Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Marine Geophysical Survey in the Northwest Pacific Ocean, March Through May, 2012, 56613-56622 [2012-22602]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Notices
27 agenda will occur as previously
published in the Federal Register on
September 7, 2012 (77 FR 55192). On
Thursday, September 27, 2012,
however, the final day of the meeting,
there will be an addition to the items
the Council will address. Just prior to
adjournment, the Council will discuss
the approval of alternatives to be
included in the Standardized Bycatch
Reporting Methodology (SBRM)
Amendment for analysis
Although non-emergency issues not
contained in this agenda may come
before this group for discussion, those
issues may not be the subject of formal
action during this meeting. Action will
be restricted to those issues specifically
listed in this notice and any issues
arising after publication of this notice
that require emergency action under
section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, provided the public has been
notified of the Council’s intent to take
final action to address the emergency.
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul
J. Howard, Executive Director, at (978)
465–0492, at least 5 days prior to the
meeting date.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: September 7, 2012.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–22506 Filed 9–12–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XB042
Marine Mammals; File No. 16325
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of permit.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that a
permit has been issued to Jooke
Robbins, Ph.D., Center for Coastal
Studies, 5 Holway Avenue,
Provincetown, MA 02657 to conduct
research on marine mammals.
ADDRESSES: The permit and related
documents are available for review
upon written request or by appointment
in the following offices:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:13 Sep 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705,
Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301)
427–8401; fax (301) 713–0376;
Northeast Region, NMFS, 55 Great
Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930;
phone (978) 281–9328; fax (978) 281–
9394; and
Southeast Region, NMFS, 263 13th
Avenue South, Saint Petersburg, FL
33701; phone (727) 824–5312; fax (727)
824–5309.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joselyd Garcia-Reyes or Carrie Hubard,
(301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
February 29, 2012, notice was published
in the Federal Register (77 FR 12244)
that a request for a permit to conduct
research on humpback whales
(Megaptera novaeangliae), fin whales
(Balaenoptera physalus), blue whales
(B. musculus), sei whales (B. borealis),
minke whales (B. acutorostrata), sperm
whales (Physeter macrocephalus), and
killer whales (Orcinus orca) had been
submitted by the above-named
applicant. The requested permit has
been issued under the authority of the
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the
regulations governing the taking and
importing of marine mammals (50 CFR
part 216), the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.), and the regulations governing
the taking, importing, and exporting of
endangered and threatened species (50
CFR parts 222–226).
The permit authorizes harassment of
humpback, fin, blue, sei, minke, sperm
and killer whales by close vessel
approaches; photo-identification and
behavioral observations;
photogrammetry; collection of exhaled
air, feces and sloughed skin; and skin
and blubber biopsy sampling import
and export of parts. The research would
continue a long-term study of North
Atlantic humpback whales and improve
understanding of the other six target
species in the North Atlantic. Research
would occur in the waters off Canada,
Maine to Florida, and Puerto Rico.
Incidental harassment of North Atlantic
right whales (Eubalaena glacialis) and
14 other non-listed marine mammals is
also authorized. The permit expires
August 31, 2017.
An environmental assessment (EA)
was prepared analyzing the effects of
the permitted activities on the human
environment in compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Based on
the analyses in the EA, NMFS
determined that issuance of the permit
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56613
would not significantly impact the
quality of the human environment and
that preparation of an environmental
impact statement was not required. That
determination is documented in a
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI), signed on August 24, 2012.
As required by the ESA, issuance of
this permit was based on a finding that
such permit: (1) Was applied for in good
faith; (2) will not operate to the
disadvantage of such endangered
species; and (3) is consistent with the
purposes and policies set forth in
section 2 of the ESA.
Dated: September 7, 2012.
P. Michael Payne,
Chief, Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–22607 Filed 9–12–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XB048
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Marine
Geophysical Survey in the Northwest
Pacific Ocean, March Through May,
2012
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) regulation, we hereby give
notification that we have issued an
Incidental Harassment Authorization
(Authorization) to Lamont-Doherty
Earth Observatory (Observatory), a part
of Columbia University, to take marine
mammals, by harassment, incidental to
conducting a marine geophysical
(seismic) survey in the central Pacific
Ocean, May through June, 2012.
DATES: Effective May 1, 2012, through
June 11, 2012.
ADDRESSES: To obtain an electronic
copy of the Authorization, write to P.
Michael Payne, Chief, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910–
3225 or download an electronic copy at:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm#applications.
To obtain an electronic copy of (1) the
application containing a list of the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
56614
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Notices
references within this document; and (2)
the National Science Foundation’s
(Foundation) Environmental
Assessment (EA) under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and
Executive Order 12114; write to the
previously mentioned address,
telephone the contact listed here (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or
download the file at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm#applications.
The Service’s Biological Opinion will
be available online at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/consultation/
opinions.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Jeannine Cody, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine
Mammal Protect Act of 1972, as
amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et
seq.) directs the Secretary of Commerce
to authorize, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional, taking of
small numbers of marine mammals of a
species or population stock, by United
States citizens who engage in a specified
activity (other than commercial fishing)
within a specified geographical region
if: (1) We make certain findings; (2) the
taking is limited to harassment; and (3)
we provide a notice of a proposed
authorization to the public for review.
We shall grant authorization for the
incidental taking of small numbers of
marine mammals if we find 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. We have
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 Marine
Mammal Protection Act established an
expedited process for U.S. citizens to
apply for an authorization to
incidentally take small numbers of
marine mammals by harassment.
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine
Mammal Protection Act establishes a
45-day time limit for our review of an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:13 Sep 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
application followed by a 30-day public
notice and comment period on any
proposed authorization for the
incidental harassment of small numbers
of marine mammals. Within 45 days of
the close of the public comment period,
we must either issue or deny the
authorization and must publish a notice
in the Federal Register within 30 days
of our determination to issue or deny
the authorization.
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the Marine
Mammal Protection Act defines
‘‘harassment’’ as: Any act of pursuit,
torment, or annoyance which (i) has the
potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild [Level
A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential
to disturb a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration,
breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering [Level B harassment].
Summary of Request
On December 12, 2012, we received a
complete application from the
Observatory requesting that we issue an
Authorization for the take, by Level B
harassment only, of small numbers of
marine mammals incidental to
conducting a seismic survey in the
central Pacific Ocean from May 1
through May 26, 2012. We determined
the application complete and adequate
on February 28, 2012 and released the
application for public comment (see
ADDRESSES) for consideration of issuing
an Authorization to the Observatory.
The Observatory, with research
funding from the Foundation, plans to
conduct the seismic survey from May 1
through May 26, 2012 offshore the Line
Islands in the central Pacific Ocean.
They plan to use one source vessel, the
R/V Marcus G. Langseth (Langseth), an
airgun array, and a single hydrophone
streamer to provide the data necessary
to understand sedimentation patterns on
the flanks of the Line Islands Ridge and
to investigate how climate patterns have
varied over time in the late Pleistocene
period. In addition to the operations of
the seismic airgun array and
hydrophone streamer, the Observatory
intends to operate a multibeam
echosounder (echosounder), a subbottom profiler, and an acoustic Doppler
current profiler continuously
throughout the survey except while on
station for marine coring activities.
Acoustic stimuli (i.e., increased
underwater sound) generated during
seismic operations, may have the
potential to cause a short-term,
behavioral disturbance for marine
mammals in the survey area. This is the
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
principal means of marine mammal
taking associated with these activities.
We expect these disturbances to be
temporary and result in a temporary
modification in behavior and/or lowlevel physiological effects (Level B
harassment only) of small numbers of
certain species of marine mammals.
We do not expect that the movement
of the Langseth, during the conduct of
the seismic survey, has the potential to
harass marine mammals because of the
relatively slow operation speed of the
vessel (4.6 knots (kts); 8.5 kilometers per
hour (km/h); 5.3 miles per hour (mph))
during seismic acquisition.
We also do not expect that the
operation of the echosounder, subbottom profiler and current profiler
have the potential to harass marine
mammals because they would already
experience affects from the airgun array.
Whether or not the airguns are operating
simultaneously with the other sources,
we expect the marine mammals to
exhibit no more than short-term and
inconsequential responses to the
echosounder, sub-bottom profiler and
current profiler given their
characteristics (e.g., narrow, downwarddirected beam)
We have outlined the purpose of the
program in a previous notice for the
proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242,
March 30, 2012). The Observatory’s
proposed activities have not changed
between the proposed IHA notice and
this final notice announcing the
issuance of the Authorization. Refer to
the to the notice of the proposed IHA
(77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012), the
application, and Environmental
Assessment for a more detailed
description of the authorized action,
including vessel and acoustic source
specifications.
Description of the Specified Geographic
Region
The Observatory will conduct the
survey in the Exclusive Economic Zones
of the Republic of Kiribati the U.S. The
study area will encompass an area in the
Line Islands bounded by approximately
0.5–8 degrees (°) North by 156–162°
West. Water depths in the survey area
range from approximately 1,100 to 5,000
m (0.68 to 3.1 mi).
Comments and Responses
We published a notice of receipt of
the Observatory’s application and
proposed Authorization in the Federal
Register on March 30, 2012 (77 FR
19242). During the 30-day public
comment period, we received comments
from the Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission) only. The Commission’s
comments are online at: https://
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Notices
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm. Following are their
comments and our responses.
Comment 1: The Commission
recommends that, before issuing the
requested Authorization, we require the
Observatory to: (1) Re-estimate the
proposed exclusion zones and buffer
zones and associated number of marine
mammal takes using operational and
site-specific environmental parameters;
and (2) if the Observatory does not reestimate the zones, provide a detailed
justification for basing the proposed
survey’s zones on modeling that relies
on measurements from the Gulf of
Mexico instead of the central Pacific
Ocean.
Response: With respect to the
Commission’s first point, based upon
the best available information and our
analysis of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, we are satisfied that
the Observatory’s data are sufficient for
us to conduct our analysis and support
our determinations under the Marine
Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) and the National
Environmental Policy Act. The
identified zones are appropriate for the
survey and additional field
measurements are not necessary at this
time. Thus, for this survey, we will not
require the Observatory to re-estimate
the proposed exclusion zones and buffer
zones and associated number of marine
mammal takes using operational and
site-specific environmental parameters.
With respect to the Commission’s
second point, The Observatory has
modeled the central Pacific Ocean
exclusion and buffer zones on modeling
based on the 2007–2008 Langseth’s
peer-reviewed, calibration study in the
Gulf of Mexico (Tolstoy, et al, 2004,
2009). The Foundation’s Environmental
Assessment (see Appendix A) includes
detailed information on the study, their
modeling process, and a comparison of
the Observatory’s modeled results with
results of the 2007 to 2008 Langseth
calibration experiment in shallow,
intermediate, and deep water. The
conclusions in Appendix A show that
the Observatory’s model represents the
actual produced sound levels,
particularly within the first few
kilometers, where the predicted zone
(i.e., safety radii) lie. At greater
distances, local oceanographic
variations begin to take effect, and the
model tends to over predict.
Because the modeling matches the
observed measurement data, the authors
concluded that those using the models
to predict zones can continue to do so,
including predicting exclusion zones
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:13 Sep 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
around the vessel for various tow
depths. At present, the Observatory’s
model does not account for site-specific
environmental conditions and the
calibration study analysis of the model
predicted that using site-specific
information may actually estimate less
conservative exclusion zones at greater
distances.
While it is difficult to estimate
exposures of marine mammals to
acoustic stimuli, we are confident that
the Observatory’s approach to
quantifying the exclusion and buffer
zones uses the best available scientific
information and estimation
methodologies.
Comment 2: The Commission
recommends that, before issuing the
requested Authorization, we use
species-specific maximum densities
(i.e., estimated by multiplying the
existing density estimates by a
precautionary correction factor) and
then re-estimate the anticipated number
of takes.
Response: For purposes of this
Authorization, the Observatory used the
cetacean densities based on the National
Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest
Fisheries Science Center’s, eastern
tropical Pacific ship transect surveys
conducted from 1986 through 2006
(Barlow et al., 2009b; Read et al., 2009)
or from surveys conducted in 2002
(Barlow, 2006) to estimate the number
of takes. The Observatory’s use of these
peer-reviewed, model-based, density
estimates are the best available
information to estimate density for the
survey area and to estimate the number
of authorized takes for the seismic
survey in the central Pacific Ocean. The
results of the associated monitoring
reports show that our past use of best
estimates was appropriate and has not
refuted our past determinations.
Comment 3: The Commission
recommends that, before issuing the
requested IHA, we condition the
Authorization to prohibit the use of a
15-minute pause following the sighting
of a mysticete or large odontocete in the
exclusion zone and to extend the pause
to cover the maximum dive times of
those species encountered near the
vessel prior to initiating ramp-up
procedures.
Response: We would like to clarify
the Commission’s understanding of two
conditions within the Authorization—
one related to turning on the airguns
(ramp-up) after a shutdown due to a
marine mammal sighting within the
exclusion zone and the other related to
a ramp-up after an extended shutdown
(i.e., the 15-minute pause due to
equipment failure or routine
maintenance).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56615
To clarify, the Authorization requires
the Langseth to shutdown the airguns
when an observer sees a marine
mammal within, approaching, or
entering the relevant exclusion zones for
cetaceans or for pinnipeds. Following a
shutdown, the Langseth would only
ramp up the airguns if a marine
mammal had exited the relevant
exclusion zone or if visual observer had
not seen the animal within the relevant
exclusion zone for 15 minutes for
species with shorter dive times (i.e.,
small odontocetes and pinnipeds) or 30
minutes for species with longer dive
durations (i.e., mysticetes and large
odontocetes, including sperm, pygmy
sperm, dwarf sperm, killer, and beaked
whales).
We believe that 30 minutes is an
adequate length for the monitoring
period prior to the ramp-up of airguns
after sighting a mysticete and large
odontocetes for the following reasons:
• The Langseth can transit roughly
4.25 kilometers (km) in 30 minutes. At
this distance, the vessel will have
moved 60 times (4.25 km ÷ 0.07 km)
away from the distance of the original
180–dB exclusion zone (70 meters (m))
from the initial sighting
• The relevant exclusion zones for
cetaceans and pinnipeds are relatively
small (i.e., 70 m for cetaceans and 20 m
for pinnipeds). Extending the
monitoring period for a relatively small
exclusion zone would not meaningfully
increase the effectiveness of observing
marine mammals approaching or
entering the exclusion zone for the full
source level and would not further
minimize the potential for take.
• Because a significant part of their
movement is vertical [deep-diving], it is
unlikely that a submerged mysticete/
large odontocete would move in the
same direction and speed (roughly 5
knots) with the vessel for 30 minutes. If
an mysticete/large odontocete’s
maximum underwater dive time is 45
minutes, then there is only a one in
three chance that the last random
surfacing could occur within the 70 m
exclusion zone.
• The visual observers are constantly
monitoring the horizon and the
exclusion zones during the 30-minute
period. On average, observers can
observe to the horizon (10 km; 6.2
miles) from the height of the Langseth’s
observation deck and should be able to
say with a reasonable degree of
confidence whether a marine mammal
would be encountered within this
distance before resuming the two-GI
airgun operations at full power.
Next, we intend to clarify the
monitoring period associated with an
extended shutdown (i.e., the 15-minute
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
56616
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Notices
pause due to equipment failure or
routine maintenance). During active
seismic operations, there are occasions
when the Langseth’s crew will need to
temporarily shut down the airguns due
to equipment failure or for maintenance.
Thus, an extended shutdown is not
related to an observer detecting a marine
mammal within, approaching, or
entering the relevant exclusion zones.
However, the observers are still actively
monitoring the relevant exclusion zones
for cetaceans and pinnipeds.
In the case of an extended shutdown,
due to equipment failure or routine
maintenance, the Langseth’s crew will
turn on the airguns and follow the
mitigation monitoring procedures for a
ramp-up after a period of 15 minutes.
Again, the observers will monitor the
full exclusion zones for marine
mammals and will implement a
shutdown if necessary.
In conclusion, we have designed
monitoring and mitigation measures to
comply with the requirement that
incidental take authorizations must
include means of effecting the least
practicable impact on marine mammal
species and their habitat. The
effectiveness of monitoring is sciencebased, and monitoring and mitigation
measures must be ‘‘practicable.’’ We
believe that the framework for visual
monitoring will: (1) Be effective at
spotting almost all species for which the
Observatory has requested take; and (2)
that imposing additional requirements,
such as those suggested by the
Commission, would not meaningfully
increase the effectiveness of observing
marine mammals approaching or
entering the exclusion zones and thus
further minimize the potential for take.
Comment 4: The Commission
recommends that we work with the
Foundation to analyze the data collected
during ramp-up procedures to help
determine the effectiveness of those
procedures as a mitigation measure for
geophysical surveys.
Response: We acknowledge the
Commission’s request for an analysis of
ramp-ups and will work with the
Foundation and the Observatory to help
identify the effectiveness of the
mitigation measure for seismic surveys.
We require the Observatory to gather
all data that could potentially provide
information regarding the effectiveness
of ramp-up as a mitigation measure in
its final report. However, considering
the low numbers of marine mammal
sightings and low number of ramp-ups
it is unlikely that the information will
result in any statistically robust
conclusions for this particular seismic
survey. Over the long term, these
reporting requirements may provide
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:13 Sep 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
information regarding the effectiveness
of ramp-up as a mitigation measure,
provided the observers detect animals
during ramp-up.
Description of the Marine Mammals in
the Area of the Specified Activity
Twenty-six marine mammal species
may occur in the survey area offshore
the Line Islands in the central Pacific
Ocean, including 19 odontocetes
(toothed cetaceans), six mysticetes
(baleen whales) and one species of
pinniped during May through June,
2012. Six of these species are listed as
endangered under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.), including the blue
(Balaenoptera musculus), fin
(Balaenoptera physalus), humpback
(Megaptera novaeangliae), sei
(Balaenoptera borealis), and sperm
(Physeter macrocephalus) whales, and
the Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus
schauinslandi).
Based on available data, we do not
expect the Observatory to encounter
nine of the 26 species in the proposed
survey areas. They include the: Blue,
fin, humpback, killer, minke, pygmy,
pygmy killer, and sei whales and the
Hawaiian monk seal because of the
species’ rare and/or extralimital
occurrence in the survey areas. The
Observatory did not request and we did
not authorize take of these nine species.
Thus, the issued Authorization only
addresses requested take authorizations
for 17 species: One mysticete, and 16
odontocetes. We expect that delphinids
would be the most common marine
mammal species in the survey area.
They include the pantropical spotted
(Stenella attenuata), spinner (S.
longirostris) dolphins, and the shortfinned pilot whale (Globicephala
macrorhynchus).
We have presented a more detailed
discussion of the status of these stocks
and their occurrence in the central
Pacific Ocean in the notice of the
proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242,
March 30, 2012).
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 impairment, or non-auditory
physical or physiological effects
(Richardson et al., 1995; Gordon et al.,
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 one
cannot entirely exclude the possibility,
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, we expect some behavioral
disturbance to occur, but we expect the
disturbance to be localized and shortterm.
The notice of the proposed
Authorization (77 FR 19242, March 30,
2012) included a discussion of the
effects of sounds from airguns on
mysticetes and odontocetes including
tolerance, masking, behavioral
disturbance, hearing impairment, and
other non-auditory physical effects. We
refer the reader to the Observatory’s
application and Environmental
Assessment 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
We 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 Authorization
(77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012). While
we anticipate that the specified activity
may result in marine mammals avoiding
certain areas due to temporary
ensonification, this impact to habitat is
temporary and reversible. We
considered these impacts in detail in the
notice of the proposed Authorization
(77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012) 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 incidental take
authorization under section 101(a)(5)(D)
of the Marine Mammal Protection Act,
we 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
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Notices
species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses.
The Observatory has based the
mitigation measures which they will
implement during the seismic survey,
on the following:
(1) Protocols used during previous
seismic research cruises as approved by
us;
(2) Previous applications for
incidental take authorizations and
Authorizations that we have approved
and authorized; and
(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, the
Observatory and/or its designees would
implement the following mitigation
measures for marine mammals:
(1) Proposed exclusion zones;
(2) Speed or course alteration;
(3) Shutdown procedures; and
(4) Ramp-up procedures.
56617
Exclusion Zones—The Observatory
uses safety radii to designate exclusion
zones and to estimate take for marine
mammals. Table 1 shows the distances
at which one would expect to receive
three sound levels (160–, 180–, and
190–dB) from the two GI airguns. The
180–dB and 190–dB level shutdown
criteria are applicable to cetaceans and
pinnipeds, respectively, as specified by
us (2000). The Observatory used these
levels to establish the exclusion zones.
TABLE 1—DISTANCES TO WHICH SOUND LEVELS ≥160, 180, 190 DB RE: 1 μPA (RMS) ONE COULD RECEIVE IN DEEP
WATER DURING THE PROPOSED SEISMIC SURVEY IN THE CENTRAL PACIFIC OCEAN, MAY, 2012. THE OBSERVATORY
PROVIDED THE DISTANCES ARE BASED ON THEIR MODEL RESULTS.
Tow depth
(m)
Source and volume
Predicted RMS radii distances
(m)
Water depth
(m)
160 dB
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Two GI airguns (105 in3) ...........................................
If the visual observer detects marine
mammal(s) within or about to enter the
appropriate exclusion zone, the
Langseth crew would shut down the
airguns immediately.
Speed or Course Alteration—If the
visual observer detects a marine
mammal outside the zone and, based on
its position and the relative motion, the
marine mammal is likely to enter the
zone, the Langseth could change the
vessel’s speed and/or direct course. The
Langseth would implement speed or
course operation if operationally
practicable, thus minimizing the effect
on the planned science objectives. The
visual observer would monitor the
activities and movements of the marine
mammal (relative to the seismic vessel)
to determine if the animal is
approaching the applicable exclusion
zone. If the animal appears likely to
enter the zone, the Langseth would
implement further mitigation measures,
(i.e., either further course alterations or
a shut-down of the seismic source).
Typically, during seismic operations,
the source vessel is unable to change
speed or course and the Langseth would
need to implement one or more
alternative mitigation measures.
Shut-down Procedures—The Langseth
will shut down the operating airgun(s)
if a marine mammal is seen outside the
exclusion zone for the airgun(s). If the
vessel cannot change its speed and/or
course to avoid having the animal enter
the zone, the Langseth will shutdown
the seismic source before the animal is
within the zone. If a marine mammal is
already within the zone when first
detected, the Langseth will shutdown
the seismic source immediately.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:13 Sep 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
3
Deep (> 1,000)
Following a shut-down, the Langseth
will not resume airgun activity until the
marine mammal has cleared the zone.
The visual observer will consider the
animal to have cleared the zone if:
• A visual observer has visually
observed the animal leave the zone, or
• A visual observer has not sighted
the animal within the zone for 15
minutes for species with shorter dive
durations (i.e., small odontocetes or
pinnipeds), or 30 minutes for species
with longer dive durations (i.e.,
mysticetes and large odontocetes,
including sperm, killer, and beaked
whales).
Ramp-up Procedures—The
Observatory will follow a ramp-up
procedure when the airgun array begins
operating after a specified period
without airgun operations or when a
shut-down has exceeded that period.
The Observatory proposes that, for the
present cruise, this period would be
approximately 15 minutes. The
Observatory has used similar periods
(approximately 15 minutes) during
previous seismic surveys.
The Observatory will begin a ramp-up
with a single GI airgun (105 in3) and
will add the second GI airgun (105 in3)
after five minutes. During ramp-up, the
visual observer will monitor the
exclusion zone, and if he/she sights a
marine mammal(s), the Langseth will
implement a shut-down as though both
GI airguns were operational.
If the complete zone is not visible for
at least 30 minutes prior to the start of
operations in either daylight or
nighttime, the Langseth will not
commence the ramp-up. If one airgun is
operational, ramp-up to full power will
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
180 dB
190 dB
670
70
20
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 if they choose. A ramp-up
from a shut-down may occur at night,
but only where the exclusion zone is
small enough to be visible. The
Observatory will not initiate a ramp-up
of the airguns if a visual observer
detects a marine mammal within or near
the applicable zones during the day or
close to the vessel at night.
We have carefully evaluated the
proposed mitigation measures and have
considered a range of other measures in
the context of ensuring that we
prescribe the means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact on the
affected marine mammal species and
stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation
of potential measures included
consideration of the following factors in
relation to one another:
(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 our evaluation of the
proposed measures, as well as other
measures considered by us or
recommended by the public for
previous low-energy seismic surveys,
we have determined that the mitigation
measures provide the means of effecting
the least practicable adverse impacts on
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
56618
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Notices
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 incidental take
authorization for an activity, section
101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal
Protection Act states that we must set
forth ‘‘requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such
taking.’’ The Act’s implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13)
indicate that requests for an
authorization must include the
suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that
will result in increased knowledge of
the species and our expectations of the
level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals present
in the action area.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Monitoring
The Observatory will conduct marine
mammal monitoring during the present
project, in order to implement the
mitigation measures that require realtime monitoring, and to satisfy the
monitoring requirements of the issued
Authorization. We describe the
Observatory’s Monitoring Plan below
this section. The Observatory has
planned the monitoring work as a selfcontained project independent of any
other related monitoring projects that
may be occurring simultaneously in the
same regions. Further, the Observatory
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
The Observatory will position visual
observers aboard the seismic source
vessel to watch for marine mammals
near the vessel during daytime airgun
operations and during any ramp-ups at
night. The observers will also watch for
marine mammals near the seismic
vessel for at least 30 minutes prior to the
ramp-up of airgun operations after an
extended shut-down (i.e., greater than
approximately 15 minutes for this
proposed cruise). When feasible, the
observers 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 their observations, the
Langseth will shutdown the airguns
when they detect marine mammals
within or about to enter a designated
exclusion zone. The zone is a region in
which a possibility exists of adverse
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:13 Sep 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
effects on animal hearing or other
physical effects.
During seismic operations in the
central Pacific Ocean, at least three
visual observers will be aboard the
Langseth. The Observatory will appoint
the observers with our concurrence. At
least one observer will monitor the
zones during seismic operations.
Observations will take place during
ongoing daytime operations and
nighttime ramp-ups of the airguns.
Observers will be on duty in shifts of
duration no longer than four hours. The
vessel crew will also be instructed to
assist in detecting marine mammals.
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
observer will have a good view around
the entire vessel. During daytime, the
visual observers 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, night
vision devices (NVDs) will be available
(ITT F500 Series Generation 3
binocular-image intensifier or
equivalent), when required. Laser rangefinding 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 the visual observers detect
marine mammals within or about to
enter the designated exclusion zone, the
Langseth will immediately shut-down
the airguns if necessary. The observers
will continue to maintain watch to
determine when the animal(s) are
outside the zone by visual confirmation.
The Langseth will not resume airgun
operations until he/she confirms that
the animal has left the zone, or if the
observer has not observed the animal
after 15 minutes for species with shorter
dive durations (small odontocetes and
pinnipeds) or 30 minutes for species
with longer dive durations (mysticetes
and large odontocetes, including sperm,
killer, and beaked whales).
Observer Data and Documentation
The observers 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.
The Observatory will use the data to
estimate numbers of animals potentially
‘taken’ by harassment (as defined in the
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Marine Mammal Protection Act). The
data will also provide information
needed to order a shutdown of the
airguns when a marine mammal is
within or near the exclusion zone. Also,
the observers will also be on watch
during daytime periods when the
Langseth is underway without seismic
operations (i.e., transits to, from, and
through the study area) to collect
baseline biological data.
When an observer makes a sighting,
they will record the following
information:
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 observer will record the data
listed under (2) 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.
Observers will record all observations
in a standardized format and will enter
data into an electronic database. The
observers will verify the accuracy of the
data entry by computerized data validity
checks as the data are entered and by
subsequent manual checking of the
database. These procedures will allow
the preparation of initial summaries of
data 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 shutdown).
2. Information needed to estimate the
number of marine mammals potentially
taken by harassment, which the
Observatory must report to the Office of
Protected Resources.
3. Data on the occurrence,
distribution, and activities of marine
mammals and turtles in the area where
the Observatory will conduct the
seismic study.
4. Information to compare the
distance and distribution of marine
mammals and turtles relative to the
source vessel at times with and without
seismic activity.
5. Data on the behavior and
movement patterns of marine mammals
detected during non-active and active
seismic operations.
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Reporting
The Observatory will submit a report
to us and to the Foundation within 90
days after the end of the cruise. The
report will describe the operations that
were conducted and sightings of marine
mammals and turtles 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 the issued Authorization,
such as an injury (Level A harassment),
serious injury or mortality (e.g., shipstrike, gear interaction, and/or
entanglement), the Observatory shall
immediately cease the specified
activities and immediately report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301–
427–8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
ITP.Cody@noaa.gov and the Pacific
Islands Regional Stranding Coordinator
at 808–944–2269
(David.Schofield@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;
• 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).
The Observatory shall not resume its
activities until we are able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take.
We shall work with the Observatory to
determine what is necessary to
minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure Marine
Mammal Protection Act compliance.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:13 Sep 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
The Observatory may not resume their
activities until notified by us via letter,
email, or telephone.
In the event that the Observatory
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead visual observer
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 we
describe in the next paragraph), the
Observatory will immediately report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301–
427–8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
ITP.Cody@noaa.gov and the Pacific
Islands Regional Stranding Coordinator
at 808–944–2269
(David.Schofield@noaa.gov). The report
must include the same information
identified in the paragraph above this
section. Activities may continue while
we review the circumstances of the
incident. We will work with the
Observatory to determine whether
modifications in the activities are
appropriate.
In the event that the Observatory
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead visual observer
determines that the injury or death is
not associated with or related to the
authorized activities (e.g., previously
wounded animal, carcass with moderate
to advanced decomposition, or
scavenger damage), the Observatory will
report to the Acting Chief of the Permits
and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301–
427–8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
ITP.Cody@noaa.gov and the NMFS
Pacific Islands Regional Stranding
Coordinator at 808–944–2269
(David.Schofield@noaa.gov), within 24
hours of the discovery. The Observatory
will provide photographs or video
footage (if available) or other
documentation of the stranded animal
sighting to us.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the Marine
Mammal Protection Act 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].
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56619
We have authorized incidental take by
Level B harassment only for the marine
geophysical survey in the central Pacific
Ocean. 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 re: 1 mPa or cause temporary, shortterm changes in behavior. There is no
evidence that the Observatory’s planned
activities could result in injury, serious
injury or mortality within the specified
geographic area for the Authorization.
The required mitigation and monitoring
measures will minimize any potential
risk for injury, serious injury, or
mortality.
The Observatory’s estimates assume
that marine mammals exposed to airgun
sounds greater than or equal to 160 dB
re: 1 mPa might change their behavior
sufficiently for us to consider them as
taken by harassment. They have based
their estimates on the number of marine
mammals that could be disturbed
appreciably by operations with the two
GI airgun array during approximately
2,316 square km (894 square miles)
(includes primary and secondary lines
and an additional 25 percent
contingency) of survey lines in the
central Pacific Ocean.
We assume that during simultaneous
operations of the airgun array and the
other sources, any marine mammals
close enough to be affected by the
echosounder, sub-bottom profiler, and
acoustic Doppler current profiler would
already be affected by the airguns.
However, whether or not the airguns are
operating simultaneously with the other
sources, we expect that the marine
mammals would exhibit no more than
short-term and inconsequential
responses to the echosounder and
profiler given their characteristics (e.g.,
narrow downward-directed beam) and
other considerations described
previously. Based on the best available
information, we do not consider that
these reactions constitute a ‘‘take’’
(NMFS, 2001). Therefore, the
Observatory did not provide any
additional allowance for animals that
could be affected by sound sources
other than the two airguns.
We have presented a more detailed
discussion of the Observatory’s methods
to estimate take by incidental
harassment in the notice of the
proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242,
March 30, 2012). Refer to the notice for
more detailed information on the
density data and their methodology to
estimate take.
The Observatory’s estimates of
exposures to various sound levels
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
56620
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Notices
assume that they will complete the
surveys; in fact, they have increased the
calculations of the ensonified by 25
percent to accommodate turns, lines
that may need to be repeated, and
equipment testing. As is typical during
ship surveys, inclement weather and
equipment malfunctions may cause
delays and may limit the number of
useful line-kilometers of seismic
operations that the Observatory can
finish. Furthermore, any marine
mammal sightings within or near the
designated exclusion zone will result in
the shutdown of seismic operations as a
mitigation measure. Thus, the following
estimates of the numbers of marine
mammals potentially exposed to 160–
dB re: 1 FPa sounds are precautionary,
and probably overestimate the actual
numbers of marine mammals that might
be involved. These estimates assume
that there will be no weather,
equipment, or mitigation delays, which
is highly unlikely.
Table 2 in this notice shows estimates
of the number of individual cetaceans
that potentially could be exposed to
greater than or equal to 160 dB re: 1 mPa
during the seismic survey if no animals
moved away from the survey vessel. We
present the take authorization in the far
right column of Table 3. For endangered
species, the requested take authorization
reflects the mean group size in the
eastern tropical Pacific Ocean (Jackson
et al., 2008) for the particular species in
cases where the calculated number of
individuals exposed was between 0.05
and the mean group size (i.e., for the
sperm whale). For non-listed species,
the requested take authorization reflects
the mean group size in the Center’s
survey area (Barlow et al., 2008) for the
particular species in cases where the
calculated number of individuals
exposed was between one and the mean
group size.
The total estimate of the number of
individual cetaceans that could be
exposed to seismic sounds with
received levels greater than or equal to
160 dB re: 1 mPa during the proposed
survey is 828 (see Table 2 in this
notice). That total includes: Four
Bryde’s whales or 0.01 percent of the
regional population; and seven sperm
whales (also listed as endangered) or
0.03 percent of the regional population
could be exposed during the survey.
As stated earlier in this notice, the
Observatory did not estimate take of
endangered humpback, sei, blue, or fin
whales or Hawaiian monk seals because
of the low likelihood of encountering
these species during the cruise. In
addition, 18 beaked whales (16 Cuvier’s,
one Longman’s, and one Mesoplodon
spp.) could be exposed during the
survey. Most (94.7 percent) of the
cetaceans that could be potentially
exposed are delphinids (e.g., spinner,
pantropical spotted, and striped
dolphins are estimated to be the most
common species in the area) with
maximum estimates ranging from four
to 425 species exposed to levels greater
than or equal to 160 dB re: 1 mPa.
TABLE 3—ESTIMATES OF THE POSSIBLE NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO DIFFERENT SOUND LEVELS DURING
THE OBSERVATORY’S SEISMIC SURVEY IN THE CENTRAL PACIFIC OCEAN DURING MAY, 2012.
Estimated number
of individuals
exposed to sound
levels ≥ 160 dB
re: 1 μPa 1
Species
Approximate
percent of regional
population 2
1
0
7
18
16
1
1
3
11
279
425
38
11
2
3
0
12
0.01
< 0.01
0.03
0.16
0.08
0.36
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.06
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Bryde’s whale ............................................................................................................
Blue whale .................................................................................................................
Sperm whale ..............................................................................................................
Dwarf sperm whale ....................................................................................................
Cuvier’s beaked whale ..............................................................................................
Longman’s beaked whale ..........................................................................................
Mesoplodon spp.3 ......................................................................................................
Rough-toothed dolphin ..............................................................................................
Bottlenose dolphin .....................................................................................................
Pantropical spotted dolphin .......................................................................................
Spinner dolphin ..........................................................................................................
Striped dolphin ...........................................................................................................
Fraser’s dolphin .........................................................................................................
Risso’s dolphin ...........................................................................................................
Melon-headed whale .................................................................................................
False killer whale .......................................................................................................
Short-finned pilot whale .............................................................................................
Requested take
authorization
44
0
48
18
16
4 14
44
4 13
4 12
279
425
4 46
4 182
4 14
4 101
49
4 24
1 Estimates are based on densities from Table 3 in the notice of the proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012) and an ensonified
area (including 25 percent contingency).
2 Regional population size estimates are from Table 2 notice of the proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012).
3 Includes ginkgo-toothed and/or Blainville’s beaked whales.
4 Requested take authorization increased to mean group size.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Encouraging and Coordinating
Research
studies in the same region during the
seismic surveys.
The Observatory and the Foundation
will coordinate the planned marine
mammal monitoring program associated
with each seismic survey in the central
Pacific Ocean with other parties that
may have interest in the area and/or
may be conducting marine mammal
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers
Analysis and Determination
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:13 Sep 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
We have 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
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’
In making a negligible impact
determination, we consider:
(1) The number of anticipated
injuries, serious injuries, or mortalities;
(2) The number, nature, and 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
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Notices
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,
impact relative to the size of the
population);
(5) Impacts on habitat affecting rates
of recruitment/survival; and
(6) The effectiveness of monitoring
and mitigation measures.
For reasons stated previously in this
document, the specified activities
associated with the marine seismic
surveys are not likely to cause
permanent threshold shift, or other nonauditory injury, serious injury, or death
because:
(1) The likelihood that, given
sufficient notice through relatively slow
ship speed, we expect marine mammals
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
relatively low and that we would likely
avoid this impact through the
incorporation of the required
monitoring and mitigation measures
(described previously in this document);
(3) The fact that cetaceans would have
to be closer than 70 meters (229.7 feet)
in deep water when the two GI airgun
array has a 3-meter (9.8 feet) 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
marine mammal observers is high at
close proximity to the vessel.
We do not anticipate that any injuries,
serious injuries, or mortalities would
occur as a result of the Observatory’s
planned marine seismic surveys, and we
do not propose to authorize injury,
serious injury or mortality for this
survey. We anticipate only short-term
behavioral disturbance to occur during
the conduct of the survey activities.
Table 2 of this document outlines the
number of requested Level B harassment
takes that we anticipate as a result of
these activities. Due to the nature,
degree, and context of Level B
(behavioral) harassment anticipated and
described (see ‘‘Potential Effects on
Marine Mammals’’ section in this
notice), we do not expect the activity to
impact rates of recruitment or survival
for any affected species or stock.
Further, the seismic surveys would not
take place in areas of significance for
marine mammal feeding, resting,
breeding, or calving and would not
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:13 Sep 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
adversely impact marine mammal
habitat.
Many animals perform vital functions,
such as feeding, resting, traveling, and
socializing, on a diel cycle (i.e., 24-hour
cycle). Behavioral reactions to noise
exposure (such as disruption of critical
life functions, displacement, or
avoidance of important habitat) are
more likely to be significant if they last
more than one diel cycle or recur on
subsequent days (Southall et al., 2007).
While we anticipate that the seismic
operations would occur on consecutive
days, the estimated duration of the
survey would last no more than 6 days
and the Langseth will be continuously
moving along planned tracklines.
Therefore, the seismic survey will be
increasing sound levels in the marine
environment in a relatively small area
surrounding the vessel, which is
constantly traveling over far distances,
for a relatively short time period in the
study area.
Of the 26 marine mammal species
under our (the National Marine
Fisheries Service’s) jurisdiction that are
known to occur or may occur in the
study area, six are listed as endangered
under endangered under the
Endangered Species Act: The
humpback, sei, fin, blue, and sperm
whale and the Hawaiian monk seal. We
also consider these species as depleted
under the Marine Mammal Protection
Act.
Based on available data, we do not
expect the Observatory to encounter
nine of the 26 species in the proposed
survey areas. They include the: Blue,
fin, humpback, killer, minke, pygmy,
pygmy killer, and sei whales and the
Hawaiian monk seal because of the
species’ rare and/or extralimital
occurrence in the survey areas and the
low likelihood of encountering these
species during the cruise. The
Observatory did not request and we did
not authorize take of these nine species.
Thus, the issued Authorization only
addresses requested take authorizations
for 17 species: One mysticete, and 16
odontocetes. As mentioned previously,
the survey would not occur in any areas
designated as critical habitat for
Endangered Species Act-listed species
and would not adversely impact marine
mammal habitat. To protect these
animals (and other marine mammals in
the study area), the Observatory must
cease or reduce airgun operations if
animals enter designated zones.
As mentioned previously, we estimate
that 17 species of marine mammals
under our jurisdiction could be
potentially affected by Level B
harassment over the course of the
proposed IHA. For each species, these
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56621
numbers are small (each less than one
percent) relative to the regional
population size (see Table 2).
Our practice has been to apply the
160 dB re: 1 mPa received level
threshold for underwater impulse sound
levels to determine whether take by
Level B harassment occurs. Southall et
al. (2007) provides a severity scale for
ranking observed behavioral responses
of both free-ranging marine mammals
and laboratory subjects to various types
of anthropogenic sound (see Table 4 in
Southall et al. [2007]).
We have determined, provided that
the aforementioned mitigation and
monitoring measures are implemented,
that the impact of conducting a marine
seismic survey in the central Pacific
Ocean, May through June, 2012, may
result, at worst, in a temporary
modification in behavior and/or lowlevel physiological effects (Level B
harassment) of small numbers of certain
species of marine mammals.
While these species may make
behavioral modifications, including
temporarily vacating the area during the
operation of the airgun(s) to avoid the
resultant acoustic disturbance, the
availability of alternate areas within
these areas and the short duration of the
research activities, have led us to
determine that this action will have a
negligible impact on the species in the
specified geographic region.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
mitigation and monitoring measures, we
have found that the Observatory’s
planned research activities would 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
would have a negligible impact on the
affected species or stocks of marine
mammals; and that the required
measures mitigate impacts to affected
species or stocks of marine mammals to
the lowest level practicable.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine
Mammal Protection Act also requires us
to determine that the authorization will
not have an unmitigable adverse effect
on the availability of marine mammal
species or stocks for subsistence use.
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals in the study area
(central Pacific Ocean) that implicate
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Act.
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
56622
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 178 / Thursday, September 13, 2012 / Notices
Endangered Species Act
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Of the species of marine mammals
that may occur in the proposed survey
area, several are listed as endangered
under the ESA, including the blue, fin,
humpback, sei, and sperm whale and
Hawaiian monk seal. The Observatory
did not request take of endangered
humpback, sei, blue, or fin whales or
Hawaiian monk seals because of the low
likelihood of encountering these species
during the cruise. As mentioned
previously, the survey would not occur
in any areas designated as critical
habitat for listed species and would not
adversely impact marine mammal
habitat.
Under section 7 of this Act, the
Foundation initiated formal
consultation with the National Marine
Fisheries Service, Office of Protected
Resources, Endangered Species Act
Interagency Cooperation Division, on
this seismic survey. We, (the Permits
and Conservation Division), also
initiated formal consultation under
section 7 of the Act with the
Endangered Species Act Interagency
Cooperation Division, to obtain a
Biological Opinion (Opinion) evaluating
the effects of issuing an incidental
harassment authorization for threatened
and endangered marine mammals and,
if appropriate, authorizing incidental
take. In May 2012, the Endangered
Species Act Interagency Cooperation
Division issued an Opinion and
concluded that the action and issuance
of the Authorization was not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
blue, fin, humpback, sei, and sperm
whales and Hawaiian monk seals. The
Opinion also concluded that the survey
would not affect designated critical
habitat for these species. The
Foundation and the Observatory must
comply with the Relevant Terms and
Conditions of the Incidental Take
Statement corresponding to the Opinion
issued to us, the Foundation, and the
Observatory. The Observatory must also
comply with the Authorization’s
mitigation and monitoring requirements
in order to be exempt under the
Incidental Take Statement in the
Opinion from the prohibition on take of
listed endangered marine mammal
species otherwise prohibited by section
9 of the Act.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
With its complete application, the
Foundation and the Observatory
provided an ‘‘Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact Determination
Pursuant to the National Environmental
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:13 Sep 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
Policy Act, (NEPA: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) and Executive Order 12114 for a
‘‘Marine Geophysical Survey by the
R/V Marcus G. Langseth in the Central
Pacific Ocean May, 2012,’’ which
incorporates an ‘‘Environmental
Assessment of a Marine Geophysical
Survey by the R/V Marcus G. Langseth
in the central Pacific Ocean, May,
2012,’’ prepared by LGL Limited
environmental research associates on
behalf of the Foundation and the
Observatory.
The Assessment analyzed the direct,
indirect, and cumulative environmental
impacts of the specified activities on
marine mammals including those listed
as threatened or endangered under the
Endangered Species Act. We conducted
an independent review and evaluation
of the document for sufficiency and
compliance with the Council of
Environmental Quality and NOAA
Administrative Order 216–6 § 5.09(d),
Environmental Review Procedures for
Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, and
determined that issuance of the
Authorization is not likely to result in
significant impacts on the human
environment. Also, we have provided
relevant environmental information to
the public through the notice of the
proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242,
March 30, 2012) and have considered
public comments received in response
prior to adopting the Foundation’s
Assessment. We have concluded that
issuance of an Authorization would not
significantly affect the quality of the
human environment and have issued a
separate Finding of No Significant
Impact. Because we have made this
finding, it is not necessary to prepare an
environmental impact statement for the
issuance of an Authorization to the
Observatory for this activity.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations,
we have issued an Incidental
Harassment Authorization to the
Observatory for the take of small
numbers of marine mammals, by Level
B harassment incidental to conducting a
marine geophysical survey in the central
Pacific Ocean, May 1 through June 11,
2012, provided the Observatory
implements the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements. The Authorization’s
duration will not exceed one year from
the date of issuance.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: April 30, 2012.
Helen M. Golde,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–22602 Filed 9–12–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration
First Responder Network Authority
Board Meeting
National Telecommunications
and Information Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Open Public Meeting.
AGENCY:
This notice announces an
open public meeting of the Board of the
First Responder Network Authority
(FirstNet).
DATES: The meeting will be held on
September 25, 2012, from 9 a.m. to
12:30 p.m. Eastern Time.
ADDRESSES: Board members will meet in
the Secretary’s Conference Room,
Herbert C. Hoover Building, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Uzoma Onyeije, Senior Advisor for
Public Safety, National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230: telephone
(202) 482–0016; email
uonyeije@ntia.doc.gov. Please direct
media inquiries to NTIA’s Office of
Public Affairs, (202) 482–7002.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: The Middle Class Tax
Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012
(Act), Public Law 112–96, 126 Stat. 156
(2012), created the First Responder
Network Authority (FirstNet) as an
independent authority within the
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA). The
Act directs FirstNet to establish a single
nationwide, interoperable public safety
broadband network. The FirstNet Board
is responsible for making strategic
decisions regarding FirstNet’s
operations. The FirstNet Board will hold
its first public meeting on September 25,
2012.
Matters to Be Considered: The
FirstNet Board will adopt its bylaws and
make initial organizational decisions.
NTIA will post a detailed agenda on its
Web site, https://www.ntia.doc.gov, prior
to the meeting. The agenda topics are
subject to change.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13SEN1.SGM
13SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 178 (Thursday, September 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56613-56622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22602]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XB048
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Marine Geophysical Survey in the Northwest Pacific Ocean, March Through
May, 2012
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)
regulation, we hereby give notification that we have issued an
Incidental Harassment Authorization (Authorization) to Lamont-Doherty
Earth Observatory (Observatory), a part of Columbia University, to take
marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to conducting a marine
geophysical (seismic) survey in the central Pacific Ocean, May through
June, 2012.
DATES: Effective May 1, 2012, through June 11, 2012.
ADDRESSES: To obtain an electronic copy of the Authorization, write to
P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225 or download an electronic copy
at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications.
To obtain an electronic copy of (1) the application containing a
list of the
[[Page 56614]]
references within this document; and (2) the National Science
Foundation's (Foundation) Environmental Assessment (EA) under the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and Executive Order 12114;
write to the previously mentioned address, telephone the contact listed
here (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or download the file at:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications.
The Service's Biological Opinion will be available online at:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/consultation/opinions.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeannine Cody, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protect Act of 1972, as
amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) directs the Secretary of
Commerce to authorize, upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals of a species or
population stock, by United States citizens who engage in a specified
activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if: (1) We make certain findings; (2) the taking is
limited to harassment; and (3) we provide a notice of a proposed
authorization to the public for review.
We shall grant authorization for the incidental taking of small
numbers of marine mammals if we find 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. We have 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 Marine Mammal Protection Act
established an expedited process for U.S. citizens to apply for an
authorization to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by
harassment. Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act
establishes a 45-day time limit for our review of an application
followed by a 30-day public notice and comment period on any proposed
authorization for the incidental harassment of small numbers of marine
mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the public comment period, we
must either issue or deny the authorization and must publish a notice
in the Federal Register within 30 days of our determination to issue or
deny the authorization.
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the
Marine Mammal Protection Act defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment];
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment].
Summary of Request
On December 12, 2012, we received a complete application from the
Observatory requesting that we issue an Authorization for the take, by
Level B harassment only, of small numbers of marine mammals incidental
to conducting a seismic survey in the central Pacific Ocean from May 1
through May 26, 2012. We determined the application complete and
adequate on February 28, 2012 and released the application for public
comment (see ADDRESSES) for consideration of issuing an Authorization
to the Observatory.
The Observatory, with research funding from the Foundation, plans
to conduct the seismic survey from May 1 through May 26, 2012 offshore
the Line Islands in the central Pacific Ocean. They plan to use one
source vessel, the R/V Marcus G. Langseth (Langseth), an airgun array,
and a single hydrophone streamer to provide the data necessary to
understand sedimentation patterns on the flanks of the Line Islands
Ridge and to investigate how climate patterns have varied over time in
the late Pleistocene period. In addition to the operations of the
seismic airgun array and hydrophone streamer, the Observatory intends
to operate a multibeam echosounder (echosounder), a sub-bottom
profiler, and an acoustic Doppler current profiler continuously
throughout the survey except while on station for marine coring
activities.
Acoustic stimuli (i.e., increased underwater sound) generated
during seismic operations, 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. We expect these disturbances to be temporary and
result in a temporary modification in behavior and/or low-level
physiological effects (Level B harassment only) of small numbers of
certain species of marine mammals.
We do not expect that the movement of the Langseth, during the
conduct of the seismic survey, has the potential to harass marine
mammals because of the relatively slow operation speed of the vessel
(4.6 knots (kts); 8.5 kilometers per hour (km/h); 5.3 miles per hour
(mph)) during seismic acquisition.
We also do not expect that the operation of the echosounder, sub-
bottom profiler and current profiler have the potential to harass
marine mammals because they would already experience affects from the
airgun array. Whether or not the airguns are operating simultaneously
with the other sources, we expect the marine mammals to exhibit no more
than short-term and inconsequential responses to the echosounder, sub-
bottom profiler and current profiler given their characteristics (e.g.,
narrow, downward-directed beam)
We have outlined the purpose of the program in a previous notice
for the proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012). The
Observatory's proposed activities have not changed between the proposed
IHA notice and this final notice announcing the issuance of the
Authorization. Refer to the to the notice of the proposed IHA (77 FR
19242, March 30, 2012), the application, and Environmental Assessment
for a more detailed description of the authorized action, including
vessel and acoustic source specifications.
Description of the Specified Geographic Region
The Observatory will conduct the survey in the Exclusive Economic
Zones of the Republic of Kiribati the U.S. The study area will
encompass an area in the Line Islands bounded by approximately 0.5-8
degrees ([deg]) North by 156-162[deg] West. Water depths in the survey
area range from approximately 1,100 to 5,000 m (0.68 to 3.1 mi).
Comments and Responses
We published a notice of receipt of the Observatory's application
and proposed Authorization in the Federal Register on March 30, 2012
(77 FR 19242). During the 30-day public comment period, we received
comments from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission) only. The
Commission's comments are online at: https://
[[Page 56615]]
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. Following are their
comments and our responses.
Comment 1: The Commission recommends that, before issuing the
requested Authorization, we require the Observatory to: (1) Re-estimate
the proposed exclusion zones and buffer zones and associated number of
marine mammal takes using operational and site-specific environmental
parameters; and (2) if the Observatory does not re-estimate the zones,
provide a detailed justification for basing the proposed survey's zones
on modeling that relies on measurements from the Gulf of Mexico instead
of the central Pacific Ocean.
Response: With respect to the Commission's first point, based upon
the best available information and our analysis of the likely effects
of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, we are
satisfied that the Observatory's data are sufficient for us to conduct
our analysis and support our determinations under the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.) and the National Environmental Policy Act. The identified
zones are appropriate for the survey and additional field measurements
are not necessary at this time. Thus, for this survey, we will not
require the Observatory to re-estimate the proposed exclusion zones and
buffer zones and associated number of marine mammal takes using
operational and site-specific environmental parameters.
With respect to the Commission's second point, The Observatory has
modeled the central Pacific Ocean exclusion and buffer zones on
modeling based on the 2007-2008 Langseth's peer-reviewed, calibration
study in the Gulf of Mexico (Tolstoy, et al, 2004, 2009). The
Foundation's Environmental Assessment (see Appendix A) includes
detailed information on the study, their modeling process, and a
comparison of the Observatory's modeled results with results of the
2007 to 2008 Langseth calibration experiment in shallow, intermediate,
and deep water. The conclusions in Appendix A show that the
Observatory's model represents the actual produced sound levels,
particularly within the first few kilometers, where the predicted zone
(i.e., safety radii) lie. At greater distances, local oceanographic
variations begin to take effect, and the model tends to over predict.
Because the modeling matches the observed measurement data, the
authors concluded that those using the models to predict zones can
continue to do so, including predicting exclusion zones around the
vessel for various tow depths. At present, the Observatory's model does
not account for site-specific environmental conditions and the
calibration study analysis of the model predicted that using site-
specific information may actually estimate less conservative exclusion
zones at greater distances.
While it is difficult to estimate exposures of marine mammals to
acoustic stimuli, we are confident that the Observatory's approach to
quantifying the exclusion and buffer zones uses the best available
scientific information and estimation methodologies.
Comment 2: The Commission recommends that, before issuing the
requested Authorization, we use species-specific maximum densities
(i.e., estimated by multiplying the existing density estimates by a
precautionary correction factor) and then re-estimate the anticipated
number of takes.
Response: For purposes of this Authorization, the Observatory used
the cetacean densities based on the National Marine Fisheries Service,
Southwest Fisheries Science Center's, eastern tropical Pacific ship
transect surveys conducted from 1986 through 2006 (Barlow et al.,
2009b; Read et al., 2009) or from surveys conducted in 2002 (Barlow,
2006) to estimate the number of takes. The Observatory's use of these
peer-reviewed, model-based, density estimates are the best available
information to estimate density for the survey area and to estimate the
number of authorized takes for the seismic survey in the central
Pacific Ocean. The results of the associated monitoring reports show
that our past use of best estimates was appropriate and has not refuted
our past determinations.
Comment 3: The Commission recommends that, before issuing the
requested IHA, we condition the Authorization to prohibit the use of a
15-minute pause following the sighting of a mysticete or large
odontocete in the exclusion zone and to extend the pause to cover the
maximum dive times of those species encountered near the vessel prior
to initiating ramp-up procedures.
Response: We would like to clarify the Commission's understanding
of two conditions within the Authorization--one related to turning on
the airguns (ramp-up) after a shutdown due to a marine mammal sighting
within the exclusion zone and the other related to a ramp-up after an
extended shutdown (i.e., the 15-minute pause due to equipment failure
or routine maintenance).
To clarify, the Authorization requires the Langseth to shutdown the
airguns when an observer sees a marine mammal within, approaching, or
entering the relevant exclusion zones for cetaceans or for pinnipeds.
Following a shutdown, the Langseth would only ramp up the airguns if a
marine mammal had exited the relevant exclusion zone or if visual
observer had not seen the animal within the relevant exclusion zone for
15 minutes for species with shorter dive times (i.e., small odontocetes
and pinnipeds) or 30 minutes for species with longer dive durations
(i.e., mysticetes and large odontocetes, including sperm, pygmy sperm,
dwarf sperm, killer, and beaked whales).
We believe that 30 minutes is an adequate length for the monitoring
period prior to the ramp-up of airguns after sighting a mysticete and
large odontocetes for the following reasons:
The Langseth can transit roughly 4.25 kilometers (km) in
30 minutes. At this distance, the vessel will have moved 60 times (4.25
km / 0.07 km) away from the distance of the original 180-dB exclusion
zone (70 meters (m)) from the initial sighting
The relevant exclusion zones for cetaceans and pinnipeds
are relatively small (i.e., 70 m for cetaceans and 20 m for pinnipeds).
Extending the monitoring period for a relatively small exclusion zone
would not meaningfully increase the effectiveness of observing marine
mammals approaching or entering the exclusion zone for the full source
level and would not further minimize the potential for take.
Because a significant part of their movement is vertical
[deep-diving], it is unlikely that a submerged mysticete/large
odontocete would move in the same direction and speed (roughly 5 knots)
with the vessel for 30 minutes. If an mysticete/large odontocete's
maximum underwater dive time is 45 minutes, then there is only a one in
three chance that the last random surfacing could occur within the 70 m
exclusion zone.
The visual observers are constantly monitoring the horizon
and the exclusion zones during the 30-minute period. On average,
observers can observe to the horizon (10 km; 6.2 miles) from the height
of the Langseth's observation deck and should be able to say with a
reasonable degree of confidence whether a marine mammal would be
encountered within this distance before resuming the two-GI airgun
operations at full power.
Next, we intend to clarify the monitoring period associated with an
extended shutdown (i.e., the 15-minute
[[Page 56616]]
pause due to equipment failure or routine maintenance). During active
seismic operations, there are occasions when the Langseth's crew will
need to temporarily shut down the airguns due to equipment failure or
for maintenance. Thus, an extended shutdown is not related to an
observer detecting a marine mammal within, approaching, or entering the
relevant exclusion zones. However, the observers are still actively
monitoring the relevant exclusion zones for cetaceans and pinnipeds.
In the case of an extended shutdown, due to equipment failure or
routine maintenance, the Langseth's crew will turn on the airguns and
follow the mitigation monitoring procedures for a ramp-up after a
period of 15 minutes. Again, the observers will monitor the full
exclusion zones for marine mammals and will implement a shutdown if
necessary.
In conclusion, we have designed monitoring and mitigation measures
to comply with the requirement that incidental take authorizations must
include means of effecting the least practicable impact on marine
mammal species and their habitat. The effectiveness of monitoring is
science-based, and monitoring and mitigation measures must be
``practicable.'' We believe that the framework for visual monitoring
will: (1) Be effective at spotting almost all species for which the
Observatory has requested take; and (2) that imposing additional
requirements, such as those suggested by the Commission, would not
meaningfully increase the effectiveness of observing marine mammals
approaching or entering the exclusion zones and thus further minimize
the potential for take.
Comment 4: The Commission recommends that we work with the
Foundation to analyze the data collected during ramp-up procedures to
help determine the effectiveness of those procedures as a mitigation
measure for geophysical surveys.
Response: We acknowledge the Commission's request for an analysis
of ramp-ups and will work with the Foundation and the Observatory to
help identify the effectiveness of the mitigation measure for seismic
surveys.
We require the Observatory to gather all data that could
potentially provide information regarding the effectiveness of ramp-up
as a mitigation measure in its final report. However, considering the
low numbers of marine mammal sightings and low number of ramp-ups it is
unlikely that the information will result in any statistically robust
conclusions for this particular seismic survey. Over the long term,
these reporting requirements may provide information regarding the
effectiveness of ramp-up as a mitigation measure, provided the
observers detect animals during ramp-up.
Description of the Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
Twenty-six marine mammal species may occur in the survey area
offshore the Line Islands in the central Pacific Ocean, including 19
odontocetes (toothed cetaceans), six mysticetes (baleen whales) and one
species of pinniped during May through June, 2012. Six of these species
are listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA;
16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including the blue (Balaenoptera musculus),
fin (Balaenoptera physalus), humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae), sei
(Balaenoptera borealis), and sperm (Physeter macrocephalus) whales, and
the Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus schauinslandi).
Based on available data, we do not expect the Observatory to
encounter nine of the 26 species in the proposed survey areas. They
include the: Blue, fin, humpback, killer, minke, pygmy, pygmy killer,
and sei whales and the Hawaiian monk seal because of the species' rare
and/or extralimital occurrence in the survey areas. The Observatory did
not request and we did not authorize take of these nine species. Thus,
the issued Authorization only addresses requested take authorizations
for 17 species: One mysticete, and 16 odontocetes. We expect that
delphinids would be the most common marine mammal species in the survey
area. They include the pantropical spotted (Stenella attenuata),
spinner (S. longirostris) dolphins, and the short-finned pilot whale
(Globicephala macrorhynchus).
We have presented a more detailed discussion of the status of these
stocks and their occurrence in the central Pacific Ocean in the notice
of the proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012).
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 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 one cannot entirely
exclude the possibility, 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, we expect some
behavioral disturbance to occur, but we expect the disturbance to be
localized and short-term.
The notice of the proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242, March 30,
2012) included a discussion of the effects of sounds from airguns on
mysticetes and odontocetes including tolerance, masking, behavioral
disturbance, hearing impairment, and other non-auditory physical
effects. We refer the reader to the Observatory's application and
Environmental Assessment 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
We 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
Authorization (77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012). While we anticipate that
the specified activity may result in marine mammals avoiding certain
areas due to temporary ensonification, this impact to habitat is
temporary and reversible. We considered these impacts in detail in the
notice of the proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012) 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 incidental take authorization under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, we 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
[[Page 56617]]
species or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses.
The Observatory has based the mitigation measures which they will
implement during the seismic survey, on the following:
(1) Protocols used during previous seismic research cruises as
approved by us;
(2) Previous applications for incidental take authorizations and
Authorizations that we have approved and authorized; and
(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, the Observatory and/or its designees
would implement the following mitigation measures for marine mammals:
(1) Proposed exclusion zones;
(2) Speed or course alteration;
(3) Shutdown procedures; and
(4) Ramp-up procedures.
Exclusion Zones--The Observatory uses safety radii to designate
exclusion zones and to estimate take for marine mammals. Table 1 shows
the distances at which one would expect to receive three sound levels
(160-, 180-, and 190-dB) from the two GI airguns. The 180-dB and 190-dB
level shutdown criteria are applicable to cetaceans and pinnipeds,
respectively, as specified by us (2000). The Observatory used these
levels to establish the exclusion zones.
Table 1--Distances to which sound levels >=160, 180, 190 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa (rms) one could receive in deep water during the proposed seismic survey in the
central Pacific Ocean, May, 2012. The Observatory provided the Distances are based on their model results.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Predicted RMS radii distances (m)
Source and volume Tow depth (m) Water depth (m) -----------------------------------------------------
160 dB 180 dB 190 dB
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two GI airguns (105 in\3\).................................... 3 Deep (> 1,000) 670 70 20
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the visual observer detects marine mammal(s) within or about to
enter the appropriate exclusion zone, the Langseth crew would shut down
the airguns immediately.
Speed or Course Alteration--If the visual observer detects a marine
mammal outside the zone and, based on its position and the relative
motion, the marine mammal is likely to enter the zone, the Langseth
could change the vessel's speed and/or direct course. The Langseth
would implement speed or course operation if operationally practicable,
thus minimizing the effect on the planned science objectives. The
visual observer would monitor the activities and movements of the
marine mammal (relative to the seismic vessel) to determine if the
animal is approaching the applicable exclusion zone. If the animal
appears likely to enter the zone, the Langseth would implement further
mitigation measures, (i.e., either further course alterations or a
shut-down of the seismic source). Typically, during seismic operations,
the source vessel is unable to change speed or course and the Langseth
would need to implement one or more alternative mitigation measures.
Shut-down Procedures--The Langseth will shut down the operating
airgun(s) if a marine mammal is seen outside the exclusion zone for the
airgun(s). If the vessel cannot change its speed and/or course to avoid
having the animal enter the zone, the Langseth will shutdown the
seismic source before the animal is within the zone. If a marine mammal
is already within the zone when first detected, the Langseth will
shutdown the seismic source immediately.
Following a shut-down, the Langseth will not resume airgun activity
until the marine mammal has cleared the zone. The visual observer will
consider the animal to have cleared the zone if:
A visual observer has visually observed the animal leave
the zone, or
A visual observer has not sighted the animal within the
zone for 15 minutes for species with shorter dive durations (i.e.,
small odontocetes or pinnipeds), or 30 minutes for species with longer
dive durations (i.e., mysticetes and large odontocetes, including
sperm, killer, and beaked whales).
Ramp-up Procedures--The Observatory will follow a ramp-up procedure
when the airgun array begins operating after a specified period without
airgun operations or when a shut-down has exceeded that period. The
Observatory proposes that, for the present cruise, this period would be
approximately 15 minutes. The Observatory has used similar periods
(approximately 15 minutes) during previous seismic surveys.
The Observatory will begin a ramp-up with a single GI airgun (105
in\3\) and will add the second GI airgun (105 in\3\) after five
minutes. During ramp-up, the visual observer will monitor the exclusion
zone, and if he/she sights a marine mammal(s), the Langseth will
implement a shut-down as though both GI airguns were operational.
If the complete zone is not visible for at least 30 minutes prior
to the start of operations in either daylight or nighttime, the
Langseth will not commence the ramp-up. If one airgun is operational,
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 if they choose. A ramp-up from a shut-down may occur at
night, but only where the exclusion zone is small enough to be visible.
The Observatory will not initiate a ramp-up of the airguns if a visual
observer detects a marine mammal within or near the applicable zones
during the day or close to the vessel at night.
We have carefully evaluated the proposed mitigation measures and
have considered a range of other measures in the context of ensuring
that we prescribe the means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their
habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included consideration of
the following factors in relation to one another:
(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 our evaluation of the proposed measures, as well as other
measures considered by us or recommended by the public for previous
low-energy seismic surveys, we have determined that the mitigation
measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impacts on
[[Page 56618]]
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 incidental take authorization for an activity,
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act states that we
must set forth ``requirements pertaining to the monitoring and
reporting of such taking.'' The Act's implementing regulations at 50
CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for an authorization must
include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring
and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species
and our expectations of the level of taking or impacts on populations
of marine mammals present in the action area.
Monitoring
The Observatory will conduct marine mammal monitoring during the
present project, in order to implement the mitigation measures that
require real-time monitoring, and to satisfy the monitoring
requirements of the issued Authorization. We describe the Observatory's
Monitoring Plan below this section. The Observatory has planned the
monitoring work as a self-contained project independent of any other
related monitoring projects that may be occurring simultaneously in the
same regions. Further, the Observatory 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
The Observatory will position visual observers aboard the seismic
source vessel to watch for marine mammals near the vessel during
daytime airgun operations and during any ramp-ups at night. The
observers will also watch for marine mammals near the seismic vessel
for at least 30 minutes prior to the ramp-up of airgun operations after
an extended shut-down (i.e., greater than approximately 15 minutes for
this proposed cruise). When feasible, the observers 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
their observations, the Langseth will shutdown the airguns when they
detect marine mammals within or about to enter a designated exclusion
zone. The zone is a region in which a possibility exists of adverse
effects on animal hearing or other physical effects.
During seismic operations in the central Pacific Ocean, at least
three visual observers will be aboard the Langseth. The Observatory
will appoint the observers with our concurrence. At least one observer
will monitor the zones during seismic operations. Observations will
take place during ongoing daytime operations and nighttime ramp-ups of
the airguns. Observers will be on duty in shifts of duration no longer
than four hours. The vessel crew will also be instructed to assist in
detecting marine mammals.
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 observer will
have a good view around the entire vessel. During daytime, the visual
observers 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, night vision devices
(NVDs) will be available (ITT F500 Series Generation 3 binocular-image
intensifier or equivalent), when required. Laser range-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 the visual observers detect marine mammals within or about to
enter the designated exclusion zone, the Langseth will immediately
shut-down the airguns if necessary. The observers will continue to
maintain watch to determine when the animal(s) are outside the zone by
visual confirmation. The Langseth will not resume airgun operations
until he/she confirms that the animal has left the zone, or if the
observer has not observed the animal after 15 minutes for species with
shorter dive durations (small odontocetes and pinnipeds) or 30 minutes
for species with longer dive durations (mysticetes and large
odontocetes, including sperm, killer, and beaked whales).
Observer Data and Documentation
The observers 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. The Observatory will
use the data to estimate numbers of animals potentially `taken' by
harassment (as defined in the Marine Mammal Protection Act). The data
will also provide information needed to order a shutdown of the airguns
when a marine mammal is within or near the exclusion zone. Also, the
observers will also be on watch during daytime periods when the
Langseth is underway without seismic operations (i.e., transits to,
from, and through the study area) to collect baseline biological data.
When an observer makes a sighting, they will record the following
information:
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 observer will record the data listed under (2) 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.
Observers will record all observations in a standardized format and
will enter data into an electronic database. The observers will verify
the accuracy of the data entry by computerized data validity checks as
the data are entered and by subsequent manual checking of the database.
These procedures will allow the preparation of initial summaries of
data 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
shutdown).
2. Information needed to estimate the number of marine mammals
potentially taken by harassment, which the Observatory must report to
the Office of Protected Resources.
3. Data on the occurrence, distribution, and activities of marine
mammals and turtles in the area where the Observatory will conduct the
seismic study.
4. Information to compare the distance and distribution of marine
mammals and turtles relative to the source vessel at times with and
without seismic activity.
5. Data on the behavior and movement patterns of marine mammals
detected during non-active and active seismic operations.
[[Page 56619]]
Reporting
The Observatory will submit a report to us and to the Foundation
within 90 days after the end of the cruise. The report will describe
the operations that were conducted and sightings of marine mammals and
turtles 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 the issued
Authorization, such as an injury (Level A harassment), serious injury
or mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction, and/or
entanglement), the Observatory shall immediately cease the specified
activities and immediately report the incident to the Chief of the
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
at 301-427-8401 and/or by email to Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
ITP.Cody@noaa.gov and the Pacific Islands Regional Stranding
Coordinator at 808-944-2269 (David.Schofield@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;
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).
The Observatory shall not resume its activities until we are able
to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. We shall work with
the Observatory to determine what is necessary to minimize the
likelihood of further prohibited take and ensure Marine Mammal
Protection Act compliance. The Observatory may not resume their
activities until notified by us via letter, email, or telephone.
In the event that the Observatory discovers an injured or dead
marine mammal, and the lead visual observer 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 we describe in
the next paragraph), the Observatory will immediately report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office
of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and ITP.Cody@noaa.gov and the Pacific Islands
Regional Stranding Coordinator at 808-944-2269
(David.Schofield@noaa.gov). The report must include the same
information identified in the paragraph above this section. Activities
may continue while we review the circumstances of the incident. We will
work with the Observatory to determine whether modifications in the
activities are appropriate.
In the event that the Observatory discovers an injured or dead
marine mammal, and the lead visual observer determines that the injury
or death is not associated with or related to the authorized activities
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), the Observatory will report to the
Acting Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and ITP.Cody@noaa.gov and the NMFS Pacific
Islands Regional Stranding Coordinator at 808-944-2269
(David.Schofield@noaa.gov), within 24 hours of the discovery. The
Observatory will provide photographs or video footage (if available) or
other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to us.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the
Marine Mammal Protection Act 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].
We have authorized incidental take by Level B harassment only for
the marine geophysical survey in the central Pacific Ocean. 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 re: 1 [mu]Pa or cause temporary, short-term changes in
behavior. There is no evidence that the Observatory's planned
activities could result in injury, serious injury or mortality within
the specified geographic area for the Authorization. The required
mitigation and monitoring measures will minimize any potential risk for
injury, serious injury, or mortality.
The Observatory's estimates assume that marine mammals exposed to
airgun sounds greater than or equal to 160 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa might change
their behavior sufficiently for us to consider them as taken by
harassment. They have based their estimates on the number of marine
mammals that could be disturbed appreciably by operations with the two
GI airgun array during approximately 2,316 square km (894 square miles)
(includes primary and secondary lines and an additional 25 percent
contingency) of survey lines in the central Pacific Ocean.
We assume that during simultaneous operations of the airgun array
and the other sources, any marine mammals close enough to be affected
by the echosounder, sub-bottom profiler, and acoustic Doppler current
profiler would already be affected by the airguns. However, whether or
not the airguns are operating simultaneously with the other sources, we
expect that the marine mammals would exhibit no more than short-term
and inconsequential responses to the echosounder and profiler given
their characteristics (e.g., narrow downward-directed beam) and other
considerations described previously. Based on the best available
information, we do not consider that these reactions constitute a
``take'' (NMFS, 2001). Therefore, the Observatory did not provide any
additional allowance for animals that could be affected by sound
sources other than the two airguns.
We have presented a more detailed discussion of the Observatory's
methods to estimate take by incidental harassment in the notice of the
proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012). Refer to the
notice for more detailed information on the density data and their
methodology to estimate take.
The Observatory's estimates of exposures to various sound levels
[[Page 56620]]
assume that they will complete the surveys; in fact, they have
increased the calculations of the ensonified by 25 percent to
accommodate turns, lines that may need to be repeated, and equipment
testing. As is typical during ship surveys, inclement weather and
equipment malfunctions may cause delays and may limit the number of
useful line-kilometers of seismic operations that the Observatory can
finish. Furthermore, any marine mammal sightings within or near the
designated exclusion zone will result in the shutdown of seismic
operations as a mitigation measure. Thus, the following estimates of
the numbers of marine mammals potentially exposed to 160-dB re: 1 FPa
sounds are precautionary, and probably overestimate the actual numbers
of marine mammals that might be involved. These estimates assume that
there will be no weather, equipment, or mitigation delays, which is
highly unlikely.
Table 2 in this notice shows estimates of the number of individual
cetaceans that potentially could be exposed to greater than or equal to
160 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa during the seismic survey if no animals moved away
from the survey vessel. We present the take authorization in the far
right column of Table 3. For endangered species, the requested take
authorization reflects the mean group size in the eastern tropical
Pacific Ocean (Jackson et al., 2008) for the particular species in
cases where the calculated number of individuals exposed was between
0.05 and the mean group size (i.e., for the sperm whale). For non-
listed species, the requested take authorization reflects the mean
group size in the Center's survey area (Barlow et al., 2008) for the
particular species in cases where the calculated number of individuals
exposed was between one and the mean group size.
The total estimate of the number of individual cetaceans that could
be exposed to seismic sounds with received levels greater than or equal
to 160 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa during the proposed survey is 828 (see Table 2
in this notice). That total includes: Four Bryde's whales or 0.01
percent of the regional population; and seven sperm whales (also listed
as endangered) or 0.03 percent of the regional population could be
exposed during the survey.
As stated earlier in this notice, the Observatory did not estimate
take of endangered humpback, sei, blue, or fin whales or Hawaiian monk
seals because of the low likelihood of encountering these species
during the cruise. In addition, 18 beaked whales (16 Cuvier's, one
Longman's, and one Mesoplodon spp.) could be exposed during the survey.
Most (94.7 percent) of the cetaceans that could be potentially exposed
are delphinids (e.g., spinner, pantropical spotted, and striped
dolphins are estimated to be the most common species in the area) with
maximum estimates ranging from four to 425 species exposed to levels
greater than or equal to 160 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa.
Table 3--Estimates of the possible numbers of marine mammals exposed to different sound levels during the
Observatory's seismic survey in the central Pacific Ocean during May, 2012.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated number
of individuals Approximate
Species exposed to sound percent of Requested take
levels >= 160 dB regional authorization
re: 1 [mu]Pa \1\ population \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryde's whale.......................................... 1 0.01 \4\ 4
Blue whale............................................. 0 < 0.01 0
Sperm whale............................................ 7 0.03 \4\ 8
Dwarf sperm whale...................................... 18 0.16 18
Cuvier's beaked whale.................................. 16 0.08 16
Longman's beaked whale................................. 1 0.36 \4\ 14
Mesoplodon spp.\3\..................................... 1 <0.01 \4\ 4
Rough-toothed dolphin.................................. 3 <0.01 \4\ 13
Bottlenose dolphin..................................... 11 <0.01 \4\ 12
Pantropical spotted dolphin............................ 279 0.06 279
Spinner dolphin........................................ 425 0.02 425
Striped dolphin........................................ 38 <0.01 \4\ 46
Fraser's dolphin....................................... 11 <0.01 \4\ 182
Risso's dolphin........................................ 2 <0.01 \4\ 14
Melon-headed whale..................................... 3 0.01 \4\ 101
False killer whale..................................... 0 <0.01 \4\ 9
Short-finned pilot whale............................... 12 <0.01 \4\ 24
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Estimates are based on densities from Table 3 in the notice of the proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242,
March 30, 2012) and an ensonified area (including 25 percent contingency).
\2\ Regional population size estimates are from Table 2 notice of the proposed Authorization (77 FR 19242, March
30, 2012).
\3\ Includes ginkgo-toothed and/or Blainville's beaked whales.
\4\ Requested take authorization increased to mean group size.
Encouraging and Coordinating Research
The Observatory and the Foundation will coordinate the planned
marine mammal monitoring program associated with each seismic survey in
the central Pacific Ocean with other parties that may have interest in
the area and/or may be conducting marine mammal studies in the same
region during the seismic surveys.
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers Analysis and Determination
We have 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,
we consider:
(1) The number of anticipated injuries, serious injuries, or
mortalities;
(2) The number, nature, and 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
[[Page 56621]]
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, impact relative
to the size of the population);
(5) Impacts on habitat affecting rates of recruitment/survival; and
(6) The effectiveness of monitoring and mitigation measures.
For reasons stated previously in this document, the specified
activities associated with the marine seismic surveys are not likely to
cause permanent threshold shift, or other non-auditory injury, serious
injury, or death because:
(1) The likelihood that, given sufficient notice through relatively
slow ship speed, we expect marine mammals 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
relatively low and that we would likely avoid this impact through the
incorporation of the required monitoring and mitigation measures
(described previously in this document);
(3) The fact that cetaceans would have to be closer than 70 meters
(229.7 feet) in deep water when the two GI airgun array has a 3-meter
(9.8 feet) 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
marine mammal observers is high at close proximity to the vessel.
We do not anticipate that any injuries, serious injuries, or
mortalities would occur as a result of the Observatory's planned marine
seismic surveys, and we do not propose to authorize injury, serious
injury or mortality for this survey. We anticipate only short-term
behavioral disturbance to occur during the conduct of the survey
activities. Table 2 of this document outlines the number of requested
Level B harassment takes that we anticipate as a result of these
activities. Due to the nature, degree, and context of Level B
(behavioral) harassment anticipated and described (see ``Potential
Effects on Marine Mammals'' section in this notice), we do not expect
the activity to impact rates of recruitment or survival for any
affected species or stock. Further, the seismic surveys would not take
place in areas of significance for marine mammal feeding, resting,
breeding, or calving and would not adversely impact marine mammal
habitat.
Many animals perform vital functions, such as feeding, resting,
traveling, and socializing, on a diel cycle (i.e., 24-hour cycle).
Behavioral reactions to noise exposure (such as disruption of critical
life functions, displacement, or avoidance of important habitat) are
more likely to be significant if they last more than one diel cycle or
recur on subsequent days (Southall et al., 2007). While we anticipate
that the seismic operations would occur on consecutive days, the
estimated duration of the survey would last no more than 6 days and the
Langseth will be continuously moving along planned tracklines.
Therefore, the seismic survey will be increasing sound levels in the
marine environment in a relatively small area surrounding the vessel,
which is constantly traveling over far distances, for a relatively
short time period in the study area.
Of the 26 marine mammal species under our (the National Marine
Fisheries Service's) jurisdiction that are known to occur or may occur
in the study area, six are listed as endangered under endangered under
the Endangered Species Act: The humpback, sei, fin, blue, and sperm
whale and the Hawaiian monk seal. We also consider these species as
depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
Based on available data, we do not expect the Observatory to
encounter nine of the 26 species in the proposed survey areas. They
include the: Blue, fin, humpback, killer, minke, pygmy, pygmy killer,
and sei whales and the Hawaiian monk seal because of the species' rare
and/or extralimital occurrence in the survey areas and the low
likelihood of encountering these species during the cruise. The
Observatory did not request and we did not authorize take of these nine
species. Thus, the issued Authorization only addresses requested take
authorizations for 17 species: One mysticete, and 16 odontocetes. As
mentioned previously, the survey would not occur in any areas
designated as critical habitat for Endangered Species Act-listed
species and would not adversely impact marine mammal habitat. To
protect these animals (and other marine mammals in the study area), the
Observatory must cease or reduce airgun operations if animals enter
designated zones.
As mentioned previously, we estimate that 17 species of marine
mammals under our jurisdiction could be potentially affected by Level B
harassment over the course of the proposed IHA. For each species, these
numbers are small (each less than one percent) relative to the regional
population size (see Table 2).
Our practice has been to apply the 160 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa received
level threshold for underwater impulse sound levels to determine
whether take by Level B harassment occurs. Southall et al. (2007)
provides a severity scale for ranking observed behavioral responses of
both free-ranging marine mammals and laboratory subjects to various
types of anthropogenic sound (see Table 4 in Southall et al. [2007]).
We have determined, provided that the aforementioned mitigation and
monitoring measures are implemented, that the impact of conducting a
marine seismic survey in the central Pacific Ocean, May through June,
2012, 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 these species may make behavioral modifications, including
temporarily vacating the area during the operation of the airgun(s) to
avoid the resultant acoustic disturbance, the availability of alternate
areas within these areas and the short duration of the research
activities, have led us to determine that this action will have a
negligible impact on the species in the specified geographic region.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring
measures, we have found that the Observatory's planned research
activities would 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 would have a negligible impact on the
affected species or stocks of marine mammals; and that the required
measures mitigate impacts to affected species or stocks of marine
mammals to the lowest level practicable.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act also
requires us to determine that the authorization will not have an
unmitigable adverse effect on the availability of marine mammal species
or stocks for subsistence use. There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals in the study area (central Pacific Ocean) that
implicate section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Act.
[[Page 56622]]
Endangered Species Act
Of the species of marine mammals that may occur in the proposed
survey area, several are listed as endangered under the ESA, including
the blue, fin, humpback, sei, and sperm whale and Hawaiian monk seal.
The Observatory did not request take of endangered humpback, sei, blue,
or fin whales or Hawaiian monk seals because of the low likelihood of
encountering these species during the cruise. As mentioned previously,
the survey would not occur in any areas designated as critical habitat
for listed species and would not adversely impact marine mammal
habitat.
Under section 7 of this Act, the Foundation initiated formal
consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of
Protected Resources, Endangered Species Act Interagency Cooperation
Division, on this seismic survey. We, (the Permits and Conservation
Division), also initiated formal consultation under section 7 of the
Act with the Endangered Species Act Interagency Cooperation Division,
to obtain a Biological Opinion (Opinion) evaluating the effects of
issuing an incidental harassment authorization for threatened and
endangered marine mammals and, if appropriate, authorizing incidental
take. In May 2012, the Endangered Species Act Interagency Cooperation
Division issued an Opinion and concluded that the action and issuance
of the Authorization was not likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of blue, fin, humpback, sei, and sperm whales and Hawaiian
monk seals. The Opinion also concluded that the survey would not affect
designated critical habitat for these species. The Foundation and the
Observatory must comply with the Relevant Terms and Conditions of the
Incidental Take Statement corresponding to the Opinion issued to us,
the Foundation, and the Observatory. The Observatory must also comply
with the Authorization's mitigation and monitoring requirements in
order to be exempt under the Incidental Take Statement in the Opinion
from the prohibition on take of listed endangered marine mammal species
otherwise prohibited by section 9 of the Act.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
With its complete application, the Foundation and the Observatory
provided an ``Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact Determination Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act,
(NEPA: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and Executive Order 12114 for a ``Marine
Geophysical Survey by the R/V Marcus G. Langseth in the Central Pacific
Ocean May, 2012,'' which incorporates an ``Environmental Assessment of
a Marine Geophysical Survey by the R/V Marcus G. Langseth in the
central Pacific Ocean, May, 2012,'' prepared by LGL Limited
environmental research associates on behalf of the Foundation and the
Observatory.
The Assessment analyzed the direct, indirect, and cumulative
environmental impacts of the specified activities on marine mammals
including those listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered
Species Act. We conducted an independent review and evaluation of the
document for sufficiency and compliance with the Council of
Environmental Quality and NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 Sec.
5.09(d), Environmental Review Procedures for Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, and determined that issuance of the
Authorization is not likely to result in significant impacts on the
human environment. Also, we have provided relevant environmental
information to the public through the notice of the proposed
Authorization (77 FR 19242, March 30, 2012) and have considered public
comments received in response prior to adopting the Foundation's
Assessment. We have concluded that issuance of an Authorization would
not significantly affect the quality of the human environment and have
issued a separate Finding of No Significant Impact. Because we have
made this finding, it is not necessary to prepare an environmental
impact statement for the issuance of an Authorization to the
Observatory for this activity.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, we have issued an Incidental
Harassment Authorization to the Observatory for the take of small
numbers of marine mammals, by Level B harassment incidental to
conducting a marine geophysical survey in the central Pacific Ocean,
May 1 through June 11, 2012, provided the Observatory implements the
previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements. The Authorization's duration will not exceed one year
from the date of issuance.
Dated: April 30, 2012.
Helen M. Golde,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-22602 Filed 9-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P