Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Marine Geophysical Survey in the Central-Western Bering Sea, August 2011, 49737-49751 [2011-20461]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
Education Division at the address listed
above. The request should set forth the
specific reasons why a hearing on this
application would be appropriate.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
RIN 0648–XA430
Laura Morse or Jennifer Skidmore, (301)
427–8401.
The
subject amendment to Permit No. 15471
is requested under the authority of the
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and
the regulations governing the taking and
importing of marine mammals (50 CFR
part 216).
Permit No. 15471 (issued on August
23, 2010; 75 FR 52721), authorizes the
permit holder to import biological
samples taken for scientific research
from South American fur seals
(Arctocephalus australis). Unlimited
samples from up to 200 salvaged
carcasses and live female and pup South
American fur seals may be received,
imported, or exported annually. No live
animals can be harassed or taken,
lethally or otherwise, under the permit.
The permit expires on August 31, 2015.
The permit holder is requesting the
permit be amended to increase the total
number of individuals and include
samples from male South American fur
seals. In addition, the permit holder is
requesting to add adult and pup South
American sea lions (Otaria flavescens)
from which unlimited samples could be
received, imported, or exported. No live
animals would be harassed or taken,
lethally or otherwise, under the
requested amendment.
In compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial
determination has been made that the
activity proposed is categorically
excluded from the requirement to
prepare an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement.
Concurrent with the publication of
this notice in the Federal Register,
NMFS is forwarding copies of this
application to the Marine Mammal
Commission and its Committee of
Scientific Advisors.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: August 5, 2011.
P. Michael Payne,
Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–20458 Filed 8–10–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Marine
Geophysical Survey in the CentralWestern Bering Sea, August 2011
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
take authorization (ITA).
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) regulation, notification is
hereby given that NMFS has issued an
Incidental Harassment Authorization
(IHA) to the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) to take marine mammals, by
Level B harassment, incidental to
conducting a marine geophysical survey
in the central-western Bering Sea,
August 2011.
DATES: Effective August 7 through
October 1, 2011.
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: Environmental Assessment
(EA), prepared by USGS. 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:
Brian D. Hopper, 301–427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (16
U.S.C. 1371 (a)(5)(D)) directs the
Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to
authorize, upon request, the incidental,
but not intentional, taking of small
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49737
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 the 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 (where relevant). 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 requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, 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’s 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].
16 U.S.C. 1362(18)
Summary of Request
NMFS received an application on
April 8, 2011, from USGS for the taking
by harassment, of marine mammals,
incidental to conducting a marine
geophysical survey in the central-
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
49738
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
western Bering Sea within the U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and
adjacent international waters in depths
greater than 3,000 m (9,842 ft). USGS
plans to conduct the survey from
approximately August 7 to September 1,
2011. On June 8, 2011, NMFS published
a notice in the Federal Register (76 FR
33246) discussing the effects on marine
mammals and making preliminary
determinations regarding a proposed
IHA. The notice initiated a 30 day
public comment period, which closed
on July 8, 2011.
USGS plans to use one source vessel,
the R/V Marcus G. Langseth (Langseth)
and a seismic airgun array to collect
seismic reflection and refraction profiles
to be used to delineate the U.S.
Extended Continental Shelf (ECS) in the
central-western Bering Sea. In addition
to the operations of the seismic airgun
array, USGS intends to operate a
multibeam echosounder (MBES) and a
sub-bottom profiler (SBP) continuously
throughout the survey.
Acoustic stimuli (i.e., increased
underwater sound) generated during the
operation of the seismic airgun array
may have the potential to cause a shortterm behavioral disturbance for marine
mammals in the survey area. This is the
principal means of marine mammal
taking associated with these activities
and USGS has requested an
authorization to take 12 species of
marine mammals by Level B
harassment. Take is not expected to
result from the use of the MBES or SBP,
for reasons discussed in this notice; nor
is take expected to result from collision
with the vessel because it is a single
vessel moving at a relatively slow speed
during seismic acquisition within the
survey, for a relatively short period of
time (approximately 21 days). It is likely
that any marine mammal would be able
to avoid the vessel.
Description of the Specified Activity
USGS plans to conduct the seismic
survey in the central-western Bering Sea
between approximately 350 and 800
kilometers (km) (189 and 432 nautical
miles (nmi)) offshore in the area 55° to
58.5° North, 177° West to 175° East. The
survey will take place in the U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and
adjacent international waters in water
depths greater than 3,000 meters (m)
(9,842 feet (ft)). The project is scheduled
to occur from approximately August 7 to
September 1, 2011. Some minor
deviation from these dates is possible,
depending on logistics and weather.
The seismic survey will collect
seismic reflection and refraction profiles
to be used to delineate the U.S. ECS in
the Bering Sea. The ECS is the region
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
beyond 200 nmi where a nation can
show that it satisfies the conditions of
Article 76 of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea. One
of the conditions in Article 76 is a
function of sediment thickness. The
seismic profiles are designed to identify
the stratigraphic ‘‘basement’’ and to map
the thickness of the overlying
sediments. Acoustic velocities (required
to convert measured travel times to true
depth) will be measured directly using
sonobuoys and ocean-bottom
seismometers (OBSs), as well as by
analysis of hydrophone streamer data.
Acoustic velocity refers to the velocity
of sound through sediments or crust.
The survey will involve one source
vessel, the Langseth. The Langseth will
deploy an array of 36 airguns as an
energy source. The receiving system
will consist of one 8 km (4.3 nmi) long
hydrophone streamer and/or five OBSs.
As the airgun is towed along the survey
lines, the hydrophone streamer will
receive the returning acoustic signals
and transfer the data to the on-board
processing system. The OBSs record the
returning acoustic signals internally for
later analysis.
The planned seismic survey will
consist of approximately 2,240 km of
transect lines in the central-western
Bering Sea survey area, with an
additional 140 km (75.6 nmi) of turns.
During turns, the array will be powereddown to one 40 in3 airgun. All of the
survey will take place in water deeper
than 3,000 m (9,842 ft). A multi-channel
seismic (MCS) survey using the
hydrophone streamer will take place
along 14 lines. Following the MCS
survey, 18 OBSs will be deployed and
a refraction survey will take place along
three of the 14 lines. If time permits, an
additional 525 km of contingency lines
will be added to the MCS survey. In
addition to the the airgun array, a
Kongsberg EM 122 MBES and Knudsen
320B SBP will be operated from the
Langseth continuously throughout the
cruise. There will be additional seismic
operations associated with equipment
testing, start-up, and possible line
changes or repeat coverage of any areas
where initial data quality is substandard. In USGS’s calculations, 25
percent has been added for those
additional operations.
All planned geophysical data
acquisition activities will be conducted
by Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
(L–DEO), the Langseth’s operator, with
on-board assistance by the scientists
who have planned the study. The
Principal Investigators are Drs. Jonathan
R. Childs and Ginger Barth of the USGS.
The vessel will be self-contained, and
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the crew will live aboard the vessel for
the entire cruise.
Description of the Dates, Duration, and
Specified Geographic Region
The survey will occur in the centralwestern Bering Sea between
approximately 350 and 800 kilometers
(km) (189 and 432 nautical miles (nmi))
offshore in the area 55° to 58.5° North,
177° West to 175° East. The seismic
survey will take place in water depths
greater than 3,000 m. The exact dates of
the activities depend on logistics and
weather conditions. The Langseth will
depart from Dutch Harbor, Alaska on
August 7, 2011, and return there on
September 1, 2011. Seismic operations
will be carried out for an estimated 18
to 21 days.
NMFS outlined the purpose of the
program in a previous notice for the
proposed IHA (76 FR 33246, June 8,
2011). 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 proposed IHA
notice (76 FR 33246, June 8, 2011), the
IHA application and associated
documents referenced above this
section.
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of the USGS
application and proposed IHA was
published in the Federal Register on
June 8, 2011 (76 FR 33246). During the
30-day public comment period, NMFS
only received comments from the
Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission). The Commission’s
comments are online at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm. Following are their
comments and NMFS’s responses:
Comment 1: The Commission
recommends that the NMFS require the
USGS to re-estimate the proposed
exclusion and buffer zones and
associated takes of marine mammals
using site-specific information.
Response: In the water depths that the
survey is to be conducted, site-specific
source signature measurements are
neither warranted nor practical. Site
signature measurements are normally
conducted commercially by shooting a
test pattern over an ocean bottom
instrument in shallow water. This
method is neither practical nor valid in
water depths as great as 3,000 m
(9,842.5 ft). The alternative method of
conducting site-specific attenuation
measurements would require a second
vessel, which is impractical both
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
logistically and financially. Sound
propagation varies noticeably less
between deep water sites than between
shallow water sites (because of the
reduced significance of bottom
interaction), thus decreasing the
importance of site-specific estimates.
Based on these reasons, and the
information provided by USGS in their
IHA application and EA, NMFS is
satisfied that the data supplied are
sufficient for NMFS to conduct its
analysis and make any determinations;
therefore, no further effort is needed by
the applicant. 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 160 dB
zone used to estimate exposure is
appropriate and sufficient for purposes
of supporting NMFS’s analysis and
determinations required under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA and its
implementing regulations. See NMFS’s
response to Comment 2 (below) for
additional details.
Comment 2: The Commission
recommends that, if site-specific
information is not used to estimate the
proposed exclusion and buffer zones
and associated takes of marine
mammals, the USGS provide a detailed
justification for the exclusion and buffer
zones applicable to the proposed survey
in the Bering Sea, which are based on
either empirical data collected in the
GOM or on modeling that uses
measurements from the GOM, and
explain the significance of any
deviations in survey method, such as
the proposed change in tow depth.
Response: USGS has revised
Appendix A in the EA to include
information from the calibration study
conducted on the Langseth in 2007 and
2008. This information is now available
in the final EA on USGS’s Web site at
https://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/EA/ECS_EA/
as well as on NSF’s Web site at
https://www.nsf.gov/geo/oce/envcomp/
index.jsp. The revised Appendix A
describes the L–DEO modeling process
and compares the model results with
empirical results of the 2007 to 2008
Langseth calibration experiment in
shallow, intermediate, and deep water.
The conclusions identified in Appendix
A show that the model represents the
actual produced levels, particularly
within the first few kms, where the
predicted exclusion zones (EZs, i.e.,
safety radii) lie. At greater distances,
local oceanographic variations begin to
take effect, and the model tends to over
predict. Further, since the modeling
matches the observed measurement
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
data, the authors have concluded that
the models can continue to be used for
defining EZs, including for predicting
mitigation radii for various tow depths.
The data results from the studies were
peer reviewed and the calibration
results, viewed as conservative, were
used to determine the cruise-specific
EZs.
At present, the L–DEO model does not
account for site-specific environmental
conditions. The calibration study of the
L–DEO model predicted that using sitespecific information may actually
provide less conservative EZ radii at
greater distances. The Draft
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement for Marine Seismic Research
Funded by the National Science
Foundation or Conducted by the U.S.
Geological Survey (DPEIS) prepared
pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) did incorporate various sitespecific environmental conditions in the
modeling of the Detailed Analysis
Areas. The NEPA process associated
with the DPEIS is still ongoing and the
USGS and NSF have not yet issued a
Record of Decision. Once the NEPA
process for the PEIS has concluded,
USGS and/or NSF will look at
upcoming cruises on a site-specific basis
for any impacts not already considered
in the DPEIS.
The IHA issued to USGS, under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
provides monitoring and mitigation
requirements that will protect marine
mammals from injury, serious injury, or
mortality. USGS is required to comply
with the IHA’s requirements. These
analyses are supported by extensive
scientific research and data. NMFS is
confident in the peer-reviewed results of
the L–DEO seismic calibration studies
which, although viewed as conservative,
are used to determine cruise-specific
EZs and which factor into exposure
estimates. NMFS has determined that
these reviews are the best scientific data
available for review of the IHA
application and to support the necessary
analyses and determinations under the
MMPA, Endangered Species Act (ESA;
16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and NEPA.
Based on NMFS’s analysis of the
likely effects of the specified activity on
marine mammals and their habitat,
NMFS has determined that the EZs
identified in 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 have
been estimated based upon the best
available scientific information and
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49739
estimation methodology. The 160 dB
zone used to estimate exposure is
appropriate and sufficient for purposes
of supporting NMFS’s analysis and
determinations required under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA and its
implementing regulations.
Comment 3: The Commission
recommends that the NMFS specify in
the authorization all conditions under
which an 8 min period could be
followed by a resumption of the airguns
at full power.
Response: In the instance of a powerdown or shut-down based on the
presence of a marine mammal in the EZ,
USGS will restart the airgun array to the
full operating source level (i.e., 36
airguns 6,600 in3) only if the PSVO
visually observes the marine mammal
exiting the EZ for the full source level
within an 8 min period of the shutdown or power-down. The 8 min period
is based on the 180 dB radius for the 36
airgun subarray at a depth of 9 m in
relation to the minimum planned speed
of the Langseth while shooting (8.5 km/
hr (4.6 kts)). In the event that a marine
mammal would re-enter the EZ after
reactivating the airguns, USGS would
reinitiate a shut-down or power-down
as required by the IHA.
Should the airguns be inactive or
powered-down for more than 8 min, and
the PSVO does not observe the marine
mammal leaving the EZ, then USGS
must wait 15 min (for small odontocetes
and pinnipeds) or 30 min (for
mysticetes and large odontocetes) after
the last sighting before USGS can
initiate ramp-up procedures. However,
ramp-up will not occur as long as a
marine mammal is detected within the
EZ, which provides more time for
animals to leave the EZ, and accounts
for the position, swim speed, and
heading for marine mammals within the
EZ.
Finally, USGS may need to
temporarily perform a shut-down due to
equipment failure or maintenance. In
this instance, USGS will restart the
airgun array to the full source level
within an 8 min period of the shut
down only if the PSVOs do not observe
marine mammals within the EZ for the
full source level. If the airguns are
inactive or powered-down for more than
8 min, USGS would follow the ramp-up
procedures required by the IHA. USGS
would restart the airguns beginning
with the smallest airgun in the array and
add airguns in a sequence such that the
source level of the array does not exceed
approximately 6 decibels (dB) per 5 min
period over a total duration of
approximately 30 min. Again, the
PSVOs would monitor the EZs for
marine mammals during this time and
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
49740
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
would initiate a power-down or a shutdown, as required by the IHA.
Comment 4: The Commission
recommends that the NMFS extend the
30 min period following a marine
mammal sighting in the EZ to cover the
full dive times of all species likely to be
encountered.
Response: NMFS recognizes that
several species of deep-diving cetaceans
are capable of remaining underwater for
more than 30 min (e.g., sperm whales,
Cuvier’s beaked whales, Baird’s beaked
whales); however, for the following
reasons NMFS believes that 30 min is an
adequate length for the monitoring
period prior to the ramp-up of airguns:
(1) Because the Langseth is required
to monitor before ramp-up of the airgun
array, the time of monitoring prior to
start-up of any but the smallest array is
effectively longer than 30 min (ramp-up
will begin with the smallest airgun in
the array and airguns will be added in
sequence such that the source level of
the array will increase in steps not
exceeding approximately 6 dB per 5 min
period over a total duration of 20 to 30
min;
(2) In many cases PSVOs are
observing during times when USGS is
not operating the seismic airguns and
would observe the area prior to the 30
min observation period;
(3) The majority of the species that
may be exposed do not stay underwater
more than 30 min; and
(4) All else being equal and if deepdiving individuals happened to be in
the area in the short time immediately
prior to the pre-ramp-up monitoring, if
an animal’s maximum underwater dive
time is 45 min, then there is only a one
in three chance that the last random
surfacing would occur prior to the
beginning of the required 30 min
monitoring period and that the animal
would not be seen during that 30 min
period.
Finally, seismic vessels are moving
continuously (because of the long,
towed array and streamer) 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 (deepdiving)), the vessel will be far beyond
the length of the EZ radii within 30 min,
and therefore it will be safe to start the
airguns again.
Under the MMPA, incidental take
authorizations must include means of
effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on marine mammal species and
their habitat. Monitoring and mitigation
measures are designed to comply with
this requirement. NMFS believes that
the framework for visual monitoring
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 EZs and
thus further minimize the potential for
take.
Comment 5: The Commission
recommends that the NMFS provide
additional justification for its
preliminary determination that the
proposed monitoring program will be
sufficient to detect, with a high level of
confidence, all marine mammals within
or entering the identified exclusion and
buffer zones, which at a minimum
should:
(1) Identify those species that it
believes can be detected with a high
degree of confidence using visual
monitoring only;
(2) Describe detection probability as a
function of distance from the vessel;
(3) Describe changes in detection
probability under various sea state and
weather conditions and light levels; and
(4) Explain how close to the vessel
marine mammals must be for Protected
Species Observers (PSOs) to achieve
high nighttime detection rates.
Response: NMFS believes that the
planned monitoring program will be
sufficient to detect (using visual
monitoring and passive acoustic
monitoring (PAM)), with reasonable
certainty, marine mammals within or
entering identified EZs. This
monitoring, along with the required
mitigation measures, will result in the
least practicable adverse impact on the
affected species or stocks and will result
in a negligible impact on the affected
species or stocks of marine mammals.
Also, NMFS expects some animals to
avoid areas around the airgun area
ensonified at the level of the EZ.
NMFS acknowledges that the
detection probability for certain species
of marine mammals varies depending
on animal size and behavior as well as
sea state and weather conditions and
light levels. The detectability of marine
mammals likely decreases in low light
(i.e., darkness), higher Beaufort sea
states and wind conditions, and poor
weather (e.g., fog and/or rain). However,
at present, NMFS views the
combination of visual monitoring and
PAM as the most effective monitoring
and mitigation techniques available for
detecting marine mammals within or
entering the EZ. The final monitoring
and mitigation measures are the most
effective feasible measures and NMFS is
not aware of any additional measures
which could meaningfully increase the
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
likelihood of detecting marine mammals
in and around the EZ. Further, public
comment has not revealed any
additional monitoring or mitigation
measures that could be feasibly
implemented to increase the
effectiveness of detection.
USGS (the Federal funding agency for
this survey), National Science
Foundation (NSF), and L–DEO are
receptive to incorporating proven
technologies and techniques to enhance
the current monitoring and mitigation
program. Until proven technological
advances are made, nighttime mitigation
measures during operations include
combinations of the use of Protected
Species Visual Observers (PSVOs) for
ramp-ups, PAM, night vision devices
(NVDs), and continuous shooting of a
mitigation airgun. Should the airgun
array be powered-down, the operation
of a single airgun would continue to
serve as a sound source deterrent to
marine mammals. In the event of a
complete shut-down of the airgun array
at night for mitigation or repairs, USGS
suspends the data collection until onehalf hour after nautical twilight-dawn
(when PSVO’s are able to clear the EZ).
USGS will not activate the airguns until
the entire EZ is visible for at least 30
min.
In cooperation with NMFS, L–DEO
will be conducting efficacy experiments
of NVDs during a future Langseth
cruise. In addition, in response to a
recommendation from NMFS, L–DEO is
evaluating the use of handheld forwardlooking thermal imaging cameras to
supplement nighttime monitoring and
mitigation practices. During other low
power seismic and seafloor mapping
surveys, USGS successfully used these
devices while conducting nighttime
seismic operations.
Comment 6: The Commission
recommends that the NMFS consult
with the funding agency (i.e., NSF) and
individual applicants (e.g., USGS and
L–DEO) to develop, validate, and
implement a monitoring program that
provides a scientifically sound,
reasonably accurate assessment of the
types of marine mammal taking and the
number of marine mammals taken.
Response: Numerous studies have
reported on the abundance and
distribution of marine mammals
inhabiting the Bering Sea, which
overlaps with the seismic survey area,
and USGS has incorporated this data
into their analyses used to predict
marine mammal take in their
application. NMFS believes that USGS’s
current approach for estimating
abundance in the survey area (prior to
the survey) is the best available
approach.
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
There will be significant amounts of
transit time during the cruise, and
PSVOs will be on watch prior to and
after the seismic portions of the survey,
in addition to during the survey. The
collection of this visual observational
data by PSVOs may contribute to
baseline data on marine mammals
(presence/absence) and provide some
generalized support for estimated take
numbers, but it is unlikely that the
information gathered from this single
cruise alone would result in any
statistically robust conclusions for any
particular species because of the small
number of animals typically observed.
NMFS acknowledges the
Commission’s recommendations and is
open to further coordination with the
Commission, USGS (the Federal
research funding agency for this cruise),
NSF (the vessel owner), and L–DEO (the
ship operator on behalf of NSF), to
develop, validate, and implement a
monitoring program that will provide or
contribute towards a more scientifically
sound and reasonably accurate
assessment of the types of marine
mammal taking and the number of
marine mammals taken. However, the
cruise’s primary focus is marine
geophysical research and the survey
may be operationally limited due to
considerations such as location, time,
fuel, services, and other resources.
Comment 7: The Commission
recommends that NMFS require the
applicant:
(1) To report on the number of marine
mammals that were detected
acoustically and for which a powerdown or shut-down of the airguns was
initiated;
(2) Specify if such animals also were
detected visually; and
(3) Compare the results from the two
monitoring methods (visual versus
acoustic) to help identify their
respective strengths and weaknesses.
Response: The IHA requires that
PSAOs on the Langseth do and record
the following when a marine mammal is
detected by the PAM:
(1) Notify the on-duty PSVO(s)
immediately of a vocalizing marine
mammal so a power-down or shut-down
can be initiated, if required;
(2) Enter the information regarding
the vocalization into a database. The
data to be entered include an acoustic
encounter identification number,
whether it was linked with a visual
sighting, date, time when first and last
heard and whenever any additional
information was recorded, position, and
water depth when first detected, bearing
if determinable, species or species group
(e.g., unidentified dolphin, sperm
whale), types and nature of sounds
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
heard (e.g., clicks, continuous, sporadic,
whistles, creaks, burst pulses, strength
of signal, etc.), and any other notable
information.
USGS reports on the number of
acoustic detections made by the PAM
system within the post-cruise
monitoring reports as required by the
IHA. The report also includes a
description of any acoustic detections
that were concurrent with visual
sightings, which allows for a
comparison of acoustic and visual
detection methods for each cruise.
The post-cruise monitoring reports
also include the following information:
the total operational effort in daylight
(hrs), the total operational effort at night
(hrs), the total number of hours of visual
observations conducted, the total
number of sightings, and the total
number of hours of acoustic detections
conducted.
LGL Ltd., Environmental Research
Associates (LGL), a contractor for USGS,
has processed sighting and density data,
and their publications can be viewed
online at: https://www.lgl.com/
index.php?option=com_content&
view=article&id=69&Itemid=162&
lang=en. Post-cruise monitoring reports
are currently available on the NMFS’s
MMPA Incidental Take Program Web
site and future reports will also be
available on the NSF Web site should
there be interest in further analysis of
this data by the public.
Comment 8: The Commission
recommends that NMFS condition the
authorization, if issued, to require the
USGS to monitor, document, and report
observations during all ramp-up
procedures; this data will provide a
stronger scientific basis for determining
the effectiveness of and deciding when
to implement this particular mitigation
measure.
Response: The IHA requires that
PSVOs on the Langseth make
observations for 30 min prior to rampup, during all ramp-ups, and during all
daytime seismic operations and record
the following information when a
marine mammal is sighted:
(1) Species, group size, age/size/sex
categories (if determinable), behavior
when first sighted and after initial
sighting, heading (if consistent), bearing
and distance from seismic vessel,
sighting cue, apparent reaction of the
airguns or vessel (e.g., none, avoidance,
approach, paralleling, etc., and
including responses to ramp-up), and
behavioral pace; and
(2) Time, location, heading, speed,
activity of the vessel (including number
of airguns operating and whether in
state of ramp-up or power-down),
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49741
Beaufort wind force and sea state,
visibility, and sun glare.
Comment 9: The Commission
recommends that NMFS in
collaboration with the NSF, analyze
these data to determine the effectiveness
of ramp-up procedures as a mitigation
measure for geophysical surveys.
Response: One of the primary
purposes of monitoring is to result in
‘‘increased knowledge of the species’’
and the effectiveness of monitoring and
mitigation measures; the effectiveness of
ramp-up as a mitigation measure and
marine mammal reaction to ramp-up
would be useful information in this
regard. NMFS has asked USGS, NSF,
and L–DEO to gather all data that could
potentially provide information
regarding the effectiveness of ramp-ups
as a mitigation measure. However,
considering the low numbers of marine
mammal sightings and low numbers of
ramp-ups, it is unlikely that the
information will result in any
statistically robust conclusions for this
particular seismic survey. Over the long
term, these requirements may provide
information regarding the effectiveness
of ramp-up as a mitigation measure,
provided animals are detected during
ramp up.
Description of the Marine Mammals in
the Area of the Specified Activity
Twenty marine mammal species (14
cetacean and 6 pinniped) are known to
or could occur in the central-western
Bering Sea. Several of these species are
listed as endangered under the U.S.
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA;
16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including the
North Pacific right whale (Eubalaena
japonica), bowhead (Balaena
mysticetus), humpback (Megaptera
novaeangliae), sei (Balaenoptera
borealis), fin (Balaenoptera physalus),
blue (Balaenoptera musculus), and
sperm (Physeter macrocephalus)
whales, as well as the western stock of
Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus).
The eastern stock of Steller sea lions is
listed as threatened.
The marine mammals that occur in
the survey area belong to three
taxonomic groups: odontocetes (toothed
cetaceans, such as dolphins), mysticetes
(baleen whales), and pinnipeds (seals,
sea lions, and walrus). Cetaceans and
pinnipeds are the subject of the IHA
application to NMFS. Walrus sightings
are rare in the Bering Sea during the
summer. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) manages the Pacific
walrus and they are not considered
further in this analysis; all others
species are managed by NMFS. Coastal
cetacean species (gray whales) likely
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
49742
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
would not be encountered in the deep,
offshore waters of the survey area.
Table 1 presents information on the
abundance, distribution, population
status, conservation status, and density
of the marine mammals that may occur
in the survey area during August 2011.
TABLE 1—THE HABITAT, REGIONAL ABUNDANCE, AND CONSERVATION STATUS OF MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY OCCUR
IN OR NEAR THE SEISMIC SURVEY AREAS IN THE CENTRAL-WESTERN BERING SEA (SEE TEXT AND TABLE 2 IN
USGS’S APPLICATION AND EA FOR FURTHER DETAILS)
Occurrence in/
near survey
area
Species
Mysticetes:
North Pacific right
whale (Eubalaena
japonica).
Bowhead whale
(Balaena
mysticetus).
Gray whale
(Eschrichtius
robustus).
Humpback whale
(Megaptera
novaeangliae).
Minke whale
(Balaenoptera
acutorostrata).
Sei whale
(Balaenoptera borealis).
Fin whale
(Balaenoptera
physalus).
Blue whale
(Balaneoptera
musculus).
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Odontocetes:
Sperm whale
(Physeter
macrocephalus).
Cuvier’s beaked
whale (Ziphius
cavirostris).
Baird’s beaked
whale (Berardius
bairdii).
Stejneger’s beaked
whale
(Mesoplodon
stejnegeri).
Pacific white-sided
dolphin
(Lagenorhynchus
obliquidens).
Killer whale
(Orcinus orca).
Dall’s porpoise
(Phocoenoides
dalli).
Pinnipeds:
Northern fur seal
(Callorhinus
ursinus).
Steller sea lion
(Eumetopias
jubatus).
Spotted seal (Phoca
largha).
Ringed seal (Pusa
hispida).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Habitat
Regional
abundance
ESA 1
MMPA 2
Density (number/1,000
km2)
Best 3
Max 4
Rare ..................
Coastal, shelf, offshore.
Low hundreds 5 ......
EN
D
0
0
Uncommon .......
Pack ice, coastal ....
12,631 6 ..................
EN
D
0
0
Common ...........
Coastal, shallow
shelf.
NW Pacific: 19,126
DL/E 8
NE Pacific: ∼100 7.
NC D (Western
populations)
0.01
0.12
Common ...........
Offshore, nearshore
in winter.
20,800 9 ..................
EN
D
0.40
1.04
Common ...........
Nearshore, offshore,
ice.
25,000 10 .................
NL
NC
1.23
4.10
Uncommon .......
Offshore, shelf ........
7,260 to 12,620 11 ..
EN
D
0.05
0.58
Common ...........
Offshore, deep
water.
13,620 to 18,680 12
EN
D
3.94
17.00
Rare ..................
Offshore, shelf,
coastal.
3,500 13 ...................
EN
D
0
0
Uncommon .......
Offshore ..................
24,000 14 .................
EN
D
0.07
0.14
Very rare ...........
Offshore ..................
20,000 15 .................
NL
NC
0
0
Rare ..................
Offshore ..................
7,000 16 ...................
NL
NC
0.07
0.10
Uncommon .......
Offshore ..................
N.A. ........................
NL
NC
0.04
0.12
Rare ..................
Pelagic, shelf,
coastal.
988,000 17 ...............
NL
NC
0.03
0.04
Common ...........
Pelagic, shelf,
coastal.
Nearshore, offshore
8,500 18 ...................
NL
NC
2.82
3.96
1,186,000 19 ............
NL
NC
8.86
18.25
Common ...........
Common ...........
Offshore and coastal.
1.1 million 20 ...........
NL
D
Common ...........
Coastal ...................
58,334, 72,223 21,
42,366 22.
T 23, EN 23
D
2.70
4.05
Uncommon .......
Ice ...........................
AK: ∼59,214 24 ........
NL
...........................
N.A.
N.A.
Uncommon .......
Ice, landfast, pack ..
AK: 249,000 24 ........
NL
NC
N.A.
N.A.
17:45 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
28.5
11AUN1
42.75
49743
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
TABLE 1—THE HABITAT, REGIONAL ABUNDANCE, AND CONSERVATION STATUS OF MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY OCCUR
IN OR NEAR THE SEISMIC SURVEY AREAS IN THE CENTRAL-WESTERN BERING SEA (SEE TEXT AND TABLE 2 IN
USGS’S APPLICATION AND EA FOR FURTHER DETAILS)—Continued
Occurrence in/
near survey
area
Species
Ribbon seal
(Histriophoca
fasciata).
Habitat
Common ...........
Ice ...........................
Regional
abundance
ESA 1
MMPA 2
Density (number/1,000
km2)
Best 3
Bering Sea:
90,000–
100,000 24.
NL
NC
43.60
Max 4
65.40
N.A. Not available or not assessed.
1 U.S. Endangered Species Act: EN = Endangered, T = Threatened, NL = Not listed.
2 U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act: D = Depleted, NC = Not Classified.
3 Best density estimate as listed in Table 3 of the application.
4 Maximum density estimate as listed in Table 3 of the application.
5 Western population (Brownell et al., 2001)
6 Based on 2003–2005 surveys (Koski et al., 2010).
7 Northwest (NW) Pacific (Allen and Angliss, 2010); Northeast (NE) Pacific (Reilly et al., 2008).
8 The western (Northeast Pacific) subpopulation is listed as Endangered.
9 North Pacific Ocean (Barlow et al., 2009).
10 Northwest Pacific (Buckland et al., 1992; IWC, 2010).
11 North Pacific (Tillman, 1977).
12 North Pacific (Ohsumi and Wada, 1974).
13 Eastern North Pacific (NMFS, 1998).
14 Eastern temperate North Pacific (Whitehead, 2002b).
15 Eastern Tropical Pacific (Wade and Gerrodette, 1993).
16 Western North Pacific (Reeves and Leatherwood, 1994; Kasuya, 2002).
17 North Pacific Ocean (Miyashita, 1993b).
18 Eastern Tropical Pacific (Ford, 2002).
19 North Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea (Houck and Jefferson, 1999).
20 North Pacific (Gelatt and Lowry, 2008).
21 Eastern U.S. Stock (Allen and Angliss, 2010).
22 Western U.S. Stock (Allen and Angliss, 2010).
23 Eastern stock is listed as threatened, and the western stock is listed as endangered.
24 Burns 1981.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Refer to Section III of USGS’s
application for detailed information
regarding the abundance and
distribution, population status, and life
history and behavior of these species
and their occurrence in the project area.
The application also presents how
USGS calculated the estimated densities
for the marine mammals in the survey
area. NMFS has reviewed these data and
determined them to be the best available
scientific information for the purposes
of the IHA.
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
Acoustic stimuli generated by the
operation of the airguns, which
introduce sound into the marine
environment, may have the potential to
cause Level B harassment of marine
mammals in the survey area. The effects
of sounds from airgun operations 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:45 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
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. Based on the
available data and studies described
here, some behavioral disturbance is
expected, but NMFS expects the
disturbance to be localized and shortterm.
The notice of the proposed IHA (76
FR 33246, June 8, 2011) included a
discussion of the effects of sounds from
airguns on mysticetes, odontocetes, and
pinnipeds including tolerance, masking,
behavioral disturbance, hearing
impairment, and other non-auditory
physical effects. NMFS refers the reader
to USGS’s application, and EA for
additional information on the
behavioral reactions (or lack thereof) by
all types of marine mammals to seismic
vessels.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal
Habitat
NMFS included a detailed discussion
of the potential effects of this action on
marine mammal habitat, including
physiological and behavioral effects on
marine fish and invertebrates in the
notice of the proposed IHA (76 FR
33246, June 8, 2011). While NMFS
anticipates that the specified activity
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
may result in marine mammals avoiding
certain areas due to temporary
ensonification, this impact to habitat is
temporary and site-specific, which
NMFS considered in greater detail in
the notice of the proposed IHA (76 FR
33246, June 8, 2011) as behavioral
modification. The main impact
associated with the activity would be
temporarily elevated noise levels and
the associated direct effects on marine
mammals.
Mitigation
In order to issue an ITA under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must
set forth the permissible methods of
taking pursuant to such activity, and
other means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact on such
species or stock and its habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating
grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and the availability of such
species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses.
USGS based the mitigation measures
to be implemented for the seismic
survey on the following:
(1) Protocols used during previous
USGS and L–DEO seismic research
cruises as approved by NMFS;
(2) Previous IHA applications and
IHAs approved and authorized by
NMFS; and
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
49744
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
(3) Recommended best practices in
Richardson et al. (1995), Pierson et al.
(1998), and Weir and Dolman (2007).
To reduce the potential for
disturbance from acoustic stimuli
associated with the activities, USGS
and/or its designees will implement the
following mitigation measures for
marine mammals:
(1) EZs;
(2) Power-down procedures;
(3) Shut-down procedures;
(4) Ramp-up procedures; and
(5) Special procedures for situations
and species of concern.
Planning Phase—In designing the
seismic survey, USGS has considered
potential environmental impacts
including seasonal, biological, and
weather factors; ship schedules; and
equipment availability. Part of the
considerations was whether the research
objectives could be met with a smaller
source; tests will be conducted to
determine whether the two-string subarray (3,300 in3) will be satisfactory to
accomplish the geophysical objectives.
If so, the smaller array will be used to
minimize environmental impact. Also,
the array will be powered-down to a
single airgun during turns, and the array
will be shut-down during OBS
deployment and retrieval.
EZs—Received sound levels have
been determined by corrected empirical
measurements for the 36 airgun array,
and the L–DEO model was used to
predict the EZs for the single 1900LL 40
in3 airgun, which will be used during
power-downs. Results were recently
reported for propagation measurements
of pulses from the 36 airgun array in
two water depths (approximately 1,600
m and 50 m (5,249 to 164 ft)) in the Gulf
of Mexico (GOM) in 2007 to 2008
(Tolstoy et al., 2009). It would be
prudent to use the empirical values that
resulted to determine EZs for the airgun
array. Results of the propagation
measurements (Tolstoy et al., 2009)
showed that radii around the airguns for
various received levels varied with
water depth. During the study, all
survey effort will take place in deep
(greater than 1,000 m) water, so
propagation in shallow water is not
relevant here. The depth of the array
was different in the GOM calibration
study (6 m (19.7 ft)) than in the survey
(9 m); thus, correction factors have been
applied to the distances reported by
Tolstoy et al. (2009). The correction
factors used were the ratios of the 160,
180, and 190 dB distances from the
modeled results for the 6,600 in3 airgun
array towed at 6 m versus 9 m. Based
on the propagation measurements and
modeling, the distances from the source
where sound levels are predicted to be
190, 180, and 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms)
were determined. The 180 and 190 dB
radii are to 940 m and 400 m,
respectively, as specified by NMFS
(2000); these levels were used to
establish the EZs.
If the PSVO detects marine
mammal(s) within or about to enter the
appropriate EZ, the airguns will be
powered-down (or shut-down, if
necessary) immediately.
Table 2 summarizes the predicted
distances at which sound levels (160,
180, and 190 dB (rms)) are expected to
be received from the 36 airgun array and
a single airgun operating in deep water
depths.
TABLE 2—MEASURED (ARRAY) OR PREDICTED (SINGLE AIRGUN) DISTANCES TO WHICH SOUND LEVELS ≥190, 180, AND
160 DB RE: 1 μPA (RMS) COULD BE RECEIVED IN WATER DEPTHS >1,000 M DURING THE SURVEY IN THE CENTRALWESTERN BERING SEA, AUGUST 2011
Predicted RMS distances (m)
Source and volume
Water depth
190 dB
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Single Bolt airgun (40 in3) ........................
4 Strings 36 airguns (6,600 in3) ...............
Deep >1,000 m ........................................
Deep >1,000 m ........................................
Power-down Procedures—A powerdown involves decreasing the number of
airguns in use such that the radius of
the 180 dB (or 190 dB) zone is decreased
to the extent that marine mammals are
no longer in or about to enter the EZ. A
power-down of the airgun array can also
occur when the vessel is moving from
one seismic line to another. During a
power-down for mitigation, USGS will
operate one airgun. The continued
operation of one airgun is intended to
alert marine mammals to the presence of
the seismic vessel in the area. In
contrast, a shut-down occurs when the
Langseth suspends all airgun activity.
If the PSVO detects a marine mammal
outside the EZ, but it is likely to enter
the EZ, USGS will power-down the
airguns before the animal is within the
EZ. Likewise, if a mammal is already
within the EZ, when first detected
USGS will power-down the airguns
immediately. During a power-down of
the airgun array, USGS will also operate
the 40 in3 airgun. If a marine mammal
is detected within or near the smaller
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
EZ around that single airgun, USGS will
shut-down the airgun (see next section).
Following a power-down, USGS will
not resume airgun activity until the
marine mammal has cleared the EZ.
USGS will consider the animal to have
cleared the EZ if:
• A PSVO has visually observed the
animal leave the EZ, or
• A PSVO has not sighted the animal
within the EZ for 15 min for species
with shorter dive durations (i.e., small
odontocetes or pinnipeds), or 30 min for
species with longer dive durations (i.e.,
mysticetes and large odontocetes,
including sperm, pygmy sperm, dwarf
sperm, killer, and beaked whales).
During airgun operations following a
power-down (or shut-down) whose
duration has exceeded the time limits
specified previously, USGS will rampup the airgun array gradually (see Shutdown and Ramp-up Procedures).
Shut-down Procedures—USGS will
shut down the operating airgun(s) if a
marine mammal is seen within or
approaching the EZ for the single
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
180 dB
12
400
160 dB
40
940
385
3,850
airgun. USGS will implement a shutdown:
(1) If an animal enters the EZ of the
single airgun after USGS has initiated a
power-down; or
(2) If an animal is initially seen within
the EZ of the single airgun when more
than one airgun (typically the full
airgun array) is operating.
USGS will not resume airgun activity
until the marine mammal has cleared
the EZ, or until the PSVO is confident
that the animal has left the vicinity of
the vessel. Criteria for judging that the
animal has cleared the EZ will be as
described in the preceding section.
Ramp-up Procedures—USGS will
follow a ramp-up procedure when the
airgun array begins operating after a
specified period without airgun
operations or when a power-down has
exceeded that period. USGS proposes
that, for the present cruise, this period
would be approximately eight min. This
period is based on the 180 dB radius
(940 m) for the 36 airgun array towed at
a depth of 9 m in relation to the
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
minimum planned speed of the
Langseth while shooting (7.4 km/hr).
USGS and L–DEO have used similar
periods (approximately 8 to 10 min)
during previous L–DEO surveys.
Ramp-up will begin with the smallest
airgun in the array (40 in3). Airguns will
be added in a sequence such that the
source level of the array will increase in
steps not exceeding six dB per five min
period over a total duration of
approximately 35 min. During ramp-up,
the PSOs will monitor the EZ, and if
marine mammals are sighted, USGS will
implement a power-down or shut-down
as though the full airgun array 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, USGS will not commence the
ramp-up unless at least one airgun (40
in3 or similar) has been operating during
the interruption of seismic survey
operations. Given these provisions, it is
likely that the airgun array will not be
ramped-up from a complete shut-down
at night or in thick fog, because the
outer part of the EZ for that array will
not be visible during those conditions.
If one airgun has operated during a
power-down period, 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 airgun and could
move away. USGS will not initiate a
ramp-up of the airguns if a marine
mammal is sighted within or near the
applicable EZs during the day or close
to the vessel at night.
Special Procedures for Situations and
Species of Concern—USGS will
implement special mitigation
procedures as follows:
• The airguns will be shut-down
immediately if ESA-listed species for
which no takes are being requested (i.e.,
North Pacific right and blue whales) are
sighted at any distance from the vessel.
Ramp-up will only begin if the whale
has not been seen for 30 min.
• Concentrations of humpback, fin,
and/or killer whales will be avoided if
possible, and the array will be powereddown if necessary. For purposes of this
survey, a concentration or group of
whales will consist of three or more
individuals visually sighted that do not
appear to be traveling (e.g., feeding,
socializing, etc.).
NMFS has carefully evaluated the
applicant’s mitigation measures and has
considered a range of other measures in
the context of ensuring that NMFS
prescribes the means of effecting the
least practicable adverse impact on the
affected marine mammal species and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
stocks and their habitat. NMFS’s
evaluation of potential measures
included consideration of the following
factors in relation to one another:
(1) The manner in which, and the
degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure is
expected to minimize adverse impacts
to marine mammals;
(2) The proven or likely efficacy of the
specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned; and
(3) The practicability of the measure
for applicant implementation.
Based on NMFS’s evaluation of the
applicant’s measures, as well as other
measures considered by NMFS or
recommended by the public, NMFS has
determined that the mitigation measures
provide the means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impacts 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.
Monitoring
USGS would sponsor marine mammal
monitoring during the present project,
in order to implement the mitigation
measures that require real-time
monitoring, and to satisfy the
anticipated monitoring requirements of
the IHA. USGS’s Monitoring Plan is
described below this section. The
monitoring work described here has
been planned as a self-contained project
independent of any other related
monitoring projects that may be
occurring simultaneously in the same
regions. USGS 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 and desirable.
Vessel-Based Visual Monitoring
USGS’s PSVOs will be based aboard
the seismic source vessel and will watch
for marine mammals near the vessel
during daytime airgun operations and
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49745
during any ramp-ups at night. PSVOs
will also watch for marine mammals
near the seismic vessel for at least 30
min prior to the start of airgun
operations after an extended shut-down.
PSVOs will conduct observations
during daytime periods when the
seismic system is not operating for
comparison of sighting rates and
behavior with and without airgun
operations and between acquisition
periods. Based on PSVO observations,
the airguns will be powered-down or
shut-down when marine mammals are
observed within or about to enter a
designated EZ.
During seismic operations in the
central-western Bering Sea, at least four
PSOs will be based aboard the Langseth.
USGS will appoint the PSOs with
NMFS’s concurrence. Observations will
take place during ongoing daytime
operations and nighttime ramp-ups of
the airguns. During the majority of
seismic operations, two PSVOs will be
on duty from the observation tower to
monitor marine mammals near the
seismic vessel. Use of two simultaneous
PSVOs will increase the effectiveness of
detecting animals near the source
vessel. However, during meal times and
bathroom breaks, it is sometimes
difficult to have two PSVOs on effort,
but at least one PSVO will be on duty.
PSVO(s) will be on duty in shifts of
duration no longer than 4 hr.
Two PSVOs will also be on visual
watch during all nighttime ramp-ups of
the seismic airguns. A third PSO (i.e.,
Protected Species Acoustic Observer
(PSAO)) will monitor the PAM
equipment 24 hours a day to detect
vocalizing marine mammals present in
the action area. In summary, a typical
daytime cruise would have scheduled
two PSVOs on duty from the
observation tower, and a third PSAO on
PAM. Other crew will also be instructed
to assist in detecting marine mammals
and implementing mitigation
requirements (if practical). Before the
start of the seismic survey, the crew will
be given additional instruction on how
to do so.
The Langseth is a suitable platform for
marine mammal observations. When
stationed on the observation platform,
the eye level will be approximately 21.5
m (70.5 ft) above sea level, and the
PSVO will have a good view around the
entire vessel. During daytime, the
PSVOs will scan the area around the
vessel systematically with reticle
binoculars (e.g., 7 x 50 Fujinon), Big-eye
binoculars (25 x 150), and with the
naked eye. During darkness, NVDs will
be available (ITT F500 Series Generation
3 binocular-image intensifier or
equivalent), when required. Laser range-
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
49746
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
finding binoculars (Leica LRF 1200 laser
rangefinder or equivalent) will be
available to assist with distance
estimation. Those are useful in training
observers to estimate distances visually,
but are generally not useful in
measuring distances to animals directly;
that is done primarily with the reticles
in the binoculars.
When marine mammals are detected
within or about to enter the designated
EZ, the airguns will immediately be
powered-down or shut-down if
necessary. The PSVO(s) will continue to
maintain watch to determine when the
animal(s) are outside the EZ by visual
confirmation. Airgun operations will
not resume until the animal is
confirmed to have left the EZ, or if not
observed after 15 min for species with
shorter dive durations (small
odontocetes and pinnipeds) or 30 min
for species with longer dive durations
(mysticetes and large odontocetes,
including sperm, killer, and beaked
whales).
PAM
PAM will complement the visual
monitoring program, when practicable.
Visual monitoring typically is not
effective during periods of poor
visibility or at night, and even with
good visibility, is unable to detect
marine mammals when they are below
the surface or beyond visual range.
Besides the three PSVOs, an
additional PSAO with primary
responsibility for PAM will also be
aboard the vessel. USGS can use
acoustic monitoring in addition to
visual observations to improve
detection, identification, and
localization of cetaceans. The acoustic
monitoring will serve to alert visual
observers (if on duty) when vocalizing
cetaceans are detected. It is only useful
when marine mammals call, but it can
be effective either by day or by night,
and does not depend on good visibility.
It will be monitored in real time so that
the PSVOs can be advised when
cetaceans are detected. When bearings
(primary and mirror-image) to calling
cetacean(s) are determined, the bearings
will be relayed to the visual observer to
help him/her sight the calling animal(s).
The PAM system consists of hardware
(i.e., hydrophones) and software. The
‘‘wet end’’ of the system consists of a
towed hydrophone array that is
connected to the vessel by a cable. The
array will be deployed from a winch
located on the back deck. A deck cable
will connect from the winch to the main
computer laboratory where the acoustic
station and signal conditioning and
processing system will be located. The
digitized signal and PAM system is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
monitored by PSAOs at a station in the
main laboratory. The lead in from the
hydrophone array is approximately 400
m (1,312 ft) long, the active section of
the array is approximately 56 m (184 ft)
long, and the hydrophone array is
typically towed at depths of less than 20
m (66 ft).
Ideally, the PSAO will monitor the
towed hydrophones 24 hr per day at the
seismic survey area during airgun
operations, and during most periods
when the Langseth is underway while
the airguns are not operating. However,
PAM may not be possible if damage
occurs to both the primary and back-up
hydrophone arrays during operations.
The primary PAM streamer on the
Langseth is a digital hydrophone
streamer. Should the digital streamer
fail, back-up systems should include an
analog spare streamer and a hullmounted hydrophone. Every effort
would be made to have a working PAM
system during the cruise. In the unlikely
event that all three of these systems
were to fail, USGS would continue
science acquisition with the visualbased observer program. The PAM
system is a supplementary enhancement
to the visual monitoring program. If
weather conditions were to prevent the
use of PAM then conditions would also
likely prevent the use of the airgun
array.
One PSAO will monitor the acoustic
detection system at any one time, by
listening to the signals from two
channels via headphones and/or
speakers and watching the real-time
spectrographic display for frequency
ranges produced by cetaceans. PSAOs
monitoring the acoustical data will be
on shift for one to six hours at a time.
Besides the PSVO, an additional PSAO
with primary responsibility for PAM
will also be aboard the source vessel.
All PSVOs are expected to rotate
through the PAM position, although the
most experienced with acoustics will be
on PAM duty more frequently.
When a vocalization is detected while
visual observations are in progress, the
PSAO will contact the PSVO
immediately, to alert him/her to the
presence of cetaceans (if they have not
already been seen), and to allow a
power-down or shut-down to be
initiated, if required. The information
regarding the call will be entered into a
database. Data entry will include an
acoustic encounter identification
number, whether it was linked with a
visual sighting, date, time when first
and last heard and whenever any
additional information was recorded,
position and water depth when first
detected, bearing if determinable,
species or species group (e.g.,
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
unidentified dolphin, sperm whale),
types and nature of sounds heard (e.g.,
clicks, continuous, sporadic, whistles,
creaks, burst pulses, strength of signal,
etc.), and any other notable information.
The acoustic detection can also be
recorded for further analysis.
PSVO Data and Documentation
PSVOs will record data to estimate
the numbers of marine mammals
exposed to various received sound
levels and to document apparent
disturbance 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 power-down or shutdown of the airguns when a marine
mammal is within or near the EZ.
Observations will also be made during
daytime periods when the Langseth is
underway without seismic operations.
In addition to transits to, from, and
through the study area, there will also
be opportunities to collect baseline
biological data during the deployment
and recovery of OBSs.
When a sighting is made, the
following information about the sighting
will be recorded:
(1) Species, group size, age/size/sex
categories (if determinable), behavior
when first sighted and after initial
sighting, heading (if consistent), bearing
and distance from seismic vessel,
sighting cue, apparent reaction to the
airguns or vessel (e.g., none, avoidance,
approach, paralleling, etc.), and
behavioral pace.
(2) Time, location, heading, speed,
activity of the vessel, sea state,
visibility, and sun glare.
The data listed under (2) 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 and power-downs or
shut-downs will be recorded in a
standardized format. Data will be
entered into an electronic database. The
accuracy of the data entry will be
verified by computerized data validity
checks as the data are entered and by
subsequent manual checking of the
database. These procedures will allow
initial summaries of data to be prepared
during and shortly after the field
program, and will facilitate transfer of
the data to statistical, graphical, and
other programs for further processing
and archiving.
Results from the vessel-based
observations will provide:
(1) The basis for real-time mitigation
(airgun power-down or shut-down).
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
(2) Information needed to estimate the
number of marine mammals potentially
taken by harassment, which must be
reported to NMFS.
(3) Data on the occurrence,
distribution, and activities of marine
mammals in the area where the seismic
study is conducted.
(4) Information to compare the
distance and distribution of marine
mammals relative to the source vessel at
times with and without seismic activity.
(5) Data on the behavior and
movement patterns of marine mammals
seen at times with and without seismic
activity.
USGS will submit a report to NMFS
and NSF 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 provide 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 number and
nature of exposures that could result in
‘‘takes’’ of marine mammals by
harassment or in other ways.
In the unanticipated event that the
specified activity clearly causes the take
of a marine mammal in a manner
prohibited by this IHA, such as an
injury (Level A harassment), serious
injury or mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear
interaction, and/or entanglement),
USGS will immediately cease the
specified activities and immediately
report the incident to the Chief of the
Permits, Conservation, and Education
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, at 301–427–8401 and/or by email to Michael.Payne@noaa.gov and
Brian.D.Hopper@noaa.gov, and the
Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinators
(Aleria.Jensen@noaa.gov and
Barbara.Mahoney@noaa.gov). The
report must include the following
information:
• Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the incident;
• Name and type of vessel involved;
• Vessel’s speed during and leading
up to the incident;
• Description of the incident;
• Status of all sound source use in the
24 hours preceding the incident;
• Water depth;
• Environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea
state, cloud cover, and visibility);
• Description of all marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
• Species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
• Fate of the animal(s); and
• Photographs or video footage of the
animal(s) (if equipment is available).
Activities will not resume until NMFS
is able to review the circumstances of
the prohibited take. NMFS will work
with USGS to determine what is
necessary to minimize the likelihood of
further prohibited take and ensure
MMPA compliance. USGS may not
resume their activities until notified by
NMFS via letter or e-mail, or telephone.
In the event that USGS discovers an
injured or dead marine mammal, and
the lead PSO determines that the cause
of the injury or death is unknown and
the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less
than a moderate state of decomposition
as described in the next paragraph),
USGS will immediately report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits,
Conservation, and Education Division,
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at
301–427–8401, and/or by e-mail to
Michael.Payne@noaa.gov and
Brian.D.Hopper@noaa.gov, and the
NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline (1–
877–925–7773) and/or by e-mail to the
Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinators
(Aleria.Jensen@noaa.gov and
Barbara.Mahoney@noaa.gov). The
report must include the same
information identified in the paragraph
above. Activities may continue while
NMFS reviews the circumstances of the
incident. NMFS will work with USGS to
determine whether modifications in the
activities are appropriate.
In the event that USGS discovers an
injured or dead marine mammal, and
the lead PSO determines that the injury
or death is not associated with or related
to the activities authorized in the IHA
(e.g., previously wounded animal,
carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage),
USGS will report the incident to the
Chief of the Permits, Conservation, and
Education Division, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, at 301–427–8401,
and/or by e-mail to
Michael.Payne@noaa.gov and
Brian.D.Hopper@noaa.gov, and the
NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline (1–
877–925–7773) and/or by e-mail to the
Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinators
(Aleria.Jensen@noaa.gov and
Barbara.Mahoney@noaa.gov), within 24
hours of the discovery. USGS will
provide photographs or video footage (if
available) or other documentation of the
stranded animal sighting to NMFS and
the Marine Mammal Stranding Network.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49747
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as:
any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance
which (i) has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
[Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential
to disturb a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns, including,
but not limited to, migration, breathing,
nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering
[Level B harassment].
Only take by Level B harassment is
anticipated and authorized as a result of
the marine seismic survey in the
central-western Bering Sea. 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 exposed to sounds
at or greater than 160 dB or cause
temporary, short-term changes in
behavior. There is no evidence that the
planned activities could result in injury,
serious injury, or mortality within the
specified geographic area for which
NMFS has issued the IHA. Take by
injury, serious injury, or mortality is
thus neither anticipated nor authorized.
NMFS has determined that the required
mitigation and monitoring measures
will minimize any potential risk for
injury, serious injury, or mortality.
The following sections describe
USGS’s methods to estimate take by
incidental harassment and present the
applicant’s estimates of the numbers of
marine mammals that could be affected
during the seismic program. The
estimates are based on a consideration
of the number of marine mammals that
could be harassed by operations with
the 36 airgun array to be used during
approximately 2,420 km (1,307 nmi) of
survey lines in the central-western
Bering Sea.
USGS assumes that, during
simultaneous operations of the airgun
array and the other sources, any marine
mammals close enough to be affected by
the MBES and SBP would already be
affected by the airguns. However,
whether or not the airguns 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
previously. Such reactions are not
considered to constitute ‘‘taking’’
(NMFS, 2001). Therefore, USGS
provides no additional allowance for
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
49748
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
animals that could be affected by sound
sources other than airguns.
There are no systematic data on the
numbers and densities of marine
mammals in the deep, offshore waters of
the central-western Bering Sea. The
closest survey data are from Moore et al,
(2002), who conducted vessel-based
surveys in the Bering Sea during July 5–
August 5, 1999 and during June 10–July
3, 2000. The area surveyed extended
from the Alaska Peninsula to
approximately 58.8° North and was
separated into two areas: the centraleastern Bering Sea and the southeastern
Bering Sea. Most of the area covered
was in water depths greater than 500 m.
Similar surveys were conducted during
July 17–August 5, 1997 and June 7–July
2, 1999 (Tynan 2004) and during June–
July 2002, 2008, and 2010 (Friday et al.,
2008, 2011). Most surveys for pinnipeds
in Alaskan waters have estimated the
number of animals at haulout sites, not
in the water (e.g., Loughlin, 1994; Sease
et al., 2001; Withrow and Cesarone,
2002; Cease and York, 2003). USGS and
NMFS are not aware of any at-sea
estimates of pinnipeds in the offshore
waters of the Bering Sea.
Table 1 (Table 6 of the IHA
application) gives the estimated average
(best) and maximum densities of marine
mammals expected to occur in the deep,
offshore waters of the survey area. For
cetaceans, USGS used the densities
reported by Moore et al. (2002), which
were corrected for trackline detection
probability, but not availability biases,
which was assumed to be 1. In addition,
USGS calculated density estimates from
the Friday et al. (2011) effort and
sightings northwest of the Pribilof
Islands using correction values from
Barlow and Forney (2007). For two
species sighted in the southeastern
Bering Sea, but not the central-eastern
Bering Sea (Baird’s beaked whale and
Pacific white-sided dolphin), USGS
assigned densitities using their best
professional judgment. Finally, USGS
used seasonal densities for pinnipeds,
which were based on counts at haul-out
sites and biological (mostly breeding)
information to estimate in-water
densities.
There is some uncertainty about the
representativeness of the data and the
assumptions used in the calculations
below for two main reasons: (1) The
surveys from which cetacean densities
were derived were conducted in June–
July whereas the seismic survey is in
August; and (2) they were in shelf and
slope waters, where most marine
mammals are expected to occur in much
higher densities than in the deep,
offshore water of the survey area.
However, the densities are based on a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
considerable survey effort (19,160 km),
and the marine mammal surveys and
the seismic survey are in the same
season; therefore, the approach used
here is believed to be the best available
approach.
Also, to provide some allowance for
these uncertainties, ‘‘maximum
estimates’’ as well as ‘‘best estimates’’ of
the densities present and numbers
potentially affected have been derived.
Best estimates of cetacean density are
effort-weighted mean densities from the
various surveys, whereas maximum
estimates of density come from the
individual survey that provided the
highest density. For marine mammals
where only one density estimate was
available, the maximum is 1.5 times the
best estimate.
For one species, the Dall’s porpoise,
density estimates in the original reports
are much higher than densities expected
during the survey, because this porpoise
is attracted to vessels. USGS estimates
for Dall’s porpoises are from vesselbased surveys without seismic activity;
they are overestimates possibly by a
factor of 5 times, given the tendency of
this species to approach vessels
(Turnock and Quinn, 1991). Noise from
the airgun array during the survey is
expected to at least reduce and possibly
eliminate the tendency of this porpoise
to approach the vessel. Dall’s porpoises
are tolerant of small airgun sources
(MacLean and Koski, 2005) and
tolerated higher sound levels than other
species during a large-array survey (Bain
and Williams, 2006); however, they did
respond to that and another large airgun
array by moving away (Calambokidis
and Osmek, 1998; Bain and Williams,
2006). Because of the probable
overestimates, the best and maximum
estimates for Dall’s porpoises shown in
Table 1 (Table 6 of the IHA application)
are one-quarter of the reported densities.
In fact, actual densities are probably
slightly lower than that.
USGS’s estimates of exposures to
various sound levels assume that the
surveys will be fully completed
including the contingency line; in fact,
the ensonified areas calculated using the
planned number of line-km have been
increased by 25 percent to accommodate
lines that may need to be repeated,
equipment testing, etc. As is typical
during 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 EZs will result in the powerdown or shut-down of seismic
operations as a mitigation measure.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Thus, the following estimates of the
numbers of marine mammals potentially
exposed to sound levels of 160 dB re 1
μPa (rms) are precautionary and
probably overestimate the actual
numbers of marine mammals that might
be involved. These estimates also
assume that there will be no weather,
equipment, or mitigation delays, which
is highly unlikely.
USGS estimated the number of
different individuals that may be
exposed to airgun sounds with received
levels greater than or equal to 160 dB re
1 μPa (rms) on one or more occasions by
considering the total marine area that
would be within the 160 dB radius
around the operating airgun array on at
least one occasion and the expected
density of marine mammals. The
number of possible exposures
(including repeated exposures of the
same individuals) can be estimated by
considering the total marine area that
would be within the 160 dB radius
around the operating airguns, including
areas of overlap. In the survey, the
seismic lines are widely spaced in the
survey area, so few individual marine
mammals would be exposed more than
once during the survey. The area
including overlap is only 1.13 times the
area excluding overlap. Moreover, it is
unlikely that a particular animal would
stay in the area during the entire survey.
The number of different individuals
potentially exposed to received levels
greater than or equal to 160 re 1 μPa was
calculated by multiplying:
(1) The expected species density,
either ‘‘mean’’ (i.e., best estimate) or
‘‘maximum’’, times
(2) The anticipated area to be
ensonified to that level during airgun
operations excluding overlap.
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 of the IHA application)
around each seismic line, and then
calculating the total area within the
buffers. Areas of overlap (because of
lines being closer together than the 160
dB radius) were limited and included
only once when estimating the number
of individuals exposed. Before
calculating numbers of individuals
exposed, the areas were increased by 25
percent as a precautionary measure.
Table 1 (Table 6 of the IHA
application) shows the best and
maximum estimates of the number of
different individual marine mammals
that potentially could be exposed to
greater than or equal to 160 dB re 1 μPa
(rms) during the seismic survey if no
animals moved away from the survey
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
49749
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
vessel. The requested take
authorization, given in Table 3 (the far
right column of Table 4 of the IHA
application), is based on the best
estimates rather than the maximum
estimates of the numbers of individuals
exposed, because of uncertainties about
the representativeness of the density
data discussed previously. For cetacean
species not listed under the ESA that
could occur in the study area but were
not sighted in the surveys from which
density estimates were calculated—
Baird’s beaked whales and Stejneger’s
beaked whales—the average group size
has been used to request take
authorization. For ESA-listed cetacean
species unlikely to be encountered
during the study (i.e., North Pacific right
and blue whales), the requested takes
are zero.
Applying the approach described
above, approximately 12,372 km2 (3,607
nmi2) (approximately 15,465 km2 (4,509
nmi2) including the 25 percent
contingency) would be within the 160
dB isopleths on one or more occasions
during the survey, assuming that the
contingency line is completed. Because
this approach does not allow for
turnover in the marine mammal
populations in the study area during the
course of the survey, the actual number
of individuals exposed could be
underestimated in some cases. However,
the approach assumes that no cetaceans
will move away from or toward the
trackline as the Langseth approaches in
response to increasing sound levels
prior to the time the levels reach 160
dB, which will result in overestimates
for those species known to avoid
seismic vessels.
The ‘‘best estimate’’ of the number of
individual cetaceans that could be
exposed to seismic sounds with greater
than or equal to 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms)
during the survey is 271 (see Table 7 of
the IHA application). That total includes
69 whales listed as endangered under
the ESA (6 humpback, 1 sei, 61 fin, and
1 sperm whale, which would represent
less than 0.03 percent, 0.01 percent,
0.38 percent, and 0.01 percent of the
regional populations, respectively.
Estimated takes also include five Baird’s
beaked whales, two Stejneger’s beaked
whales, 44 killer whales, and 19 minke
whales, which would represent 0.02
percent, Not Available (NA), 0.51
percent, and 0.08 percent of the regional
populations, respectively. Dall’s
porpoises are expected to be the most
common species in the study area; the
best estimate of the number of Dall’s
porpoises that could be exposed is 137
or 0.01 percent of the regional
population. This may be a slight
overestimate because the estimated
densities are slight overestimates.
Estimates for other species are lower.
The ‘‘maximum estimates’’ total 703
cetaceans. ‘‘Best estimates’’ of 42 Steller
sea lions, 441 northern fur seals, and
674 ribbon seals could be exposed to
airgun sounds with received levels
greater than or equal to 160 dB re 1 μPa
(rms). These estimates represent 0.06
percent of the Steller sea lion regional
population, 0.04 percent of the northern
fur seal regional population, and 0.71
percent of the ribbon seal regional
population. The estimated numbers of
pinnipeds that could be exposed to
received levels greater than or equal to
160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) are probably
overestimates of the actual numbers that
will be affected. During the August
survey period, the Steller sea lion is in
its breeding season, with males staying
on land and females with pups
generally staying close to the rookeries
in shallow water. Male northern fur
seals are at their rookeries in June, and
adult females are either there or
migrating there, possibly through the
survey area. No take has been requested
for North Pacific right, bowhead, gray,
and blue whales, Cuvier’s beaked
whales, and white-sided dolphins. In
addition, takes were not requested for
spotted and ringed seals. Although these
marine mammal species may occur in
the offshore waters of the Bering Sea in
the summer (Table 2), USGS and NMFS
believe that the remote likelihood of
encountering these species in the survey
area (most of which are considered rare
to uncommon during the summer) does
not warrant requesting and/or
authorizing takes.
TABLE 3—ESTIMATES OF THE POSSIBLE NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO DIFFERENT SOUND LEVELS ≥ 160
dB DURING USGS’S SEISMIC SURVEY IN THE CENTRAL-WESTERN BERING SEA DURING AUGUST 2011
Estimated number
of individuals
exposed to
sound levels
≥ 160 dB re 1 μPa
(Best 1)
Species
Estimated number
of individuals
exposed to
sound levels
≥ 160 dB re 1 μPa
(Maximum 1)
0
0
0
6
19
1
61
0
0
0
2
16
63
9
263
0
0
0
0
6
19
1
61
0
0
0
<0.01
0.03
0.08
0.01
0.38
0
1
2
1
<0.01
0
1
1
0
2
2
0
5
2
0
0.02
NA
0
44
1
61
0
44
<0.01
0.51
137
282
137
0.01
441
42
661
63
441
42
0.04
0.06
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Mysticetes:
North Pacific right whale ..................................................
Bowhead whale ................................................................
Gray whale .......................................................................
Humpback whale ..............................................................
Minke whale ......................................................................
Sei whale ..........................................................................
Fin whale ..........................................................................
Blue whale ........................................................................
Physeteridae:
Sperm whale .....................................................................
Ziphidae:
Cuvier’s beaked whale .....................................................
Baird’s beaked whale .......................................................
Stejneger’s beaked whale ................................................
Delphinidae:
Pacific white-sided dolphin ...............................................
Killer whale .......................................................................
Phocoenidae:
Dall’s porpoise ..................................................................
Pinnipeds:
Northern fur seal ...............................................................
Steller sea lion ..................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
Approximate
percent of
regional
population 2
(Best)
Take authorized
11AUN1
49750
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
TABLE 3—ESTIMATES OF THE POSSIBLE NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO DIFFERENT SOUND LEVELS ≥ 160
dB DURING USGS’S SEISMIC SURVEY IN THE CENTRAL-WESTERN BERING SEA DURING AUGUST 2011—Continued
Estimated number
of individuals
exposed to
sound levels
≥ 160 dB re 1 μPa
(Best 1)
Species
Estimated number
of individuals
exposed to
sound levels
≥ 160 dB re 1 μPa
(Maximum 1)
0
0
674
0
0
1011
Spotted seal ......................................................................
Ringed seal .......................................................................
Ribbon seal .......................................................................
Take authorized
Approximate
percent of
regional
population 2
(Best)
0
0
674
0
0
0.71
1 Best and maximum estimates are based on densities from Table 3 and ensonified areas (including 25% contingency) of 26,166.25 km2 for
160 dB.
2 Regional population size estimates are from Table 2 (see Table 2 of the IHA application); NA means not available.
Encouraging and Coordinating
Research
USGS will coordinate the planned
marine mammal monitoring program
associated with the seismic survey in
the central-western Bering Sea with
other parties that may have an interest
in the area and/or be conducting marine
mammal studies in the same region
during the seismic survey. USGS will
coordinate with applicable U.S.
agencies (e.g., NMFS), and will comply
with their requirements.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers
Analysis and Determination
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 evaluated factors
such as:
(1) The number of anticipated
injuries, serious injuries, or mortalities;
(2) The number, nature, intensity, and
duration of Level B harassment (all
relatively limited); and
(3) The context in which the takes
occur (i.e., impacts to areas of
significance, impacts to local
populations, and cumulative impacts
when taking into account successive/
contemporaneous actions when added
to baseline data);
(4) The status of stock or species of
marine mammals (i.e., depleted, not
depleted, decreasing, increasing, stable,
and impact relative to the size of the
population);
(5) Impacts on habitat affecting rates
of recruitment or survival; and
(6) The effectiveness of monitoring
and mitigation measures (i.e., the
manner and degree in which the
measure is likely to reduce adverse
impacts to marine mammals, the likely
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
effectiveness of measures, and the
practicability of implementation).
For reasons stated previously in this
document, and in the proposed notice of
an IHA (76 FR 33246, June 8, 2011), the
specified activities associated with the
marine seismic survey are not likely to
cause PTS, or other non-auditory injury,
serious injury, or death 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 potential for temporary or
permanent hearing impairment is very
low and would likely be avoided
through the incorporation of the
monitoring and mitigation measures;
(3) The fact that pinnipeds and
cetaceans would have to be closer than
400 m (1,312.3 ft) and 940 m (3,084 ft)
in deep water when the 36 airgun array
and 12 m (39.4 ft) and 40 m (131.2ft)
when the single airgun is in use at 9 m
(29.5 ft) tow depth from the vessel to be
exposed to levels of sound believed to
have even a minimal chance of causing
permanent threshold shift; and
(4) The likelihood that marine
mammal detection ability by trained
PSOs is high at close proximity to the
vessel.
No injuries, serious injuries, or
mortalities are anticipated to occur as a
result of the USGS’s planned marine
seismic 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. Due to the nature,
degree, and context of behavioral
harassment anticipated, the activity is
not expected to impact rates of
recruitment or survival for any affected
species or stock.
As mentioned previously, NMFS
estimates that 12 species of marine
mammals under its jurisdiction could be
potentially affected by Level B
harassment over the course of the IHA.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
For each species, these numbers are
small relative to the population size.
NMFS has determined, provided that
the aforementioned mitigation and
monitoring measures are implemented,
that the impact of conducting a marine
seismic survey in the central-western
Bering Sea, August 2011, 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 in
this notice 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 USGS’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 seismic survey
will have a negligible impact on the
affected species or stocks of marine
mammals; and that impacts to affected
species or stocks of marine mammals
have been mitigated to the lowest level
practicable.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
Section 101(a)(5)(D) also requires
NMFS to determine that the
authorization will not have an
unmitigable adverse effect on the
availability of marine mammal species
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 155 / Thursday, August 11, 2011 / Notices
or stocks for subsistence use. There are
no relevant subsistence uses of marine
mammals in the study area (deep,
offshore waters of the central-western
Bering Sea) that implicate MMPA
section 101(a)(5)(D).
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Endangered Species Act
Of the species of marine mammals
that may occur in the survey area,
several are listed as endangered under
the ESA, including the North Pacific
right, humpback, sei, fin, blue, and
sperm whales, as well as the western
stock of Steller sea lions. The eastern
stock of Steller sea lions is listed as
threatened. Under section 7 of the ESA,
USGS initiated formal consultation with
the NMFS, Office of Protected
Resources, Endangered Species
Division, on this seismic survey.
NMFS’s Office of Protected Resources,
Permits, Conservation and Education
Division, also initiated formal
consultation under section 7 of the ESA
with NMFS’s 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, if appropriate,
authorizing incidental take. In August
2011, NMFS issued a BiOp and
concluded that the action and issuance
of the IHA are not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of the North
Pacific right, humpback, sei, fin, blue,
and sperm whales, and Steller sea lions.
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.
USGS must comply with the Relevant
Terms and Conditions of the Incidental
Take Statement (ITS) corresponding to
NMFS’s BiOp issued to both USGS and
NMFS’s Office of Protected Resources.
USGS must also comply with the
mitigation and monitoring requirements
included in the IHA in order to be
exempt under the ITS in the BiOp from
the prohibition on take of listed
endangered marine mammal species
otherwise prohibited by section 9 of the
ESA.
NEPA
With its complete application, USGS
provided NMFS an EA analyzing the
direct, indirect, and cumulative
environmental impacts of the specified
activities on marine mammals including
those listed as threatened or endangered
under the ESA. The EA, prepared by
LGL on behalf of USGS, is entitled
‘‘Environmental Assessment of a Marine
Geophysical Survey by the R/V Marcus
G. Langseth in the central-western
Bering Sea, August 2011.’’ After NMFS
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:59 Aug 10, 2011
Jkt 223001
reviewed and evaluated the USGS EA
for consistency with the regulations
published by the Council of
Environmental Quality (CEQ) and
NOAA Administrative Order 216–6,
Environmental Review Procedures for
Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, NMFS
adopted the USGS EA and issued a
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI).
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to USGS for
the take, by Level B harassment, of
small numbers of marine mammals
incidental to conducting a marine
geophysical survey in the centralwestern Bering Sea, August 2011,
provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated.
Dated: August 5, 2011.
James H. Lecky,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–20461 Filed 8–10–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
[CPSC Docket No. 11–C0009]
Perfect Fitness, Provisional
Acceptance of a Settlement Agreement
and Order
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
It is the policy of the
Commission to publish settlements
which it provisionally accepts under the
Consumer Product Safety Act in the
Federal Register in accordance with the
terms of 16 CFR 1118.20(e). Published
below is a provisionally-accepted
Settlement Agreement with Perfect
Fitness, containing a civil penalty of
$425,000.00.
DATES: Any interested person may ask
the Commission not to accept this
agreement or otherwise comment on its
contents by filing a written request with
the Office of the Secretary by August 26,
2011.
ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to
comment on this Settlement Agreement
should send written comments to the
Comment 11–C0009, Office of the
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, 4330 East West Highway,
Room 820, Bethesda, Maryland 20814–
4408.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer C. Argabright, Trial Attorney,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49751
Division of Compliance, Office of the
General Counsel, Consumer Product
Safety Commission, 4330 East West
Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814–
4408; telephone (301) 504–7808.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of
the Agreement and Order appears
below.
Dated: August 8, 2011.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
United States of America Consumer
Product Safety Commission
Settlement Agreement
1. In accordance with 16 CFR 1118.20,
Perfect Fitness and staff (‘‘Staff’’) of the
United States Consumer Product Safety
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) hereby
enter into this Settlement Agreement
(‘‘Agreement’’) under the Consumer
Product Safety Act (‘‘CPSA’’). The
Agreement and the incorporated
attached Order resolve Staff’s
allegations set forth below.
The Parties
2. Staff is the staff of the Commission,
an independent federal regulatory
agency established pursuant to, and
responsible for, the enforcement of the
CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2051–2089.
3. Perfect Fitness is a privately-held
Limited Liability Company, organized
and existing under the laws of the State
of California, with its principal
corporate office located at 1750
Bridgeway, Suite A100, Sausalito,
California 94965.
Staff Allegations
4. Between January 2008 and August
2008, Perfect Fitness manufactured and
distributed approximately ten thousand
(10,000) ‘‘Perfect Pullup’’ exercise
equipment (‘‘Subject Products’’).
Retailers continued to sell the Subject
Products until they were recalled on
February 17, 2011. The Subject Products
sold for approximately $80–$100
through major sporting goods stores,
online retailers, and through direct
television marketing.
5. The Subject Products are
‘‘consumer products’’ and, at all
relevant times, Perfect Fitness was a
‘‘manufacturer’’ of these consumer
products, which were ‘‘distribute[d] in
commerce,’’ as those terms are defined
or used in sections 3(a)(5), (8), and (11)
of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(5), (8),
and (11).
6. The Subject Products are defective
because the handle can break during
use, resulting in consumers falling to
the floor.
7. Perfect Fitness received its first
complaint involving handle breakage in
E:\FR\FM\11AUN1.SGM
11AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 155 (Thursday, August 11, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49737-49751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20461]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XA430
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Marine Geophysical Survey in the Central-Western Bering Sea, August
2011
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental take authorization (ITA).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)
regulation, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an
Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) to take marine mammals, by Level B harassment, incidental to
conducting a marine geophysical survey in the central-western Bering
Sea, August 2011.
DATES: Effective August 7 through October 1, 2011.
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: Environmental
Assessment (EA), prepared by USGS. 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: Brian D. Hopper, 301-427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1371 (a)(5)(D)) directs
the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) 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 the 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 (where relevant). 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 requirements pertaining to the mitigation, 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's 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].
16 U.S.C. 1362(18)
Summary of Request
NMFS received an application on April 8, 2011, from USGS for the
taking by harassment, of marine mammals, incidental to conducting a
marine geophysical survey in the central-
[[Page 49738]]
western Bering Sea within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and
adjacent international waters in depths greater than 3,000 m (9,842
ft). USGS plans to conduct the survey from approximately August 7 to
September 1, 2011. On June 8, 2011, NMFS published a notice in the
Federal Register (76 FR 33246) discussing the effects on marine mammals
and making preliminary determinations regarding a proposed IHA. The
notice initiated a 30 day public comment period, which closed on July
8, 2011.
USGS plans to use one source vessel, the R/V Marcus G. Langseth
(Langseth) and a seismic airgun array to collect seismic reflection and
refraction profiles to be used to delineate the U.S. Extended
Continental Shelf (ECS) in the central-western Bering Sea. In addition
to the operations of the seismic airgun array, USGS intends to operate
a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and a sub-bottom profiler (SBP)
continuously throughout the survey.
Acoustic stimuli (i.e., increased underwater sound) generated
during the operation of the seismic airgun array may have the potential
to cause a short-term behavioral disturbance for marine mammals in the
survey area. This is the principal means of marine mammal taking
associated with these activities and USGS has requested an
authorization to take 12 species of marine mammals by Level B
harassment. Take is not expected to result from the use of the MBES or
SBP, for reasons discussed in this notice; nor is take expected to
result from collision with the vessel because it is a single vessel
moving at a relatively slow speed during seismic acquisition within the
survey, for a relatively short period of time (approximately 21 days).
It is likely that any marine mammal would be able to avoid the vessel.
Description of the Specified Activity
USGS plans to conduct the seismic survey in the central-western
Bering Sea between approximately 350 and 800 kilometers (km) (189 and
432 nautical miles (nmi)) offshore in the area 55[deg] to 58.5[deg]
North, 177[deg] West to 175[deg] East. The survey will take place in
the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and adjacent international
waters in water depths greater than 3,000 meters (m) (9,842 feet (ft)).
The project is scheduled to occur from approximately August 7 to
September 1, 2011. Some minor deviation from these dates is possible,
depending on logistics and weather.
The seismic survey will collect seismic reflection and refraction
profiles to be used to delineate the U.S. ECS in the Bering Sea. The
ECS is the region beyond 200 nmi where a nation can show that it
satisfies the conditions of Article 76 of the United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea. One of the conditions in Article 76 is a
function of sediment thickness. The seismic profiles are designed to
identify the stratigraphic ``basement'' and to map the thickness of the
overlying sediments. Acoustic velocities (required to convert measured
travel times to true depth) will be measured directly using sonobuoys
and ocean-bottom seismometers (OBSs), as well as by analysis of
hydrophone streamer data. Acoustic velocity refers to the velocity of
sound through sediments or crust.
The survey will involve one source vessel, the Langseth. The
Langseth will deploy an array of 36 airguns as an energy source. The
receiving system will consist of one 8 km (4.3 nmi) long hydrophone
streamer and/or five OBSs. As the airgun is towed along the survey
lines, the hydrophone streamer will receive the returning acoustic
signals and transfer the data to the on-board processing system. The
OBSs record the returning acoustic signals internally for later
analysis.
The planned seismic survey will consist of approximately 2,240 km
of transect lines in the central-western Bering Sea survey area, with
an additional 140 km (75.6 nmi) of turns. During turns, the array will
be powered-down to one 40 in\3\ airgun. All of the survey will take
place in water deeper than 3,000 m (9,842 ft). A multi-channel seismic
(MCS) survey using the hydrophone streamer will take place along 14
lines. Following the MCS survey, 18 OBSs will be deployed and a
refraction survey will take place along three of the 14 lines. If time
permits, an additional 525 km of contingency lines will be added to the
MCS survey. In addition to the the airgun array, a Kongsberg EM 122
MBES and Knudsen 320B SBP will be operated from the Langseth
continuously throughout the cruise. There will be additional seismic
operations associated with equipment testing, start-up, and possible
line changes or repeat coverage of any areas where initial data quality
is sub-standard. In USGS's calculations, 25 percent has been added for
those additional operations.
All planned geophysical data acquisition activities will be
conducted by Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (L-DEO), the Langseth's
operator, with on-board assistance by the scientists who have planned
the study. The Principal Investigators are Drs. Jonathan R. Childs and
Ginger Barth of the USGS. The vessel will be self-contained, and the
crew will live aboard the vessel for the entire cruise.
Description of the Dates, Duration, and Specified Geographic Region
The survey will occur in the central-western Bering Sea between
approximately 350 and 800 kilometers (km) (189 and 432 nautical miles
(nmi)) offshore in the area 55[deg] to 58.5[deg] North, 177[deg] West
to 175[deg] East. The seismic survey will take place in water depths
greater than 3,000 m. The exact dates of the activities depend on
logistics and weather conditions. The Langseth will depart from Dutch
Harbor, Alaska on August 7, 2011, and return there on September 1,
2011. Seismic operations will be carried out for an estimated 18 to 21
days.
NMFS outlined the purpose of the program in a previous notice for
the proposed IHA (76 FR 33246, June 8, 2011). 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 proposed IHA
notice (76 FR 33246, June 8, 2011), the IHA application and associated
documents referenced above this section.
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of the USGS application and proposed IHA was
published in the Federal Register on June 8, 2011 (76 FR 33246). During
the 30-day public comment period, NMFS only received comments from the
Marine Mammal Commission (Commission). The Commission's comments are
online at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm.
Following are their comments and NMFS's responses:
Comment 1: The Commission recommends that the NMFS require the USGS
to re-estimate the proposed exclusion and buffer zones and associated
takes of marine mammals using site-specific information.
Response: In the water depths that the survey is to be conducted,
site-specific source signature measurements are neither warranted nor
practical. Site signature measurements are normally conducted
commercially by shooting a test pattern over an ocean bottom instrument
in shallow water. This method is neither practical nor valid in water
depths as great as 3,000 m (9,842.5 ft). The alternative method of
conducting site-specific attenuation measurements would require a
second vessel, which is impractical both
[[Page 49739]]
logistically and financially. Sound propagation varies noticeably less
between deep water sites than between shallow water sites (because of
the reduced significance of bottom interaction), thus decreasing the
importance of site-specific estimates.
Based on these reasons, and the information provided by USGS in
their IHA application and EA, NMFS is satisfied that the data supplied
are sufficient for NMFS to conduct its analysis and make any
determinations; therefore, no further effort is needed by the
applicant. 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 160 dB zone used
to estimate exposure is appropriate and sufficient for purposes of
supporting NMFS's analysis and determinations required under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA and its implementing regulations. See NMFS's
response to Comment 2 (below) for additional details.
Comment 2: The Commission recommends that, if site-specific
information is not used to estimate the proposed exclusion and buffer
zones and associated takes of marine mammals, the USGS provide a
detailed justification for the exclusion and buffer zones applicable to
the proposed survey in the Bering Sea, which are based on either
empirical data collected in the GOM or on modeling that uses
measurements from the GOM, and explain the significance of any
deviations in survey method, such as the proposed change in tow depth.
Response: USGS has revised Appendix A in the EA to include
information from the calibration study conducted on the Langseth in
2007 and 2008. This information is now available in the final EA on
USGS's Web site at https://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/EA/ECS_EA/ as well as on
NSF's Web site at https://www.nsf.gov/geo/oce/envcomp/index.jsp. The
revised Appendix A describes the L-DEO modeling process and compares
the model results with empirical results of the 2007 to 2008 Langseth
calibration experiment in shallow, intermediate, and deep water. The
conclusions identified in Appendix A show that the model represents the
actual produced levels, particularly within the first few kms, where
the predicted exclusion zones (EZs, i.e., safety radii) lie. At greater
distances, local oceanographic variations begin to take effect, and the
model tends to over predict. Further, since the modeling matches the
observed measurement data, the authors have concluded that the models
can continue to be used for defining EZs, including for predicting
mitigation radii for various tow depths. The data results from the
studies were peer reviewed and the calibration results, viewed as
conservative, were used to determine the cruise-specific EZs.
At present, the L-DEO model does not account for site-specific
environmental conditions. The calibration study of the L-DEO model
predicted that using site-specific information may actually provide
less conservative EZ radii at greater distances. The Draft Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement for Marine Seismic Research Funded by
the National Science Foundation or Conducted by the U.S. Geological
Survey (DPEIS) prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) did incorporate various site-
specific environmental conditions in the modeling of the Detailed
Analysis Areas. The NEPA process associated with the DPEIS is still
ongoing and the USGS and NSF have not yet issued a Record of Decision.
Once the NEPA process for the PEIS has concluded, USGS and/or NSF will
look at upcoming cruises on a site-specific basis for any impacts not
already considered in the DPEIS.
The IHA issued to USGS, under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
provides monitoring and mitigation requirements that will protect
marine mammals from injury, serious injury, or mortality. USGS is
required to comply with the IHA's requirements. These analyses are
supported by extensive scientific research and data. NMFS is confident
in the peer-reviewed results of the L-DEO seismic calibration studies
which, although viewed as conservative, are used to determine cruise-
specific EZs and which factor into exposure estimates. NMFS has
determined that these reviews are the best scientific data available
for review of the IHA application and to support the necessary analyses
and determinations under the MMPA, Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and NEPA.
Based on NMFS's analysis of the likely effects of the specified
activity on marine mammals and their habitat, NMFS has determined that
the EZs identified in 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 have
been estimated based upon the best available scientific information and
estimation methodology. The 160 dB zone used to estimate exposure is
appropriate and sufficient for purposes of supporting NMFS's analysis
and determinations required under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA and
its implementing regulations.
Comment 3: The Commission recommends that the NMFS specify in the
authorization all conditions under which an 8 min period could be
followed by a resumption of the airguns at full power.
Response: In the instance of a power-down or shut-down based on the
presence of a marine mammal in the EZ, USGS will restart the airgun
array to the full operating source level (i.e., 36 airguns 6,600 in\3\)
only if the PSVO visually observes the marine mammal exiting the EZ for
the full source level within an 8 min period of the shut-down or power-
down. The 8 min period is based on the 180 dB radius for the 36 airgun
subarray at a depth of 9 m in relation to the minimum planned speed of
the Langseth while shooting (8.5 km/hr (4.6 kts)). In the event that a
marine mammal would re-enter the EZ after reactivating the airguns,
USGS would reinitiate a shut-down or power-down as required by the IHA.
Should the airguns be inactive or powered-down for more than 8 min,
and the PSVO does not observe the marine mammal leaving the EZ, then
USGS must wait 15 min (for small odontocetes and pinnipeds) or 30 min
(for mysticetes and large odontocetes) after the last sighting before
USGS can initiate ramp-up procedures. However, ramp-up will not occur
as long as a marine mammal is detected within the EZ, which provides
more time for animals to leave the EZ, and accounts for the position,
swim speed, and heading for marine mammals within the EZ.
Finally, USGS may need to temporarily perform a shut-down due to
equipment failure or maintenance. In this instance, USGS will restart
the airgun array to the full source level within an 8 min period of the
shut down only if the PSVOs do not observe marine mammals within the EZ
for the full source level. If the airguns are inactive or powered-down
for more than 8 min, USGS would follow the ramp-up procedures required
by the IHA. USGS would restart the airguns beginning with the smallest
airgun in the array and add airguns in a sequence such that the source
level of the array does not exceed approximately 6 decibels (dB) per 5
min period over a total duration of approximately 30 min. Again, the
PSVOs would monitor the EZs for marine mammals during this time and
[[Page 49740]]
would initiate a power-down or a shut-down, as required by the IHA.
Comment 4: The Commission recommends that the NMFS extend the 30
min period following a marine mammal sighting in the EZ to cover the
full dive times of all species likely to be encountered.
Response: NMFS recognizes that several species of deep-diving
cetaceans are capable of remaining underwater for more than 30 min
(e.g., sperm whales, Cuvier's beaked whales, Baird's beaked whales);
however, for the following reasons NMFS believes that 30 min is an
adequate length for the monitoring period prior to the ramp-up of
airguns:
(1) Because the Langseth is required to monitor before ramp-up of
the airgun array, the time of monitoring prior to start-up of any but
the smallest array is effectively longer than 30 min (ramp-up will
begin with the smallest airgun in the array and airguns will be added
in sequence such that the source level of the array will increase in
steps not exceeding approximately 6 dB per 5 min period over a total
duration of 20 to 30 min;
(2) In many cases PSVOs are observing during times when USGS is not
operating the seismic airguns and would observe the area prior to the
30 min observation period;
(3) The majority of the species that may be exposed do not stay
underwater more than 30 min; and
(4) All else being equal and if deep-diving individuals happened to
be in the area in the short time immediately prior to the pre-ramp-up
monitoring, if an animal's maximum underwater dive time is 45 min, then
there is only a one in three chance that the last random surfacing
would occur prior to the beginning of the required 30 min monitoring
period and that the animal would not be seen during that 30 min period.
Finally, seismic vessels are moving continuously (because of the
long, towed array and streamer) 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 EZ radii within 30 min, and therefore it will be safe to
start the airguns again.
Under the MMPA, incidental take authorizations must include means
of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on marine mammal
species and their habitat. Monitoring and mitigation measures are
designed to comply with this requirement. 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 EZs and thus further minimize the
potential for take.
Comment 5: The Commission recommends that the NMFS provide
additional justification for its preliminary determination that the
proposed monitoring program will be sufficient to detect, with a high
level of confidence, all marine mammals within or entering the
identified exclusion and buffer zones, which at a minimum should:
(1) Identify those species that it believes can be detected with a
high degree of confidence using visual monitoring only;
(2) Describe detection probability as a function of distance from
the vessel;
(3) Describe changes in detection probability under various sea
state and weather conditions and light levels; and
(4) Explain how close to the vessel marine mammals must be for
Protected Species Observers (PSOs) to achieve high nighttime detection
rates.
Response: NMFS believes that the planned monitoring program will be
sufficient to detect (using visual monitoring and passive acoustic
monitoring (PAM)), with reasonable certainty, marine mammals within or
entering identified EZs. This monitoring, along with the required
mitigation measures, will result in the least practicable adverse
impact on the affected species or stocks and will result in a
negligible impact on the affected species or stocks of marine mammals.
Also, NMFS expects some animals to avoid areas around the airgun area
ensonified at the level of the EZ.
NMFS acknowledges that the detection probability for certain
species of marine mammals varies depending on animal size and behavior
as well as sea state and weather conditions and light levels. The
detectability of marine mammals likely decreases in low light (i.e.,
darkness), higher Beaufort sea states and wind conditions, and poor
weather (e.g., fog and/or rain). However, at present, NMFS views the
combination of visual monitoring and PAM as the most effective
monitoring and mitigation techniques available for detecting marine
mammals within or entering the EZ. The final monitoring and mitigation
measures are the most effective feasible measures and NMFS is not aware
of any additional measures which could meaningfully increase the
likelihood of detecting marine mammals in and around the EZ. Further,
public comment has not revealed any additional monitoring or mitigation
measures that could be feasibly implemented to increase the
effectiveness of detection.
USGS (the Federal funding agency for this survey), National Science
Foundation (NSF), and L-DEO are receptive to incorporating proven
technologies and techniques to enhance the current monitoring and
mitigation program. Until proven technological advances are made,
nighttime mitigation measures during operations include combinations of
the use of Protected Species Visual Observers (PSVOs) for ramp-ups,
PAM, night vision devices (NVDs), and continuous shooting of a
mitigation airgun. Should the airgun array be powered-down, the
operation of a single airgun would continue to serve as a sound source
deterrent to marine mammals. In the event of a complete shut-down of
the airgun array at night for mitigation or repairs, USGS suspends the
data collection until one-half hour after nautical twilight-dawn (when
PSVO's are able to clear the EZ). USGS will not activate the airguns
until the entire EZ is visible for at least 30 min.
In cooperation with NMFS, L-DEO will be conducting efficacy
experiments of NVDs during a future Langseth cruise. In addition, in
response to a recommendation from NMFS, L-DEO is evaluating the use of
handheld forward-looking thermal imaging cameras to supplement
nighttime monitoring and mitigation practices. During other low power
seismic and seafloor mapping surveys, USGS successfully used these
devices while conducting nighttime seismic operations.
Comment 6: The Commission recommends that the NMFS consult with the
funding agency (i.e., NSF) and individual applicants (e.g., USGS and L-
DEO) to develop, validate, and implement a monitoring program that
provides a scientifically sound, reasonably accurate assessment of the
types of marine mammal taking and the number of marine mammals taken.
Response: Numerous studies have reported on the abundance and
distribution of marine mammals inhabiting the Bering Sea, which
overlaps with the seismic survey area, and USGS has incorporated this
data into their analyses used to predict marine mammal take in their
application. NMFS believes that USGS's current approach for estimating
abundance in the survey area (prior to the survey) is the best
available approach.
[[Page 49741]]
There will be significant amounts of transit time during the
cruise, and PSVOs will be on watch prior to and after the seismic
portions of the survey, in addition to during the survey. The
collection of this visual observational data by PSVOs may contribute to
baseline data on marine mammals (presence/absence) and provide some
generalized support for estimated take numbers, but it is unlikely that
the information gathered from this single cruise alone would result in
any statistically robust conclusions for any particular species because
of the small number of animals typically observed.
NMFS acknowledges the Commission's recommendations and is open to
further coordination with the Commission, USGS (the Federal research
funding agency for this cruise), NSF (the vessel owner), and L-DEO (the
ship operator on behalf of NSF), to develop, validate, and implement a
monitoring program that will provide or contribute towards a more
scientifically sound and reasonably accurate assessment of the types of
marine mammal taking and the number of marine mammals taken. However,
the cruise's primary focus is marine geophysical research and the
survey may be operationally limited due to considerations such as
location, time, fuel, services, and other resources.
Comment 7: The Commission recommends that NMFS require the
applicant:
(1) To report on the number of marine mammals that were detected
acoustically and for which a power-down or shut-down of the airguns was
initiated;
(2) Specify if such animals also were detected visually; and
(3) Compare the results from the two monitoring methods (visual
versus acoustic) to help identify their respective strengths and
weaknesses.
Response: The IHA requires that PSAOs on the Langseth do and record
the following when a marine mammal is detected by the PAM:
(1) Notify the on-duty PSVO(s) immediately of a vocalizing marine
mammal so a power-down or shut-down can be initiated, if required;
(2) Enter the information regarding the vocalization into a
database. The data to be entered include an acoustic encounter
identification number, whether it was linked with a visual sighting,
date, time when first and last heard and whenever any additional
information was recorded, position, and water depth when first
detected, bearing if determinable, species or species group (e.g.,
unidentified dolphin, sperm whale), types and nature of sounds heard
(e.g., clicks, continuous, sporadic, whistles, creaks, burst pulses,
strength of signal, etc.), and any other notable information.
USGS reports on the number of acoustic detections made by the PAM
system within the post-cruise monitoring reports as required by the
IHA. The report also includes a description of any acoustic detections
that were concurrent with visual sightings, which allows for a
comparison of acoustic and visual detection methods for each cruise.
The post-cruise monitoring reports also include the following
information: the total operational effort in daylight (hrs), the total
operational effort at night (hrs), the total number of hours of visual
observations conducted, the total number of sightings, and the total
number of hours of acoustic detections conducted.
LGL Ltd., Environmental Research Associates (LGL), a contractor for
USGS, has processed sighting and density data, and their publications
can be viewed online at: https://www.lgl.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69&Itemid=162&lang=en. Post-cruise monitoring
reports are currently available on the NMFS's MMPA Incidental Take
Program Web site and future reports will also be available on the NSF
Web site should there be interest in further analysis of this data by
the public.
Comment 8: The Commission recommends that NMFS condition the
authorization, if issued, to require the USGS to monitor, document, and
report observations during all ramp-up procedures; this data will
provide a stronger scientific basis for determining the effectiveness
of and deciding when to implement this particular mitigation measure.
Response: The IHA requires that PSVOs on the Langseth make
observations for 30 min prior to ramp-up, during all ramp-ups, and
during all daytime seismic operations and record the following
information when a marine mammal is sighted:
(1) Species, group size, age/size/sex categories (if determinable),
behavior when first sighted and after initial sighting, heading (if
consistent), bearing and distance from seismic vessel, sighting cue,
apparent reaction of the airguns or vessel (e.g., none, avoidance,
approach, paralleling, etc., and including responses to ramp-up), and
behavioral pace; and
(2) Time, location, heading, speed, activity of the vessel
(including number of airguns operating and whether in state of ramp-up
or power-down), Beaufort wind force and sea state, visibility, and sun
glare.
Comment 9: The Commission recommends that NMFS in collaboration
with the NSF, analyze these data to determine the effectiveness of
ramp-up procedures as a mitigation measure for geophysical surveys.
Response: One of the primary purposes of monitoring is to result in
``increased knowledge of the species'' and the effectiveness of
monitoring and mitigation measures; the effectiveness of ramp-up as a
mitigation measure and marine mammal reaction to ramp-up would be
useful information in this regard. NMFS has asked USGS, NSF, and L-DEO
to gather all data that could potentially provide information regarding
the effectiveness of ramp-ups as a mitigation measure. However,
considering the low numbers of marine mammal sightings and low numbers
of ramp-ups, it is unlikely that the information will result in any
statistically robust conclusions for this particular seismic survey.
Over the long term, these requirements may provide information
regarding the effectiveness of ramp-up as a mitigation measure,
provided animals are detected during ramp up.
Description of the Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
Twenty marine mammal species (14 cetacean and 6 pinniped) are known
to or could occur in the central-western Bering Sea. Several of these
species are listed as endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act
of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including the North Pacific
right whale (Eubalaena japonica), bowhead (Balaena mysticetus),
humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae), sei (Balaenoptera borealis), fin
(Balaenoptera physalus), blue (Balaenoptera musculus), and sperm
(Physeter macrocephalus) whales, as well as the western stock of
Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus). The eastern stock of Steller
sea lions is listed as threatened.
The marine mammals that occur in the survey area belong to three
taxonomic groups: odontocetes (toothed cetaceans, such as dolphins),
mysticetes (baleen whales), and pinnipeds (seals, sea lions, and
walrus). Cetaceans and pinnipeds are the subject of the IHA application
to NMFS. Walrus sightings are rare in the Bering Sea during the summer.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) manages the Pacific walrus
and they are not considered further in this analysis; all others
species are managed by NMFS. Coastal cetacean species (gray whales)
likely
[[Page 49742]]
would not be encountered in the deep, offshore waters of the survey
area.
Table 1 presents information on the abundance, distribution,
population status, conservation status, and density of the marine
mammals that may occur in the survey area during August 2011.
Table 1--The Habitat, Regional Abundance, and Conservation Status of Marine Mammals That May Occur in or Near the Seismic Survey Areas in the Central-
Western Bering Sea (See Text and Table 2 in USGS's Application and EA for Further Details)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Density (number/1,000
Occurrence in/near Regional km\2\)
Species survey area Habitat abundance ESA \1\ MMPA \2\ -----------------------
Best \3\ Max \4\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mysticetes:
North Pacific right whale Rare................. Coastal, shelf, Low hundreds \5\ EN D 0 0
(Eubalaena japonica). offshore.
Bowhead whale (Balaena Uncommon............. Pack ice, 12,631 \6\...... EN D 0 0
mysticetus). coastal.
Gray whale (Eschrichtius Common............... Coastal, shallow NW Pacific: DL/E \8\ NC D (Western 0.01 0.12
robustus). shelf. 19,126 NE populations)
Pacific: ~100
\7\.
Humpback whale (Megaptera Common............... Offshore, 20,800 \9\...... EN D 0.40 1.04
novaeangliae). nearshore in
winter.
Minke whale (Balaenoptera Common............... Nearshore, 25,000 \10\..... NL NC 1.23 4.10
acutorostrata). offshore, ice.
Sei whale (Balaenoptera Uncommon............. Offshore, shelf. 7,260 to 12,620 EN D 0.05 0.58
borealis). \11\.
Fin whale (Balaenoptera Common............... Offshore, deep 13,620 to 18,680 EN D 3.94 17.00
physalus). water. \12\.
Blue whale (Balaneoptera Rare................. Offshore, shelf, 3,500 \13\...... EN D 0 0
musculus). coastal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Odontocetes:
Sperm whale (Physeter Uncommon............. Offshore........ 24,000 \14\..... EN D 0.07 0.14
macrocephalus).
Cuvier's beaked whale (Ziphius Very rare............ Offshore........ 20,000 \15\..... NL NC 0 0
cavirostris).
Baird's beaked whale Rare................. Offshore........ 7,000 \16\...... NL NC 0.07 0.10
(Berardius bairdii).
Stejneger's beaked whale Uncommon............. Offshore........ N.A............. NL NC 0.04 0.12
(Mesoplodon stejnegeri).
Pacific white-sided dolphin Rare................. Pelagic, shelf, 988,000 \17\.... NL NC 0.03 0.04
(Lagenorhynchus obliquidens). coastal.
Killer whale (Orcinus orca)... Common............... Pelagic, shelf, 8,500 \18\...... NL NC 2.82 3.96
coastal.
Dall's porpoise (Phocoenoides Common............... Nearshore, 1,186,000 \19\.. NL NC 8.86 18.25
dalli). offshore.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pinnipeds:
Northern fur seal (Callorhinus Common............... Offshore and 1.1 million \20\ NL D 28.5 42.75
ursinus). coastal.
Steller sea lion (Eumetopias Common............... Coastal......... 58,334, 72,223 T \23\, EN D 2.70 4.05
jubatus). \21\, 42,366 \23\
\22\.
Spotted seal (Phoca largha)... Uncommon............. Ice............. AK: ~59,214 \24\ NL ..................... N.A. N.A.
Ringed seal (Pusa hispida).... Uncommon............. Ice, landfast, AK: 249,000 \24\ NL NC N.A. N.A.
pack.
[[Page 49743]]
Ribbon seal (Histriophoca Common............... Ice............. Bering Sea: NL NC 43.60 65.40
fasciata). 90,000-100,000
\24\.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
N.A. Not available or not assessed.
\1\ U.S. Endangered Species Act: EN = Endangered, T = Threatened, NL = Not listed.
\2\ U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act: D = Depleted, NC = Not Classified.
\3\ Best density estimate as listed in Table 3 of the application.
\4\ Maximum density estimate as listed in Table 3 of the application.
\5\ Western population (Brownell et al., 2001)
\6\ Based on 2003-2005 surveys (Koski et al., 2010).
\7\ Northwest (NW) Pacific (Allen and Angliss, 2010); Northeast (NE) Pacific (Reilly et al., 2008).
\8\ The western (Northeast Pacific) subpopulation is listed as Endangered.
\9\ North Pacific Ocean (Barlow et al., 2009).
\10\ Northwest Pacific (Buckland et al., 1992; IWC, 2010).
\11\ North Pacific (Tillman, 1977).
\12\ North Pacific (Ohsumi and Wada, 1974).
\13\ Eastern North Pacific (NMFS, 1998).
\14\ Eastern temperate North Pacific (Whitehead, 2002b).
\15\ Eastern Tropical Pacific (Wade and Gerrodette, 1993).
\16\ Western North Pacific (Reeves and Leatherwood, 1994; Kasuya, 2002).
\17\ North Pacific Ocean (Miyashita, 1993b).
\18\ Eastern Tropical Pacific (Ford, 2002).
\19\ North Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea (Houck and Jefferson, 1999).
\20\ North Pacific (Gelatt and Lowry, 2008).
\21\ Eastern U.S. Stock (Allen and Angliss, 2010).
\22\ Western U.S. Stock (Allen and Angliss, 2010).
\23\ Eastern stock is listed as threatened, and the western stock is listed as endangered.
\24\ Burns 1981.
Refer to Section III of USGS's application for detailed information
regarding the abundance and distribution, population status, and life
history and behavior of these species and their occurrence in the
project area. The application also presents how USGS calculated the
estimated densities for the marine mammals in the survey area. NMFS has
reviewed these data and determined them to be the best available
scientific information for the purposes of the IHA.
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
Acoustic stimuli generated by the operation of the airguns, which
introduce sound into the marine environment, may have the potential to
cause Level B harassment of marine mammals in the survey area. The
effects of sounds from airgun operations 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. Based
on the available data and studies described here, some behavioral
disturbance is expected, but NMFS expects the disturbance to be
localized and short-term.
The notice of the proposed IHA (76 FR 33246, June 8, 2011) included
a discussion of the effects of sounds from airguns on mysticetes,
odontocetes, and pinnipeds including tolerance, masking, behavioral
disturbance, hearing impairment, and other non-auditory physical
effects. NMFS refers the reader to USGS's application, and EA for
additional information on the behavioral reactions (or lack thereof) by
all types of marine mammals to seismic vessels.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
NMFS included a detailed discussion of the potential effects of
this action on marine mammal habitat, including physiological and
behavioral effects on marine fish and invertebrates in the notice of
the proposed IHA (76 FR 33246, June 8, 2011). While NMFS anticipates
that the specified activity may result in marine mammals avoiding
certain areas due to temporary ensonification, this impact to habitat
is temporary and site-specific, which NMFS considered in greater detail
in the notice of the proposed IHA (76 FR 33246, June 8, 2011) as
behavioral modification. The main impact associated with the activity
would be temporarily elevated noise levels and the associated direct
effects on marine mammals.
Mitigation
In order to issue an ITA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and the availability of such species or stock for taking
for certain subsistence uses.
USGS based the mitigation measures to be implemented for the
seismic survey on the following:
(1) Protocols used during previous USGS and L-DEO seismic research
cruises as approved by NMFS;
(2) Previous IHA applications and IHAs approved and authorized by
NMFS; and
[[Page 49744]]
(3) Recommended best practices in Richardson et al. (1995), Pierson
et al. (1998), and Weir and Dolman (2007).
To reduce the potential for disturbance from acoustic stimuli
associated with the activities, USGS and/or its designees will
implement the following mitigation measures for marine mammals:
(1) EZs;
(2) Power-down procedures;
(3) Shut-down procedures;
(4) Ramp-up procedures; and
(5) Special procedures for situations and species of concern.
Planning Phase--In designing the seismic survey, USGS has
considered potential environmental impacts including seasonal,
biological, and weather factors; ship schedules; and equipment
availability. Part of the considerations was whether the research
objectives could be met with a smaller source; tests will be conducted
to determine whether the two-string sub-array (3,300 in\3\) will be
satisfactory to accomplish the geophysical objectives. If so, the
smaller array will be used to minimize environmental impact. Also, the
array will be powered-down to a single airgun during turns, and the
array will be shut-down during OBS deployment and retrieval.
EZs--Received sound levels have been determined by corrected
empirical measurements for the 36 airgun array, and the L-DEO model was
used to predict the EZs for the single 1900LL 40 in\3\ airgun, which
will be used during power-downs. Results were recently reported for
propagation measurements of pulses from the 36 airgun array in two
water depths (approximately 1,600 m and 50 m (5,249 to 164 ft)) in the
Gulf of Mexico (GOM) in 2007 to 2008 (Tolstoy et al., 2009). It would
be prudent to use the empirical values that resulted to determine EZs
for the airgun array. Results of the propagation measurements (Tolstoy
et al., 2009) showed that radii around the airguns for various received
levels varied with water depth. During the study, all survey effort
will take place in deep (greater than 1,000 m) water, so propagation in
shallow water is not relevant here. The depth of the array was
different in the GOM calibration study (6 m (19.7 ft)) than in the
survey (9 m); thus, correction factors have been applied to the
distances reported by Tolstoy et al. (2009). The correction factors
used were the ratios of the 160, 180, and 190 dB distances from the
modeled results for the 6,600 in\3\ airgun array towed at 6 m versus 9
m. Based on the propagation measurements and modeling, the distances
from the source where sound levels are predicted to be 190, 180, and
160 dB re 1 [micro]Pa (rms) were determined. The 180 and 190 dB radii
are to 940 m and 400 m, respectively, as specified by NMFS (2000);
these levels were used to establish the EZs.
If the PSVO detects marine mammal(s) within or about to enter the
appropriate EZ, the airguns will be powered-down (or shut-down, if
necessary) immediately.
Table 2 summarizes the predicted distances at which sound levels
(160, 180, and 190 dB (rms)) are expected to be received from the 36
airgun array and a single airgun operating in deep water depths.
Table 2--Measured (Array) or Predicted (Single Airgun) Distances To Which Sound Levels >=190, 180, and 160 dB
re: 1 [mu]Pa (rms) Could Be Received in Water Depths >1,000 m During the Survey in the Central-Western Bering
Sea, August 2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Predicted RMS distances (m)
Source and volume Water depth -----------------------------------------------------
190 dB 180 dB 160 dB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single Bolt airgun (40 in\3\)...... Deep >1,000 m........ 12 40 385
4 Strings 36 airguns (6,600 in\3\). Deep >1,000 m........ 400 940 3,850
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power-down Procedures--A power-down involves decreasing the number
of airguns in use such that the radius of the 180 dB (or 190 dB) zone
is decreased to the extent that marine mammals are no longer in or
about to enter the EZ. A power-down of the airgun array can also occur
when the vessel is moving from one seismic line to another. During a
power-down for mitigation, USGS will operate one airgun. The continued
operation of one airgun is intended to alert marine mammals to the
presence of the seismic vessel in the area. In contrast, a shut-down
occurs when the Langseth suspends all airgun activity.
If the PSVO detects a marine mammal outside the EZ, but it is
likely to enter the EZ, USGS will power-down the airguns before the
animal is within the EZ. Likewise, if a mammal is already within the
EZ, when first detected USGS will power-down the airguns immediately.
During a power-down of the airgun array, USGS will also operate the 40
in\3\ airgun. If a marine mammal is detected within or near the smaller
EZ around that single airgun, USGS will shut-down the airgun (see next
section).
Following a power-down, USGS will not resume airgun activity until
the marine mammal has cleared the EZ. USGS will consider the animal to
have cleared the EZ if:
A PSVO has visually observed the animal leave the EZ, or
A PSVO has not sighted the animal within the EZ for 15 min
for species with shorter dive durations (i.e., small odontocetes or
pinnipeds), or 30 min for species with longer dive durations (i.e.,
mysticetes and large odontocetes, including sperm, pygmy sperm, dwarf
sperm, killer, and beaked whales).
During airgun operations following a power-down (or shut-down)
whose duration has exceeded the time limits specified previously, USGS
will ramp-up the airgun array gradually (see Shut-down and Ramp-up
Procedures).
Shut-down Procedures--USGS will shut down the operating airgun(s)
if a marine mammal is seen within or approaching the EZ for the single
airgun. USGS will implement a shut-down:
(1) If an animal enters the EZ of the single airgun after USGS has
initiated a power-down; or
(2) If an animal is initially seen within the EZ of the single
airgun when more than one airgun (typically the full airgun array) is
operating.
USGS will not resume airgun activity until the marine mammal has
cleared the EZ, or until the PSVO is confident that the animal has left
the vicinity of the vessel. Criteria for judging that the animal has
cleared the EZ will be as described in the preceding section.
Ramp-up Procedures--USGS will follow a ramp-up procedure when the
airgun array begins operating after a specified period without airgun
operations or when a power-down has exceeded that period. USGS proposes
that, for the present cruise, this period would be approximately eight
min. This period is based on the 180 dB radius (940 m) for the 36
airgun array towed at a depth of 9 m in relation to the
[[Page 49745]]
minimum planned speed of the Langseth while shooting (7.4 km/hr). USGS
and L-DEO have used similar periods (approximately 8 to 10 min) during
previous L-DEO surveys.
Ramp-up will begin with the smallest airgun in the array (40
in\3\). Airguns will be added in a sequence such that the source level
of the array will increase in steps not exceeding six dB per five min
period over a total duration of approximately 35 min. During ramp-up,
the PSOs will monitor the EZ, and if marine mammals are sighted, USGS
will implement a power-down or shut-down as though the full airgun
array 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, USGS will
not commence the ramp-up unless at least one airgun (40 in\3\ or
similar) has been operating during the interruption of seismic survey
operations. Given these provisions, it is likely that the airgun array
will not be ramped-up from a complete shut-down at night or in thick
fog, because the outer part of the EZ for that array will not be
visible during those conditions. If one airgun has operated during a
power-down period, 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
airgun and could move away. USGS will not initiate a ramp-up of the
airguns if a marine mammal is sighted within or near the applicable EZs
during the day or close to the vessel at night.
Special Procedures for Situations and Species of Concern--USGS will
implement special mitigation procedures as follows:
The airguns will be shut-down immediately if ESA-listed
species for which no takes are being requested (i.e., North Pacific
right and blue whales) are sighted at any distance from the vessel.
Ramp-up will only begin if the whale has not been seen for 30 min.
Concentrations of humpback, fin, and/or killer whales will
be avoided if possible, and the array will be powered-down if
necessary. For purposes of this survey, a concentration or group of
whales will consist of three or more individuals visually sighted that
do not appear to be traveling (e.g., feeding, socializing, etc.).
NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's mitigation measures
and has considered a range of other measures in the context of ensuring
that NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least practicable
adverse impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and
their habitat. NMFS's evaluation of potential measures included
consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts
to marine mammals;
(2) The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to
minimize adverse impacts as planned; and
(3) The practicability of the measure for applicant implementation.
Based on NMFS's evaluation of the applicant's measures, as well as
other measures considered by NMFS or recommended by the public, NMFS
has determined that the mitigation measures provide the means of
effecting the least practicable adverse impacts 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.
Monitoring
USGS would sponsor marine mammal monitoring during the present
project, in order to implement the mitigation measures that require
real-time monitoring, and to satisfy the anticipated monitoring
requirements of the IHA. USGS's Monitoring Plan is described below this
section. The monitoring work described here has been planned as a self-
contained project independent of any other related monitoring projects
that may be occurring simultaneously in the same regions. USGS 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 and desirable.
Vessel-Based Visual Monitoring
USGS's PSVOs will be based aboard the seismic source vessel and
will watch for marine mammals near the vessel during daytime airgun
operations and during any ramp-ups at night. PSVOs will also watch for
marine mammals near the seismic vessel for at least 30 min prior to the
start of airgun operations after an extended shut-down.
PSVOs will conduct observations during daytime periods when the
seismic system is not operating for comparison of sighting rates and
behavior with and without airgun operations and between acquisition
periods. Based on PSVO observations, the airguns will be powered-down
or shut-down when marine mammals are observed within or about to enter
a designated EZ.
During seismic operations in the central-western Bering Sea, at
least four PSOs will be based aboard the Langseth. USGS will appoint
the PSOs with NMFS's concurrence. Observations will take place during
ongoing daytime operations and nighttime ramp-ups of the airguns.
During the majority of seismic operations, two PSVOs will be on duty
from the observation tower to monitor marine mammals near the seismic
vessel. Use of two simultaneous PSVOs will increase the effectiveness
of detecting animals near the source vessel. However, during meal times
and bathroom breaks, it is sometimes difficult to have two PSVOs on
effort, but at least one PSVO will be on duty. PSVO(s) will be on duty
in shifts of duration no longer than 4 hr.
Two PSVOs will also be on visual watch during all nighttime ramp-
ups of the seismic airguns. A third PSO (i.e., Protected Species
Acoustic Observer (PSAO)) will monitor the PAM equipment 24 hours a day
to detect vocalizing marine mammals present in the action area. In
summary, a typical daytime cruise would have scheduled two PSVOs on
duty from the observation tower, and a third PSAO on PAM. Other crew
will also be instructed to assist in detecting marine mammals and
implementing mitigation requirements (if practical). Before the start
of the seismic survey, the crew will be given additional instruction on
how to do so.
The Langseth is a suitable platform for marine mammal observations.
When stationed on the observation platform, the eye level will be
approximately 21.5 m (70.5 ft) above sea level, and the PSVO will have
a good view around the entire vessel. During daytime, the PSVOs will
scan the area around the vessel systematically with reticle binoculars
(e.g., 7 x 50 Fujinon), Big-eye binoculars (25 x 150), and with the
naked eye. During darkness, NVDs will be available (ITT F500 Series
Generation 3 binocular-image intensifier or equivalent), when required.
Laser range-
[[Page 49746]]
finding binoculars (Leica LRF 1200 laser rangefinder or equivalent)
will be available to assist with distance estimation. Those are useful
in training observers to estimate distances visually, but are generally
not useful in measuring distances to animals directly; that is done
primarily with the reticles in the binoculars.
When marine mammals are detected within or about to enter the
designated EZ, the airguns will immediately be powered-down or shut-
down if necessary. The PSVO(s) will continue to maintain watch to
determine when the animal(s) are outside the EZ by visual confirmation.
Airgun operations will not resume until the animal is confirmed to have
left the EZ, or if not observed after 15 min for species with shorter
dive durations (small odontocetes and pinnipeds) or 30 min for species
with longer dive durations (mysticetes and large odontocetes, including
sperm, killer, and beaked whales).
PAM
PAM will complement the visual monitoring program, when
practicable. Visual monitoring typically is not effective during
periods of poor visibility or at night, and even with good visibility,
is unable to detect marine mammals when they are below the surface or
beyond visual range.
Besides the three PSVOs, an additional PSAO with primary
responsibility for PAM will also be aboard the vessel. USGS can use
acoustic monitoring in addition to visual observations to improve
detection, identification, and localization of cetaceans. The acoustic
monitoring will serve to alert visual observers (if on duty) when
vocalizing cetaceans are detected. It is only useful when marine
mammals call, but it can be effective either by day or by night, and
does not depend on good visibility. It will be monitored in real time
so that the PSVOs can be advised when cetaceans are detected. When
bearings (primary and mirror-image) to calling cetacean(s) are
determined, the bearings will be relayed to the visual observer to help
him/her sight the calling animal(s).
The PAM system consists of hardware (i.e., hydrophones) and
software. The ``wet end'' of the system consists of a towed hydrophone
array that is connected to the vessel by a cable. The array will be
deployed from a winch located on the back deck. A deck cable will
connect from the winch to the main computer laboratory where the
acoustic station and signal conditioning and processing system will be
located. The digitized signal and PAM system is monitored by PSAOs at a
station in the main laboratory. The lead in from the hydrophone array
is approximately 400 m (1,312 ft) long, the active section of the array
is approximately 56 m (184 ft) long, and the hydrophone array is
typically towed at depths of less than 20 m (66 ft).
Ideally, the PSAO will monitor the towed hydrophones 24 hr per day
at the seismic survey area during airgun operations, and during most
periods when the Langseth is underway while the airguns are not
operating. However, PAM may not be possible if damage occurs to both
the primary and back-up hydrophone arrays during operations. The
primary PAM streamer on the Langseth is a digital hydrophone streamer.
Should the digital streamer fail, back-up systems should include an
analog spare streamer and a hull-mounted hydrophone. Every effort would
be made to have a working PAM system during the cruise. In the unlikely
event that all three of these systems were to fail, USGS would continue
science acquisition with the visual-based observer program. The PAM
system is a supplementary enhancement to the visual monitoring program.
If weather conditions were to prevent the use of PAM then conditions