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (16
U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) directs the
Secretary of Commerce to authorize,
upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of
marine mammals of a species or
population stock, by United States
citizens who engage in a specified
activity (other than commercial fishing)
within a specified geographical region if
certain findings are made and, if the
taking is limited to harassment, a notice
of a proposed authorization is provided
to the public for review.
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), and will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
subsistence uses. The authorization
must set forth the permissible methods
of taking, other means of effecting the
least practicable adverse impact on the
species or stock and its habitat, and
monitoring and reporting of such
takings. 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 to
incidentally take small numbers of
marine mammals by harassment.
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
establishes a 45-day time limit for
NMFS’ review of an application
followed by a 30-day public notice and
comment period on any proposed
authorizations for the incidental
harassment of small numbers of marine
mammals. Within 45 days of the close
of the public comment period, NMFS
must either issue or deny the
authorization.
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as:
RIN 0648–XZ60
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Marine
Geophysical Survey in the Eastern
Tropical Pacific Ocean, October
Through November 2010
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
take authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) regulations, notification is
hereby given that NMFS has issued an
Incidental Harassment Authorization
(IHA) to Scripps Institution of
Oceanography (SIO), a part of the
University of California, to take small
numbers of marine mammals, by
harassment, incidental to conducting a
marine geophysical survey in the
eastern tropical Pacific Ocean (ETP),
October through November, 2010.
DATES: Effective October 19, 2010,
through November 30, 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 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910
or by telephoning the contacts listed
here. A copy of the application
containing a list of the references used
in this document may be obtained by
writing to the above address,
telephoning the contact listed here (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or
visiting the Internet at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm#applications. The
following associated documents are also
available at the same Internet address:
SIO’s application, the Environmental
Assessment (EA) prepared by NMFS,
and the finding of no significant impact
(FONSI). The NMFS Biological Opinion
will be available online at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/consultation/
opinions.htm. Documents cited in this
notice may be viewed, by appointment,
during regular business hours, at the
aforementioned address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Laws or Candace Nachman, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 713–
2289.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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].
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices
Summary of Request
NMFS received an application on
May 28, 2010 from SIO for the taking,
by harassment, of marine mammals,
incidental to conducting a marine
geophysical survey in the ETP. SIO,
with research funding from the U.S.
National Science Foundation (NSF),
plans to conduct a marine seismic
survey in the ETP, from October through
November 2010.
SIO plans to use one source vessel,
the R/V Melville (Melville), with a
seismic airgun array to conduct a
geophysical survey in the ETP. In
addition to the operations of the seismic
airgun array, SIO intends to operate a
multibeam echosounder (MBES) and a
sub-bottom profiler (SBP) continuously
throughout the survey. The purpose of
this project is to better understand how
marine sediments record paleooceanographic information.
Acoustic stimuli (i.e., increased
underwater sound) generated during the
operation of the seismic airgun array
may have the potential to cause marine
mammals in the survey area to be
behaviorally disturbed in a manner that
NMFS considers to be Level B
harassment. This is the principal means
of marine mammal taking associated
with these activities and SIO has
requested an authorization for the
incidental take, by Level B harassment
only, of up to 21 species of marine
mammals. These species include:
Bryde’s whale; blue whale; sperm
whale; humpback whale; Cuvier’s
beaked whale; Blainville’s beaked
whale; pygmy beaked whale; gingkotoothed beaked whale; rough-toothed
dolphin; bottlenose dolphin;
pantropical spotted dolphin; spinner
dolphin; striped dolphin; Fraser’s
dolphin; short-beaked common dolphin;
Risso’s dolphin; melon-headed whale;
pygmy killer whale; false killer whale;
killer whale; and short-finned pilot
whale. Blainville’s beaked whale,
pygmy beaked whale, and gingkotoothed beaked whale are hereafter
grouped as Mesoplodon sp., as these
species are expected to be encountered
only infrequently and are difficult to
distinguish from one another.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Description of the Specified Activity
The Melville is expected to depart
Puntarenas, Costa Rica, on October 19,
2010, and spend approximately fifteen
days conducting seismic surveys, ten
days collecting water and core samples,
and approximately two days in transit,
arriving at Arica, Chile, on November
14, 2010. The proposed survey will
encompass the area from approximately
8° N–12° S and 80–91° W, off the coasts
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Oct 20, 2010
Jkt 223001
of Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia,
Ecuador, and Peru, in the high seas and
within the Exclusive Economic Zones
(EEZs) of Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia,
and Ecuador. At each of four sites (see
Figure 1 of SIO’s application), seismic
operations will be conducted for
approximately two days, and each water
sampling and coring station will be
occupied for one to two days. SIO will
operate the Melville to deploy an airgun
array and tow a hydrophone streamer to
complete the survey. Some minor
deviation from these dates is possible,
depending on logistics and weather.
Therefore, NMFS plans to issue an
authorization that extends to November
30, 2010.
The Melville will deploy a pair of lowenergy generator-injector (GI) airguns as
an energy source at a depth of 2 m (each
with a discharge volume of 45 in 3), plus
either of two towed hydrophone
streamers, one 725 m (2,378.6 ft) long
with 40 channels, and the other 350 m
(1,148.3 ft) long with 16 channels.
Hydrophone streamers are towed at
adjustable depth to afford best reception
of returning seismic signals, depending
upon surface conditions, but are
typically towed at approximately 10 m.
The energy to the GI airgun is
compressed air supplied by compressors
onboard the source vessel. As the GI
airgun is towed along the survey lines,
the receiving systems will receive the
returning acoustic signals. The study
(e.g., equipment testing, startup, line
changes, repeat coverage of any areas)
will take place in waters deeper than
1,000 m (3,280 ft). All planned
geophysical data acquisition activities
will be conducted by SIO with on-board
assistance by the scientists who have
proposed the study. The Chief Scientist
is Dr. Franco Marcantonio of Texas
A&M University. The vessel will be selfcontained, and the crew will live aboard
the vessel for the entire cruise.
NMFS outlined the purpose of the
program in a previous notice for the
proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September
3, 2010). The activities to be conducted
have not changed between the proposed
IHA notice and this final notice
announcing the issuance of the IHA. For
a more detailed description of the
authorized action, including vessel and
acoustic source specifications, the
reader should refer to the
aforementioned proposed IHA notice.
Several errors found in the notice for
the proposed IHA (75 FR 54095,
September 3, 2010) have been corrected
in this document. These errors are as
follows:
• The notice for proposed IHA
referenced 40, 16, and 12 channel
hydrophone streamers. The 12 channel
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64997
streamer was referenced in error; 40 and
16 channel streamers will be utilized as
discussed in this document.
• Several errors were corrected with
regard to exposure estimates and the
resulting take authorization (see
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals by
Incidental Harassment and Table 2 of
this document).
Æ Take estimate for sperm whales
(Physeter macrocephalus) was
presented as 23 due to a calculation
error and has been revised to 22.
Æ Take estimate for striped dolphins
(Stenella coeruleoalba) was presented as
six, due to the erroneous use of Fraser’s
dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei) density
estimates. Take estimate, as well as
density estimate, for striped dolphin has
been corrected to 192.
Æ Exposure estimates and take
authorization numbers have been
corrected for several species by
rounding up rather than down. As there
can be no portion of an individual in
estimating take, NMFS has rounded up
in all cases where exposure estimates
have some non-negligible portion of a
whole (see Table 2 in this document).
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of the SIO
application and proposed IHA was
published in the Federal Register on
September 3, 2010 (75 FR 54095).
During the comment period, NMFS
received comments from the Marine
Mammal Commission (Commission).
The public comments can be found
online at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
permits/incidental.htm. Following are
their comments and NMFS’ responses.
Comment 1: The Commission
recommends that NMFS require the
applicant to use location-specific
environmental parameters to re-estimate
safety zones and then recalculate
associated exposures. The Commission
further suggests that the applicant
should be required to use in-situ
measurements to verify and, if need be,
refine the safety zones prior to or at the
beginning of the survey, and that the
applicant should be required to
determine actual exposures based on
refined safety zones, sightability, and
relevant detection functions.
Response: NMFS is confident in the
peer-reviewed results of the LamontDoherty Earth Observatory seismic
equipment calibration studies which,
although viewed as conservative, are
used to determine cruise-specific
exclusion zones and which factor into
exposure estimates. With the expected
low density of marine mammals,
combined with the remote, deep-water
survey location, NMFS has determined
that the exclusion zones identified in
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
64998
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices
the IHA are appropriate for the survey
and that additional field measurement is
not necessary at this time. While
exposures of marine mammals to
acoustic stimuli are difficult to estimate,
NMFS is confident that the levels of
take authorized herein are estimated
based upon the best available scientific
information and estimation
methodology. The safety zones used to
estimate exposure are appropriate and
sufficient.
Comment 2: The Commission
recommends that 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 safety zones.
Response: As discussed in the
proposed rule, combined with the fact
that a portion of marine mammals
would be expected to avoid exposure to
the higher levels of sound present
within the designated safety zone, as
well as the comparatively small size of
the safety zone, NMFS believes that the
planned monitoring program will be
sufficient to, with reasonable certainty,
minimize the exposure of marine
mammals to sound within the identified
exclusion zones (EZ). 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 protected species observers
(PSOs) and night vision devices. In the
event of a complete shut-down of the
airgun array, for mitigation or repairs,
airgun operations will be suspended
until nautical twilight-dawn (when
PSOs are able to clear the EZ). Airgun
operations will not begin until the entire
EZ radius is visible for at least 30
minutes.
Comment 3: The Commission
recommends that NMFS propose to SIO
that it revise its study design to include
collection of meaningful baseline data
on the distribution and behavior of
marine mammals.
Response: The purpose of this cruise
is for marine geophysical research, not
to conduct a dedicated marine mammal
research survey. Extending or altering
the survey is not practicable from either
an operational or research standpoint
for the applicant. Due to the remote
location of the survey and the length of
time needed to conduct the requested
research, there may be little time left for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Oct 20, 2010
Jkt 223001
the vessel to operate without the need
for refueling and servicing.
During the cruise, there will be
significant amounts of transit time preand 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 on marine mammals, but it is
unlikely that the information would
result in any statistically robust
conclusions for this particular seismic
survey. As the monitoring program is
currently devised, one PSO (at
minimum) will be on watch not only
during all daylight airgun operations, or
start-up of airguns at any time, but at all
times when effective observation is
possible. Any further revisions of study
design are impractical.
In addition, SIO is not responsible for
the study design. Through a cooperative
agreement with the NSF, SIO is the
operator of the Melville, which hosts the
field research program. The study is
designed by the Principal Investigator
and is submitted to NSF as a proposal
for funding consideration and
subsequently reviewed by a merit
review panel. This study was selected
based on its scientific merits, and
extension or modification of the field
component would require scientific
justification and NSF approval and
potentially further merit review.
Comment 4: The Commission
recommends that NMFS extend the
monitoring period to at least one hour
before initiation of seismic activities
and at least one hour before the
resumption of airgun activities after a
power-down because of a marine
mammal sighting within a safety zone.
Response: As the Commission points
out, several species of deep-diving
cetaceans are capable of remaining
underwater for more than 30 minutes,
however, for the following reasons
NMFS believes that 30 minutes is an
adequate length for the monitoring
period prior to the start-up of airguns:
(1) In most cases PSOs are making
observations during times when seismic
sources are not being operated and will
actually be observing prior to the 30 min
observation period anyway, (2) the
majority of the species that may be
exposed do not stay underwater more
than 30 minutes, and (3) if deep-diving
individuals happened to be in the area
in the short time immediately prior to
the pre-start-up monitoring and if an
animal’s maximum underwater time is
45 min, there is only a one in three
chance that the last random surfacing
would be prior to the beginning of the
required 30 min monitoring period.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Also, seismic vessels are moving
continuously (because of the long,
towed array) and NMFS believes that
unless the animal submerges and
follows at the speed of the vessel (highly
unlikely, especially when considering
that a significant part of their
movements is vertical [deep-diving]),
the vessel will be far beyond the length
of the safety radii within 30 min, and
therefore it will be safe to resume
acquisition. Finally, due to the nature of
the seismic source to be used during the
survey, power-down (as mentioned in
the Commission’s comment) will not be
used as a mitigation measure.
In addition, mitigation measures are
required to be ‘‘practicable.’’ NMFS
believes that the framework for visual
monitoring will (1) be effective at
spotting almost all species for which
take is requested; and (2) that imposing
additional requirements, such as those
suggested by the Commission, would
not meaningfully increase the
effectiveness of observing marine
mammals approaching or entering the
exclusion zones. The Commission’s
recommendation would cause
additional impact on the science
mission, limiting acquisition
opportunity without dramatically
increasing overall effectiveness of visual
monitoring.
Comment 5: The Commission
recommends that NMFS continue to
require ramp-up and power-down
procedures as a mitigation measure
pending the outcome of a meeting to
discuss these procedures.
Response: NMFS will continue to
require ramp-up and power-down
procedures as mitigation measures,
when applicable, unless or until these
measures are proven to be ineffective or
other measures are proven to be more
effective.
Comment 6: The Commission
recommends that NMFS not include
detailed information and analyses for
species that are not expected to be in the
proposed survey area in future Federal
Register notices.
Response: NMFS agrees that detailed
information and analyses for species
that are not expected to be in the
proposed survey area should not be
included in Federal Register notices.
NMFS considers the information
included in the Federal Register notice
of proposed IHA (75 FR 54095,
September 3, 2010) in this case to be
necessary justification for
determinations to not authorize take for
certain species.
In closing, NMFS is planning to meet
with the Commission to further discuss
the broad issues raised in their
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices
comments, which relate to more than
just the IHA contemplated here.
Description of the Marine Mammals in
the Area of the Specified Activity
Forty-three species of marine
mammals, including 29 odontocetes, 7
mysticetes, 6 pinnipeds, and the marine
sea otter (Enhydra lutris), are known to
occur in the ETP. Of these, 21 cetacean
species are likely to occur in the
proposed survey areas in the ETP during
October-November (see Table 2 in this
document), and are considered further
here. Three of these cetacean species are
listed under the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) as Endangered: The sperm
(Physeter macrocephalus), humpback
(Megaptera novaeangliae), and blue
(Balaenoptera musculus) whales.
NMFS has presented a more detailed
discussion of the status of these stocks
and their occurrence in the ETP in the
notice of the proposed IHA (75 FR
54095, September 3, 2010).
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Summary of Potential Effects of Airgun
Sounds
Level B harassment of cetaceans has
the potential to occur during the seismic
survey due to acoustic stimuli caused by
the firing of airguns, which introduces
sound into the marine environment. The
effects of sounds from airguns might
include one or more of the following:
tolerance, masking of natural sounds,
behavioral disturbance, temporary or
permanent hearing impairment, or nonauditory physical or physiological
effects (Richardson et al., 1995; Gordon
et al., 2004; Nowacek et al., 2007;
Southall et al., 2007). Permanent
hearing impairment, in the unlikely
event that it occurred, would constitute
injury, but temporary threshold shift
(TTS) is not an injury (Southall et al.,
2007). Although the possibility cannot
be entirely excluded, it is unlikely that
the project would result in any cases of
temporary or permanent hearing
impairment, or any significant nonauditory physical or physiological
effects. Some behavioral disturbance is
expected, but NMFS expects the
disturbance to be localized and shortterm.
The notice of the proposed IHA (75
FR 54095, September 3, 2010) included
a discussion of the effects of sounds
from airguns on mysticetes and
odontocetes, including tolerance,
masking, behavioral disturbance,
hearing impairment, and other non-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Oct 20, 2010
Jkt 223001
auditory physical effects. Additional
information on the behavioral reactions
(or lack thereof) by all types of marine
mammals to seismic vessels can be
found in SIO’s application and NMFS’
EA. The notice of the proposed IHA also
included a discussion of the potential
effects of the multibeam echosounder
(MBES) and the sub-bottom profiler
(SBP). Because of the shape of the
beams of these sources and their power,
NMFS believes it unlikely that marine
mammals will be exposed to either the
MBES or the SBP at levels at or above
those likely to cause harassment.
Further, NMFS believes that the brief
exposure of cetaceans to a few signals
from the multi-beam bathymetric sonar
system is not likely to result in the
harassment of marine mammals.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal
Habitat
A detailed discussion of the potential
effects of this action on marine mammal
habitat, including physiological and
behavioral effects on marine fish and
invertebrates was included in the
proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September
3, 2010). Based on the discussion in the
proposed IHA notice and the nature of
the activities (limited duration), the
authorized operations are not expected
to result in any permanent impact on
habitats used by marine mammals,
including the food sources they use. The
main impact associated with the activity
will be temporarily elevated noise levels
and the associated direct effects on
marine mammals.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization (ITA) under sections
101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must, where applicable, 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
(where relevant).
Mitigation and monitoring measures
to be implemented for the seismic
survey have been developed and refined
during previous SIO seismic studies and
associated EAs, IHA applications, and
IHAs. The mitigation and monitoring
measures described herein represent a
combination of procedures required by
past IHAs for other similar projects and
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64999
on best practices recommended in
Richardson et al. (1995), Pierson et al.
(1998), and Weir and Dolman (2007).
The measures are described in detail
below.
Mitigation measures to be
implemented by SIO during the survey
include (1) visual monitoring by
protected species observers (discussed
later in this document), (2)
establishment of an exclusion zone (EZ),
(3) speed or course alteration, provided
that doing so will not compromise
operational safety requirements, (4) GI
airgun shut down procedures, and (5)
ramp-up procedures. Although powerdown procedures are often standard
operating practice for seismic surveys,
they will not be used here because
powering down from two airguns to one
airgun would make only a small
difference in the 180-dB safety radius.
The difference is not enough to allow
continued one-airgun operations if a
mammal came within the safety radius
for two airguns.
Exclusion Zones—As discussed
previously in this document, NMFS has
determined that for acoustic effects,
using acoustic thresholds in
combination with corresponding safety
radii is an effective way to consistently
apply measures to avoid or minimize
the impacts of an action. Thresholds are
used to establish a mitigation shutdown, or exclusion, zone, i.e., if an
animal enters an area calculated to be
ensonified above the level of an
established threshold, a sound source is
shut down.
As a matter of past practice and based
on the best available information at the
time regarding the effects of marine
sound, NMFS estimates that Level A
harassment from acoustic sources may
occur when cetaceans are exposed to
levels above 180 dB re 1 μPa (rms) level.
NMFS also considers 160 dB re 1 μPa
(rms) as the criterion for estimating the
onset of Level B harassment from
acoustic sources producing impulse
sounds, as in this seismic survey.
Empirical data concerning the 180–
and 160–dB distances have been
acquired based on measurements during
the acoustic verification study
conducted by L–DEO in the northern
Gulf of Mexico from May 27–June 3,
2003 (Tolstoy et al., 2004). The
empirical data indicate that, for this
survey, the assumed 180– and 160–dB
radii are 40 m (131.2 ft) and 400 m
(1,312.3 ft), respectively (see Table 1 in
this document).
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
65000
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices
TABLE 1—PREDICTED DISTANCES TO WHICH SOUND LEVELS ≥190, 180 AND 160 DB RE 1 μPA (RMS) MIGHT BE RECEIVED FROM TWO 45 IN3 GI AIRGUNS THAT WILL BE USED DURING THE SEISMIC SURVEYS IN THE EASTERN TROPICAL PACIFIC OCEAN DURING OCTOBER–NOVEMBER 2010
[Distances are based on model results provided by L–DEO.]
Tow depth
(m)
Source and volume
Estimated Distances at Received
Levels (m)
Water depth
180 dB
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Two GI airguns, 45 in3 each .................
2
Speed or Course Alteration—If a
marine mammal is detected outside the
EZ but is likely to enter it based on
relative movement of the vessel and the
animal, and if safety and scientific
objectives allow, the vessel speed and/
or course will be adjusted to minimize
the likelihood of the animal entering the
EZ. In the event that safety and/or
scientific objectives do not allow for
alteration of speed and/or course as a
needed mitigation measure, shut-down
procedures will still be utilized (see
below). Major course and speed
adjustments are often impractical when
towing long seismic streamers and large
source arrays but are possible in this
case because only a small source and
short streamers will be used.
Shut-down Procedures—If a marine
mammal is detected by PSOs outside
the EZ but is likely to enter the EZ, and
if the vessel’s speed and/or course
cannot be changed to avoid having the
animal enter the EZ, the airgun array,
MBES, and SBP will be shut down
before the animal is within the EZ.
Likewise, if a marine mammal is already
within the EZ when first detected, the
airgun array, MBES, and SBP will be
shut down immediately. Following a
shut down, seismic activity will not
resume until the marine mammal has
cleared the EZ. The animal will be
considered to have cleared the EZ if it
(a) is visually observed to have left the
EZ, or (b) has not been seen within the
EZ for 15 min in the case of small
odontocetes, or has not been seen
within the EZ for 30 min in the case of
mysticetes and large odontocetes,
including sperm and beaked whales.
Ramp-up Procedures—A ramp-up
procedure will be followed when the GI
airguns begin operating after a specified
period without GI airgun operations. It
is proposed that, for the present cruise,
this period would be approximately 1–
2 min. This period is based on the 180–
dB radii for the GI airguns (see Table 1
in this document) in relation to the
planned speed of the Melville while
shooting. Ramp-up will begin with a
single GI airgun (45 in3). The second GI
airgun (45 in3) will be added after 5
min. During ramp up, the PSOs will
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Oct 20, 2010
Jkt 223001
40
400
Deep (>1,000 m)
monitor the exclusion zone, and, if
marine mammals are sighted, a shutdown will be implemented as though
both GI airguns were operational.
If the complete EZ has not been
visible for at least 30 min prior to the
start of operations in either daylight or
nighttime, ramp-up will not commence.
If one GI airgun has operated, ramp-up
to full power will be permissible at
night or in poor visibility on the
assumption that marine mammals will
be alerted to the approaching seismic
vessel by the sounds from the single GI
airgun and could move away if they
choose. A ramp-up from a shut-down
may occur at night, but only when the
entire EZ is visible, and it has been
determined from the pre-ramp up watch
that the EZ is clear of marine mammals.
Ramp-up of the GI airguns will not be
initiated if a marine mammal is sighted
within or near the applicable EZ during
day or night.
NMFS has carefully evaluated the
applicant’s proposed mitigation
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.
PO 00000
160 dB
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 IHAs 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 action
area.
SIO will sponsor marine mammal
monitoring during the present project,
in order to implement the mitigation
measures that require real-time
monitoring, and to satisfy the
monitoring requirements of the IHA.
SIO’s Monitoring Plan is described
below this section and was planned as
a self-contained project independent of
any other related monitoring projects
that may be occurring simultaneously in
the same regions. SIO is prepared to
discuss coordination of its monitoring
program with any related work that
might be done by other groups insofar
as this is practical.
Vessel-Based Visual Monitoring
Three protected species observers
(PSOs) will be based aboard the seismic
source vessel for the duration of the
cruise and will watch for marine
mammals near the vessel during
daytime airgun operations and during
start-up of airguns at any time. Watches
will be conducted by at least one
observer 100% of the time during
seismic surveys in daylight hours.
Daylight observation by at least one
observer will continue during nonseismic periods, as long as weather
conditions make observations
meaningful, for comparison of sighting
rates and animal behavior during
periods with vs. without airgun
operations. PSOs will be appointed by
SIO with NMFS concurrence after a
review of their qualifications.
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices
The Melville is a suitable platform for
marine mammal observations. The
observer platform is located one deck
below and forward of the bridge (12.46
meters (40.88 ft) above the waterline),
affording a relatively unobstructed 180degree forward view. Aft views can be
obtained along the port and starboard
decks. During daytime hours, the
observer(s) will scan the area
systematically using reticulated 25 ×
150 big-eye binoculars and 7 × 50 handheld binoculars to determine bearing
and distance of sightings. A clinometer
is used to determine distances of
animals in close proximity to the vessel.
Hand-held fixed rangefinders and
distance marks on the ship’s side rails
are used to measure the exact location
of the safety zone. Laser rangefinders,
which have proven to be less reliable for
open water sighting, are also provided.
During darkness, night-vision
equipment will be available. The PSOs
will be in wireless communication with
ship’s officers on the bridge and
scientists in the vessel’s operations
laboratory, so they can advise promptly
of the need for avoidance maneuvers or
GI airgun shut down.
Before commencing seismic
operations during daylight hours, two
observers will maintain a 360-degree
watch for all marine mammals for at
least 30 minutes prior to the start of
seismic operations after an extended
shutdown of the airguns (1–2 minutes,
depending on vessel speed). If no
marine mammals are observed within
the EZ during this time, the observers
will notify the seismic personnel of an
‘‘all clear’’ status. Watch periods are
scheduled as a 2-hour rotation. The
observers continually scan the water
from the horizon to the ship’s hull, and
forward of 90 degrees from the port and
starboard beams. Based on PSO
observations, the GI airgun(s) will be
shut down (as described earlier in this
document) when marine mammals are
detected within or about to enter a
designated EZ that corresponds to the
180-dB re 1 μPa (rms) isopleth. The
PSOs will continue to maintain watch to
determine when the animal(s) are
outside the EZ, and airgun operations
will not resume until the animal has left
that EZ. The predicted distance for the
180-dB EZ is listed in Table 1 earlier in
this document. Seismic operations will
resume only after the animals are seen
to exit the safety radius or after no
further visual detection of the animal for
15 minutes (for small odontocetes and
pinnipeds) or 30 minutes (for mysticetes
and large odontocetes, including beaked
whales).
The bridge officers and other crew
will be instructed to alert the observer
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Oct 20, 2010
Jkt 223001
on watch of any suspected marine
mammal sighting. If needed, the bridge
will be contacted in order to maneuver
the ship to avoid interception with
approaching marine mammals.
PSO Data and Documentation
PSOs will record data to estimate the
numbers of marine mammals exposed to
various received sound levels and to
document reactions or lack thereof. Data
will be used to estimate numbers of
animals potentially ‘‘taken’’ by
harassment (as defined in the MMPA).
They will also provide information
needed to order a shutdown of the
seismic source when a marine mammal
is within or near the EZ. When a
sighting is made, the following
information about the sighting will be
recorded:
• Species, group size, and 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 seismic source or vessel (e.g., none,
avoidance, approach, paralleling, etc.);
and behavioral pace; and
• Time, location, heading, speed,
activity of the vessel, sea state,
visibility, cloud cover, and sun glare.
The data will also be recorded at the
start and end of each observation watch
and during a watch whenever there is a
change in one or more of the variables.
All observations, as well as
information regarding seismic source
shutdown, will be recorded in a
standardized format. Data collection
procedures are adapted from the linetransect protocols developed by the
SWFSC for their marine mammal
abundance research cruises. A laptop
computer is located on the observer
platform for ease of data entry. The
computer is connected to the ship’s
Global Positioning System, which
allows a record of time and position to
be made at 3-minute intervals and for
each event entered (such as sightings,
weather updates and effort changes).
Data accuracy will be verified by the
PSOs at sea and preliminary reports will
be prepared during the field program
and summaries forwarded to the SIO’s
shore facility and to NSF weekly or
more frequently. PSO observations will
provide the following information:
• The basis for decisions about
shutting down the airgun arrays;
• Information needed to estimate the
number of marine mammals potentially
‘‘taken by harassment’’, which will be
reported to NMFS;
• Data on the occurrence,
distribution, and activities of marine
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65001
mammals in the area where the seismic
study is conducted; and
• Data on the behavior and movement
patterns of marine mammals seen at
times with and without seismic activity.
A report will be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the end of the
cruise. The report will describe the
operations that were conducted and
sightings of marine mammals near the
operations. The report will be submitted
to NMFS, providing full documentation
of methods, results, and interpretation
pertaining to all monitoring. The 90-day
report will summarize the dates and
locations of seismic operations and all
marine mammal sightings (dates, times,
locations, activities, associated seismic
survey activities). The report will also
include estimates of the amount and
nature of potential ‘‘take’’ of marine
mammals by harassment or in other
ways.
All injured or dead marine mammals
(regardless of cause) will be reported to
NMFS as soon as practicable. The report
should include species or description of
animal, condition of animal, location,
time first found, observed behaviors (if
alive), and photo or video, if available.
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals by
Incidental Harassment
With respect to the activities
described 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].
All anticipated takes will be by Level
B harassment, involving temporary
changes in behavior. The mitigation and
monitoring measures described herein
are expected to minimize the possibility
of injurious or lethal takes such that
take by Level A harassment, serious
injury or mortality is considered remote.
However, as noted earlier, there is no
specific information demonstrating that
injurious or lethal ‘‘takes’’ would occur
even in the absence of the planned
mitigation and monitoring measures.
The sections here describe methods to
estimate ‘‘take by Level B harassment’’
and present estimates of the numbers of
marine mammals that might be affected
during the proposed seismic program.
The estimates of ‘‘take’’ are based on data
collected in the ETP by NMFS SWFSC
during 12 ship-based cetacean and
ecosystem assessment surveys
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
65002
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices
conducted during July–December from
1986–2006.
It is assumed that, during
simultaneous operations of the seismic
sources and the other sources, any
marine mammals close enough to be
affected by the MBES or SBP would
already be affected by the seismic
sources. However, whether or not the
seismic sources are operating
simultaneously with the other sources,
marine mammals are expected to exhibit
no more than short-term and
inconsequential responses to the MBES
and SBP given their characteristics (e.g.,
narrow downward-directed beam) and
other considerations described above,
such as the unlikelihood of being
exposed to the source at higher levels
and the fact that it would likely only be
for one or two pulses. Such reactions are
not considered to constitute ‘‘taking’’
(NMFS, 2001). Therefore, no additional
allowance is included for animals that
might be affected by sound sources
other than the seismic sources (i.e.,
airguns).
Extensive systematic ship-based
surveys have been conducted by NMFS
SWFSC for marine mammals in the ETP.
SWFSC has recently developed habitat
modeling as a method to estimate
cetacean densities on a finer spatial
scale than traditional line-transect
analyses by using a continuous function
of habitat variables, e.g., sea surface
temperature, depth, distance from shore,
and prey density (Barlow et al., 2009).
The models have been incorporated into
a web-based Geographic Information
System (GIS) developed by Duke
University’s Department of Defense
Strategic Environmental Research and
Development Program (SERDP) team in
close collaboration with the SWFSC
SERDP team (Read et al., 2009). The GIS
was used to obtain densities for the 10
cetaceans in the model (Bryde’s whale,
blue whale, Mesoplodon spp., roughtoothed, bottlenose, pantropical spotted,
spinner, striped, and short-beaked
common dolphins, and short-finned
pilot whale) in each of eight areas: The
four proposed survey areas (see Figure
1 in SIO’s application), and corridors 1°
wide and centered on the tracklines
between the survey areas and from the
southernmost survey area to the EEZ of
Peru. For species sighted in SWFSC
surveys whose sample sizes were too
small to model density (sperm whale,
humpback whale, Cuvier’s beaked
whale, Fraser’s dolphin, Risso’s
dolphin, melon-headed, pygmy killer,
false killer, and killer whales), SIO used
densities from the surveys conducted
during summer and fall 1986–1996, as
summarized by Ferguson and Barlow
(2001). Densities were calculated from
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Oct 20, 2010
Jkt 223001
Ferguson and Barlow (2003) for 5° x 5°
blocks that include the proposed survey
areas and corridors. Those blocks
included 27,275 km (16,947.9 mi) of
survey effort in Beaufort sea states 0–5
and 2,564 km (1,593.2 mi) of survey
effort in Beaufort sea states 0–2.
Densities were obtained for an
additional eight species that were
sighted in one or more of those blocks.
Oceanographic conditions, including
occasional El Nino and La Nina events,
influence the distribution and numbers
of marine mammals present in the ETP,
resulting in considerable year-to-year
variation in the distribution and
abundance of many marine mammal
species (Escorza-Trevino, 2009). Thus,
for some species, the densities derived
from recent surveys may not be
representative of the densities that will
be encountered during the proposed
seismic survey.
Table 3 in SIO’s application gives the
average (or ‘‘best’’) and maximum
densities for each species of cetacean
likely to occur in the study area, i.e.,
species for which densities were
obtained or assigned. These densities
have been corrected for both
detectability and availability bias by the
study authors. Detectability bias is
associated with diminishing sightability
with increasing lateral distance from the
trackline. Availability bias refers to the
fact that there is less than 100 percent
probability of sighting an animal that is
present along the survey trackline. The
estimated numbers of individuals
potentially exposed are presented next
based on the 160-dB re 1 μPa (rms)
Level B harassment criterion for all
cetaceans. It is assumed that marine
mammals exposed to airgun sounds at
that level might change their behavior
sufficiently to be considered ‘‘taken by
harassment’’.
It should be noted that the following
estimates of ‘‘takes by harassment’’
assume that the surveys will be
undertaken and completed; in fact, the
planned number of line-kilometers has
been increased to accommodate lines
that may need to be repeated,
equipment testing, etc. As is typical on
offshore ship surveys, inclement
weather and equipment malfunctions
are likely to cause delays and may limit
the number of useful line-kilometers of
seismic operations that can be
undertaken. Furthermore, any marine
mammal sightings within or near the
designated EZ will result in the
shutdown of seismic operations as a
mitigation measure. Thus, the following
estimates of the numbers of marine
mammals potentially exposed to 160-dB
re 1 μPa (rms) sounds are precautionary
and probably overestimate the actual
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
numbers of marine mammals that might
be taken. These estimates assume that
there will be no weather, equipment, or
mitigation delays, which is highly
unlikely. There is some uncertainty
about the representativeness of the data
and the assumptions used in the
calculations presented here. However,
the approach used here is believed to be
the best available approach.
The number of different individuals
that may be exposed to GI airgun sounds
with received levels ≥160 dB re 1 μPa
(rms) on one or more occasions was
estimated by considering the total
marine area that would be within the
160-dB radius around the operating
airgun array on at least one occasion,
along with the expected density of
animals in the area. The proposed
seismic lines do not run parallel to each
other in close proximity, which
minimizes the number of times an
individual mammal may be exposed
during the survey; in this case, an
individual could be exposed 1.01 times
on average. The numbers of different
individuals potentially exposed to ≥160
dB re 1 μPa (rms) were calculated by
multiplying the expected species
density, times the anticipated area to be
ensonified to that level during GI airgun
operations.
The area expected to be ensonified
was determined by entering the planned
survey lines into a MapInfo GIS, using
the GIS to identify the relevant areas by
‘‘drawing’’ the applicable 160-dB buffer
(see Table 1 in this document) around
each seismic line, and then calculating
the total area within the buffers. Areas
where overlap occurred (because of
intersecting lines) were included only
once when estimating the number of
individuals exposed.
Applying the approach described
here, approximately 4,340 km2 (1,675.7
mi2) would be within the 160-dB
isopleth on one or more occasions
during the surveys. In calculating
exposure estimates, this figure was
increased by 25% (i.e., to 5,425 km2) in
order to account for the potential need
to re-survey lines or other contingency.
This approach does not allow for
turnover in the mammal populations in
the study area during the course of the
survey. That might underestimate actual
numbers of individuals exposed,
although the conservative distances
used to calculate the area may offset
this. In addition, the approach assumes
that no cetaceans will move away or
toward the trackline as the Melville
approaches in response to increasing
sound levels prior to the time the levels
reach 160 dB. Another way of
interpreting the estimates that follow
(Table 2 in this document) is that they
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
65003
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices
represent the number of individuals that
are expected (in the absence of a seismic
program) to occur in the waters that will
be exposed to ≥160 dB re 1 μPa (rms).
The take estimates presented here do
not take the proposed mitigation
measures into consideration and thus
are likely to be overestimates.
TABLE 2—THE ESTIMATES OF THE POSSIBLE NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO SOUND LEVELS GREATER
THAN OR EQUAL TO 160 DB DURING SIO’S PROPOSED SEISMIC SURVEY IN THE EASTERN TROPICAL PACIFIC OCEAN
IN OCT–NOV 2010. THE PROPOSED SOUND SOURCE IS A PAIR OF GI AIRGUNS. RECEIVED LEVELS ARE EXPRESSED
IN DB RE 1 μPA (RMS) (AVERAGED OVER PULSE DURATION), CONSISTENT WITH NMFS’ PRACTICE. NOT ALL MARINE
MAMMALS WILL CHANGE THEIR BEHAVIOR WHEN EXPOSED TO THESE SOUND LEVELS, BUT SOME MAY ALTER THEIR
BEHAVIOR WHEN LEVELS ARE LOWER (SEE TEXT). SEE TABLES 2–4 IN SIO’S APPLICATION FOR FURTHER DETAIL.
Number of
individuals
exposed
(best) 1
Species
Approx. %
regional
population
(best) 2
Take
authorization
Mysticetes
Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni) ...............................................................................
Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) ..............................................................................
Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) ..................................................................
3
**2
**2
0.02
0.05
3 NA
3
2
2
22
10
**2
9
**68
21
**83
192
6
777
**4
**16
**56
**3
5
**35
0.09
0.05
<0.01
0.01
0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.05
0.01
0.05
0.01
22
10
**2
*15
*131
*109
**83
192
*440
777
*30
*258
**56
*11
5
**35
Odontocetes
Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) ........................................................................
Cuvier’s beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris) ....................................................................
Mesoplodon sp. (unidentified) .........................................................................................
Rough-toothed dolphin (Steno bredanensis) ...................................................................
Pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata) ............................................................
Spinner dolphin (Stenella longirostris) .............................................................................
Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) ..........................................................................
Striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba) ..........................................................................
Fraser’s dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei) ..........................................................................
Short-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) .......................................................
Pygmy killer whale (Feresa attenuata) ............................................................................
Melon-headed whale (Peponocephala electra) ...............................................................
Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus) .................................................................................
False killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens) ......................................................................
Killer whale (Orcinus orca) ..............................................................................................
Short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus) .................................................
* Requested take authorization increased from ‘best’ exposure estimate to mean group size as reported in Ferguson et al. (2006).
** Rounded-up, where proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010) presented figures rounded down. See Description of the Specified Activity in this document for discussion.
1 Best (mean) estimate density are from Table 3 of SIO’s application. Humpback whale estimates calculated independently using methodology
described previously.
2 Regional population size estimates are from Table 2 in the proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010).
3 Southern Hemisphere population sizes are poorly understood. However, the number of individuals potentially exposed is low relative to regional population.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers
Analysis
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.’’
In making a negligible impact
determination, NMFS considers:
(1) The number of anticipated
mortalities;
(2) The number and nature of
anticipated injuries;
(3) The number, nature, and intensity,
and duration of Level B harassment; and
(4) The context in which the takes
occur.
As mentioned previously, NMFS
estimates that 21 species of marine
mammals (including three species
categorized as Mesoplodon sp.) could be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:04 Oct 20, 2010
Jkt 223001
potentially affected by Level B
harassment over the course of the IHA.
For each species, these numbers are
small (each, less than one percent)
relative to the population size.
No takes by (Level A harassment),
serious injury, or mortality are
anticipated to occur as a result of the
SIO’s marine geophysical survey, and
none are authorized. Only short-term
behavioral disturbance is anticipated to
occur due to the brief and sporadic
duration of the survey activities, and
these takes are not expected to occur in
a place that is of specific biological
importance to marine mammals, such as
in a known breeding, calving, or feeding
area, as no such times or places are
known for the project location or time.
If such a place, previously unknown,
does exist in the project area, NMFS
would still anticipate that the impacts
would be negligible due to their
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
temporary nature in space and time.
Due to the nature, degree, and context
of the behavioral harassment
anticipated, the activity is not expected
to impact rates of recruitment or
survival.
For reasons stated previously, the
specified activities associated with the
survey are not likely to cause TTS, PTS
or other non-auditory injury, serious
injury, or death to affected marine
mammals because:
(1) The likelihood that, given
sufficient notice through relatively slow
ship speed, marine mammals are
expected to move away from a noise
source that is annoying prior to its
becoming potentially injurious;
(2) The fact that cetaceans would have
to be closer than 40 m (0.025 mi) in
deep water when the full array is in use
at a 2 m (6.6 ft) tow depth from the
vessel to be exposed to levels of sound
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
65004
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices
believed to have even a minimal chance
of causing PTS;
(3) The fact that marine mammals
would have to be closer than 400 m
(0.25 mi) in deep water when the full
array is in use at a 2 m (6.6 ft) tow depth
from the vessel to be exposed to levels
of sound (160 dB) believed to have even
a minimal chance at causing TTS; and
(4) The likelihood that marine
mammal detection ability by trained
observers is high at that short distance
from the vessel;
(5) The incorporation of other
required mitigation measures (i.e.,
ramp-up, shut-down, temporal and
spatial avoidance, and additional
mitigation measures); and
(7) The relatively limited duration
and geographically widespread
distances of the seismic survey
(approximately 15 days).
As a result, no take by injury, serious
injury, or death is anticipated or
authorized, and the potential for
temporary or permanent hearing
impairment is very low and will be
avoided through the incorporation of
the monitoring and mitigation measures.
While the number of marine
mammals potentially incidentally
harassed will depend on the
distribution and abundance of marine
mammals in the vicinity of the survey
activity, the number of potential Level
B incidental harassment takings (see
Table 2) is estimated to be small, less
than one percent of any of the estimated
population sizes based on the data
disclosed in Table 2 of this notice, and
has been mitigated to the lowest level
practicable through incorporation of the
monitoring and mitigation measures
mentioned previously in this document.
Also, there are no known important
reproductive or feeding areas in the
action area.
NMFS has determined, provided that
the aforementioned mitigation and
monitoring measures are implemented,
that the impact of conducting a marine
geophysical survey in the ETP, October
through November 2010, may result, at
worst, in a temporary modification in
behavior and/or low-level physiological
effects (Level B harassment) of small
numbers of certain species of marine
mammals.
While behavioral modifications,
including temporarily vacating the area
during the operation of the airgun(s),
may be made by these species to avoid
the resultant acoustic disturbance, the
availability of alternate areas within
these areas and the short and sporadic
duration of the research activities, have
led NMFS to determine that this action
will have a negligible impact on the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Oct 20, 2010
Jkt 223001
species in the specified geographic
region.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
mitigation and monitoring measures,
NMFS finds that SIO’s planned research
activities, will result in the incidental
take of small numbers of marine
mammals, by Level B harassment only,
and that the total taking from the marine
geophysical survey will have a
negligible impact on the affected species
or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by this
action.
Endangered Species Act
Of the 21 species of marine mammals
that may occur in the survey area, three
are listed as endangered under the ESA,
including the humpback, blue, and
sperm whales. Under Section 7 of the
ESA, NSF had initiated formal
consultation with the NMFS, Office of
Protected Resources, Endangered
Species Division, on this seismic
survey. NMFS’ Office of Protected
Resources, Permits, Conservation and
Education Division, also initiated formal
consultation under Section 7 of the ESA
with NMFS’ Office of Protected
Resources, Endangered Species
Division, to obtain a Biological Opinion
(BiOp) evaluating the effects of issuing
the IHA on threatened and endangered
marine mammals and, consistent with
the requirements for mitigation and
monitoring set forth in the IHA,
authorizing incidental take. On October
15, 2010, NMFS concluded formal
Section 7 consultation with itself and
issued a BiOp which concluded that the
proposed action and issuance of the IHA
are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the humpback,
blue, and sperm whales and leatherback
(Dermochelys coriacea), green (Chelonia
mydas), loggerhead (Caretta caretta),
hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), and
olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) sea
turtles. The BiOp also concluded that
designated critical habitat for these
species does not occur in the action area
and would not be affected by the survey.
SIO must comply with the Relevant
Terms and Conditions of the Incidental
Take Statement corresponding to NMFS’
BiOp issued to both NSF and NMFS’
Office of Protected Resources.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
To meet NMFS’ National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) requirements for the
issuance of an IHA to SIO, NMFS has
prepared an Environmental Assessment
(EA) titled ‘‘Issuance of an Incidental
Harassment Authorization to the
Scripps Institution of Oceanography to
Take Marine Mammals by Harassment
Incidental to a Marine Geophysical
Survey off of Central and South
America in the Eastern Tropical Pacific
Ocean, October-November 2010’’. This
EA incorporates by reference the NSF’s
Environmental Analysis Pursuant To
Executive Order 12114 (NSF, 2010) and
an associated report (Report) prepared
by LGL Limited Environmental
Research Associates (LGL) for NSF,
titled, ‘‘Environmental Assessment of a
Marine Geophysical Survey by the R/V
Melville in the Pacific Ocean off Central
and South America, October-November
2010’’ (LGL, 2010) by reference pursuant
to 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
1502.21 and NOAA Administrative
Order (NAO) 216–6 § 5.09(d). NMFS’ EA
analyzes the direct, indirect and
cumulative environmental impacts of
the specified activities on marine
mammals including those listed as
threatened or endangered under the
ESA. NMFS also evaluated and
considered comments provided by the
public in finalizing the EA and
addressing the intensity of impacts to
marine mammals
The NMFS has made a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) and,
therefore, will not prepare an
environmental impact statement for the
issuance of an IHA to SIO for this
activity. The EA and the NMFS FONSI
for this activity are available upon
request (see ADDRESSES).
Determinations
NMFS has determined that the impact
of conducting the specific seismic
survey activities described in this notice
and the IHA request in the specific
geographic region in the eastern tropical
Pacific Ocean may result, at worst, in a
temporary modification in behavior
(Level B harassment) of small numbers
of marine mammals. Further, this
activity is expected to result in a
negligible impact on the affected species
or stocks of marine mammals. The
provision requiring that the activity not
have an unmitigable impact on the
availability of the affected species or
stock of marine mammals for
subsistence uses is not implicated for
this action.
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices
Authorization
As a result of these determinations,
NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to SIO
for conducting a marine geophysical
survey in the eastern tropical Pacific
Ocean, provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
The duration of the IHA would not
exceed one year from the date of its
issuance.
Dated: October 15, 2010.
Helen M. Golde,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–26547 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XZ53
Taking and Importing of Marine
Mammals
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; annual affirmative
finding renewal.
AGENCY:
The Assistant Administrator
for Fisheries, NMFS, (Assistant
Administrator) has renewed the
affirmative finding for the Government
of El Salvador under the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). This
affirmative finding will allow yellowfin
tuna harvested in the eastern tropical
Pacific Ocean (ETP) in compliance with
the International Dolphin Conservation
Program (IDCP) by El Salvadorian-flag
purse seine vessels or purse seine
vessels operating under El Salvadorian
jurisdiction to be imported into the
United States. The affirmative finding
was based on review of documentary
evidence submitted by the Government
of El Salvador and obtained from the
Inter-American Tropical Tuna
Commission (IATTC) and the U.S.
Department of State.
DATES: The affirmative finding renewal
is effective from April 1, 2010, through
March 31, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sarah Wilkin, Southwest Region, NMFS,
501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200,
Long Beach, CA 90802–4213; phone
562–980–3230; fax 562–980–4027.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq., allows
the entry into the United States of
yellowfin tuna harvested by purse seine
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:24 Oct 20, 2010
Jkt 223001
vessels in the ETP under certain
conditions. If requested by the
harvesting nation, the Assistant
Administrator will determine whether
to make an affirmative finding based
upon documentary evidence provided
by the government of the harvesting
nation, the IATTC, or the Department of
State.
The affirmative finding process
requires that the harvesting nation is
meeting its obligations under the IDCP
and obligations of membership in the
IATTC. Every 5 years, the government of
the harvesting nation must request an
affirmative finding and submit the
required documentary evidence directly
to the Assistant Administrator. On an
annual basis, NMFS will review the
affirmative finding and determine
whether the harvesting nation continues
to meet the requirements. A nation may
provide information related to
compliance with IDCP and IATTC
measures directly to NMFS on an
annual basis or may authorize the
IATTC to release the information to
NMFS to annually renew an affirmative
finding determination without an
application from the harvesting nation.
An affirmative finding will be
terminated, in consultation with the
Secretary of State, if the Assistant
Administrator determines that the
requirements of 50 CFR 216.24(f) are no
longer being met or that a nation is
consistently failing to take enforcement
actions on violations, thereby
diminishing the effectiveness of the
IDCP.
As a part of the affirmative finding
process set forth in 50 CFR 216.24(f), the
Assistant Administrator considered
documentary evidence submitted by the
Republic of El Salvador or obtained
from the IATTC and the Department of
State and has determined that El
Salvador has met the MMPA’s
requirements to receive an annual
affirmative finding renewal.
After consultation with the
Department of State, the Assistant
Administrator issued the Republic of El
Salvador’s annual affirmative finding
renewal, allowing the continued
importation into the United States of
yellowfin tuna and products derived
from yellowfin tuna harvested in the
ETP by El Salvadorian-flag purse seine
vessels or purse seine vessels operating
under El Salvadorian jurisdiction. This
annual renewal of El Salvador’s
affirmative finding will remain valid
through March 31, 2011.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65005
Dated: October 15, 2010.
Eric C. Schwaab,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–26652 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of
Engineers
Intent To Prepare a Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement
(SEIS), Mississippi Barrier Island
Restoration, Mississippi Coastal
Improvements Program (MsCIP) for
Hancock, Harrison, and Jackson
Counties, MS
Department of the Army, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, DOD.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
AGENCY:
The Mobile District, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps),
intends to prepare a Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement
(DSEIS) to the MsCIP Comprehensive
Plan and Integrated Programmatic EIS,
prepared in June 2009, which evaluated
comprehensive water resource
improvements associated with
hurricane and storm damage risk
reduction, shoreline erosion, salt water
intrusion and fish and wildlife
preservation in three coastal counties of
Mississippi. As described in the
Comprehensive Plan, the SEIS will
address potential impacts associated
with the comprehensive restoration of
the Mississippi barrier islands. These
actions are related to the consequences
of hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico in
2005 and will be used as a basis for
ensuring compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
ADDRESSES: Questions about the
proposed action and the DSEIS should
be addressed to Mr. Larry Parson, or Dr.
Susan Ivester Rees, Planning and
Environmental Division, Mobile
District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
P.O. Box 2288, Mobile, AL 36628–0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Larry Parson, (251) 694–3139 or e-mail
at larry.e.parson@usace.army.mil or Dr.
Susan Ivester Rees, (251) 694–414, or email at susan.i.rees@usace.army.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Hurricane Katrina made landfall in
Mississippi on August 29, 2005 causing
catastrophic damage to lives, property,
and natural resources throughout
coastal Mississippi. In response, the
U.S. Congress directed the Secretary of
the Army through the Corps of
Engineers (the Corps) to conduct an
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21OCN1.SGM
21OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 203 (Thursday, October 21, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64996-65005]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-26547]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XZ60
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Marine Geophysical Survey in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean,
October Through November 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 has issued an
Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to Scripps Institution of
Oceanography (SIO), a part of the University of California, to take
small numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to
conducting a marine geophysical survey in the eastern tropical Pacific
Ocean (ETP), October through November, 2010.
DATES: Effective October 19, 2010, through November 30, 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 contacts listed here. A copy of the application
containing a list of the references used in this document may be
obtained by writing to the above address, telephoning the contact
listed here (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or visiting the
Internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications. The following associated documents are
also available at the same Internet address: SIO's application, the
Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared by NMFS, and the finding of no
significant impact (FONSI). The NMFS Biological Opinion will be
available online at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/consultation/opinions.htm. Documents cited in this notice may be viewed, by
appointment, during regular business hours, at the aforementioned
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws or Candace Nachman, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 713-2289.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) directs
the Secretary of Commerce to authorize, upon request, the incidental,
but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals of a
species or population stock, by United States citizens who engage in a
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings are made and, if the taking is
limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided
to the public for review.
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), and will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or
stock(s) for subsistence uses. The authorization must set forth the
permissible methods of taking, other means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact on the species or stock and its habitat, and
monitoring and reporting of such takings. 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
to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment.
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA establishes a 45-day time limit for
NMFS' review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and
comment period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental
harassment of small numbers of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the
close of the public 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].
[[Page 64997]]
Summary of Request
NMFS received an application on May 28, 2010 from SIO for the
taking, by harassment, of marine mammals, incidental to conducting a
marine geophysical survey in the ETP. SIO, with research funding from
the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), plans to conduct a marine
seismic survey in the ETP, from October through November 2010.
SIO plans to use one source vessel, the R/V Melville (Melville),
with a seismic airgun array to conduct a geophysical survey in the ETP.
In addition to the operations of the seismic airgun array, SIO intends
to operate a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and a sub-bottom profiler
(SBP) continuously throughout the survey. The purpose of this project
is to better understand how marine sediments record paleo-oceanographic
information.
Acoustic stimuli (i.e., increased underwater sound) generated
during the operation of the seismic airgun array may have the potential
to cause marine mammals in the survey area to be behaviorally disturbed
in a manner that NMFS considers to be Level B harassment. This is the
principal means of marine mammal taking associated with these
activities and SIO has requested an authorization for the incidental
take, by Level B harassment only, of up to 21 species of marine
mammals. These species include: Bryde's whale; blue whale; sperm whale;
humpback whale; Cuvier's beaked whale; Blainville's beaked whale; pygmy
beaked whale; gingko-toothed beaked whale; rough-toothed dolphin;
bottlenose dolphin; pantropical spotted dolphin; spinner dolphin;
striped dolphin; Fraser's dolphin; short-beaked common dolphin; Risso's
dolphin; melon-headed whale; pygmy killer whale; false killer whale;
killer whale; and short-finned pilot whale. Blainville's beaked whale,
pygmy beaked whale, and gingko-toothed beaked whale are hereafter
grouped as Mesoplodon sp., as these species are expected to be
encountered only infrequently and are difficult to distinguish from one
another.
Description of the Specified Activity
The Melville is expected to depart Puntarenas, Costa Rica, on
October 19, 2010, and spend approximately fifteen days conducting
seismic surveys, ten days collecting water and core samples, and
approximately two days in transit, arriving at Arica, Chile, on
November 14, 2010. The proposed survey will encompass the area from
approximately 8[deg] N-12[deg] S and 80-91[deg] W, off the coasts of
Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru, in the high seas and
within the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of Costa Rica, Panama,
Colombia, and Ecuador. At each of four sites (see Figure 1 of SIO's
application), seismic operations will be conducted for approximately
two days, and each water sampling and coring station will be occupied
for one to two days. SIO will operate the Melville to deploy an airgun
array and tow a hydrophone streamer to complete the survey. Some minor
deviation from these dates is possible, depending on logistics and
weather. Therefore, NMFS plans to issue an authorization that extends
to November 30, 2010.
The Melville will deploy a pair of low-energy generator-injector
(GI) airguns as an energy source at a depth of 2 m (each with a
discharge volume of 45 in \3\), plus either of two towed hydrophone
streamers, one 725 m (2,378.6 ft) long with 40 channels, and the other
350 m (1,148.3 ft) long with 16 channels. Hydrophone streamers are
towed at adjustable depth to afford best reception of returning seismic
signals, depending upon surface conditions, but are typically towed at
approximately 10 m. The energy to the GI airgun is compressed air
supplied by compressors onboard the source vessel. As the GI airgun is
towed along the survey lines, the receiving systems will receive the
returning acoustic signals. The study (e.g., equipment testing,
startup, line changes, repeat coverage of any areas) will take place in
waters deeper than 1,000 m (3,280 ft). All planned geophysical data
acquisition activities will be conducted by SIO with on-board
assistance by the scientists who have proposed the study. The Chief
Scientist is Dr. Franco Marcantonio of Texas A&M University. The vessel
will be self-contained, and the crew will live aboard the vessel for
the entire cruise.
NMFS outlined the purpose of the program in a previous notice for
the proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010). The activities to be
conducted have not changed between the proposed IHA notice and this
final notice announcing the issuance of the IHA. For a more detailed
description of the authorized action, including vessel and acoustic
source specifications, the reader should refer to the aforementioned
proposed IHA notice.
Several errors found in the notice for the proposed IHA (75 FR
54095, September 3, 2010) have been corrected in this document. These
errors are as follows:
The notice for proposed IHA referenced 40, 16, and 12
channel hydrophone streamers. The 12 channel streamer was referenced in
error; 40 and 16 channel streamers will be utilized as discussed in
this document.
Several errors were corrected with regard to exposure
estimates and the resulting take authorization (see Estimated Take of
Marine Mammals by Incidental Harassment and Table 2 of this document).
[cir] Take estimate for sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) was
presented as 23 due to a calculation error and has been revised to 22.
[cir] Take estimate for striped dolphins (Stenella coeruleoalba)
was presented as six, due to the erroneous use of Fraser's dolphin
(Lagenodelphis hosei) density estimates. Take estimate, as well as
density estimate, for striped dolphin has been corrected to 192.
[cir] Exposure estimates and take authorization numbers have been
corrected for several species by rounding up rather than down. As there
can be no portion of an individual in estimating take, NMFS has rounded
up in all cases where exposure estimates have some non-negligible
portion of a whole (see Table 2 in this document).
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of the SIO application and proposed IHA was
published in the Federal Register on September 3, 2010 (75 FR 54095).
During the comment period, NMFS received comments from the Marine
Mammal Commission (Commission). The public comments can be found online
at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. Following are
their comments and NMFS' responses.
Comment 1: The Commission recommends that NMFS require the
applicant to use location-specific environmental parameters to re-
estimate safety zones and then recalculate associated exposures. The
Commission further suggests that the applicant should be required to
use in-situ measurements to verify and, if need be, refine the safety
zones prior to or at the beginning of the survey, and that the
applicant should be required to determine actual exposures based on
refined safety zones, sightability, and relevant detection functions.
Response: NMFS is confident in the peer-reviewed results of the
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory seismic equipment calibration studies
which, although viewed as conservative, are used to determine cruise-
specific exclusion zones and which factor into exposure estimates. With
the expected low density of marine mammals, combined with the remote,
deep-water survey location, NMFS has determined that the exclusion
zones identified in
[[Page 64998]]
the IHA are appropriate for the survey and that additional field
measurement is not necessary at this time. While exposures of marine
mammals to acoustic stimuli are difficult to estimate, NMFS is
confident that the levels of take authorized herein are estimated based
upon the best available scientific information and estimation
methodology. The safety zones used to estimate exposure are appropriate
and sufficient.
Comment 2: The Commission recommends that 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 safety
zones.
Response: As discussed in the proposed rule, combined with the fact
that a portion of marine mammals would be expected to avoid exposure to
the higher levels of sound present within the designated safety zone,
as well as the comparatively small size of the safety zone, NMFS
believes that the planned monitoring program will be sufficient to,
with reasonable certainty, minimize the exposure of marine mammals to
sound within the identified exclusion zones (EZ). 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 protected species observers (PSOs) and night
vision devices. In the event of a complete shut-down of the airgun
array, for mitigation or repairs, airgun operations will be suspended
until nautical twilight-dawn (when PSOs are able to clear the EZ).
Airgun operations will not begin until the entire EZ radius is visible
for at least 30 minutes.
Comment 3: The Commission recommends that NMFS propose to SIO that
it revise its study design to include collection of meaningful baseline
data on the distribution and behavior of marine mammals.
Response: The purpose of this cruise is for marine geophysical
research, not to conduct a dedicated marine mammal research survey.
Extending or altering the survey is not practicable from either an
operational or research standpoint for the applicant. Due to the remote
location of the survey and the length of time needed to conduct the
requested research, 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
on marine mammals, but it is unlikely that the information would result
in any statistically robust conclusions for this particular seismic
survey. As the monitoring program is currently devised, one PSO (at
minimum) will be on watch not only during all daylight airgun
operations, or start-up of airguns at any time, but at all times when
effective observation is possible. Any further revisions of study
design are impractical.
In addition, SIO is not responsible for the study design. Through a
cooperative agreement with the NSF, SIO is the operator of the
Melville, which hosts the field research program. The study is designed
by the Principal Investigator and is submitted to NSF as a proposal for
funding consideration and subsequently reviewed by a merit review
panel. This study was selected based on its scientific merits, and
extension or modification of the field component would require
scientific justification and NSF approval and potentially further merit
review.
Comment 4: The Commission recommends that NMFS extend the
monitoring period to at least one hour before initiation of seismic
activities and at least one hour before the resumption of airgun
activities after a power-down because of a marine mammal sighting
within a safety zone.
Response: As the Commission points out, several species of deep-
diving cetaceans are capable of remaining underwater for more than 30
minutes, however, for the following reasons NMFS believes that 30
minutes is an adequate length for the monitoring period prior to the
start-up of airguns: (1) In most cases PSOs are making observations
during times when seismic sources are not being operated and will
actually be observing prior to the 30 min observation period anyway,
(2) the majority of the species that may be exposed do not stay
underwater more than 30 minutes, and (3) if deep-diving individuals
happened to be in the area in the short time immediately prior to the
pre-start-up monitoring and if an animal's maximum underwater time is
45 min, there is only a one in three chance that the last random
surfacing would be prior to the beginning of the required 30 min
monitoring period.
Also, seismic vessels are moving continuously (because of the long,
towed array) and NMFS believes that unless the animal submerges and
follows at the speed of the vessel (highly unlikely, especially when
considering that a significant part of their movements is vertical
[deep-diving]), the vessel will be far beyond the length of the safety
radii within 30 min, and therefore it will be safe to resume
acquisition. Finally, due to the nature of the seismic source to be
used during the survey, power-down (as mentioned in the Commission's
comment) will not be used as a mitigation measure.
In addition, mitigation measures are required to be
``practicable.'' NMFS believes that the framework for visual monitoring
will (1) be effective at spotting almost all species for which take is
requested; and (2) that imposing additional requirements, such as those
suggested by the Commission, would not meaningfully increase the
effectiveness of observing marine mammals approaching or entering the
exclusion zones. The Commission's recommendation would cause additional
impact on the science mission, limiting acquisition opportunity without
dramatically increasing overall effectiveness of visual monitoring.
Comment 5: The Commission recommends that NMFS continue to require
ramp-up and power-down procedures as a mitigation measure pending the
outcome of a meeting to discuss these procedures.
Response: NMFS will continue to require ramp-up and power-down
procedures as mitigation measures, when applicable, unless or until
these measures are proven to be ineffective or other measures are
proven to be more effective.
Comment 6: The Commission recommends that NMFS not include detailed
information and analyses for species that are not expected to be in the
proposed survey area in future Federal Register notices.
Response: NMFS agrees that detailed information and analyses for
species that are not expected to be in the proposed survey area should
not be included in Federal Register notices. NMFS considers the
information included in the Federal Register notice of proposed IHA (75
FR 54095, September 3, 2010) in this case to be necessary justification
for determinations to not authorize take for certain species.
In closing, NMFS is planning to meet with the Commission to further
discuss the broad issues raised in their
[[Page 64999]]
comments, which relate to more than just the IHA contemplated here.
Description of the Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
Forty-three species of marine mammals, including 29 odontocetes, 7
mysticetes, 6 pinnipeds, and the marine sea otter (Enhydra lutris), are
known to occur in the ETP. Of these, 21 cetacean species are likely to
occur in the proposed survey areas in the ETP during October-November
(see Table 2 in this document), and are considered further here. Three
of these cetacean species are listed under the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) as Endangered: The sperm (Physeter macrocephalus), humpback
(Megaptera novaeangliae), and blue (Balaenoptera musculus) whales.
NMFS has presented a more detailed discussion of the status of
these stocks and their occurrence in the ETP in the notice of the
proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010).
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
Summary of Potential Effects of Airgun Sounds
Level B harassment of cetaceans has the potential to occur during
the seismic survey due to acoustic stimuli caused by the firing of
airguns, which introduces sound into the marine environment. The
effects of sounds from airguns might include one or more of the
following: tolerance, masking of natural sounds, behavioral
disturbance, temporary or permanent hearing impairment, or non-auditory
physical or physiological effects (Richardson et al., 1995; Gordon et
al., 2004; Nowacek et al., 2007; Southall et al., 2007). Permanent
hearing impairment, in the unlikely event that it occurred, would
constitute injury, but temporary threshold shift (TTS) is not an injury
(Southall et al., 2007). Although the possibility cannot be entirely
excluded, it is unlikely that the project would result in any cases of
temporary or permanent hearing impairment, or any significant non-
auditory physical or physiological effects. Some behavioral disturbance
is expected, but NMFS expects the disturbance to be localized and
short-term.
The notice of the proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010)
included a discussion of the effects of sounds from airguns on
mysticetes and odontocetes, including tolerance, masking, behavioral
disturbance, hearing impairment, and other non-auditory physical
effects. Additional information on the behavioral reactions (or lack
thereof) by all types of marine mammals to seismic vessels can be found
in SIO's application and NMFS' EA. The notice of the proposed IHA also
included a discussion of the potential effects of the multibeam
echosounder (MBES) and the sub-bottom profiler (SBP). Because of the
shape of the beams of these sources and their power, NMFS believes it
unlikely that marine mammals will be exposed to either the MBES or the
SBP at levels at or above those likely to cause harassment. Further,
NMFS believes that the brief exposure of cetaceans to a few signals
from the multi-beam bathymetric sonar system is not likely to result in
the harassment of marine mammals.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
A detailed discussion of the potential effects of this action on
marine mammal habitat, including physiological and behavioral effects
on marine fish and invertebrates was included in the proposed IHA (75
FR 54095, September 3, 2010). Based on the discussion in the proposed
IHA notice and the nature of the activities (limited duration), the
authorized operations are not expected to result in any permanent
impact on habitats used by marine mammals, including the food sources
they use. The main impact associated with the activity will be
temporarily elevated noise levels and the associated direct effects on
marine mammals.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization (ITA) under
sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA, NMFS must, where applicable,
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 (where relevant).
Mitigation and monitoring measures to be implemented for the
seismic survey have been developed and refined during previous SIO
seismic studies and associated EAs, IHA applications, and IHAs. The
mitigation and monitoring measures described herein represent a
combination of procedures required by past IHAs for other similar
projects and on best practices recommended in Richardson et al. (1995),
Pierson et al. (1998), and Weir and Dolman (2007). The measures are
described in detail below.
Mitigation measures to be implemented by SIO during the survey
include (1) visual monitoring by protected species observers (discussed
later in this document), (2) establishment of an exclusion zone (EZ),
(3) speed or course alteration, provided that doing so will not
compromise operational safety requirements, (4) GI airgun shut down
procedures, and (5) ramp-up procedures. Although power-down procedures
are often standard operating practice for seismic surveys, they will
not be used here because powering down from two airguns to one airgun
would make only a small difference in the 180-dB safety radius. The
difference is not enough to allow continued one-airgun operations if a
mammal came within the safety radius for two airguns.
Exclusion Zones--As discussed previously in this document, NMFS has
determined that for acoustic effects, using acoustic thresholds in
combination with corresponding safety radii is an effective way to
consistently apply measures to avoid or minimize the impacts of an
action. Thresholds are used to establish a mitigation shut-down, or
exclusion, zone, i.e., if an animal enters an area calculated to be
ensonified above the level of an established threshold, a sound source
is shut down.
As a matter of past practice and based on the best available
information at the time regarding the effects of marine sound, NMFS
estimates that Level A harassment from acoustic sources may occur when
cetaceans are exposed to levels above 180 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) level.
NMFS also considers 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) as the criterion for
estimating the onset of Level B harassment from acoustic sources
producing impulse sounds, as in this seismic survey.
Empirical data concerning the 180- and 160-dB distances have been
acquired based on measurements during the acoustic verification study
conducted by L-DEO in the northern Gulf of Mexico from May 27-June 3,
2003 (Tolstoy et al., 2004). The empirical data indicate that, for this
survey, the assumed 180- and 160-dB radii are 40 m (131.2 ft) and 400 m
(1,312.3 ft), respectively (see Table 1 in this document).
[[Page 65000]]
Table 1--Predicted Distances to Which Sound Levels [gteqt]190, 180 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) Might Be
Received From Two 45 in\3\ GI Airguns That Will Be Used During the Seismic Surveys in the Eastern Tropical
Pacific Ocean During October-November 2010
[Distances are based on model results provided by L-DEO.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Distances at Received Levels
(m)
Source and volume Tow depth (m) Water depth ---------------------------------------
180 dB 160 dB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two GI airguns, 45 in\3\ each... 2 Deep (>1,000 m) 40 400
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speed or Course Alteration--If a marine mammal is detected outside
the EZ but is likely to enter it based on relative movement of the
vessel and the animal, and if safety and scientific objectives allow,
the vessel speed and/or course will be adjusted to minimize the
likelihood of the animal entering the EZ. In the event that safety and/
or scientific objectives do not allow for alteration of speed and/or
course as a needed mitigation measure, shut-down procedures will still
be utilized (see below). Major course and speed adjustments are often
impractical when towing long seismic streamers and large source arrays
but are possible in this case because only a small source and short
streamers will be used.
Shut-down Procedures--If a marine mammal is detected by PSOs
outside the EZ but is likely to enter the EZ, and if the vessel's speed
and/or course cannot be changed to avoid having the animal enter the
EZ, the airgun array, MBES, and SBP will be shut down before the animal
is within the EZ. Likewise, if a marine mammal is already within the EZ
when first detected, the airgun array, MBES, and SBP will be shut down
immediately. Following a shut down, seismic activity will not resume
until the marine mammal has cleared the EZ. The animal will be
considered to have cleared the EZ if it (a) is visually observed to
have left the EZ, or (b) has not been seen within the EZ for 15 min in
the case of small odontocetes, or has not been seen within the EZ for
30 min in the case of mysticetes and large odontocetes, including sperm
and beaked whales.
Ramp-up Procedures--A ramp-up procedure will be followed when the
GI airguns begin operating after a specified period without GI airgun
operations. It is proposed that, for the present cruise, this period
would be approximately 1-2 min. This period is based on the 180-dB
radii for the GI airguns (see Table 1 in this document) in relation to
the planned speed of the Melville while shooting. Ramp-up will begin
with a single GI airgun (45 in\3\). The second GI airgun (45 in\3\)
will be added after 5 min. During ramp up, the PSOs will monitor the
exclusion zone, and, if marine mammals are sighted, a shut-down will be
implemented as though both GI airguns were operational.
If the complete EZ has not been visible for at least 30 min prior
to the start of operations in either daylight or nighttime, ramp-up
will not commence. If one GI airgun has operated, ramp-up to full power
will be permissible at night or in poor visibility on the assumption
that marine mammals will be alerted to the approaching seismic vessel
by the sounds from the single GI airgun and could move away if they
choose. A ramp-up from a shut-down may occur at night, but only when
the entire EZ is visible, and it has been determined from the pre-ramp
up watch that the EZ is clear of marine mammals. Ramp-up of the GI
airguns will not be initiated if a marine mammal is sighted within or
near the applicable EZ during day or night.
NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation
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.
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 IHAs
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 action area.
SIO will sponsor marine mammal monitoring during the present
project, in order to implement the mitigation measures that require
real-time monitoring, and to satisfy the monitoring requirements of the
IHA. SIO's Monitoring Plan is described below this section and was
planned as a self-contained project independent of any other related
monitoring projects that may be occurring simultaneously in the same
regions. SIO is prepared to discuss coordination of its monitoring
program with any related work that might be done by other groups
insofar as this is practical.
Vessel-Based Visual Monitoring
Three protected species observers (PSOs) will be based aboard the
seismic source vessel for the duration of the cruise and will watch for
marine mammals near the vessel during daytime airgun operations and
during start-up of airguns at any time. Watches will be conducted by at
least one observer 100% of the time during seismic surveys in daylight
hours. Daylight observation by at least one observer will continue
during non-seismic periods, as long as weather conditions make
observations meaningful, for comparison of sighting rates and animal
behavior during periods with vs. without airgun operations. PSOs will
be appointed by SIO with NMFS concurrence after a review of their
qualifications.
[[Page 65001]]
The Melville is a suitable platform for marine mammal observations.
The observer platform is located one deck below and forward of the
bridge (12.46 meters (40.88 ft) above the waterline), affording a
relatively unobstructed 180-degree forward view. Aft views can be
obtained along the port and starboard decks. During daytime hours, the
observer(s) will scan the area systematically using reticulated 25 x
150 big-eye binoculars and 7 x 50 hand-held binoculars to determine
bearing and distance of sightings. A clinometer is used to determine
distances of animals in close proximity to the vessel. Hand-held fixed
rangefinders and distance marks on the ship's side rails are used to
measure the exact location of the safety zone. Laser rangefinders,
which have proven to be less reliable for open water sighting, are also
provided. During darkness, night-vision equipment will be available.
The PSOs will be in wireless communication with ship's officers on the
bridge and scientists in the vessel's operations laboratory, so they
can advise promptly of the need for avoidance maneuvers or GI airgun
shut down.
Before commencing seismic operations during daylight hours, two
observers will maintain a 360-degree watch for all marine mammals for
at least 30 minutes prior to the start of seismic operations after an
extended shutdown of the airguns (1-2 minutes, depending on vessel
speed). If no marine mammals are observed within the EZ during this
time, the observers will notify the seismic personnel of an ``all
clear'' status. Watch periods are scheduled as a 2-hour rotation. The
observers continually scan the water from the horizon to the ship's
hull, and forward of 90 degrees from the port and starboard beams.
Based on PSO observations, the GI airgun(s) will be shut down (as
described earlier in this document) when marine mammals are detected
within or about to enter a designated EZ that corresponds to the 180-dB
re 1 [micro]Pa (rms) isopleth. The PSOs will continue to maintain watch
to determine when the animal(s) are outside the EZ, and airgun
operations will not resume until the animal has left that EZ. The
predicted distance for the 180-dB EZ is listed in Table 1 earlier in
this document. Seismic operations will resume only after the animals
are seen to exit the safety radius or after no further visual detection
of the animal for 15 minutes (for small odontocetes and pinnipeds) or
30 minutes (for mysticetes and large odontocetes, including beaked
whales).
The bridge officers and other crew will be instructed to alert the
observer on watch of any suspected marine mammal sighting. If needed,
the bridge will be contacted in order to maneuver the ship to avoid
interception with approaching marine mammals.
PSO Data and Documentation
PSOs will record data to estimate the numbers of marine mammals
exposed to various received sound levels and to document reactions or
lack thereof. Data will be used to estimate numbers of animals
potentially ``taken'' by harassment (as defined in the MMPA). They will
also provide information needed to order a shutdown of the seismic
source when a marine mammal is within or near the EZ. When a sighting
is made, the following information about the sighting will be recorded:
Species, group size, and 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 seismic source or vessel (e.g.,
none, avoidance, approach, paralleling, etc.); and behavioral pace; and
Time, location, heading, speed, activity of the vessel,
sea state, visibility, cloud cover, and sun glare.
The data will also be recorded at the start and end of each observation
watch and during a watch whenever there is a change in one or more of
the variables.
All observations, as well as information regarding seismic source
shutdown, will be recorded in a standardized format. Data collection
procedures are adapted from the line-transect protocols developed by
the SWFSC for their marine mammal abundance research cruises. A laptop
computer is located on the observer platform for ease of data entry.
The computer is connected to the ship's Global Positioning System,
which allows a record of time and position to be made at 3-minute
intervals and for each event entered (such as sightings, weather
updates and effort changes). Data accuracy will be verified by the PSOs
at sea and preliminary reports will be prepared during the field
program and summaries forwarded to the SIO's shore facility and to NSF
weekly or more frequently. PSO observations will provide the following
information:
The basis for decisions about shutting down the airgun
arrays;
Information needed to estimate the number of marine
mammals potentially ``taken by harassment'', which will be reported to
NMFS;
Data on the occurrence, distribution, and activities of
marine mammals in the area where the seismic study is conducted; and
Data on the behavior and movement patterns of marine
mammals seen at times with and without seismic activity.
A report will be submitted to NMFS within 90 days after the end of
the cruise. The report will describe the operations that were conducted
and sightings of marine mammals near the operations. The report will be
submitted to NMFS, providing full documentation of methods, results,
and interpretation pertaining to all monitoring. The 90-day report will
summarize the dates and locations of seismic operations and all marine
mammal sightings (dates, times, locations, activities, associated
seismic survey activities). The report will also include estimates of
the amount and nature of potential ``take'' of marine mammals by
harassment or in other ways.
All injured or dead marine mammals (regardless of cause) will be
reported to NMFS as soon as practicable. The report should include
species or description of animal, condition of animal, location, time
first found, observed behaviors (if alive), and photo or video, if
available.
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals by Incidental Harassment
With respect to the activities described 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].
All anticipated takes will be by Level B harassment, involving
temporary changes in behavior. The mitigation and monitoring measures
described herein are expected to minimize the possibility of injurious
or lethal takes such that take by Level A harassment, serious injury or
mortality is considered remote. However, as noted earlier, there is no
specific information demonstrating that injurious or lethal ``takes''
would occur even in the absence of the planned mitigation and
monitoring measures. The sections here describe methods to estimate
``take by Level B harassment'' and present estimates of the numbers of
marine mammals that might be affected during the proposed seismic
program. The estimates of ``take'' are based on data collected in the
ETP by NMFS SWFSC during 12 ship-based cetacean and ecosystem
assessment surveys
[[Page 65002]]
conducted during July-December from 1986-2006.
It is assumed that, during simultaneous operations of the seismic
sources and the other sources, any marine mammals close enough to be
affected by the MBES or SBP would already be affected by the seismic
sources. However, whether or not the seismic sources are operating
simultaneously with the other sources, marine mammals are expected to
exhibit no more than short-term and inconsequential responses to the
MBES and SBP given their characteristics (e.g., narrow downward-
directed beam) and other considerations described above, such as the
unlikelihood of being exposed to the source at higher levels and the
fact that it would likely only be for one or two pulses. Such reactions
are not considered to constitute ``taking'' (NMFS, 2001). Therefore, no
additional allowance is included for animals that might be affected by
sound sources other than the seismic sources (i.e., airguns).
Extensive systematic ship-based surveys have been conducted by NMFS
SWFSC for marine mammals in the ETP. SWFSC has recently developed
habitat modeling as a method to estimate cetacean densities on a finer
spatial scale than traditional line-transect analyses by using a
continuous function of habitat variables, e.g., sea surface
temperature, depth, distance from shore, and prey density (Barlow et
al., 2009). The models have been incorporated into a web-based
Geographic Information System (GIS) developed by Duke University's
Department of Defense Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program (SERDP) team in close collaboration with the SWFSC SERDP team
(Read et al., 2009). The GIS was used to obtain densities for the 10
cetaceans in the model (Bryde's whale, blue whale, Mesoplodon spp.,
rough-toothed, bottlenose, pantropical spotted, spinner, striped, and
short-beaked common dolphins, and short-finned pilot whale) in each of
eight areas: The four proposed survey areas (see Figure 1 in SIO's
application), and corridors 1[deg] wide and centered on the tracklines
between the survey areas and from the southernmost survey area to the
EEZ of Peru. For species sighted in SWFSC surveys whose sample sizes
were too small to model density (sperm whale, humpback whale, Cuvier's
beaked whale, Fraser's dolphin, Risso's dolphin, melon-headed, pygmy
killer, false killer, and killer whales), SIO used densities from the
surveys conducted during summer and fall 1986-1996, as summarized by
Ferguson and Barlow (2001). Densities were calculated from Ferguson and
Barlow (2003) for 5[deg] x 5[deg] blocks that include the proposed
survey areas and corridors. Those blocks included 27,275 km (16,947.9
mi) of survey effort in Beaufort sea states 0-5 and 2,564 km (1,593.2
mi) of survey effort in Beaufort sea states 0-2. Densities were
obtained for an additional eight species that were sighted in one or
more of those blocks.
Oceanographic conditions, including occasional El Nino and La Nina
events, influence the distribution and numbers of marine mammals
present in the ETP, resulting in considerable year-to-year variation in
the distribution and abundance of many marine mammal species (Escorza-
Trevino, 2009). Thus, for some species, the densities derived from
recent surveys may not be representative of the densities that will be
encountered during the proposed seismic survey.
Table 3 in SIO's application gives the average (or ``best'') and
maximum densities for each species of cetacean likely to occur in the
study area, i.e., species for which densities were obtained or
assigned. These densities have been corrected for both detectability
and availability bias by the study authors. Detectability bias is
associated with diminishing sightability with increasing lateral
distance from the trackline. Availability bias refers to the fact that
there is less than 100 percent probability of sighting an animal that
is present along the survey trackline. The estimated numbers of
individuals potentially exposed are presented next based on the 160-dB
re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) Level B harassment criterion for all cetaceans. It is
assumed that marine mammals exposed to airgun sounds at that level
might change their behavior sufficiently to be considered ``taken by
harassment''.
It should be noted that the following estimates of ``takes by
harassment'' assume that the surveys will be undertaken and completed;
in fact, the planned number of line-kilometers has been increased to
accommodate lines that may need to be repeated, equipment testing, etc.
As is typical on offshore ship surveys, inclement weather and equipment
malfunctions are likely to cause delays and may limit the number of
useful line-kilometers of seismic operations that can be undertaken.
Furthermore, any marine mammal sightings within or near the designated
EZ will result in the shutdown of seismic operations as a mitigation
measure. Thus, the following estimates of the numbers of marine mammals
potentially exposed to 160-dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) sounds are
precautionary and probably overestimate the actual numbers of marine
mammals that might be taken. These estimates assume that there will be
no weather, equipment, or mitigation delays, which is highly unlikely.
There is some uncertainty about the representativeness of the data and
the assumptions used in the calculations presented here. However, the
approach used here is believed to be the best available approach.
The number of different individuals that may be exposed to GI
airgun sounds with received levels >=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) on one or
more occasions was estimated by considering the total marine area that
would be within the 160-dB radius around the operating airgun array on
at least one occasion, along with the expected density of animals in
the area. The proposed seismic lines do not run parallel to each other
in close proximity, which minimizes the number of times an individual
mammal may be exposed during the survey; in this case, an individual
could be exposed 1.01 times on average. The numbers of different
individuals potentially exposed to >=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) were
calculated by multiplying the expected species density, times the
anticipated area to be ensonified to that level during GI airgun
operations.
The area expected to be ensonified was determined by entering the
planned survey lines into a MapInfo GIS, using the GIS to identify the
relevant areas by ``drawing'' the applicable 160-dB buffer (see Table 1
in this document) around each seismic line, and then calculating the
total area within the buffers. Areas where overlap occurred (because of
intersecting lines) were included only once when estimating the number
of individuals exposed.
Applying the approach described here, approximately 4,340 km\2\
(1,675.7 mi\2\) would be within the 160-dB isopleth on one or more
occasions during the surveys. In calculating exposure estimates, this
figure was increased by 25% (i.e., to 5,425 km\2\) in order to account
for the potential need to re-survey lines or other contingency. This
approach does not allow for turnover in the mammal populations in the
study area during the course of the survey. That might underestimate
actual numbers of individuals exposed, although the conservative
distances used to calculate the area may offset this. In addition, the
approach assumes that no cetaceans will move away or toward the
trackline as the Melville approaches in response to increasing sound
levels prior to the time the levels reach 160 dB. Another way of
interpreting the estimates that follow (Table 2 in this document) is
that they
[[Page 65003]]
represent the number of individuals that are expected (in the absence
of a seismic program) to occur in the waters that will be exposed to
>=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms). The take estimates presented here do not
take the proposed mitigation measures into consideration and thus are
likely to be overestimates.
Table 2--The Estimates of the Possible Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to Sound Levels Greater Than or Equal
to 160 dB During SIO's Proposed Seismic Survey in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean in Oct-Nov 2010. The
Proposed Sound Source is a Pair of GI Airguns. Received Levels Are Expressed in dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) (Averaged
Over Pulse Duration), Consistent With NMFS' Practice. Not All Marine Mammals Will Change Their Behavior When
Exposed to These Sound Levels, But Some May Alter Their Behavior When Levels Are Lower (see text). See Tables 2-
4 in SIO's Application for Further Detail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Approx. %
individuals regional Take
Species exposed (best) population authorization
\1\ (best) \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mysticetes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryde's whale (Balaenoptera edeni)........................ 3 0.02 3
Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus)........................ **2 0.05 2
Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae)................... **2 \3\ NA 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Odontocetes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus)...................... 22 0.09 22
Cuvier's beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris)............... 10 0.05 10
Mesoplodon sp. (unidentified)............................. **2 <0.01 **2
Rough-toothed dolphin (Steno bredanensis)................. 9 0.01 *15
Pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata).......... **68 0.01 *131
Spinner dolphin (Stenella longirostris)................... 21 <0.01 *109
Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)................... **83 0.02 **83
Striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba)................... 192 <0.01 192
Fraser's dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei).................... 6 <0.01 *440
Short-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis)........... 777 0.02 777
Pygmy killer whale (Feresa attenuata)..................... **4 0.01 *30
Melon-headed whale (Peponocephala electra)................ **16 0.03 *258
Risso's dolphin (Grampus griseus)......................... **56 0.05 **56
False killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens)................. **3 0.01 *11
Killer whale (Orcinus orca)............................... 5 0.05 5
Short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus)..... **35 0.01 **35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Requested take authorization increased from `best' exposure estimate to mean group size as reported in
Ferguson et al. (2006).
** Rounded-up, where proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010) presented figures rounded down. See
Description of the Specified Activity in this document for discussion.
\1\ Best (mean) estimate density are from Table 3 of SIO's application. Humpback whale estimates calculated
independently using methodology described previously.
\2\ Regional population size estimates are from Table 2 in the proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010).
\3\ Southern Hemisphere population sizes are poorly understood. However, the number of individuals potentially
exposed is low relative to regional population.
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers Analysis
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.'' In making a negligible impact determination,
NMFS considers:
(1) The number of anticipated mortalities;
(2) The number and nature of anticipated injuries;
(3) The number, nature, and intensity, and duration of Level B
harassment; and
(4) The context in which the takes occur.
As mentioned previously, NMFS estimates that 21 species of marine
mammals (including three species categorized as Mesoplodon sp.) could
be potentially affected by Level B harassment over the course of the
IHA. For each species, these numbers are small (each, less than one
percent) relative to the population size.
No takes by (Level A harassment), serious injury, or mortality are
anticipated to occur as a result of the SIO's marine geophysical
survey, and none are authorized. Only short-term behavioral disturbance
is anticipated to occur due to the brief and sporadic duration of the
survey activities, and these takes are not expected to occur in a place
that is of specific biological importance to marine mammals, such as in
a known breeding, calving, or feeding area, as no such times or places
are known for the project location or time. If such a place, previously
unknown, does exist in the project area, NMFS would still anticipate
that the impacts would be negligible due to their temporary nature in
space and time. Due to the nature, degree, and context of the
behavioral harassment anticipated, the activity is not expected to
impact rates of recruitment or survival.
For reasons stated previously, the specified activities associated
with the survey are not likely to cause TTS, PTS or other non-auditory
injury, serious injury, or death to affected marine mammals because:
(1) The likelihood that, given sufficient notice through relatively
slow ship speed, marine mammals are expected to move away from a noise
source that is annoying prior to its becoming potentially injurious;
(2) The fact that cetaceans would have to be closer than 40 m
(0.025 mi) in deep water when the full array is in use at a 2 m (6.6
ft) tow depth from the vessel to be exposed to levels of sound
[[Page 65004]]
believed to have even a minimal chance of causing PTS;
(3) The fact that marine mammals would have to be closer than 400 m
(0.25 mi) in deep water when the full array is in use at a 2 m (6.6 ft)
tow depth from the vessel to be exposed to levels of sound (160 dB)
believed to have even a minimal chance at causing TTS; and
(4) The likelihood that marine mammal detection ability by trained
observers is high at that short distance from the vessel;
(5) The incorporation of other required mitigation measures (i.e.,
ramp-up, shut-down, temporal and spatial avoidance, and additional
mitigation measures); and
(7) The relatively limited duration and geographically widespread
distances of the seismic survey (approximately 15 days).
As a result, no take by injury, serious injury, or death is
anticipated or authorized, and the potential for temporary or permanent
hearing impairment is very low and will be avoided through the
incorporation of the monitoring and mitigation measures.
While the number of marine mammals potentially incidentally
harassed will depend on the distribution and abundance of marine
mammals in the vicinity of the survey activity, the number of potential
Level B incidental harassment takings (see Table 2) is estimated to be
small, less than one percent of any of the estimated population sizes
based on the data disclosed in Table 2 of this notice, and has been
mitigated to the lowest level practicable through incorporation of the
monitoring and mitigation measures mentioned previously in this
document. Also, there are no known important reproductive or feeding
areas in the action area.
NMFS has determined, provided that the aforementioned mitigation
and monitoring measures are implemented, that the impact of conducting
a marine geophysical survey in the ETP, October through November 2010,
may result, at worst, in a temporary modification in behavior and/or
low-level physiological effects (Level B harassment) of small numbers
of certain species of marine mammals.
While behavioral modifications, including temporarily vacating the
area during the operation of the airgun(s), may be made by these
species to avoid the resultant acoustic disturbance, the availability
of alternate areas within these areas and the short and sporadic
duration of the research activities, have led NMFS to determine that
this action will have a negligible impact on the species in the
specified geographic region.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring
measures, NMFS finds that SIO's planned research activities, will
result in the incidental take of small numbers of marine mammals, by
Level B harassment only, and that the total taking from the marine
geophysical survey will have a negligible impact on the affected
species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action.
Endangered Species Act
Of the 21 species of marine mammals that may occur in the survey
area, three are listed as endangered under the ESA, including the
humpback, blue, and sperm whales. Under Section 7 of the ESA, NSF had
initiated formal consultation with the NMFS, Office of Protected
Resources, Endangered Species Division, on this seismic survey. NMFS'
Office of Protected Resources, Permits, Conservation and Education
Division, also initiated formal consultation under Section 7 of the ESA
with NMFS' Office of Protected Resources, Endangered Species Division,
to obtain a Biological Opinion (BiOp) evaluating the effects of issuing
the IHA on threatened and endangered marine mammals and, consistent
with the requirements for mitigation and monitoring set forth in the
IHA, authorizing incidental take. On October 15, 2010, NMFS concluded
formal Section 7 consultation with itself and issued a BiOp which
concluded that the proposed action and issuance of the IHA are not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the humpback, blue, and
sperm whales and leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), green (Chelonia
mydas), loggerhead (Caretta caretta), hawksbill (Eretmochelys
imbricata), and olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) sea turtles. The
BiOp also concluded that designated critical habitat for these species
does not occur in the action area and would not be affected by the
survey. SIO must comply with the Relevant Terms and Conditions of the
Incidental Take Statement corresponding to NMFS' BiOp issued to both
NSF and NMFS' Office of Protected Resources.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
To meet NMFS' National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.) requirements for the issuance of an IHA to SIO, NMFS has
prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) titled ``Issuance of an
Incidental Harassment Authorization to the Scripps Institution of
Oceanography to Take Marine Mammals by Harassment Incidental to a
Marine Geophysical Survey off of Central and South America in the
Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean, October-November 2010''. This EA
incorporates by reference the NSF's Environmental Analysis Pursuant To
Executive Order 12114 (NSF, 2010) and an associated report (Report)
prepared by LGL Limited Environmental Research Associates (LGL) for
NSF, titled, ``Environmental Assessment of a Marine Geophysical Survey
by the R/V Melville in the Pacific Ocean off Central and South America,
October-November 2010'' (LGL, 2010) by reference pursuant to 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) 1502.21 and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO)
216-6 Sec. 5.09(d). NMFS' EA analyzes the direct, indirect and
cumulative environmental impacts of the specified activities on marine
mammals including those listed as threatened or endangered under the
ESA. NMFS also evaluated and considered comments provided by the public
in finalizing the EA and addressing the intensity of impacts to marine
mammals
The NMFS has made a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and,
therefore, will not prepare an environmental impact statement for the
issuance of an IHA to SIO for this activity. The EA and the NMFS FONSI
for this activity are available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Determinations
NMFS has determined that the impact of conducting the specific
seismic survey activities described in this notice and the IHA request
in the specific geographic region in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean
may result, at worst, in a temporary modification in behavior (Level B
harassment) of small numbers of marine mammals. Further, this activity
is expected to result in a negligible impact on the affected species or
stocks of marine mammals. The provision requiring that the activity not
have an unmitigable impact on the availability of the affected species
or stock of marine mammals for subsistence uses is not implicated for
this action.
[[Page 65005]]
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, NMFS proposes to issue an IHA
to SIO for conducting a marine geophysical survey in the eastern
tropical Pacific Ocean, provided the previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. The duration
of the IHA would not exceed one year from the date of its issuance.
Dated: October 15, 2010.
Helen M. Golde,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-26547 Filed 10-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P