Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; U.S. Marine Corps Training Exercises at Air Station Cherry Point, 19224-19243 [2013-07305]
Download as PDF
19224
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
likely overestimates the actual take that
would occur; no marine mammal takes
were observed during 28 days of survey
activity in 2012. No affected marine
mammals are listed under the ESA or
considered strategic under the MMPA.
Marine mammals are expected to avoid
the survey area, thereby reducing
exposure and impacts. No disruption to
reproductive behavior is anticipated and
there is no anticipated effect on annual
rates of recruitment or survival of
affected marine mammals.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
mitigation and monitoring measures,
NMFS determines that CWA’s survey
activities may result in the incidental
take of small numbers of marine
mammals, by Level B harassment, and
that the total taking will have a
negligible impact on the affected species
or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by this
action.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No marine mammal species listed
under the ESA are anticipated to occur
within the action area. Therefore,
section 7 consultation under the ESA is
not required.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
In compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by
the regulations published by the
Council on Environmental Quality (40
CFR parts 1500–1508), and NOAA
Administrative Order 216–6, NMFS
prepared an Environmental Assessment
(EA) to consider the direct, indirect, and
cumulative effects to marine mammals
and other applicable environmental
resources resulting from issuance of a 1year IHA to and the potential issuance
of additional authorization for
incidental harassment. This analysis is
still considered relevant for the
proposed IHA because the applicant’s
proposed activity has not changed. The
EA is available on the NMFS Web site
listed in the beginning of this document
concurrently with this notice.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Dated: March 25, 2013.
Helen M. Golde,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–07304 Filed 3–28–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XC486
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental
to Specified Activities; U.S. Marine
Corps Training Exercises at Air Station
Cherry Point
National Marine Fisheries
Service, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
harassment authorization; receipt of
application for letter of authorization;
request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We have received an
application from the U.S. Marine Corps
(Marine Corps) requesting an incidental
harassment authorization
(Authorization) to take marine mammals
incidental to various training exercises
at Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS)
Cherry Point Range Complex, North
Carolina for a period of one year.
The Marine Corps’ activities are
military readiness activities pursuant to
the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), as amended by the National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for
Fiscal Year 2004. Per the MMPA, we are
requesting comments on our proposal to
issue an authorization to the Marine
Corps to incidentally harass by Level B
harassment only, bottlenose dolphins
(Tursiops truncatus), during the training
exercises that would occur within the
proposed effective period of May 20,
2013 through May 19, 2014. We are also
requesting comments on our intent to
promulgate regulations governing the
take of marine mammals over a 5-year
period incidental to the activities
described in this notice.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than April 29, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the
application should be addressed 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. The mailbox address for providing
email comments is ITP.Cody@noaa.gov.
Please include 0648–XC486 in the
subject line. We are not responsible for
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
email comments sent to addresses other
than the one provided here. Comments
sent via email, including all
attachments, must not exceed a 25megabyte file size.
Instructions: All submitted comments
are a part of the public record and we
would post to https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm#applications without
change. All Personal Identifying
Information (for example, name,
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter may be publicly
accessible. Do not submit confidential
business information or otherwise
sensitive or protected information.
To obtain an electronic copy of the
application, write to the previously
mentioned address, telephone the
contact listed here (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT), or visit the
internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications.
The following associated document is
also available at the same internet
address: The Marine Corps’
Environmental Assessment (EA) titled,
‘‘Environmental Assessment MCAS
Cherry Point Range Operations,’’ for
their federal action of supporting and
conducting current and emerging
training operations. Their EA evaluates
the effects of the proposed training
operations on the human environment
including impacts to marine mammals
and their 2009 Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) for the activities.
This notice and the referenced
document present detailed information
on the scope of our federal action and
resultant environmental impacts for
purposes of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.) (i.e., potential impacts to
marine mammals from issuing the
proposed Authorization including
measures for mitigation, and
monitoring). We solicit and would
consider comments submitted in
response to this notice when
determining whether to prepare
additional NEPA analysis. Documents
cited in this notice may also be viewed,
by appointment, during regular business
hours, at the aforementioned address.
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 Protection 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
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
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, after notice of a proposed
authorization to the public for review
and public comment: (1) We make
certain findings; and (2) the taking is
limited to harassment.
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 taking. 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 MMPA
established an expedited process by
which citizens of the United States can
apply for an authorization to
incidentally take small numbers of
marine mammals by harassment.
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
establishes a 45-day time limit for our
review of an application followed by a
30-day public notice and comment
period on any proposed authorizations
for the incidental harassment of small
numbers of marine mammals. Within 45
days of the close of the public comment
period, 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.
The National Defense Authorization
Act of 2004 (NDAA; (Public Law 108–
136)) amended section 101(a)(5)(A) of
the MMPA by removing the small
numbers and specified geographic
region provisions; revising the
definition of harassment as it applies to
a military readiness activity; and
explicitly requiring that our
determination of ‘‘least practicable
adverse impact’’ include consideration
of: (1) Personnel safety; (2) the
practicality of implementation; and (3)
impact on the effectiveness of the
military readiness activity.
The NDAA’s definition of harassment
as it applies to a military readiness
activity is: (i) any act that injures or has
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
the significant potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild [Level A Harassment];
or (ii) any act that disturbs or is likely
to disturb a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of natural behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering, to a point where
such behavioral patterns are abandoned
or significantly altered [Level B
Harassment].
Summary of Request
We received a request from the
Marine Corps on January 28, 2013,
requesting that we issue we issue an
Incidental Harassment Authorization
(Authorization) for the take, by Level B
harassment only, of small numbers of
Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops
truncatus) incidental to air-to-surface
and surface-to-surface training exercises
conducted around two bombing targets
within southern Pamlico Sound, North
Carolina, at MCAS Cherry Point. We
received a complete and adequate
application requesting Authorization on
March 19, 2013.
To date, we have issued two, 1-year
Authorizations to the Marine Corps for
the conduct of the same activities from
2010 to 2012 (75 FR 72807, November
26, 2010; 77 FR January 3, 2012). This
is the Marine Corps’ third request for an
Authorization. We intend to proceed to
rulemaking after a final determination is
made on whether or not to issue this
Authorization. This document also
serves as Notice of Receipt of a request
for rulemaking and subsequent Letter of
Authorization.
Project Purpose—The Marine Corps
plan to conduct weapon delivery
training at two bombing targets: Brant
Island Target (BT–9) and Piney Island
Bombing Range (BT–11). Training at
BT–9 would involve air-to-surface (from
aircraft to in-water targets) and surfaceto-surface (from vessels to in-water
targets) warfare training, including
bombing, strafing, special (laser
systems) weapons; surface fires using
non-explosive and explosive ordnance;
and mine laying exercises (inert).
Training at BT–11 would involve air- tosurface exercises to provide training in
the delivery of conventional (nonexplosive) and special (laser systems)
weapons. Surface-to-surface training by
small military watercraft would also be
executed here. The types of ordnances
proposed for use at BT–9 and BT–11
include small arms, large arms, bombs,
rockets, missiles, and pyrotechnics. All
munitions used at BT–11 are inert,
practice rounds. No live firing occurs at
BT–11. Training for any activity may
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19225
occur year-round. Active sonar is not a
component of these specified training
exercises; therefore, we have not
included a discussion of marine
mammal harassment from active sonar
operations within this notice.
Description of the Specified Activity
The Marine Corps is requesting
authorization to harass bottlenose
dolphins from ammunition firing
conducted at two bombing targets
within MCAS Cherry Point. The
authorization would be valid for a
period of one year from the date of
issuance. The bombing targets are
located at the convergence of the Neuse
River and Pamlico Sound, North
Carolina.
BT–9 is a water-based target located
approximately 52 kilometers (km) (32.3
miles (mi); 28 nautical miles (nm))
northeast of MCAS Cherry Point. The
BT–9 target area ranges in depth from
1.2 to 6.1 meters (m) (3.9 to 20 feet (ft)),
with the shallow areas concentrated
along the Brandt Island Shoal (which
runs down the middle of the restricted
area in a northwest to southeast
orientation). The target itself consists of
three ship hulls grounded on Brant
Island Shoals, located approximately 4.8
km (3.0 mi) southeast of Goose Creek
Island. Inert (non-explosive) ordnance
up to 454 kilograms (kg) (1,000 pounds
(lbs) and live (explosive) ordnance up to
45.4 kg (100 lbs) trinitrotoluene (TNT)
equivalent, including ordnance released
during strafing, are authorized for use at
this target range. The target is defined
by a 6 statute-mile diameter prohibited
area designated by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Wilmington District (33
CFR 334.420). Non-military vessels are
not permitted within the prohibited
area, which is delineated by large signs
located on pilings surrounding the
perimeter of the BT. BT–9 also provides
a mining exercise area; however, all
mine exercises are simulation only and
do not involve detonations. BT–9
standard operating procedures limit live
ordnance deliveries to a maximum
explosive weight of 100 lbs TNT
equivalent. The USMC estimates that it
could conduct up to approximately
1,554 aircraft-based and 322 vesselbased sorties, annually, at BT–9. The
standard sortie consists of two aircraft
per bombing run or an average of two
and maximum of six vessels.
BT–11 is a 50.6 square kilometers
(km2) (19.5 square miles (mi2)) complex
of land- and water-based targets on
Piney Island. The BT–11 target area
ranges in depth from 0.3 m (1.0 ft) along
the shoreline to 3.1 m (10.1 ft) in the
center of Rattan Bay (BA, 2001). The inwater stationary targets of BT–11 consist
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
19226
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
of a barge and patrol (PT) boat located
in roughly the center of Rattan Bay. The
barge target is approximately 41.1 by
12.2 m (135 by 40 ft) in dimension. The
PT boat is approximately 33.5 by 10.7 ft
(110 ft by 35 ft) in dimension. Water
depths in the center of Rattan Bay are
estimated as 2.4 to 3 m (8 to 10 ft) with
bottom depths ranging from 0.3 to 1.5 m
(1 to 5 ft) adjacent to the shoreline of
Piney Island. A shallow ledge, with
substrate expected to be hard-packed to
hard bottom, surrounds Piney Island.
No live firing occurs at BT–11; all
munitions used are inert, non-explosive
practice rounds. Only 36 percent of all
munitions fired at BT–11 occur over
water; the remaining munitions are fired
to land based targets on Piney Island.
The USMC estimates that it could
conduct up to approximately 6,727
aircraft-based and 51 vessel-based
sorties, annually, at BT–11.
All inert and live-fire exercises at
MCAS Cherry Point ranges are
conducted so that all ammunition and
other ordnances strike and/or fall on the
land or water based target or within the
existing danger zones or water restricted
areas. A danger zone is a defined water
area that is closed to the public on an
intermittent or full-time basis for use by
military forces for hazardous operations
such as target practice and ordnance
firing. A water restricted area is a
defined water area where public access
is prohibited or limited in order to
provide security for government
property and/or to protect the public
from the risks of injury or damage that
could occur from the government’s use
of that area (33 CFR 334.2). Surface
danger zones are designated areas of
rocket firing, target practice, or other
surface firing activities. Typical
munitions would be 7.62 millimeter
(mm) or .50 caliber (cal) machine guns;
and/or 40 mm grenade machine guns.
This exercise is usually a live-fire
exercise, but at times blanks would be
used so that the boat crews could
practice their ship handling skills. The
goal of training is to hit the targets;
however, some munitions may bounce
off the targets and land in the water or
miss the target entirely. Additionally,
the personnel would use G911
concussion hand grenades (inert and
live); however, these are not aimed at
targets, as the goal is to learn how to
throw them into the water.
Table 1 includes the estimated
amount of munitions expended at BT–
9 and BT–11 in 2011 and 2012.
Historically, boat sorties have been
conducted at BT–9 and BT–11 year
round with equal distribution of
training effort throughout the seasons.
Live fires constitute approximately 90
percent of all surface-to-surface gunnery
events. The majority of sorties
originated and practiced at BT–9 as no
live fire is conducted at BT–11. The
Marine Corps has indicated a
comparable number of sorties would
occur throughout the IHA timeframe.
There is no specific schedule associated
with the use of ranges by the small boat
teams. However, exercises tend to be
scheduled for 5-day blocks with
exercises at various times throughout
that timeframe. There is no specific time
of year or month training occurs as
variables such as deployment status,
range availability, and completion of
crew specific training requirements
influence schedules.
hazardous operations (33 CFR 334.420).
The surface danger zone (prohibited
area) for BT–9 is a 4.8 km (3.0 mi)
radius centered on the south side of
Brant Island Shoal. The surface danger
zone for BT–11 is a 2.9 km (1.8 mi)
radius centered on a barge target in
Rattan Bay.
According to the application, the
Marine Corps is requesting take of
marine mammals incidental to specified
activities at MCAS Cherry Point Range
Complex, located within Pamlico
Sound, North Carolina. These activities
include gunnery; mine laying; bombing;
or rocket exercises and are classified
into two categories here based on
delivery method: (1) Surface-to-surface
gunnery and (2) air-to-surface bombing.
Exercises may occur year round, day or
night (approximately 15 percent of
training occurs at night).
Surface-to-Surface Gunnery Exercises
Surface-to-surface fires are fires from
boats at sea to targets at sea. These can
be direct (targets are within sight) or
indirect (targets are not within sight).
Gunnery exercise employing only direct
fire is the only category of surface-tosurface activity currently conducted
within the MCAS Cherry Point bombing
targets. An average of two and
maximum of six small boats (7.3–26.0
m; 24–85 ft), or fleet of boats, typically
operated by Special Boat Team
personnel, use a machine gun to attack
and disable or destroy a surface target
that simulates another ship, boat,
swimmer, floating mine or near shore
land targets. Vessels would travel
between 0–20 knots (kts) (0–23 miles
per hour (mph)) with an average of two
vessels actually conducting surface-to-
TABLE 1—AIRCRAFT AND BOAT SORTIES, BY MISSION TYPE, CONDUCTED IN 2011 AND 2012
BT–9
BT–11
Mission type
2011
2012
2011
2012
1,554
223
........................
322
4,251
105
........................
106
Total ..........................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Air-to-Surface ...................................................................................................
Surface-to-Surface ...........................................................................................
1,777
........................
4,356
........................
A number of different types of boats
are used during surface-to-surface
exercises depending on the unit using
the boat and their mission and include
versions of Small Unit River Craft,
Combat Rubber Raiding Craft, Rigid
Hull Inflatable Boats, Patrol Craft. They
are inboard or outboard, diesel or
gasoline engines with either propeller or
water jet propulsion. Boat crews
approach, at a maximum of 20 kts (23
mph), and engage targets simulating
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
other boats, swimmers, floating mines,
or near shore land targets with 7.62 mm
or .50 cal machine guns; 40 mm grenade
machine guns; or M3A2 concussion
hand grenades (approximately 200, 800,
10, and 10 rounds respectively). Vessels
typically travel in linear paths and do
not operate erratically. Other vessels
may be located within the BTs;
however, these are support craft and do
not participate in munitions
expenditures. The purpose of the
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
support craft is to remotely control High
Speed Maneuvering Surface Targets
(HSMSTs) or to conduct maintenance
on electronic equipment located in the
towers at BT–9. Support craft are
typically anchored or tied to marker
pilings during HSMST operations or
tied to equipment towers. When
underway, vessels do not typically
travel faster than 12–18 kts (13.8–20.7
mph) or in an erratic manner.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
Air-to-Surface
Air-to-surface training involves
ordnance delivered from aircraft and
aimed at targets on the water’s surface
or on land in the case of BT–11. We
provide a description of the types of
targets used at MCAS Cherry Point in
the previous section. There are four
types of air-to-surface activities
conducted within the MCAS Cherry
Point BTs: mine laying; bombing,
gunnery, or rocket exercises which are
carried out via fixed- or rotary-wing
aircraft.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Mine Laying Exercises
Mine warfare includes the strategic,
operational, and tactical use of mines
and mine countermine measures. Mine
warfare is divided into two basic
subdivisions: (a) The laying of mines to
degrade the enemy’s capabilities to
wage land, air, and maritime warfare,
and (b) the countering of enemy-laid
mines to permit friendly maneuver or
use of selected land or sea areas (DoN,
2007). MCAS Cherry Point would only
engage in mine laying exercises as
described below in the waters around
BT–9. No detonations of any mine
device are involved with this training.
During mine laying, a fixed-wing or
maritime patrol aircraft (P–3 or P–8)
typically drops a series of about four
inert mine shapes in an offensive or
defensive pattern, making multiple
passes along a pre-determined flight
azimuth, and dropping one or more
shapes each time. Mine simulation
shapes include MK76, MK80 series, and
BDU practice bombs ranging from 25 to
2,000 pounds in weight. There is an
attempt to fly undetected to the area
where the mines are laid with either a
low or high altitude tactic flight. The
shapes are scored for accuracy as they
enter the water and the aircrew is later
debriefed on their performance. The
training shapes are inert (no detonations
occur) and expendable.
Bombing Exercises
The purpose of bombing exercises is
to train pilots in destroying or disabling
enemy ships or boats. During training,
fixed wing or rotary wing aircraft
deliver bombs against surface maritime
targets at BT–9 or BT–11,day or night,
using either unguided or precisionguided munitions. Unguided munitions
include MK–76 and BDU–45 inert
training bombs, and MK–80 series of
inert bombs (no cluster munitions
authorized). Precision-guided munitions
consist of laser-guided bombs (inert)
and laser-guided training rounds (inert).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Typically, two aircraft approach the
target (principally BT–9) from an
altitude of approximately 914 m (3,000
ft) up to 4,572 m (15,000 ft) and, when
on an established range, the aircraft
adhere to designated ingress and egress
routes. Typical bomb release altitude is
914 m (3,000 ft) for unguided munitions
or above 4,572 m (15,000 ft) and in
excess of 1.8 km (1 nm) for precisionguided munitions. However, the lowest
minimum altitude for ordnance delivery
(inert bombs) would be 152 m (500 ft).
Onboard laser designators or laser
designators from a support aircraft or
ground support personnel are used to
illuminate certified targets for use when
using laser guided weapons. Due to
target maintenance issues, live bombs
have not been dropped at the BT–9
targets for the past few years although
these munitions are authorized for use.
For the effective IHA timeframe, the
Marine Corps would not use live bombs.
Live rockets and grenades; however,
have been expended at BT–9.
Air-to-surface bombing exercises have
the potential to occur on a daily basis.
The standard sortie consists of two
aircraft per bombing run. The frequency
of these exercises is dependent on
squadron level training requirements,
deployment status, and range
availability; therefore, there is no set
pattern or specific time of year or month
when this training occurs. Normal
operating hours for the range are 8 a.m.
to 11 p.m., Monday through Friday;
however, the range is available for use
365 days per year.
Gunnery Exercises
During gunnery training, fixed- and
rotary-wing aircraft expend smaller
munitions targeted at the bombing
targets with the purpose of hitting them.
However, some small arms may land in
the water. Rotary wing exercises involve
either CH–53, UH–1, CH–46, MV–22, or
H–60 rotary-wing aircraft with mounted
7.62 mm or .50 cal machine guns. Each
gunner expends approximately 800
rounds of 7.62 mm and 200 rounds of
.50 cal ammunition in each exercise.
These may be live or inert.
Fixed wing gunnery exercises involve
the flight of two aircraft that begin to
descend to the target from an altitude of
approximately 914 m (3,000 ft) while
still several miles away. Within a
distance of 1,219 m (4,000 ft) from the
target, each aircraft fires a burst of
approximately 30 rounds before
reaching an altitude of 305 m (1,000 ft),
then breaks off and repositions for
another strafing run until each aircraft
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19227
expends its exercise ordnance
allowance of approximately 250 rounds.
In total, about 8–12 passes are made by
each aircraft per exercise. Typically
these fixed wing exercise events involve
an F/A–18 and AH–1 with Vulcan
M61A1/A2, 20 mm cannon; AV–8 with
GAU–12, 25 mm cannon.
Rocket Exercises
Rocket exercises are carried out
similar to bombing exercises. Fixed- and
rotary-wing aircraft crews launch
rockets at surface maritime targets, day
and night, to train for destroying or
disabling enemy ships or boats. These
operations employ 2.75-inch and 5-inch
rockets. Generally, the average number
of rockets delivered per sortie is
approximately 14. As with the bombing
exercise, there is no set level or pattern
of amount of sorties conducted.
Munitions Descriptions
We refer the reader to Tables 2 and 3
for a complete list of the ordnance
authorized for use at BT–9 and BT–11,
respectively. There are several varieties
and net explosive weights (for live
munition used at BT–9) can vary
according to the variety. All practice
bombs are inert and used to simulate the
same ballistic properties of service type
bombs. They are manufactured as either
solid cast metal bodies or thin sheet
metal containers. Since practice bombs
contain no explosive filler, a practice
bomb signal cartridge (smoke) is used
for visual observation of weapon target
impact. Practice bombs provide a low
cost training device for pilot and ground
handling crews. Due to the relatively
small amount of explosive material in
practice bombs (small signal charge), the
availability of ranges for training is
greatly increased.
When a high explosive detonates, it is
converted almost instantly into a gas at
very high pressure and temperature.
Under the pressure of the gases thus
generated, the weapon case expands and
breaks into fragments. The air
surrounding the casing is compressed
and shock (blast) wave is transmitted
into it. Typical initial values for a highexplosive weapon are 200 kilobars of
pressure (1 bar = 1 atmosphere) and
5,000 degrees Celsius (9,032 degrees
Fahrenheit). There are five types of
explosive sources used at BT–9: 2.75inch Rocket High Explosives, 5-inch
Rocket High Explosives, 30 mm High
Explosives, 40 mm High Explosives, and
G911 grenades. No live munitions are
used at BT–11.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
19228
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 2—DESCRIPTION OF MUNITIONS USED AT BT–9
Ordnance
Description
Net explosive weight
MK–76 Practice Bomb (inert) ...................
25-pound teardrop-shaped cast metal bomb, with a bore
tube for installation of a signal cartridge.
Air Force MK 76 practice bomb ............................................
10-pound metal cylindrical bomb body with a bore tube for
installation of a signal cartridge.
500-pound metal bomb either sand or water filled. Two signal cartridges..
500-pound metal bomb either sand or water filled. Two signal cartridges..
250-pound bomb ...................................................................
500-pound bomb ...................................................................
1,000-pound bomb configured like BDU 45 .........................
2,000-pound bomb configured like BDU 45 .........................
(of signal cartridge) varies, maximum
0.083800 lbs.
same as above.
same as above.
Unguided 2.75 inch diameter rocket .....................................
Unguided 5 inch diameter rocket ..........................................
Unguided 5-inch diameter rocket ..........................................
2.75-inch rocket containing white phosphorous ...................
High Explosive, 2.75 inch rocket ..........................................
Machine gun rounds .............................................................
0.
0.
15 lbs.
0.
4.8 lbs.
0.
High Explosive Incendiary, Live machine gun rounds ..........
Aerial flare .............................................................................
18-pound chaff canister ........................................................
30-pound high intensity illumination flare .............................
89-pound inert training bomblet ............................................
0.269 lbs.
0.
0.
0.
0.
BDU–33 Practice Bomb (inert) ................
BDU–48 Practice Bomb (inert) ................
BDU–45 Practice Bomb (inert) ................
BDU–50 Practice Bomb (inert) ................
MK–81 Practice Bomb (inert) ...................
MK–82 Practice Bomb (inert) ...................
MK–83 Practice Bomb (inert) ...................
MK–84 Practice Bomb (inert) (special exception use only).
2.75-inch (inert) ........................................
5-inch Zuni (inert) .....................................
5-inch Zuni (live) ......................................
2.75wp (inert) ...........................................
2.75HE .....................................................
0.50 cal (inert) ..........................................
7.62 mm (inert)
20 mm (inert)
25mm (inert)
30 mm (inert)
40 mm (inert)
25 mm HE (live) .......................................
Self Protection Flare ................................
Chaff .........................................................
LUU–2 ......................................................
Laser Guided Training Round (LGTR)
(inert).
(of signal cartridges, total 0.1676 lbs.
same as above.
0.
0.
0.1676 lbs.
0.1676 lbs.
TABLE 3—DESCRIPTION OF MUNITIONS USED AT BT–11
Ordnance
Description
MK76 Practice Bomb ................................................................................
25-pound teardrop-shaped cast metal bomb body, with a bore tube for
installation of a signal cartridge.
Air Force designation for MK 76 practice bomb.
10-pound metal cylindrical bomb body with a bore tube for installation
of a signal cartridge.
500-pound metal bomb body either sand or water filled. Configured
with either low drag conical tail fins or high drag tail fins for retarded
weapons delivery. Two signal cartridges installed.
250-pound inert bomb
500-pound inert bomb.
Unguided 2.75 inch diameter rocket.
5 inch diameter rocket.
White phosphorous 7-pound rocket.
Inert machine gun rounds.
BDU 33 Practice Bomb ............................................................................
BDU 48 Practice Bomb ............................................................................
BDU 45 Practice Bomb ............................................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
MK 81 Practice Bomb ..............................................................................
MK 82 Practice Bomb ..............................................................................
2.75-inch ...................................................................................................
5-inch Zuni ................................................................................................
WP–2.75-inch ...........................................................................................
0.50 cal .....................................................................................................
7.62 mm
5.56 mm
20 mm
30 mm
40 mm
TOW .........................................................................................................
Self Protection Flare .................................................................................
SMD SAMS ..............................................................................................
LUU–2 .......................................................................................................
Laser Guided Training Round (LGTR) .....................................................
The amounts of all ordnance to be
expended at BT–9 and BT–11 (both
surface-to-surface and air-to-surface) are
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wire guided 56-pound anti-tank missile.
Aerial flare.
1.5-pound smoking flare.
30-pound high-intensity illumination flare.
89-pound inert training bomblet.
1,225,815 and 1,254,684 rounds,
respectively (see Table 4 and 5).
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
19229
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 4—AMOUNT OF LIVE AND INERT MUNITIONS THAT WOULD BE EXPENDED AT BT–9, ANNUALLY
Proposed munitions 1
Proposed total No. of rounds
Proposed number of explosive
rounds having an impact on
the water
Small Arms Rounds Excluding .50 cal ......................................
.50 Cal .......................................................................................
Large Arms Rounds—Live ........................................................
Large Arms Rounds—Inert .......................................................
Rockets—Live ...........................................................................
525,610 ...................................
568,515 ...................................
5,000 .......................................
117,051 ...................................
48 ............................................
20 ............................................
876 ..........................................
0 ..............................................
4,199 .......................................
4,496 .......................................
1,225,815 ................................
N/A ..........................................
N/A ..........................................
40mm HE: 5,000 ....................
N/A ..........................................
2.75’’ Rocket: 48 ....................
5’’ Rocket: 20 .........................
N/A ..........................................
G911 Grenade: N/A ...............
N/A ..........................................
N/A ..........................................
.................................................
Rockets—Inert ...........................................................................
Bombs and Grenades—Live .....................................................
Bombs and Grenades—Inert ....................................................
Pyrotechnics ..............................................................................
Total ...................................................................................
1 Munitions
Proposed munitions 1
Small Arms Rounds Excluding .50 Cal .........................
.50 Cal ..................................
Large Arms Rounds .............
Rockets .................................
Bombs and Grenades ..........
Pyrotechnics .........................
Total ...............................
The specified activity has the
potential to affect only one marine
mammal species under our jurisdiction:
the bottlenose dolphin. We refer the
public to Waring et al. (2011) for general
610,957 information on this species which is
366,775
240,334 presented below this section. The
5,592 publication is available at https://
22,114 www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/
8,912 ao2011.pdf. We present a summary of
information on the species below this
1,254,684 section.
Proposed total
No. of rounds
1 Munitions
may be expended from aircraft
or small boats.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
N/A.
N/A.
0.1199.
N/A.
4.8
15.0.
N/A.
0.5.
N/A.
N/A.
N/A.
may be expended from aircraft or small boats.
are oceanic in distribution and do not
TABLE 5—AMOUNT OF INERT MUNITIONS THAT WOULD BE EXPENDED venture into the shallow, brackish
waters of southern Pamlico Sound.
AT BT–11
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
Forty marine mammal species occur
within the nearshore and offshore
waters of North Carolina; however, the
majority of these species are solely
oceanic in distribution. Only one
marine mammal species, the bottlenose
dolphin, has been repeatedly sighted in
Pamlico Sound, while an additional
species, the endangered West Indian
manatee (Trichechus manatus), has
been sighted rarely (Lefebvre et al, 2001;
DoN 2003). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service oversees management of the
manatee; therefore, we would not
include a proposed authorization to
harass manatees and we will not discuss
this species further in this notice.
No sightings of the endangered North
Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena
glacialis) or other large whales have
been observed within Pamlico Sound or
in vicinity of the bombing targets
(Kenney, 2006). No suitable habitat
exists for these species in the shallow
Pamlico Sound or bombing target
vicinity; therefore, whales would not be
affected by the specified activities.
Thus, we will not discuss them further
in this notice. Other dolphins, such as
Atlantic spotted (Stenella frontalis) and
common dolphins (Delphinus delphis),
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Net explosive
weight (lb)
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Bottlenose Dolphin
California sea lions are not listed as
threatened or endangered under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.), however, they are
categorized as depleted (and thus
strategic) under the MMPA.
Four out of the seven designated
coastal stocks for bottlenose dolphins
may occur in North Carolina waters at
some part of the year: the Northern
Migratory stock (NM; winter); the
Southern Migratory stock (SM; winter);
the Northern North Carolina Estuarine
stock (NNCE; resident, year round); and
the more recently identified Southern
North Carolina Estuarine stock (SNCE;
resident, year round).
Dolphins encountered at the BTs
likely belong to the NNCE and SNCE
stock; however, this may not always be
the case. NMFS’ 2011 stock assessment
report provides further detail on stock
delineation.
NMFS provides abundance estimates
for the four aforementioned migratory
and resident coastal stocks in its 2011
stock assessment report. The best
available abundance estimate for the
NNCE stock is the combined abundance
from estuarine (Read et al., 2003) and
coastal (aerial survey data dating from
2002) waters. This combined estimate is
1,387 (Waring et al., 2011). Similarly,
the best available abundance estimate
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
for the SNCE stock is the combined
abundance from estuarine and coastal
waters. This combined estimate is 2,454
(Waring et al., 2011). The best
abundance estimate for the NM stock,
resulting from 2002 aerial surveys, is
9,604 (Waring et al., 2011). Using the
same information, the resulting best
abundance estimate for the SM stock is
12,482 (Waring et al., 2011).
From July 2004 through April 2006,
the Services Southeast Fisheries Science
Center conducted 41 aerial surveys to
document the seasonal distribution and
estimated density of sea turtles and
dolphins within Core Sound and
portions of Pamlico Sound, and coastal
waters extending one mile offshore
(Goodman et al, 2007). Pamlico Sound
was divided into two survey areas:
western (encompassing BT–9 and BT–
11) and eastern (including Core Sound
and the eastern portion of restricted air
space R–5306). In total, 281 dolphins
were sighted in the western range. To
account for animals likely missed
during sightings (i.e., those below the
surface), Goodman et al. (2007) estimate
that, in reality, 415 dolphins were
present. Densities for bottlenose
dolphins in the western part of Pamlico
Sound were calculated to be 0.0272 per
square kilometer (km2) in winter and
0.2158 per km2 in autumn. Dolphins
were sighted throughout the entire range
when mean sea surface temperature was
7.60° C to 30.82° C (45.6 to 87.5 °F),
with fewer dolphins sighted as water
temperatures increased. Like in Mayer
(2003), dolphins were found in higher
numbers around BT–11, a range where
no live firing occurs.
In 2000, Duke University Marine Lab
(DUML), conducted a boat-based markrecapture survey throughout the
estuaries, bays and sounds of North
Carolina (Read et al., 2003). This
summer survey yielded a dolphin
density of 0.183/km2 (0.071 mi2) based
on an estimate of 919 dolphins for the
northern inshore waters divided by an
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
19230
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
estimated 5,015 km2 (1,936 mi2) survey
area. Additionally, from July 2002–June
2003, the USMC supported DUML to
conduct dolphin surveys specifically in
and around BT–9 and BT–11. During
these surveys, one sighting in the
restricted area surrounding BT–9 and
two sightings in proximity to BT–11
were observed, as well as seven
sightings in waters adjacent to the BTs.
In total, 276 bottlenose dolphins were
sighted ranging in group size from two
to 70 animals with mean dolphin
density in BT–11 more than twice as
large as the density of any of the other
areas; however, the daily densities were
not significantly different (Maher, 2003).
Estimated dolphin density at BT–9 and
BT–11 based on these surveys were
calculated to be 0.11 dolphins/km2, and
1.23 dolphins/km2, respectively, based
on boat surveys conducted from July
2002 through June 2003 (excluding
April, May, Sept. and Jan.). However,
the Marine Corps choose to estimate
take of dolphins based on the higher
density reported from the summer 2000
surveys (0.183/km2). Although the aerial
surveys were conducted year round and
therefore provide for seasonal density
estimates, the average year-round
density from the aerial surveys is
0.0936, lower than the 0.183/km2
density chosen to calculate take for
purposes of this MMPA authorization.
Additionally, Goodman et al. (2007)
acknowledged that boat based density
estimates may be more accurate than the
uncorrected estimates derived from the
aerial surveys.
In Pamlico Sound, bottlenose
dolphins concentrate in shallow water
habitats along shorelines, and few, if
any, individuals are present in the
central portions of the sounds (Gannon,
2003; Read et al., 2003a, 2003b). The
dolphins utilize shallow habitats, such
as tributary creeks and the edges of the
Neuse River, where the bottom depth is
less than 3.5 m (Gannon, 2003). Finescale distribution of dolphins seems to
relate to the presence of topography or
vertical structure, such as the steeplysloping bottom near the shore and
oyster reefs, which may be used to
facilitate prey capture (Gannon, 2003).
Results of a passive acoustic monitoring
effort conducted from 2006–2007 by
Duke University researchers validated
this information. Vocalizations of
dolphins in the BT–11 vicinity were
higher in August and September than
vocalization detection at BT–9, an open
water area (Read et al., 2007).
Additionally, detected vocalizations of
dolphins were more frequent at night for
the BT–9 area and during early morning
hours at BT–11.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Unlike migrating whales which
display strong temporal foraging and
mating/birthing periods, many
bottlenose dolphins in Pamlico Sound
are residents and mate year round.
However, dolphins in the southeast U.S.
do display some reproductive
seasonality. Based on neonate stranding
records, sighting data, and births by
known females, the populations of
dolphins that frequent the North
Carolina estuarine waters have calving
peaks in spring but calving continues
throughout the summer and is followed
by a smaller number of fall births
(Thayer et al., 2003).
Bottlenose dolphins can typically
hear within a broad frequency range of
0.04 to 160 kiloHertz (kHz) (Au, 1993;
Turl, 1993). Electrophysiological
experiments suggest that the bottlenose
dolphin brain has a dual analysis
system: one specialized for ultrasonic
clicks and another for lower-frequency
sounds, such as whistles (Ridgway,
2000). Scientists have reported a range
of highest sensitivity between 25 and 70
kHz, with peaks in sensitivity at 25 and
50 kHz (Nachtigall et al., 2000). Recent
research on the same individuals
indicates that auditory thresholds
obtained by electrophysiological
methods correlate well with those
obtained in behavior studies, except at
some lower (10 kHz) and higher (80 and
100 kHz) frequencies (Finneran and
Houser, 2006).
Sounds emitted by bottlenose
dolphins have been classified into two
broad categories: pulsed sounds
(including clicks and burst-pulses) and
narrow-band continuous sounds
(whistles), which usually are frequency
modulated. Clicks have a dominant
frequency range of 110 to 130 kHz and
a source level of 218 to 228 decibels
(dB) re: 1 mPa (peak-to-peak) (Au, 1993)
and 3.4 to 14.5 kHz at 125 to 173 dB re
1 mPa (peak-to-peak) (Ketten, 1998).
Whistles are primarily associated with
communication and can serve to
identify specific individuals (i.e.,
signature whistles) (Caldwell and
Caldwell, 1965; Janik et al., 2006). Up to
52 percent of whistles produced by
bottlenose dolphin groups with mothercalf pairs can be classified as signature
whistles (Cook et al., 2004). Sound
production is also influenced by group
type (single or multiple individuals),
habitat, and behavior (Nowacek, 2005).
Bray calls (low-frequency vocalizations;
majority of energy below 4 kHz), for
example, are used when capturing fish,
specifically sea trout (Salmo trutta) and
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), in some
regions (i.e., Moray Firth, Scotland)
(Janik, 2000). Additionally, whistle
production has been observed to
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
increase while feeding (Acevedo´
Gutierrez and Stienessen, 2004; Cook et
al., 2004).
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
As mentioned previously, with
respect to military readiness activities,
Section 3(18)(B) of the MMPA defines
‘‘harassment’’ as: (i) Any act that injures
or has the significant potential to injure
a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild [Level A Harassment];
or (ii) any act that disturbs or is likely
to disturb a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of natural behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering, to a point where
such behavioral patterns are abandoned
or significantly altered [Level B
Harassment].
The Marine Corps concluded that
Level B harassment to marine mammals
may occur incidental to munitions firing
noise and pressure at the bombing
targets. These military readiness
activities would result in increased
noise levels, explosions, and munitions
debris within bottlenose dolphin
habitat. In addition, we also considered
the potential for harassment from vessel
and aircraft operation. Our analysis of
potential impacts from these factors,
including consideration of the Marine
Corps’ analysis in its application, is
outlined in the following sections.
Anthropogenic Sound
Marine mammals respond to various
types of anthropogenic sounds
introduced in the ocean environment.
Responses are highly variable and
depend on a suite of internal and
external factors which in turn results in
varying degrees of significance (NRC,
2003; Southall et al., 2007). Internal
factors include: (1) Individual hearing
sensitivity, activity pattern, and
motivational and behavioral state (e.g.,
feeding, traveling) at the time it receives
the stimulus; (2) past exposure of the
animal to the noise, which may lead to
habituation or sensitization; (3)
individual noise tolerance; and (4)
demographic factors such as age, sex,
and presence of dependent offspring.
External factors include: (1) nonacoustic characteristics of the sound
source (e.g., if it is moving or
stationary); (2) environmental variables
(e.g., substrate) which influence sound
transmission; and (3) habitat
characteristics and location (e.g., open
ocean vs. confined area). To determine
whether an animal perceives the sound,
the received level, frequency, and
duration of the sound are compared to
ambient noise levels and the species’
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
hearing sensitivity range. That is, if the
frequency of an introduced sound is
outside of the species’ frequency
hearing range, it cannot be heard.
Similarly, if the frequency is on the
upper or lower end of the species
hearing range, the sound must be louder
in order to be heard.
Marine mammal responses to
anthropogenic noise are typically subtle
and can include visible and acoustic
reactions such as avoidance, altered
dive patterns and cessation of preexposure activities and vocalization
reactions such as increasing or
decreasing call rates or shifting call
frequency. Responses can also be
unobservable, such as stress hormone
production and auditory trauma or
fatigue. It is not always known how
these behavioral and physiological
responses relate to significant effects
(e.g., long-term effects or individual/
population consequences); however,
individuals and populations can be
monitored to provide some insight into
the consequences of exposing marine
mammals to noise. For example,
Haviland-Howell et al. (2007) compared
sighting rates of bottlenose dolphins
within the Wilmington, NC stretch of
the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway
(ICW) on weekends, when recreational
vessel traffic was high, to weekdays,
when vessel traffic was relatively
minimal. The authors found that
dolphins were less often sighted in the
ICW during times of increased boat
traffic (i.e., on weekends) and theorized
that because vessel noise falls within
the frequencies of dolphin
communication whistles and primary
energy of most fish vocalizations, the
continuous vessel traffic along that
stretch of the ICW could result in social
and foraging impacts. However, the
extent to which these impacts affect
individual health and population
structure is unknown.
A full assessment of marine mammal
responses and disturbances when
exposed to anthropogenic sound can be
found in our proposed rulemaking for
the Navy Cherry Point Range Complex
(74 FR 11057, March 16, 2009). That
rulemaking was made final on June 15,
2009 (74 FR 28370). In summary, sound
exposure may result in physiological
impacts, stress responses, and
behavioral responses which could affect
proximate or ultimate life functions.
Proximate life history functions are the
functions that the animal is engaged in
at the time of acoustic exposure. The
ultimate life functions are those that
enable an animal to contribute to the
population (or stock, or species, etc.).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
I. Physiology-Hearing Threshold Shift
In mammals, high-intensity sound
may rupture the eardrum, damage the
small bones in the middle ear, or over
stimulate the electromechanical hair
cells that convert the fluid motions
caused by sound into neural impulses
that are sent to the brain. Lower level
exposures may cause a loss of hearing
sensitivity, termed a threshold shift (TS)
(Miller, 1974). Incidence of TS may be
either permanent, referred to as
permanent threshold shift (PTS), or
temporary, referred to as temporary
threshold shift (TTS). The amplitude,
duration, frequency, and temporal
pattern, and energy distribution of
sound exposure all affect the amount of
associated TS and the frequency range
in which it occurs. As amplitude and
duration of sound exposure increase,
generally, so does the amount of TS and
recovery time. Human non-impulsive
noise exposure guidelines are based on
exposures of equal energy (the same
SEL) producing equal amounts of
hearing impairment regardless of how
the sound energy is distributed in time
(NIOSH 1998). Until recently, previous
marine mammal TTS studies have also
generally supported this equal energy
relationship (Southall et al., 2007).
Three newer studies, two by Mooney et
al. (2009a, 2009b) on a single bottlenose
dolphin either exposed to playbacks of
Navy MFAS or octave-band noise (4–8
kHz) and one by Kastak et al. (2007) on
a single California sea lion exposed to
airborne octave-band noise (centered at
2.5 kHz), concluded that for all noise
exposure situations the equal energy
relationship may not be the best
indicator to predict TTS onset levels.
Generally, with sound exposures of
equal energy, those that were quieter
(lower sound pressure level [SPL]) with
longer duration were found to induce
TTS onset more than those of louder
(higher SPL) and shorter duration (more
similar to noise from AS Cherry Point
exercises). For intermittent sounds, less
TS will occur than from a continuous
exposure with the same energy (some
recovery will occur between exposures)
(Kryter et al., 1966; Ward, 1997).
Additionally, though TTS is temporary,
very prolonged exposure to sound
strong enough to elicit TTS, or shorterterm exposure to sound levels well
above the TTS threshold, can cause
PTS, at least in terrestrial mammals
(Kryter, 1985). However, these studies
highlight the inherent complexity of
predicting TTS onset in marine
mammals, as well as the importance of
considering exposure duration when
assessing potential impacts.
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19231
PTS consists of non-recoverable
physical damage to the sound receptors
in the ear, which can include total or
partial deafness, or an impaired ability
to hear sounds in specific frequency
ranges; PTS is considered Level A
harassment. TTS is recoverable and is
considered to result from temporary,
non-injurious impacts to hearing-related
tissues; TTS is considered Level B
harassment.
Permanent Threshold Shift
Auditory trauma represents direct
mechanical injury to hearing related
structures, including tympanic
membrane rupture, disarticulation of
the middle ear ossicles, and trauma to
the inner ear structures such as the
organ of Corti and the associated hair
cells. Auditory trauma is irreversible
and considered to be an injury that
could result in PTS. PTS results from
exposure to intense sounds that cause a
permanent loss of inner or outer
cochlear hair cells or exceed the elastic
limits of certain tissues and membranes
in the middle and inner ears and result
in changes in the chemical composition
of the inner ear fluids. In some cases,
there can be total or partial deafness
across all frequencies, whereas in other
cases, the animal has an impaired
ability to hear sounds in specific
frequency ranges. There is no empirical
data for onset of PTS in any marine
mammal, and therefore, PTS-onset must
be estimated from TTS-onset
measurements and from the rate of TTS
growth with increasing exposure levels
above the level eliciting TTS-onset. PTS
is presumed to be likely if the hearing
threshold is reduced by ≥ 40 dB (i.e., 40
dB of TTS). Relationships between TTS
and PTS thresholds have not been
studied in marine mammals, but are
assumed to be similar to those in
humans and other terrestrial mammals.
Temporary Threshold Shift
TTS is the mildest form of hearing
impairment that can occur during
exposure to a loud sound (Kryter, 1985).
Southall et al. (2007) indicate that
although PTS is a tissue injury, TTS is
not because the reduced hearing
sensitivity following exposure to intense
sound results primarily from fatigue, not
loss, of cochlear hair cells and
supporting structures and is reversible.
Accordingly, NMFS classifies TTS as
Level B Harassment, not Level A
Harassment (injury); however, NMFS
does not consider the onset of TTS to be
the lowest level at which Level B
Harassment may occur (see III. Behavior
section below this section).
Southall et al. (2007) considers a 6 dB
TTS (i.e., baseline hearing thresholds
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
19232
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
are elevated by 6 dB) sufficient to be
recognized as an unequivocal deviation
and thus a sufficient definition of TTS
onset. TTS in bottlenose dolphin
hearing have been experimentally
induced. For example, Finneran et al.
(2002) exposed a trained captive
bottlenose dolphin to a seismic
watergun simulator with a single
acoustic pulse. No TTS was observed in
the dolphin at the highest exposure
condition (peak: 207 kPa [30psi]; peakto-peak: 228 dB re: 1 microPa; SEL: 188
dB re 1 microPa2-s). Schludt et al.
(2000) demonstrated temporary shifts in
masked hearing thresholds in five
bottlenose dolphins occurring generally
between 192 and 201 dB rms (192 and
201 dB SEL) after exposure to intense,
non-pulse, 1–s tones at, 3kHz, 10kHz,
and 20 kHz. TTS onset occurred at mean
sound exposure level of 195 dB rms
(195 dB SEL). At 0.4 kHz, no subjects
exhibited threshold shifts after SPL
exposures of 193dB re: 1 microPa (192
dB re: 1 microPa2-s). In the same study,
at 75 kHz, one dolphin exhibited a TTS
after exposure at 182 dB SPL re: 1
microPa but not at higher exposure
levels. Another dolphin experienced no
threshold shift after exposure to
maximum SPL levels of 193 dB re: 1
microPa at the same frequency.
Frequencies of explosives used at MCAS
Cherry Point range from 1–25 kHz; the
range where dolphin TTS onset
occurred at 195 dB rms in the Schlundt
et al. (2000) study.
Preliminary research indicates that
TTS and recovery after noise exposure
are frequency dependent and that an
inverse relationship exists between
exposure time and sound pressure level
associated with exposure (Mooney et
al., 2005; Mooney, 2006). For example,
Nachtigall et al. (2003) measured TTS in
a bottlenose dolphin and found an
average 11 dB shift following a 30
minute net exposure to OBN at a 7.5
kHz center frequency (max SPL of 179
dB re: 1 microPa; SEL: 212–214 dB re:1
microPa2-s). No TTS was observed after
exposure to the same duration and
frequency noise with maximum SPLs of
165 and 171 dB re:1 microPa. After 50
minutes of exposure to the same 7.5 kHz
frequency OBN, Natchigall et al. (2004)
measured a 4–8 dB shift (max SPL:
160dB re 1microPa; SEL: 193–195 dB
re:1 microPa2-s). Finneran et al. (2005)
concluded that a sound exposure level
of 195 dB re 1 mPa2-s is a reasonable
threshold for the onset of TTS in
bottlenose dolphins exposed to midfrequency tones.
II. Stress Response
An acoustic source is considered a
potential stressor if, by its action on the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
animal, via auditory or non-auditory
means, it may produce a stress response
in the animal. Here, the stress response
will refer to an increase in energetic
expenditure that results from exposure
to the stressor and which is
predominantly characterized by either
the stimulation of the sympathetic
nervous system (SNS) or the
hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA)
axis (Reeder and Kramer, 2005). The
SNS response to a stressor is immediate
and acute and is characterized by the
release of the catecholamine
neurohormones norepinephrine and
epinephrine (i.e., adrenaline). These
hormones produce elevations in the
heart and respiration rate, increase
awareness, and increase the availability
of glucose and lipids for energy. The
HPA response is ultimately defined by
increases in the secretion of the
glucocorticoid steroid hormones,
predominantly cortisol in mammals.
The presence and magnitude of a stress
response in an animal depends on a
number of factors. These include the
animal’s life history stage (e.g., neonate,
juvenile, adult), the environmental
conditions, reproductive or
developmental state, and experience
with the stressor. Not only will these
factors be subject to individual
variation, but they will also vary within
an individual over time. The stress
response may or may not result in a
behavioral change, depending on the
characteristics of the exposed animal.
However, provided a stress response
occurs, we assume that some
contribution is made to the animal’s
allostatic load. Any immediate effect of
exposure that produces an injury is
assumed to also produce a stress
response and contribute to the allostatic
load. Allostasis is the ability of an
animal to maintain stability through
change by adjusting its physiology in
response to both predictable and
unpredictable events (McEwen and
Wingfield, 2003). If the acoustic source
does not produce tissue effects, is not
perceived by the animal, or does not
produce a stress response by any other
means, we assume that the exposure
does not contribute to the allostatic
load. Additionally, without a stress
response or auditory masking, it is
assumed that there can be no behavioral
change.
III. Behavior
Changes in marine mammal behavior
in response to anthropogenic noise may
include altered travel directions,
increased swimming speeds, changes in
dive, surfacing, respiration and feeding
patterns, and changes in vocalizations.
As described above, lower level
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
physiological stress responses could
also co-occur with altered behavior;
however, stress responses are more
difficult to detect and fewer data exist
relative to specific received levels of
sound.
Acoustic Masking
Marine mammals use acoustic signals
for a variety of purposes, which differ
among species, but include
communication between individuals,
navigation, foraging, reproduction, and
learning about their environment (Erbe
and Farmer, 2000; Tyack, 2000).
Masking, or auditory interference,
generally occurs when sounds in the
environment are louder than, and of a
similar frequency as, auditory signals an
animal is trying to receive. Masking is
a phenomenon that affects animals that
are trying to receive acoustic
information about their environment,
including sounds from other members
of their species, predators, prey, and
sounds that allow them to orient in their
environment. Masking these acoustic
signals can disturb the behavior of
individual animals, groups of animals,
or entire populations.
Southall et al. (2007) defines auditory
masking as the partial or complete
reduction in the audibility of signals
due to the presence of interfering noise
with the degree of masking depending
on the spectral, temporal, and spatial
relationships between signals and
masking noise, as well as the respective
received levels. Masking of sender
communication space can be considered
as the amount of change in a sender’s
communication space caused by the
presence of other sounds, relative to a
pre-industrial ambient noise condition
(Clark et al., 2009). Unlike auditory
fatigue, which always results in a stress
response because the sensory tissues are
being stimulated beyond their normal
physiological range, masking may or
may not result in a stress response,
depending on the degree and duration
of the masking effect. Masking may also
result in a unique circumstance where
an animal’s ability to detect other
sounds is compromised without the
animal’s knowledge. This could
conceivably result in sensory
impairment and subsequent behavior
change; in this case, the change in
behavior is the lack of a response that
would normally be made if sensory
impairment did not occur. For this
reason, masking also may lead directly
to behavior change without first causing
a stress response. Projecting noise into
the marine environment which causes
acoustic masking is considered Level B
harassment as it can disrupt natural
behavioral patterns by interrupting or
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
limiting the marine mammal’s receipt or
transmittal of important information or
environmental cues. To compensate for
masking, marine mammals, including
bottlenose dolphins, are known to
increase their levels of vocalization as a
function of background noise by
increasing call repetition and
amplitude, shifting calls higher
frequencies, and/or changing the
structure of call content (Lesage et al.,
1999; Scheifele et al., 2005; McIwem,
2006).
While it may occur temporarily, we
do not expect auditory masking to result
in detrimental impacts to an
individual’s or population’s survival,
fitness, or reproductive success.
Dolphins are not confined to the BT
ranges; allowing for movement out of
area to avoid masking impacts. The
Marine Corps would also conduct visual
sweeps of the area before any training
exercise and implement training delay
mitigation measures if a dolphin is
sighted within designated zones (see
Proposed Mitigation Measures section).
As discussed previously, the Marine
Corps has been working with DUML to
collect baseline information on dolphins
in Pamlico Sound, specifically dolphin
abundance and habitat use around the
BTs.
Assessment of Marine Mammal Impacts
from Explosive Ordnances
MCAS Cherry Point plans to use five
types of explosive sources during its
training exercises: 2.75-inch Rocket
High Explosives, 5-inch Rocket High
Explosives, 30 mm High Explosives, 40
mm High Explosives, and G911
grenades. The underwater explosions
from these weapons would send a shock
wave and blast noise through the water,
release gaseous by-products, create an
oscillating bubble, and cause a plume of
water to shoot up from the water
surface. The shock wave and blast noise
are of most concern to marine animals.
In general, potential impacts from
explosive detonations can range from
brief effects (such as short term
behavioral disturbance), tactile
perception, physical discomfort, slight
injury of the internal organs and the
auditory system, to death of the animal
(Yelverton et al., 1973; O’Keeffe and
Young, 1984; DoN, 2001).
Explosives produce significant
acoustic energy across several frequency
decades of bandwidth (i.e., broadband).
Propagation loss is sufficiently sensitive
to frequency as to require model
estimates at several frequencies over
such a wide band. The effects of an
underwater explosion on a marine
mammal depend on many factors,
including the size, type, and depth of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
both the animal and the explosive
charge; the depth of the water column;
and the standoff distance between the
charge and the animal, as well as the
sound propagation properties of the
environment. The net explosive weight
(or NEW) of an explosive is the weight
of TNT required to produce an
equivalent explosive power. The
detonation depth of an explosive is
particularly important due to a
propagation effect known as surfaceimage interference. For sources located
near the sea surface, a distinct
interference pattern arises from the
coherent sum of the two paths that
differ only by a single reflection from
the pressure-release surface. As the
source depth and/or the source
frequency decreases, these two paths
increasingly, destructively interfere
with each other, reaching total
cancellation at the surface (barring
surface-reflection scattering loss).
Marine Corps conservatively estimates
that all explosives would detonate at a
1.2 m (3.9 ft) water depth. This is the
worst case scenario as the purpose of
training is to hit the target, resulting in
an in-air explosion.
The firing sequence for some of the
munitions consists of a number of rapid
bursts, often lasting a second or less.
The maximum firing time is 10–15
second bursts. Due to the tight spacing
in time, each burst can be treated as a
single detonation. For the energy
metrics, the impact area of a burst is
computed using a source energy
spectrum that is the source spectrum for
a single detonation scaled by the
number of rounds in a burst. For the
pressure metrics, the impact area for a
burst is the same as the impact area of
a single round. For all metrics, the
cumulative impact area of an event
consisting of a certain number of bursts
is merely the product of the impact area
of a single burst and the number of
bursts, as would be the case if the bursts
are sufficiently spaced in time or
location as to insure that each burst is
affecting a different set of marine
wildlife.
Physical damage of tissues resulting
from a shock wave (from an explosive
detonation) is classified as an injury.
Blast effects are greatest at the gas-liquid
interface (Landsberg, 2000) and gas
containing organs, particularly the lungs
and gastrointestinal tract, are especially
susceptible to damage (Goertner, 1982;
Hill 1978; Yelverton et al., 1973). Nasal
sacs, larynx, pharynx, trachea, and
lungs may be damaged by compression/
expansion caused by the oscillations of
the blast gas bubble (Reidenberg and
Laitman, 2003). Severe damage (from
the shock wave) to the ears can include
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19233
tympanic membrane rupture, fracture of
the ossicles, damage to the cochlea,
hemorrhage, and cerebrospinal fluid
leakage into the middle ear.
Non-lethal injury includes slight
injury to internal organs and the
auditory system; however, delayed
lethality can be a result of individual or
cumulative sublethal injuries (DoN,
2001). Immediate lethal injury would be
a result of massive combined trauma to
internal organs as a direct result of
proximity to the point of detonation
(DoN, 2001). Exposure to distance
explosions could result only in
behavioral changes. Masked underwater
hearing thresholds in two bottlenose
dolphins and one beluga whale have
been measured before and after
exposure to impulsive underwater
sounds with waveforms resembling
distant signatures of underwater
explosions (Finneran et al., 2000). The
authors found no temporary shifts in
masked-hearing thresholds, defined as a
6–dB or larger increase in threshold
over pre-exposure levels, had been
observed at the highest impulse level
generated (500 kg at 1.7 km, peak
pressure 70 kPa); however, disruptions
of the animals’ trained behaviors began
to occur at exposures corresponding to
5 kg at 9.3 km and 5 kg at 1.5 km for
the dolphins and 500 kg at 1.9 km for
the beluga whale.
Generally, the higher the level of
impulse and pressure level exposure,
the more severe the impact to an
individual. While, in general, dolphins
could sustain injury or mortality if
within very close proximity to in-water
explosion, monitoring and mitigation
measures employed by the Marine
Corps before and during training
exercises, as would be required under
any Authorization issued, are designed
to avoid any firing if a marine mammal
is sighted within designated BT zones
(see Proposed Mitigation and
Monitoring section). No marine
mammal injury or death has been
attributed to the specified activities
described in the application. As such,
and due to implementation of the
proposed mitigation and monitoring
measures, bottlenose dolphin injury,
serious injury or mortality is not
anticipated nor would any be
authorized.
Inert Ordnances
The potential risk to marine mammals
from non-explosive ordnance entails
two possible sources of impacts:
elevated sound levels or the ordnance
physically hitting an animal. The latter
is discussed below in the Munition
Presence section. The USMC provided
information that the noise fields
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
19234
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
generated in water by the firing of nonexplosive ordnance indicate that the
energy radiated is about 1 to 2 percent
of the total kinetic energy of the impact.
This energy level (and likely peak
pressure levels) is well below the TTSenergy threshold, even at 1-m from the
impact and is not expected to be audible
to marine mammals. As such, the noise
generated by the in-water impact of nonexplosive ordnance will not result in
take of marine mammals.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Training Debris
In addition to behavioral and
physiological impacts from live fire and
ammunition testing, we have
preliminarily analyzed impacts from
presence of munition debris in the
water, as described in the Marine Corps’
application and 2009 EA. These impacts
include falling debris, ingestion of
expended ordnance, and entanglement
in parachute debris.
Ingestion of marine debris by marine
mammals can cause digestive tract
blockages or damage the digestive
system (Gorzelany, 1998; Stamper et al.,
2006). Debris could be either the
expended ordnance or non-munition
related products such as chaff and self
protection flares. Expended ordnance
would be small and sink to the bottom.
Chaff is composed of either aluminum
foil or aluminum-coated glass fibers
designed to act as a visual smoke screen;
hiding the aircraft from enemy radar.
Chaff also serves as a decoy for radar
detection, allowing aircraft to maneuver
or egress from the area. The foil type
currently used is no longer
manufactured, although it remains in
the inventory and is used primarily by
B–52 bombers. Both types of chaff are
cut into dipoles ranging in length from
0.3 to over 2.0 inches. The aluminum
foil dipoles are 0.45 mils (0.00045
inches) thick and 6 to 8 mils wide. The
glass fiber dipoles are generally 1 mil
(25.4 microns) in diameter, including
the aluminum coating. Chaff is packed
into about 4-ounce bundles. The major
components of chaff are silica,
aluminum, and stearic acid; all
naturally prevalent in the environment.
Based on the dispersion
characteristics of chaff, concentrations
around the BTs would be low. For
example, Hullar et al. (1999) calculated
that a 4.97-mile by 7.46-mile area (37.1
km2) would be affected by deployment
of a single cartridge containing 150
grams of chaff; however, concentration
would only be about 5.4 grams per
square nautical mile. This corresponds
to fewer than 179,000 fibers per square
nautical mile or fewer than 0.005 fibers
per square foot.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Self-protection flares are deployed to
mislead or confuse heat-sensitive or
heat-seeking anti-aircraft systems. The
flares are magnesium pellets that, when
ignited, burn for a short period of time
(less than 10 seconds) at 2,000 degrees
Fahrenheit. Air-deployed LUU–2 highintensity illumination flares are used to
illuminate targets, enhancing a pilot’s
ability to see targets while using Night
Vision Goggles. The LUU–2B Flare has
a light output rating of 1.8 x 10(6)
candlepower and at 1,000 feet altitude
illuminates a circle on the ground of 500
meters. The LUU–2 is housed in a pod
or canister and is deployed by ejection.
The mechanism has a timer on it that
deploys the parachute and ignites the
flare candle. The flare candle burns
magnesium at high temperature,
emitting an intense bright white light.
The LUU–2 has a burn time of
approximately 5 minutes while
suspended from a parachute. The
pyrotechnic candle consumes the flare
housing, reducing flare weight, which in
turn slows the rate of fall during the last
2 minutes of burn time. At candle
burnout an explosive bolt is fired,
releasing one parachute support cable,
which causes the parachute to collapse.
Ingestion of debris by dolphins is not
likely, as dolphins typically eat fish and
other moving prey items. We solicited
information on evidence of debris
ingestion from two marine mammal
veterinarians who have performed many
necropsies on the protected species of
North Carolina’s waters. In their
experience, no necropsies of bottlenose
dolphins have revealed evidence of
munition, parachute, or chaff ingestion
(pers. comm., Drs. C. Harms and D.
Rostein, November 14, 2009). However,
it was noted evidence of chaff ingestion
would be difficult to detect. In the
chance that dolphins do ingest chaff, the
filaments are so fine they would likely
pass through the digestive system
without complication. However, if the
chaff is durable enough, it might act as
a linear foreign body. In such case, the
intestines bunch up on the line
restricting movement of the line
resulting in an obstruction. The
peristalsis on an immovable thin line
can cause intestinal lacerations and
perforations (pers. comm., C. Harms,
November 14, 2009). This is a wellknown complication in cats when they
ingest thread and which occurs
occasionally with sea turtles ingesting
fishing line. The longevity of chaff
filaments, based upon dispersion rates,
is unclear. Chaff exposed to synthetic
seawater and aqueous environments in
the pH range of 4–10 exhibited varying
levels of degradation suggesting a short
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
lifespan for the outer aluminum coating
(Farrell and Siciliano, 1998). The
underlying filament is a flexible silica
core and composed of primarily silica
dioxide. While no studies have been
conducted to evaluate the effects of
chaff ingestion on marine mammals, the
effects are expected to be negligible
based upon chaff concentration in the
environment, size of fibers, and
available toxicity data on fiberglass and
aluminum. Given that the size of chaff
fibers are no more than 2 inches long,
tidal flushing reduces concentration in
the environment, and chaff degradation
rate, the chance of chaff ingestions is
unlikely; however, if swallowed,
impacts would be negligible.
Given that there is no evidence that
dolphins ingest military debris;
dolphins in the Sound forage on moving
prey suspended in the water column
while expended munition would sink;
the property and dispersion
characteristics of chaff make potential
for ingestion discountable; and that
Pamlico Sound is a tidal body of water
with continuing flushing, we have
preliminarily determined that the
presence of training debris would not
have an effect on dolphins in Pamlico
Sound.
Although sometimes large, expended
parachutes (e.g., those from the flares)
are flimsy and structurally simple.
Thus, we have preliminarily determined
that the probability of entanglement
with a dolphin is low. There are no
known reports of live or stranded
dolphins entangled in parachute gear;
fishing gear is usually the culprit of
reported entanglements. The Service’s
Marine Mammal Stranding Network
(Network) has established protocol for
reporting marine mammals in peril.
Should any injured, stranded or
entangled marine mammal be observed
by USMC personnel during training
exercises, the sighting would be
reported to the Network within 24 hours
of the observation.
Vessel and Aircraft Presence
The marine mammals most vulnerable
to vessel strikes are slow-moving and/or
spend extended periods of time at the
surface in order to restore oxygen levels
within their tissues after deep dives
(e.g., right whales, fin whales
(Balaenoptera physalus), and sperm
whales (Physeter macrocephalus)).
Smaller marine mammals such as
bottlenose dolphins (the only marine
mammal that would be encountered at
the BTs) are agile and move more
quickly through the water, making them
less susceptible to ship strikes. We are
not aware of any vessel strikes of
bottlenose dolphins in Pamlico Sound
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
during training operations. Therefore,
we do not anticipate that Marine Corps
vessels engaged in the specified activity
would strike any marine mammals and
no take from ship strike would be
authorized in the proposed
Authorization.
Behaviorally, marine mammals may
or may not respond to the operation of
vessels and associated noise. Responses
to vessels vary widely among marine
mammals in general, but also among
different species of small cetaceans.
Responses may include attraction to the
vessel (Richardson et al., 1995); altering
travel patterns to avoid vessels
(Constantine, 2001; Nowacek et al.,
2001; Lusseau, 2003, 2006); relocating to
other areas (Allen and Read, 2000);
cessation of feeding, resting, and social
interaction (Baker et al., 1983; Bauer
and Herman, 1986; Hall, 1982; Krieger
and Wing, 1984; Lusseau, 2003;
Constantine et al., 2004); abandoning
feeding, resting, and nursing areas
(Jurasz and Jurasz 1979; Dean et al.,
1985; Glockner-Ferrari and Ferrari 1985,
1990; Lusseau, 2005; Norris et al., 1985;
Salden, 1988; Forest, 2001; Morton and
Symonds, 2002; Courbis, 2004; Bejder,
2006); stress (Romano et al., 2004); and
changes in acoustic behavior (Van Parijs
and Corkeron, 2001). However, in some
studies marine mammals display no
reaction to vessels (Watkins, 1986;
Nowacek et al., 2003) and many
odontocetes show considerable
tolerance to vessel traffic (Richardson et
al., 1995). Dolphins may actually reduce
the energetic cost of traveling by riding
the bow or stern waves of vessels
(Williams et al., 1992; Richardson et al.,
1995).
Dolphins within Pamlico Sound are
continually exposed to recreational,
commercial, and military vessels.
Richardson et al. (1995) addresses in
detail three responses that marine
mammals may experience when
exposed to anthropogenic activities:
tolerance; habituation; and
sensitization. More recent publications
provide variations on these themes
rather than new data (NRC, 2003).
Marine mammals are often seen in
regions with much human activity; thus,
certain individuals or populations
exhibit some tolerance of anthropogenic
noise and other stimuli. Animals will
tolerate a stimulus they might otherwise
avoid if the benefits in terms of feeding,
mating, migrating to traditional habitats,
or other factors outweigh the negative
aspects of the stimulus (NRC, 2003). In
many cases, tolerance develops as a
result of habituation. The NRC (2003)
defines habituation as a gradual waning
of behavioral responsiveness over time
as animals learn that a repeated or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
ongoing stimulus lacks significant
consequences for the animals.
Contrarily, sensitization occurs when an
animal links a stimulus with some
degree of negative consequence and as
a result increases responsiveness to that
human activity over time (Richardson et
al., 1995). For example, seals and
whales are known to avoid previously
encountered vessels involved in
subsistence hunts (Walker, 1949; Ash,
1962; Terhune, 1985) and bottlenose
dolphins that had previously been
captured and released from a 7.3 m boat
involved in health studies were
documented to flee when that boat
approached closer than 400 m, whereas
dolphins that had not been involved in
the capture did not display signs of
avoidance of the vessel (Irvine et al.,
1981). Because dolphins in Pamlico
Sound are continually exposed to vessel
traffic that does not present immediate
danger to them, it is likely animals are
both tolerant and habituated to vessels.
The specified activities also involve
aircraft, which marine mammals are
known to react (Richardson et al., 1995).
Aircraft produce noise at frequencies
that are well within the frequency range
of cetacean hearing and also produce
visual signals such as the aircraft itself
and its shadow (Richardson et al., 1995,
¨
Richardson & Wursig, 1997). A major
difference between aircraft noise and
noise caused by other anthropogenic
sources is that the sound is generated in
the air, transmitted through the water
surface and then propagates underwater
to the receiver, diminishing the received
levels to significantly below what is
heard above the water’s surface. Sound
transmission from air to water is greatest
in a sound cone 26 degrees directly
under the aircraft.
Reactions of odontocetes to aircraft
have been reported less often than those
of pinnipeds. Responses to aircraft
include diving, slapping the water with
pectoral fins or tail fluke, or swimming
away from the track of the aircraft
(Richardson et al., 1995). The nature
and degree of the response, or the lack
thereof, are dependent upon nature of
the flight (e.g., type of aircraft, altitude,
straight vs. circular flight pattern).
¨
Wursig et al. (1998) assessed the
responses of cetaceans to aerial surveys
in the northcentral and western Gulf of
Mexico using a DeHavilland Twin Otter
fixed-wing airplane. The plane flew at
an altitude of 229 m at 204 km/hr. A
minimum of 305 m straight line
distance from the cetaceans was
maintained. Water depth was 100–
1000m. Bottlenose dolphins most
commonly responded by diving (48
percent), while 14 percent responded by
moving away. Other species (e.g., beluga
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19235
whale (Delphinapterus leucas), sperm
whale) show considerable variation in
reactions to aircraft but diving or
swimming away from the aircraft are the
most common reactions to low flights
(less than 500 m).
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
Detonations of live ordnance would
result in temporary modification to
water properties. As described above, an
underwater explosion from these
weapon would send a shock wave and
blast noise through the water, release
gaseous by-products, create an
oscillating bubble, and cause a plume of
water to shoot up from the water
surface. However, these would be
temporary and not expected to last more
than a few seconds. Because dolphins
are not expected to be in the area during
live firing, due to monitoring and
mitigation measure implementation,
they would not be subject to any short
term habitat alterations.
Similarly, no long term impacts with
regard to hazardous constituents are
expected to occur. MCAS Cherry Point
has an active Range Environmental
Vulnerability Assessment (REVA)
program in place to monitor impacts to
habitat from its activities. One goal of
REVA is to determine the horizontal and
vertical concentration profiles of heavy
metals, explosives constituents,
perchlorate nutrients, and dissolved
salts in the sediment and seawater
surrounding BT–9 and BT–11. The
preliminary results of the sampling
indicate that explosive constituents
(e.g., trinitrotoluene (TNT),
cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (RDX),
and hexahydro-trinitro-triazine (HMX),
as described in Hazardous Constituents
[Subchapter 3.2.7.2] of the MCAS
Cherry Point Range Operations EA, were
not detected in any sediment or water
sample surrounding the BTs. Metals
were not present above toxicity
screening values. Perchlorate was
detected in a few sediment samples
above the detection limit (0.21 ppm),
but below the reporting limit (0.6 ppm).
The ongoing REVA would continue to
evaluate potential munitions constituent
migration from operational range areas
to off-range areas and MCAS Cherry
Point.
While it is anticipated that the
specified activity may result in marine
mammals avoiding certain areas due to
temporary ensonification, this impact to
habitat and prey resources is temporary
and reversible and considered in further
detail earlier in this document, as
behavioral modification. The main
impact associated with the proposed
activity would be temporarily elevated
noise levels and the associated direct
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
19236
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
effects on marine mammals, previously
discussed in this notice.
Summary of Previous Monitoring
The Marine Corps complied with the
mitigation and monitoring required
under the previous authorizations
(2010–2012). In accordance with the
2010–11 IHA, USMC submitted a final
monitoring report, which described the
activities conducted and observations
made. USMC did not record
observations of any marine mammals
during training exercises. The only
recorded observations—which were of
bottlenose dolphins—were on two
occasions by maintenance vessels
engaged in target maintenance. No
marine mammals were observed during
range sweeps, air to ground activities,
surface to surface activities (small
boats), or ad hoc via range cameras.
Table 6 details the number of sorties
conducted, by air and water, at each
target. The number of sorties conducted
does not relate to the total amount of
munitions expended, as the training
requirements for the specific military
unit conducting the sortie determine the
munitions loading for the air platform or
watercraft during each sortie. In
addition, munitions expenditures may
be determined by the loading
specifications of the specific aircraft and
vessels used in the training exercise.
TABLE 6—SORTIES CONDUCTED AT
BT–9 AND BT–11
Mission type
BT–9
BT–11
Air-to-surface ...............
Surface-to-surface
(water-to-water) .......
1,554
4,251
223
105
Total .........................
1,777
The total amount of ordnance
expended at BT–9 and BT–11 under the
2010–11 IHA was 878,625 and 693,612
respectively (Table 7). These amounts
represent 98 and 62 percent of the
estimated annual maximum ordnance
expenditures. The amounts of ordnance
expended at the BTs account for all use
of the targets. There are five types of
explosive sources used at BT–9: 2.75-inc
Rocket High Explosives, 5-inch Rocket
High Explosives, 30 mm High
Explosives, 40 mm High Explosives, and
G911 grenades. No explosive munitions
are used at BT–11. Based on this
information, the Marine Corps did not
exceed the authorized level of take.
4,356
TABLE 7—ORDNANCE USAGE AT BT–9
Total rounds
Percentage of maximum
Munitions expenditures
BT–9
BT–11
BT–9
BT–11
Small arms, excluding .50 cal .................................................
.50 cal .....................................................................................
Large arms (Live) ....................................................................
Large arms (Inert) ...................................................................
Rockets (Live) .........................................................................
Rockets (Inert) ........................................................................
Bombs/Grenades (Live) ..........................................................
Bombs/Grenades (Inert) .........................................................
Pyrotechnics ............................................................................
355,718 ..................................
410,815 ..................................
480 (all 40 mm) ......................
108,811 ..................................
48 (all 2.75 in) ........................
185 .........................................
0 .............................................
2,086 ......................................
482 .........................................
363,899
246,255
N/A
79,531
N/A
2,018
N/A
1,697
212
68
160
4
117
20
26
0
51
11
72
75
N/A
33
N/A
44
N/A
8
2
Total .................................................................................
878,625 ..................................
693,612
98
62
The Marine Corps will submit a
monitoring report for the 2012 training
season which expired on December 31,
2012, to us no later than March 31,
2013.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization under section 101(a)(5)(D)
of the MMPA, 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 species or stock for taking for
certain subsistence uses.
The NDAA of 2004 amended the
MMPA as it relates to military-readiness
activities and the ITA process such that
‘‘least practicable adverse impact’’ shall
include consideration of personnel
safety, practicality of implementation,
and impact on the effectiveness of the
military readiness activity. The training
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
activities described in the Marine Corp’s
application are considered military
readiness activities.
The Marine Corps, in collaboration
with us, has worked to identify
potential practicable and effective
mitigation measures, which include a
careful balancing of the likely benefit of
any particular measure to the marine
mammals with the likely effect of that
measure on personnel safety,
practicality of implementation, and
impact on the ‘‘military-readiness
activity’’. These proposed mitigation
measures are listed below.
(1) Range Sweeps: The VMR–1
squadron, stationed at MCAS Cherry
Point, includes three specially equipped
HH–46D helicopters. The primary
mission of these aircraft, known as
PEDRO, is to provide search and rescue
for downed 2d Marine Air Wing
aircrews. On-board are a pilot, co-pilot,
crew chief, search and rescue swimmer,
and a medical corpsman. Each crew
member has received extensive training
in search and rescue techniques, and is
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
therefore particularly capable at spotting
objects floating in the water.
PEDRO crew would conduct a range
sweep the morning of each exercise day
prior to the commencement of range
operations. The primary goal of the preexercise sweep is to ensure that the
target area is clear of fisherman, other
personnel, and protected species. The
sweep is flown at 100–300 meters above
the water surface, at airspeeds between
60–100 knots. The path of the sweep
runs down the western side of BT–11,
circles around BT–9 and then continues
down the eastern side of BT–9 before
leaving. The sweep typically takes 20–
30 minutes to complete. The PEDRO
crew is able to communicate directly
with range personnel and can provide
immediate notification to range
operators. The PEDRO aircraft would
remain in the area of a sighting until
clear if possible or as mission
requirements dictate.
If marine mammals are sighted during
a range sweep, sighting data will be
collected and entered into the US
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
Marine Corps sighting database, webinterface, or report generator and this
information would be relayed to the
training Commander. Sighting data
includes the following (collected to the
best of the observer’s ability): (1)
Species identification; (2) group size; (3)
the behavior of marine mammals (e.g.,
milling, travel, social, foraging); (4)
location and relative distance from the
BT; (5) date, time and visual conditions
(e.g., Beaufort sea state, weather)
associated with each observation; (6)
direction of travel relative to the BT;
and (7) duration of the observation.
(2) Cold Passes: All aircraft
participating in an air-to-surface
exercise would be required to perform a
‘‘cold pass’’ immediately prior to
ordnance delivery at the BTs both day
and night. That is, prior to granting a
‘‘First Pass Hot’’ (use of ordnance),
pilots would be directed to perform a
low, cold (no ordnance delivered) first
pass which serves as a visual sweep of
the targets prior to ordnance delivery to
determine if unauthorized civilian
vessels or personnel, or protected
species, are present. The cold pass is
conducted with the aircraft (helicopter
or fixed-winged) flying straight and
level at altitudes of 200–3000 feet over
the target area. The viewing angle is
approximately 15 degrees. A blind spot
exists to the immediate rear of the
aircraft. Based upon prevailing
visibility, a pilot can see more than one
mile forward upon approach. The
aircrew and range personnel make every
attempt to ensure clearance of the area
via visual inspection and remotely
operated camera operations (see
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
section). The Range Controller may
deny or approve the First Pass Hot
clearance as conditions warrant.
(3) Delay of Exercises: An active range
would be considered ‘‘fouled’’ and not
available for use if a marine mammal is
present within 1000 yards (914 m) of the
target area at BT–9 or anywhere within
Rattan Bay (BT–11). Therefore, if a
marine mammal is sighted within 1000
yards (914 m) of the target at BT–9 or
anywhere within Rattan Bay at BT–11
during the cold pass or from range
camera detection, training would be
delayed until the marine mammal
moves beyond and on a path away from
1000 yards (914 m) from the BT–9 target
or out of Rattan Bay at BT–11. This
mitigation applies to both air-to-surface
and surface-to-surface exercises.
(4) Range Camera Use: To increase
the safety of persons or property near
the targets, Range Operation and Control
personnel monitor the target area
through tower mounted safety and
surveillance cameras. The remotely
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
operated range cameras are high
resolution and, according to range
personnel, allow a clear visual of a duck
floating near the target. The cameras
allow viewers to see animals at the
surface and breaking the surface, but not
underwater.
A new, enhanced camera system has
been purchased and will be installed on
BT–11 towers 3 and 7, and on both
towers at BT–9. The new camera system
has night vision capabilities with
resolution levels near those during
daytime. Lenses on the camera system
have focal lengths of 40 mm to 2200 mm
(56x), with view angles of 18° 10′ and
13° 41′, respectively. The field of view
when zoomed in on the Rattan Bay
targets will be 23 ft wide by 17 ft high,
and on the mouth of Rattan Bay itself 87
ft wide by 66 ft high.
Again, in the event that a marine
mammal is sighted within 1000 yards
(914 m) of the BT–9 target, or anywhere
within Rattan Bay, the target would be
declared fouled. Operations may
commence in the fouled area after the
animal(s) have moved 1000 yards (914
m) from the BT–9 target and/or out of
Rattan Bay.
(5) Vessel Operation: All vessels used
during training operations would abide
by the Service’s Southeast Regional
Viewing Guidelines designed to prevent
harassment to marine mammals (https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/education/
southeast/).
(6) Stranding Network Coordination:
The USMC would coordinate with the
local NMFS Stranding Coordinator for
any unusual marine mammal behavior
and any stranding, beached live/dead,
or floating marine mammals that may
occur at any time during training
activities or within 24 hours after
completion of training.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that we must set forth
‘‘requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such
taking’’. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13)
indicate that requests for IHAs must
include the suggested means of
accomplishing the necessary monitoring
and reporting that will result in
increased knowledge of the species and
of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are
expected to be present.
Proposed Monitoring
The Marine Corps proposes to
conduct the following to fulfill the
necessary monitoring and reporting that
would result in increased knowledge of
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19237
the species and of the level of taking or
impacts on populations of marine
mammals expected to be present within
the action area:
(1) Protected Species Observer
Training: Pilots, operators of small
boats, and other personnel monitoring
for marine mammals would be required
to take the Marine Species Awareness
Training (Version 2), maintained and
promoted by the Department of the
Navy. This training would make
personnel knowledgeable of marine
mammals, protected species, and visual
cues related to the presence of marine
mammals and protected species.
(2) Weekly and Post-Exercise
Monitoring: Post-exercise monitoring
would be conducted concomitant to the
next regularly scheduled pre-exercise
sweep. Weekly monitoring events
would include a maximum of five preexercise and four post-exercise sweeps.
The maximum number of days that
would elapse between pre- and postexercise monitoring events would be
approximately three days, and would
normally occur on weekends. If marine
mammals are observed during this
monitoring, sighting data identical to
those collected by PEDRO crew would
be recorded.
(3) Long-term Monitoring: The Marine
Corps has awarded DUML duties to
obtain abundance, group dynamics (e.g.,
group size, age census), behavior,
habitat use, and acoustic data on the
bottlenose dolphins which inhabit
Pamlico Sound, specifically those
around BT–9 and BT–11. DUML began
conducting boat-based surveys and
passive acoustic monitoring of
bottlenose dolphins in Pamlico Sound
in 2000 (Read et al., 2003) and
specifically at BT–9 and BT–11 in 2003
(Mayer, 2003). To date, boat-based
surveys indicate that bottlenose
dolphins may be resident to Pamlico
Sound and use BT restricted areas on a
frequent basis. Passive acoustic
monitoring (PAM) is providing more
detailed insight into how dolphins use
the two ranges, by monitoring for their
vocalizations year-round, regardless of
weather conditions or darkness. In
addition to these surveys, DUML
scientists are testing a real-time passive
acoustic monitoring system at BT–9 that
will allow automated detection of
bottlenose dolphin whistles, providing
yet another method of detecting
dolphins prior to training operations.
Although it is unlikely this PAM system
would be active for purposes of
implementing mitigation measures
before an exercise prior to expiration of
the proposed Authorization, it could be
operational for future MMPA incidental
take authorizations and would be
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
19238
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
evaluated for effectiveness at the
appropriate time.
(4) Reporting: The Marine Corps
would submit a report to us within 90
days after expiration of the
Authorization or, if a subsequent
incidental take authorization is
requested, within 120 days prior to
expiration of the Authorization. The
report would summarize the type and
amount of training exercises conducted,
all marine mammal observations made
during monitoring, and if mitigation
measures were implemented. The report
would also address the effectiveness of
the monitoring plan in detecting marine
mammals.
General Notification of Injured or Dead
Marine Mammals
The Marine Corps would
systematically observe training
operations for injured or disabled
marine mammals. In addition, the
Marine Corps would monitor the
principal marine mammal stranding
networks and other media to correlate
analysis of any dolphin strandings that
could potentially be associated with
MCAS Cherry Point training operations.
Marine Corps personnel would ensure
that we are notified immediately or as
soon as clearance procedures allow if an
injured, stranded, or dead marine
mammal is found during or shortly
after, and in the vicinity of, any training
operations. The Marine Corps would
provide us with species or description
of the animal(s), the condition of the
animal(s) (including carcass condition if
the animal is dead), location, time of
first discovery, observed behaviors (if
alive), and photo or video (if available).
In the event that an injured, stranded,
or dead marine mammal is found by
Marine Corps personnel that is not in
the vicinity of, or found during or
shortly after operations, the Marine
Corps personnel would report the same
information as listed above as soon as
operationally feasible and clearance
procedures allow.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
General Notification of a Ship Strike
In the event of a vessel strike, at any
time or place, the Marine Corps shall do
the following:
• Immediately report to us the species
identification (if known), location (lat/
long) of the animal (or the strike if the
animal has disappeared), and whether
the animal is alive or dead (or
unknown);
• Report to us as soon as
operationally feasible the size and
length of the animal, an estimate of the
injury status (e.g., dead, injured but
alive, injured and moving, unknown,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
etc.), vessel class/type and operational
status;
• Report to us the vessel length,
speed, and heading as soon as feasible;
and
• Provide us a photo or video, if
equipment is available.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
The following provides the Marine
Corps’ model for take of dolphins from
explosives (without consideration of
mitigation and the conservative
assumption that all explosives would
land in the water and not on the targets
or land) and potential for direct hits and
our analysis of potential harassment
from small vessel and aircraft
operations.
Acoustic Take Criteria
For the purposes of an MMPA
incidental take authorization, three
levels of take are identified: Level B
harassment; Level A harassment; and
mortality (or serious injury leading to
mortality). The categories of marine
mammal responses (physiological and
behavioral) that fall into harassment
categories were described previously in
this notice. A method to estimate the
number of individuals that will be
taken, pursuant to the MMPA, based on
the proposed action has been derived.
To this end, we use acoustic criteria that
estimate at what received level Level B
harassment, Level A harassment, and
mortality (or serious injury) of marine
mammals would occur. The acoustic
criteria for underwater detonations are
comprehensively explained in our
proposed and final rulemakings for the
U.S. Navy’s Cherry Point Range
Operations (74 FR 11057; 74 FR 28370).
We summarize them here:
Criteria and thresholds for estimating
the exposures from a single explosive
activity on marine mammals were
established for the Seawolf Submarine
Shock Test Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS) (‘‘Seawolf’’) and
subsequently used in the USS Winston
S. Churchill (DDG 81) Ship Shock FEIS
(‘‘Churchill’’) (DoN, 1998 and 2001). We
adopted these criteria and thresholds in
final rule on the unintentional taking of
marine animals occurring incidental to
the shock testing which involved large
explosives (65 FR 77546; December 12,
2000). Because no large explosives
(greater than 1000 lbs NEW) would be
used at Cherry Point during the
specified activities, a revised acoustic
criterion for small underwater
explosions (i.e., 23 pounds per square
inch [psi] instead of previous acoustic
criteria of 12 psi for peak pressure over
all exposures) has been established to
predict onset of TTS.
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
I.1. Thresholds and Criteria for Injurious
Physiological Impacts
I.1.a. Single Explosion
For injury, NMFS uses dual criteria,
eardrum rupture (i.e. tympanicmembrane injury) and onset of slight
lung injury, to indicate the onset of
injury. The threshold for tympanicmembrane (TM) rupture corresponds to
a 50 percent rate of rupture (i.e., 50
percent of animals exposed to the level
are expected to suffer TM rupture). This
value is stated in terms of an Energy
Flux Density Level (EL) value of 1.17
inch pounds per square inch (in-lb/in2),
approximately 205 dB re 1 microPa2sec.
The threshold for onset of slight lung
injury is calculated for a small animal
(a dolphin calf weighing 26.9 lbs), and
is given in terms of the ‘‘Goertner
modified positive impulse,’’ indexed to
13 psi-msec (DoN, 2001). This threshold
is conservative since the positive
impulse needed to cause injury is
proportional to animal mass, and
therefore, larger animals require a
higher impulse to cause the onset of
injury. This analysis assumed the
marine species populations were 100
percent small animals. The criterion
with the largest potential impact range
(most conservative), either TM rupture
(energy threshold) or onset of slight lung
injury (peak pressure), will be used in
the analysis to determine Level A
exposures for single explosive events.
For mortality and serious injury, we
use the criterion corresponding to the
onset of extensive lung injury. This is
conservative in that it corresponds to a
1 percent chance of mortal injury, and
yet any animal experiencing onset
severe lung injury is counted as a lethal
exposure. For small animals, the
threshold is given in terms of the
Goertner modified positive impulse,
indexed to 30.5 psi-msec. Since the
Goertner approach depends on
propagation, source/animal depths, and
animal mass in a complex way, the
actual impulse value corresponding to
the 30.5 psi-msec index is a complicated
calculation. To be conservative, the
analysis used the mass of a calf dolphin
(at 26.9 lbs) for 100 percent of the
populations.
I.1.b. Multiple Explosions
For multiple explosions, the Churchill
approach had to be extended to cover
multiple sound events at the same
training site. For multiple exposures,
accumulated energy over the entire
training time is the natural extension for
energy thresholds since energy
accumulates with each subsequent shot
(detonation); this is consistent with the
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
treatment of multiple arrivals in
Churchill. For positive impulse, it is
consistent with the Churchill final rule
to use the maximum value over all
impulses received.
I.2. Thresholds and Criteria for NonInjurious Physiological Effects
To determine the onset of TTS (noninjurious harassment)—a slight,
recoverable loss of hearing sensitivity,
there are dual criteria: an energy
threshold and a peak pressure
threshold. The criterion with the largest
potential impact range (most
conservative), either the energy or peak
pressure threshold, will be used in the
analysis to determine Level B TTS
exposures. We refer the reader to the
following sections for descriptions of
the thresholds for each criterion.
I.2.a. Single Explosion—TTS-Energy
Threshold
The TTS energy threshold for
explosives is derived from the Space
and Naval Warfare Systems Center
(SSC) pure-tone tests for TTS (Schlundt
et al., 2000; Finneran and Schlundt,
2004). The pure-tone threshold (192 dB
as the lowest value) is modified for
explosives by (a) interpreting it as an
energy metric, (b) reducing it by 10 dB
to account for the time constant of the
mammal ear, and (c) measuring the
energy in 1/3-octave bands, the natural
filter band of the ear. The resulting
threshold is 182 dB re 1 microPa2-sec in
any 1/3-octave band.
I.2.b. Single Explosion—TTS-Peak
Pressure Threshold
The second threshold applies to all
species and is stated in terms of peak
pressure at 23 psi (about 225 dB re 1
mPa). This criterion was adopted for
Precision Strike Weapons (PSW) Testing
and Training by Eglin Air Force Base in
the Gulf of Mexico (NMFS, 2005). It is
important to note that for small shots
near the surface (such as in this
analysis), the 23-psi peak pressure
threshold generally will produce longer
impact ranges than the 182-dB energy
metric. Furthermore, it is not unusual
for the TTS impact range for the 23-psi
pressure metric to actually exceed the
without-TTS (behavioral change
without onset of TTS) impact range for
the 177-dB energy metric.
I.3. Thresholds and Criteria for
Behavioral Effects
I.3.a. Single Explosion
For a single explosion, to be
consistent with Churchill, TTS is the
criterion for Level B harassment. In
other words, because behavioral
disturbance for a single explosion is
likely to be limited to a short-lived
startle reaction, use of the TTS criterion
is considered sufficient protection and
therefore behavioral effects (Level B
behavioral harassment without onset of
TTS) are not expected for single
explosions.
I.3.b. Multiple Explosions—Without
TTS
For multiple explosions, the Churchill
approach had to be extended to cover
multiple sound events at the same
training site. For multiple exposures,
accumulated energy over the entire
uninterrupted firing time is the natural
extension for energy thresholds since
energy accumulates with each
subsequent shot (detonation); this is
consistent with the treatment of
multiple arrivals in Churchill. Because
19239
multiple explosions could occur within
a discrete time period, a new acoustic
criterion-behavioral disturbance without
TTS is used to account for behavioral
effects significant enough to be judged
as harassment, but occurring at lower
noise levels than those that may cause
TTS.
The threshold is based on test results
published in Schlundt et al. (2000), with
derivation following the approach of the
Churchill FEIS for the energy-based TTS
threshold. The original Schlundt et al.
(2000) data and the report of Finneran
and Schlundt (2004) are the basis for
thresholds for behavioral disturbance
without TTS. During this study,
instances of altered behavior sometimes
began at lower exposures than those
causing TTS; however, there were many
instances when subjects exhibited no
altered behavior at levels above the
onset-TTS levels. Regardless of
reactions at higher or lower levels, all
instances of altered behavior were
included in the statistical summary. The
behavioral disturbance without TTS
threshold for tones is derived from the
SSC tests, and is found to be 5 dB below
the threshold for TTS, or 177 dB re 1
microPa2-sec maximum energy flux
density level in any 1⁄3-octave band at
frequencies above 100 Hz for cetaceans.
II. Summary of Thresholds and Criteria
for Impulsive Sounds
The effects, criteria, and thresholds
used in the assessment for impulsive
sounds are summarized in Table 8. The
criteria for behavioral effects without
physiological effects used in this
analysis are based on use of multiple
explosives from live, explosive firing at
BT–9 only; no live firing occurs at BT–
11.
TABLE 8—EFFECTS, CRITERIA, AND THRESHOLDS FOR IMPULSIVE SOUNDS
Effect
Criteria
Metric
Threshold
Mortality .........................
Onset of Extensive Lung
Injury.
Goertner modified positive impulse ......................
Injurious Physiological ...
50 percent Tympanic
Membrane Rupture.
Onset Slight Lung Injury
Energy flux density ...............................................
Non-injurious Physiological.
TTS ................................
Non-injurious Physiological.
Non-injurious Behavioral
TTS ................................
Greatest energy flux density level in any 1/3-octave band (> 100 Hz for toothed whales and >
10 Hz for baleen whales)—for total energy
over all exposures.
Peak pressure over all exposures ........................
indexed to 30.5 psi-msec
(assumes 100 percent
small animal at 26.9
lbs).
1.17 in-lb/in2 (about 205
dB re 1 microPa2-sec).
indexed to 13 psi-msec
(assumes 100 percent
small animal at 26.9
lbs).
182 dB re 1 microPa2sec.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Injurious Physiological ...
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Multiple Explosions
Without TTS.
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Goertner modified positive impulse ......................
Greatest energy flux density level in any 1/3-octave (> 100 Hz for toothed whales and > 10
Hz for baleen whales)—for total energy over
all exposures (multiple explosions only).
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
Effect
Mortality.
Level A.
Level A.
Level B.
23 psi ..............................
Level B.
177 dB re 1 microPa2sec.
Level B.
29MRN1
19240
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
Take from Explosives
The Marine Corps conservatively
modeled that all explosives would
detonate at a 1.2 m (3.9 ft) water depth
despite the training goal of hitting the
target, resulting in an above water or on
land explosion. For sources that are
account. Properties of explosive sources
used at BT–9, including NEW, peak onethird-octave (OTO) source level, the
approximate frequency at which the
peak occurs, and rounds per burst are
described in Table 9. Refer to Table 10
for distances to our harassment
threshold levels from these sources.
detonated at shallow depths, it is
frequently the case that the explosion
may breech the surface with some of the
acoustic energy escaping the water
column. The source levels presented in
the table above have not been adjusted
for possible venting nor does the
subsequent analysis take this into
TABLE 9—SOURCE WEIGHTS AND PEAK SOURCE LEVELS
Source type
New
Peak OTO SL
2.75-inch Rocket ........................
5-inch Rocket .............................
30 mm ........................................
40 mm ........................................
G911 Grenade ...........................
4.8 lbs .......................................
15.0 lbs .....................................
0.1019 lbs .................................
0.1199 lbs .................................
0.5 .............................................
223.9
228.9
212.1
227.8
213.9
dB
dB
dB
dB
dB
re:
re:
re:
re:
re:
Frequency of Peak OTO SL
1μPa ....................
1μPa ....................
1μPa ....................
1μPa ....................
1 μPa ...................
∼
∼
∼
∼
∼
1500
1000
2500
1100
2500
Rounds
per
burst
Hertz (Hz) .....................
Hz .................................
Hz .................................
Hz .................................
Hz .................................
1
1
30
5
1
TABLE 10—DISTANCES TO OUR HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS FROM EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCES
Behavioral
disturbance
(177 dB energy)
2.75-inch Rocket HE ................................................................
5’’ Rocket HE ...........................................................................
30mm HE .................................................................................
40mm HE .................................................................................
G911 Grenade .........................................................................
To calculate take, the distances to
which animals may be harassed were
considered along with dolphin density.
The density estimate from Read et al.
(2003) was used to calculate take from
munitions firing. As described in the
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity section,
this density, 0.183/km2, was derived
from boat based surveys in 2000 which
covered all inland North Carolina
waters. Note that estimated density of
dolphins at BT–9 and BT–11,
specifically, were calculated to be 0.11
dolphins/km2, and 1.23 dolphins/km2
respectively (Maher 2003), based on
N/A
N/A
209 m (686 ft)
144 m (472 ft)
N/A
TTS
(23 psi)
Level A
(13 psi-msec)
172 m (564 ft)
255 m (837 ft)
N/A
N/A
83 m (272 ft)
boat surveys conducted from July 2002
through June 2003 (excluding April,
May, Sept. and Jan.). However, the
USMC chose to estimate take of
dolphins based on the higher density
reported from the summer 2000 surveys
(0.183/km2). Additionally, take
calculations for munition firing are
based on 100 percent water detonation,
although the goal of training is to hit the
targets, and no pre-exercise monitoring
or mitigation. Therefore, take estimates
can be considered conservative.
Based on dolphin density and amount
of munitions expended, there is very
low potential for Level A harassment,
47 m (154
61 m (200
10 m (33
10 m (33
21 m (33
Mortality
(31 psi-ms)
ft)
ft)
ft)
ft)
ft)
27 m (89
39 m (128
5 m (16
5 m (16
10 m (33
ft)
ft)
ft)
ft)
ft)
serious injury, and mortality and
monitoring and mitigation measures are
anticipated to further negate this
potential. Accordingly, we are not
proposing to issue these levels of take.
As portrayed in Table 9, the largest
harassment zone (Level B) is within 209
m of a detonation in water; however, the
Marine Corps has implemented a 1,000
m ‘‘foul’’ zone for BT–9 and anywhere
within Raritan Bay for BT–11. In total,
from firing of explosive ordnances, the
USMC is requesting, and NMFS is
proposing to issue, the incidental take of
25 bottlenose dolphins from Level B
harassment (Table 11).
TABLE 11—NUMBER OF DOLPHINS POTENTIALLY TAKEN FROM EXPOSURE TO EXPLOSIVES BASED ON THRESHOLD
CRITERIA
Level B—
behavioral
(177dB re
1microPa2-s)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Ordnance type
Level B—TTS
(23 psi)
Level A—
Injurious
(205 dB re
1microPa2-s or
13 psi)
Mortality
(30.5 psi)
2.75″ Rocket HE ..............................................................................................
5″ Rocket HE ...................................................................................................
30mm HE .........................................................................................................
40mm HE .........................................................................................................
G911 Grenade .................................................................................................
N/A
N/A
2.55
12.60
N/A
4.97
3.39
N/A
N/A
0.87
0.17
0.09
0.05
0.16
0.03
0.06
0.03
0.00
0.01
0.01
Total ..........................................................................................................
15.15
9.23
0.5
0.11
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Take from Direct Hit
The potential risk of a direct hit to an
animal in the target area is estimated to
be so low it is discountable. A Range Air
Installation Compatible Use Zone
(RAICUZ) study generated the surface
area or footprints of weapon impact
areas associated with air-to-ground
ordnance delivery (USMC 2001).
Statistically, a weapon safety footprint
describes the area needed to contain
99.99 percent of initial and ricochet
impacts at the 95-percent confidence
interval for each type of aircraft and
ordnance utilized on the BTs. At both
BT–9 and BT–11 the probability of
deployed ordnance landing in the
impact footprint is essentially 1.0, since
the footprints were designed to contain
99.99 percent of impacts, including
ricochets. However, only 36 percent of
the weapon footprint for BT–11 is over
water in Rattan Bay, so the likelihood of
a weapon striking an animal at the BT
in Rattan Bay is 64 percent less. Water
depths in Rattan Bay range from 3 m (10
ft) in the deepest part of the bay to 0.5
m (1.6 m) close to shore, so that nearly
the entire habitat in Rattan Bay is
suitable for marine mammal use (or 36
percent of the weapon footprint).
The estimated potential risk of a
direct hit to an animal in the target area
is extremely low. The probability of
hitting a bottlenose dolphin at the BTs
can be derived as follows: Probability =
dolphin’s dorsal surface area * density
of dolphins. The estimated dorsal
surface area of a bottlenose dolphin is
1.425 m2 (or the average length of 2.85
m times the average body width of 0.5
m). Thus, using Read et al. (2003)’s
density estimate of 0.183 dolphins/km2,
without consideration of mitigation and
monitoring implementation, the
probability of a dolphin being hit in the
waters of BT–9 is 2.61 × 10¥7 and of
BT–11 is 9.4 × 10¥8. Using the proposed
levels of ordnance expenditures at each
in-water BT (Tables 4 and 5) and taking
into account that only 36 percent of the
ordnance deployed at BT–11 is over
water, as described in the application,
the estimated potential number of
ordnance strikes on a marine mammal
per year is 0.263 at BT–9 and 0.034 at
BT–11. It would take approximately
three years of ordnance deployment at
the BTs before it would be likely or
probable that one bottlenose dolphin
would be struck by deployed inert
ordnance. Again, these estimates are
without consideration to proposed
monitoring and mitigation measures.
Take from Vessel and Aircraft Presence
Vessel movement is associated with
surface-to-surface exercises, as
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
described in the Specified Activities
section above, which primarily occurs
within BT–11. The USMC is not
requesting takes specific to the act of
maneuvering small boats within the
BTs; however, NMFS has analyzed the
potential for take from this activity.
The potential impacts from exposure
to vessels are described in the Vessel
and Aircraft Presence section above.
Interactions with vessels are not a new
experience for bottlenose dolphins in
Pamlico Sound. Pamlico Sound is
heavily used by recreational,
commercial (fishing, daily ferry service,
tugs, etc.), and military (including the
Navy, Air Force, and Coast Guard)
vessels year-round. The NMFS’
Southeast Regional Office has
developed marine mammal viewing
guidelines to educate the public on how
to responsibly view marine mammals in
the wild and avoid causing a take
(https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
education/southeast). The guidelines
recommend that vessels should remain
a minimum of 50 yards from a dolphin,
operate vessels in a predictable manner,
avoid excessive speed or sudden
changes in speed or direction in the
vicinity of animals, and not to pursue,
chase, or separate a group of animals.
The Marine Corps would abide by these
guidelines to the fullest extent
practicable. The Marine Corps would
not engage in high speed exercises
should a marine mammal be detected
within the immediate area of the BTs
prior to training commencement and
would never closely approach, chase, or
pursue dolphins. Detection of marine
mammals would be facilitated by
personnel monitoring on the vessels and
those marking success rate of target hits
and monitoring of remote camera on the
BTs (see Proposed Monitoring and
Reporting section).
Based on the description of the action,
the other activities regularly occurring
in the area, the species that may be
exposed to the activity and their
observed behaviors in the presence of
vessel traffic, and the implementation of
measures to avoid vessel strikes, we
determined that it is unlikely that the
operation of vessels during surface-tosurface maneuvers will result in the take
of any marine mammals, in the form of
either behavioral harassment, injury,
serious injury, or mortality.
Aircraft would move swiftly through
the area and would typically fly
approximately 914 m from the water’s
surface before dropping unguided
munitions and above 4,572 m for
precision-guided munitions bombing.
While the aircraft may approach as low
as 152 m (500 ft) to drop a bomb this
is not the norm and would never be
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19241
done around marine mammals. Regional
whale watching guidelines advise
aircraft to maintain a minimum altitude
of 300 m (1,000 ft) above all marine
mammals, including small odontocetes,
and to not circle or hover over the
animals to avoid harassment. Our
approach regulations limit aircraft from
flying below 300 m (1,000 ft) over a
humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae) in Hawaii, a known
calving ground, and limit aircraft from
flying over North Atlantic right whales
closer than 460 m (1509 ft). Given that
Marine Corps aircraft would not fly
below 300 m on the approach, would
not engage in hovering or circling the
animals, and would not drop to the
minimal altitude of 152 m if a marine
mammal is in the area, we believe it
unlikely that the operation of aircraft, as
described above, will result in take of
bottlenose dolphins in Pamlico Sound
in any manner.
Negligible Impact Analysis and
Preliminary Determination
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has
the potential to disturb a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild by causing disruption of behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering [Level B
harassment].
The NDAA’s definition of harassment
as it applies to a military readiness
activity is: (i) any act that injures or has
the significant potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild [Level A Harassment];
or (ii) any act that disturbs or is likely
to disturb a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of natural behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering, to a point where
such behavioral patterns are abandoned
or significantly altered [Level B
Harassment].
We propose to authorize take by Level
B harassment for the proposed training
operations. Acoustic stimuli generated
during training operations may have the
potential to result in the behavioral
disturbance of some marine mammals.
There is no evidence that planned
activities could result in injury, serious
injury, or mortality within the specified
geographic area for the requested
authorization. The required mitigation
and monitoring measures would
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
19242
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
minimize any potential risk for serious
injury or mortality.
Pursuant to our regulations
implementing the MMPA, an applicant
is required to estimate the number of
animals that will be ‘‘taken’’ by the
specified activities (i.e., takes by
harassment only, or takes by
harassment, injury, and/or death). This
estimate informs the analysis that we
must perform to determine whether the
activity will have a ‘‘negligible impact’’
on the species or stock. 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.’’
A negligible impact finding is based on
the lack of likely adverse effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival
(i.e., population-level effects). An
estimate of the number and manner of
takes, alone, is not enough information
on which to base a negligible impact
determination. We must also consider
other factors, such as the likely nature
of any responses (their intensity,
duration, etc.), the context of any
responses (critical reproductive time or
location, migration, etc.), or any of the
other variables mentioned in the first
paragraph (if known), as well as the
number and nature of estimated Level A
takes, the number of estimated
mortalities, and effects on habitat.
The Marine Corps has been
conducting gunnery and bombing
training exercises at BT–9 and BT–11
for several years and, to date, no
dolphin injury, serious injury, or
mortality has been attributed these
military training exercises. The Marine
Corps has a history of notifying the
NMFS stranding network when any
injured or stranded animal comes
ashore or is spotted by personnel on the
water. Therefore, stranded animals have
been examined by stranding responders,
further confirming that it is unlikely
training contributes to marine mammal
injuries or deaths. Due to the
implementation of the aforementioned
proposed mitigation measures, no take
by Level A harassment or serious injury
or mortality is anticipated nor would
any be authorized in the IHA. We are
proposing; however, to authorize 25
Level B harassment takes associated
with training exercises.
The Marine Corps has proposed a
1000 yard (914 m) safety zone around
BT–9 despite the fact that the distance
to NMFS explosive Level B harassment
threshold is 228 yards (209 m). They
also would consider an area fouled if
any dolphins are spotted within Raritan
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
Bay (where BT–11 is located). The Level
B harassment takes allowed for in the
IHA would be of very low intensity and
would likely result in dolphins being
temporarily behaviorally affected by
bombing or gunnery exercises. In
addition, takes may be attributed to
animals not using the area when
exercises are occurring; however, this is
difficult to calculate. Instead, we look if
the specified activities occur during and
within habitat important to vital life
functions to better inform its negligible
impact determination.
Read et al. (2003) concluded that
dolphins rarely occur in open waters in
the middle of North Carolina sounds
and large estuaries, but instead are
concentrated in shallow water habitats
along shorelines. However, no specific
areas have been identified as vital
reproduction or foraging habitat.
Scientific boat based surveys conducted
throughout Pamlico Sound conclude
that dolphins use the areas around the
BTs more frequently than other portions
of Pamlico Sound (Maher, 2003) despite
the Marine Corps actively training in a
manner identical to the specified
activities described here for years.
As described in the Affected Species
section of this notice, bottlenose
dolphin stock segregation is complex
with stocks overlapping throughout the
coastal and estuarine waters of North
Carolina. It is not possible for the
Marine Corps to determine to which
stock any individual dolphin taken
during training activities belong as this
can only be accomplished through
genetic testing. However, it is likely that
many of the dolphins encountered
would belong to the NNCE or SNCE
stock. These stocks have a population
estimate of 1,387 and 2,454,
respectively. We are proposing to
authorize 25 takes of bottlenose
dolphins in total; therefore, this number
represents 1.8 and 1.0 percent,
respectively, of those populations. This
species is not listed as threatened or
endangered under the ESA
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
preliminarily find that the specified
USMC AS Cherry Point BT–9 and BT–
11 training activities will result in the
incidental take of marine mammals, by
Level B harassment only, and that the
total taking from will have a negligible
impact on the affected species or stocks.
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Subsistence Harvest of Marine
Mammals
Marine mammals are not taken for
subsistence uses within Pamlico Sound;
therefore, issuance of an IHA to the
USMC for MCAS Cherry Point training
exercises would not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the affected species or
stocks for subsistence use.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No ESA-listed marine mammals are
known to occur within the action area.
Therefore, there is no requirement for
NMFS to consult under Section 7 of the
ESA on the issuance of an Authorization
under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA. However, ESA-listed sea turtles
may be present within the action area.
On September 27, 2002, NMFS issued
a Biological Opinion (BiOp) on Ongoing
Ordnance Delivery at Bombing Target 9
(BT–9) and Bombing Target 11 (BT–11)
at Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry
Point, North Carolina. The BiOp, which
is still in effect, concluded that that the
USMC’s proposed action will not result
in adverse impacts to any ESA-listed
marine mammals and is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
the endangered green turtle (Chelonia
mydas), leatherback turtle (Dermochelys
coriacea), Kemp’s ridley turtle
(Lepidochelys kempii), or threatened
loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta). The
proposed IHA will not result in effects
beyond those considered in the 2002
BiOp and NMFS does not anticipate the
need for further Section 7 consultation
for the Authorization or the underlying
activities proposed by the Marines. No
critical habitat has been designated for
these species in the action area;
therefore, none will be affected.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
On February 11, 2009, the Marine
Corps issued a Finding of No Significant
Impact for its Environmental
Assessment (EA) on MCAS Cherry Point
Range Operations. Based on the analysis
of the EA, the Marine Corps determined
that the proposed action will not have
a significant impact on the human
environment. We adopted the Marine
Corps’ EA and signed a Finding of No
Significant Impact on August 31, 2010.
We have again reviewed the proposed
application and preliminarily
determined that there are no substantial
changes to the proposed action or new
environmental impacts or concerns.
Therefore, we have determined that a
new or supplemental EA or
Environmental Impact Statement is
likely unnecessary. Before making a
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 61 / Friday, March 29, 2013 / Notices
final determination in this regard, we
will review public comments and
information submitted by the public and
others in response to this notice. The EA
referenced above is available for review
at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
permits/incidental.htm.
Dated: March 26, 2013.
Helen M. Golde,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–07305 Filed 3–28–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark
Office
Privacy Act of 1974; System of
Records
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of amendment of Privacy
Act system of records.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974,
as amended, the United States Patent
and Trademark Office (USPTO) is
amending the system of records
currently listed under ‘‘COMMERCE/
PAT–TM–7 Patent Application Files.’’
This action is being taken to update the
Privacy Act notice. We invite the public
to comment on the amendments noted
in this publication.
DATES: Written comments must be
received no later than April 29, 2013.
The amendments will become effective
as proposed on April 29, 2013, unless
the USPTO receives comments that
would result in a contrary
determination.
You may submit written
comments by any of the following
methods:
• Email: Raul.Tamayo@uspto.gov.
Include ‘‘Privacy Act PAT–TM–7
comment’’ in the subject line of the
message.
• Fax: (571) 273–7728, marked to the
attention of Raul Tamayo.
• Mail: Raul Tamayo, Office of Patent
Legal Administration, Office of the
Deputy Commissioner for Patent
Examination Policy, United States
Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box
1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450.
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
All comments received will be available
for public inspection at the Federal
rulemaking portal located at
www.regulations.gov.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:34 Mar 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
19243
Raul
Tamayo, Office of Patent Legal
Administration, Office of the Deputy
Commissioner for Patent Examination
Policy, United States Patent and
Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450,
Alexandria, VA 22313–1450, (571) 272–
7728.
CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS COVERED BY THE
SYSTEM:
The
United States Patent and Trademark
Office (USPTO) is giving notice of an
amendment to a system of records that
is subject to the Privacy Act of 1974.
This system of records maintains
information on patent applicants and
their authorized representatives. The
Privacy Act notice is being updated
with the current address and
departmental information for the system
location and system manager. The
routine uses of records maintained in
the system have been updated to
include use in law enforcement, audits
and oversight activities, and distribution
to contractors, all uses commonly
published in other agency system of
records notices. The descriptions of
storage, retrievability, and safeguards
have been revised to reflect current
database practices. The rule references
for the notification procedure,
contesting record procedures, and
exemptions have been updated to
correspond to the current statutes and
rules for those items as related to the
USPTO.
The amended Privacy Act system of
records notice, ‘‘COMMERCE/PAT–TM–
7 Patent Application Files,’’ is
published in its entirety below.
Oath or declaration of applicant
including name, citizenship, residence,
post office address and other
information pertaining to the applicant’s
activities in connection with the
invention for which a patent is sought.
Statements containing various kinds of
information with respect to inventors
who are deceased or incapacitated, or
who are unavailable or unwilling to
make application for patent.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
COMMERCE/PAT–TM–7
SYSTEM NAME:
Patent Application Files. (Note: This
notice is broken down, where indicated,
into three subsystems relating to the
status of the files: a. Pending; b.
Abandoned; and c. Patented.)
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION:
Unclassified.
SYSTEM LOCATION:
a. United States Patent and Trademark
Office, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria,
VA 22314; b. Franconia Warehouse—
Files Repository, 6808 Loisdale Road,
Springfield, VA 22150; and United
States Patent and Trademark Office, 600
Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA 22314; c.
Franconia Warehouse—Files
Repository, 6808 Loisdale Road,
Springfield, VA 22150; and United
States Patent and Trademark Office, 600
Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Applicants for patent, including
inventors, legal representatives for
deceased or incapacitated inventors,
and other persons authorized by law to
make applications for patent.
CATEGORIES OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM:
AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM:
35 U.S.C. 1, 6, and 115; 5 U.S.C. 301.
PURPOSE(S):
To carry out the duties of the USPTO
to grant and issue patents, including the
collection of the inventor’s oath or
declaration under 35 U.S.C. 115.
ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE
SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND
THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES:
(1) a. Information concerning these
records is provided outside the Office
only upon authorization of the applicant
or owner of the application or when
necessary to carry out the provisions of
any act of Congress or in such special
circumstances as may be determined by
the Commissioner, e.g. files referred for
secrecy order determination under 35
U.S.C. 181. b. Same as a., except where
application is referred to in a U.S.
Patent, in which case the record is open
to public inspection. c. Records are
open to public inspection.
(2) Routine uses will include
disclosure for law enforcement purposes
to the appropriate agency or other
authority, whether federal, state, local,
foreign, international or tribal, charged
with the responsibility of enforcing,
investigating, or prosecuting a violation
of any law, rule, regulation, or order in
any case in which there is an indication
of a violation or potential violation of
law (civil, criminal, or regulatory in
nature).
(3) Routine uses will include
disclosure to an agency, organization, or
individual for the purpose of performing
audit or oversight operations as
authorized by law, but only such
information as is necessary and relevant
to such audit or oversight function.
(4) Routine uses will include
disclosure to contractors and their
agents, grantees, experts, consultants,
and others performing or working on a
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 61 (Friday, March 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19224-19243]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07305]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XC486
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; U.S.
Marine Corps Training Exercises at Air Station Cherry Point
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; receipt
of application for letter of authorization; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We have received an application from the U.S. Marine Corps
(Marine Corps) requesting an incidental harassment authorization
(Authorization) to take marine mammals incidental to various training
exercises at Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Cherry Point Range
Complex, North Carolina for a period of one year.
The Marine Corps' activities are military readiness activities
pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as amended by the
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2004. Per the
MMPA, we are requesting comments on our proposal to issue an
authorization to the Marine Corps to incidentally harass by Level B
harassment only, bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus), during the
training exercises that would occur within the proposed effective
period of May 20, 2013 through May 19, 2014. We are also requesting
comments on our intent to promulgate regulations governing the take of
marine mammals over a 5-year period incidental to the activities
described in this notice.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than April
29, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed 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. The mailbox address for
providing email comments is ITP.Cody@noaa.gov. Please include 0648-
XC486 in the subject line. We are not responsible for email comments
sent to addresses other than the one provided here. Comments sent via
email, including all attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file
size.
Instructions: All submitted comments are a part of the public
record and we would post to https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications without change. All Personal Identifying
Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential
business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
To obtain an electronic copy of the application, write to the
previously mentioned address, telephone the contact listed here (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or visit the internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications.
The following associated document is also available at the same
internet address: The Marine Corps' Environmental Assessment (EA)
titled, ``Environmental Assessment MCAS Cherry Point Range
Operations,'' for their federal action of supporting and conducting
current and emerging training operations. Their EA evaluates the
effects of the proposed training operations on the human environment
including impacts to marine mammals and their 2009 Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) for the activities.
This notice and the referenced document present detailed
information on the scope of our federal action and resultant
environmental impacts for purposes of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (i.e., potential impacts to
marine mammals from issuing the proposed Authorization including
measures for mitigation, and monitoring). We solicit and would consider
comments submitted in response to this notice when determining whether
to prepare additional NEPA analysis. Documents cited in this notice may
also be viewed, by appointment, during regular business hours, at the
aforementioned address.
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 Protection 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
[[Page 19225]]
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, after
notice of a proposed authorization to the public for review and public
comment: (1) We make certain findings; and (2) the taking is limited to
harassment.
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 taking. 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 MMPA established an expedited process
by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization
to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment.
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA establishes a 45-day time limit for
our review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and
comment period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental
harassment of small numbers of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the
close of the public comment period, 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.
The National Defense Authorization Act of 2004 (NDAA; (Public Law
108-136)) amended section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA by removing the
small numbers and specified geographic region provisions; revising the
definition of harassment as it applies to a military readiness
activity; and explicitly requiring that our determination of ``least
practicable adverse impact'' include consideration of: (1) Personnel
safety; (2) the practicality of implementation; and (3) impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
The NDAA's definition of harassment as it applies to a military
readiness activity is: (i) any act that injures or has the significant
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
[Level A Harassment]; or (ii) any act that disturbs or is likely to
disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including, but not limited
to, migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to
a point where such behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly
altered [Level B Harassment].
Summary of Request
We received a request from the Marine Corps on January 28, 2013,
requesting that we issue we issue an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (Authorization) for the take, by Level B harassment only,
of small numbers of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus)
incidental to air-to-surface and surface-to-surface training exercises
conducted around two bombing targets within southern Pamlico Sound,
North Carolina, at MCAS Cherry Point. We received a complete and
adequate application requesting Authorization on March 19, 2013.
To date, we have issued two, 1-year Authorizations to the Marine
Corps for the conduct of the same activities from 2010 to 2012 (75 FR
72807, November 26, 2010; 77 FR January 3, 2012). This is the Marine
Corps' third request for an Authorization. We intend to proceed to
rulemaking after a final determination is made on whether or not to
issue this Authorization. This document also serves as Notice of
Receipt of a request for rulemaking and subsequent Letter of
Authorization.
Project Purpose--The Marine Corps plan to conduct weapon delivery
training at two bombing targets: Brant Island Target (BT-9) and Piney
Island Bombing Range (BT-11). Training at BT-9 would involve air-to-
surface (from aircraft to in-water targets) and surface-to-surface
(from vessels to in-water targets) warfare training, including bombing,
strafing, special (laser systems) weapons; surface fires using non-
explosive and explosive ordnance; and mine laying exercises (inert).
Training at BT-11 would involve air- to-surface exercises to provide
training in the delivery of conventional (non-explosive) and special
(laser systems) weapons. Surface-to-surface training by small military
watercraft would also be executed here. The types of ordnances proposed
for use at BT-9 and BT-11 include small arms, large arms, bombs,
rockets, missiles, and pyrotechnics. All munitions used at BT-11 are
inert, practice rounds. No live firing occurs at BT-11. Training for
any activity may occur year-round. Active sonar is not a component of
these specified training exercises; therefore, we have not included a
discussion of marine mammal harassment from active sonar operations
within this notice.
Description of the Specified Activity
The Marine Corps is requesting authorization to harass bottlenose
dolphins from ammunition firing conducted at two bombing targets within
MCAS Cherry Point. The authorization would be valid for a period of one
year from the date of issuance. The bombing targets are located at the
convergence of the Neuse River and Pamlico Sound, North Carolina.
BT-9 is a water-based target located approximately 52 kilometers
(km) (32.3 miles (mi); 28 nautical miles (nm)) northeast of MCAS Cherry
Point. The BT-9 target area ranges in depth from 1.2 to 6.1 meters (m)
(3.9 to 20 feet (ft)), with the shallow areas concentrated along the
Brandt Island Shoal (which runs down the middle of the restricted area
in a northwest to southeast orientation). The target itself consists of
three ship hulls grounded on Brant Island Shoals, located approximately
4.8 km (3.0 mi) southeast of Goose Creek Island. Inert (non-explosive)
ordnance up to 454 kilograms (kg) (1,000 pounds (lbs) and live
(explosive) ordnance up to 45.4 kg (100 lbs) trinitrotoluene (TNT)
equivalent, including ordnance released during strafing, are authorized
for use at this target range. The target is defined by a 6 statute-mile
diameter prohibited area designated by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Wilmington District (33 CFR 334.420). Non-military vessels
are not permitted within the prohibited area, which is delineated by
large signs located on pilings surrounding the perimeter of the BT. BT-
9 also provides a mining exercise area; however, all mine exercises are
simulation only and do not involve detonations. BT-9 standard operating
procedures limit live ordnance deliveries to a maximum explosive weight
of 100 lbs TNT equivalent. The USMC estimates that it could conduct up
to approximately 1,554 aircraft-based and 322 vessel-based sorties,
annually, at BT-9. The standard sortie consists of two aircraft per
bombing run or an average of two and maximum of six vessels.
BT-11 is a 50.6 square kilometers (km\2\) (19.5 square miles
(mi\2\)) complex of land- and water-based targets on Piney Island. The
BT-11 target area ranges in depth from 0.3 m (1.0 ft) along the
shoreline to 3.1 m (10.1 ft) in the center of Rattan Bay (BA, 2001).
The in-water stationary targets of BT-11 consist
[[Page 19226]]
of a barge and patrol (PT) boat located in roughly the center of Rattan
Bay. The barge target is approximately 41.1 by 12.2 m (135 by 40 ft) in
dimension. The PT boat is approximately 33.5 by 10.7 ft (110 ft by 35
ft) in dimension. Water depths in the center of Rattan Bay are
estimated as 2.4 to 3 m (8 to 10 ft) with bottom depths ranging from
0.3 to 1.5 m (1 to 5 ft) adjacent to the shoreline of Piney Island. A
shallow ledge, with substrate expected to be hard-packed to hard
bottom, surrounds Piney Island. No live firing occurs at BT-11; all
munitions used are inert, non-explosive practice rounds. Only 36
percent of all munitions fired at BT-11 occur over water; the remaining
munitions are fired to land based targets on Piney Island. The USMC
estimates that it could conduct up to approximately 6,727 aircraft-
based and 51 vessel-based sorties, annually, at BT-11.
All inert and live-fire exercises at MCAS Cherry Point ranges are
conducted so that all ammunition and other ordnances strike and/or fall
on the land or water based target or within the existing danger zones
or water restricted areas. A danger zone is a defined water area that
is closed to the public on an intermittent or full-time basis for use
by military forces for hazardous operations such as target practice and
ordnance firing. A water restricted area is a defined water area where
public access is prohibited or limited in order to provide security for
government property and/or to protect the public from the risks of
injury or damage that could occur from the government's use of that
area (33 CFR 334.2). Surface danger zones are designated areas of
rocket firing, target practice, or other hazardous operations (33 CFR
334.420). The surface danger zone (prohibited area) for BT-9 is a 4.8
km (3.0 mi) radius centered on the south side of Brant Island Shoal.
The surface danger zone for BT-11 is a 2.9 km (1.8 mi) radius centered
on a barge target in Rattan Bay.
According to the application, the Marine Corps is requesting take
of marine mammals incidental to specified activities at MCAS Cherry
Point Range Complex, located within Pamlico Sound, North Carolina.
These activities include gunnery; mine laying; bombing; or rocket
exercises and are classified into two categories here based on delivery
method: (1) Surface-to-surface gunnery and (2) air-to-surface bombing.
Exercises may occur year round, day or night (approximately 15 percent
of training occurs at night).
Surface-to-Surface Gunnery Exercises
Surface-to-surface fires are fires from boats at sea to targets at
sea. These can be direct (targets are within sight) or indirect
(targets are not within sight). Gunnery exercise employing only direct
fire is the only category of surface-to-surface activity currently
conducted within the MCAS Cherry Point bombing targets. An average of
two and maximum of six small boats (7.3-26.0 m; 24-85 ft), or fleet of
boats, typically operated by Special Boat Team personnel, use a machine
gun to attack and disable or destroy a surface target that simulates
another ship, boat, swimmer, floating mine or near shore land targets.
Vessels would travel between 0-20 knots (kts) (0-23 miles per hour
(mph)) with an average of two vessels actually conducting surface-to-
surface firing activities. Typical munitions would be 7.62 millimeter
(mm) or .50 caliber (cal) machine guns; and/or 40 mm grenade machine
guns. This exercise is usually a live-fire exercise, but at times
blanks would be used so that the boat crews could practice their ship
handling skills. The goal of training is to hit the targets; however,
some munitions may bounce off the targets and land in the water or miss
the target entirely. Additionally, the personnel would use G911
concussion hand grenades (inert and live); however, these are not aimed
at targets, as the goal is to learn how to throw them into the water.
Table 1 includes the estimated amount of munitions expended at BT-9
and BT-11 in 2011 and 2012. Historically, boat sorties have been
conducted at BT-9 and BT-11 year round with equal distribution of
training effort throughout the seasons. Live fires constitute
approximately 90 percent of all surface-to-surface gunnery events. The
majority of sorties originated and practiced at BT-9 as no live fire is
conducted at BT-11. The Marine Corps has indicated a comparable number
of sorties would occur throughout the IHA timeframe. There is no
specific schedule associated with the use of ranges by the small boat
teams. However, exercises tend to be scheduled for 5-day blocks with
exercises at various times throughout that timeframe. There is no
specific time of year or month training occurs as variables such as
deployment status, range availability, and completion of crew specific
training requirements influence schedules.
Table 1--Aircraft and Boat Sorties, by Mission Type, Conducted in 2011 and 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BT-9 BT-11
Mission type ---------------------------------------------------------------
2011 2012 2011 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-to-Surface.................................. 1,554 .............. 4,251 ..............
Surface-to-Surface.............................. 223 322 105 106
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 1,777 .............. 4,356 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A number of different types of boats are used during surface-to-
surface exercises depending on the unit using the boat and their
mission and include versions of Small Unit River Craft, Combat Rubber
Raiding Craft, Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats, Patrol Craft. They are
inboard or outboard, diesel or gasoline engines with either propeller
or water jet propulsion. Boat crews approach, at a maximum of 20 kts
(23 mph), and engage targets simulating other boats, swimmers, floating
mines, or near shore land targets with 7.62 mm or .50 cal machine guns;
40 mm grenade machine guns; or M3A2 concussion hand grenades
(approximately 200, 800, 10, and 10 rounds respectively). Vessels
typically travel in linear paths and do not operate erratically. Other
vessels may be located within the BTs; however, these are support craft
and do not participate in munitions expenditures. The purpose of the
support craft is to remotely control High Speed Maneuvering Surface
Targets (HSMSTs) or to conduct maintenance on electronic equipment
located in the towers at BT-9. Support craft are typically anchored or
tied to marker pilings during HSMST operations or tied to equipment
towers. When underway, vessels do not typically travel faster than 12-
18 kts (13.8-20.7 mph) or in an erratic manner.
[[Page 19227]]
Air-to-Surface
Air-to-surface training involves ordnance delivered from aircraft
and aimed at targets on the water's surface or on land in the case of
BT-11. We provide a description of the types of targets used at MCAS
Cherry Point in the previous section. There are four types of air-to-
surface activities conducted within the MCAS Cherry Point BTs: mine
laying; bombing, gunnery, or rocket exercises which are carried out via
fixed- or rotary-wing aircraft.
Mine Laying Exercises
Mine warfare includes the strategic, operational, and tactical use
of mines and mine countermine measures. Mine warfare is divided into
two basic subdivisions: (a) The laying of mines to degrade the enemy's
capabilities to wage land, air, and maritime warfare, and (b) the
countering of enemy-laid mines to permit friendly maneuver or use of
selected land or sea areas (DoN, 2007). MCAS Cherry Point would only
engage in mine laying exercises as described below in the waters around
BT-9. No detonations of any mine device are involved with this
training.
During mine laying, a fixed-wing or maritime patrol aircraft (P-3
or P-8) typically drops a series of about four inert mine shapes in an
offensive or defensive pattern, making multiple passes along a pre-
determined flight azimuth, and dropping one or more shapes each time.
Mine simulation shapes include MK76, MK80 series, and BDU practice
bombs ranging from 25 to 2,000 pounds in weight. There is an attempt to
fly undetected to the area where the mines are laid with either a low
or high altitude tactic flight. The shapes are scored for accuracy as
they enter the water and the aircrew is later debriefed on their
performance. The training shapes are inert (no detonations occur) and
expendable.
Bombing Exercises
The purpose of bombing exercises is to train pilots in destroying
or disabling enemy ships or boats. During training, fixed wing or
rotary wing aircraft deliver bombs against surface maritime targets at
BT-9 or BT-11,day or night, using either unguided or precision-guided
munitions. Unguided munitions include MK-76 and BDU-45 inert training
bombs, and MK-80 series of inert bombs (no cluster munitions
authorized). Precision-guided munitions consist of laser-guided bombs
(inert) and laser-guided training rounds (inert). Typically, two
aircraft approach the target (principally BT-9) from an altitude of
approximately 914 m (3,000 ft) up to 4,572 m (15,000 ft) and, when on
an established range, the aircraft adhere to designated ingress and
egress routes. Typical bomb release altitude is 914 m (3,000 ft) for
unguided munitions or above 4,572 m (15,000 ft) and in excess of 1.8 km
(1 nm) for precision-guided munitions. However, the lowest minimum
altitude for ordnance delivery (inert bombs) would be 152 m (500 ft).
Onboard laser designators or laser designators from a support
aircraft or ground support personnel are used to illuminate certified
targets for use when using laser guided weapons. Due to target
maintenance issues, live bombs have not been dropped at the BT-9
targets for the past few years although these munitions are authorized
for use. For the effective IHA timeframe, the Marine Corps would not
use live bombs. Live rockets and grenades; however, have been expended
at BT-9.
Air-to-surface bombing exercises have the potential to occur on a
daily basis. The standard sortie consists of two aircraft per bombing
run. The frequency of these exercises is dependent on squadron level
training requirements, deployment status, and range availability;
therefore, there is no set pattern or specific time of year or month
when this training occurs. Normal operating hours for the range are 8
a.m. to 11 p.m., Monday through Friday; however, the range is available
for use 365 days per year.
Gunnery Exercises
During gunnery training, fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft expend
smaller munitions targeted at the bombing targets with the purpose of
hitting them. However, some small arms may land in the water. Rotary
wing exercises involve either CH-53, UH-1, CH-46, MV-22, or H-60
rotary-wing aircraft with mounted 7.62 mm or .50 cal machine guns. Each
gunner expends approximately 800 rounds of 7.62 mm and 200 rounds of
.50 cal ammunition in each exercise. These may be live or inert.
Fixed wing gunnery exercises involve the flight of two aircraft
that begin to descend to the target from an altitude of approximately
914 m (3,000 ft) while still several miles away. Within a distance of
1,219 m (4,000 ft) from the target, each aircraft fires a burst of
approximately 30 rounds before reaching an altitude of 305 m (1,000
ft), then breaks off and repositions for another strafing run until
each aircraft expends its exercise ordnance allowance of approximately
250 rounds. In total, about 8-12 passes are made by each aircraft per
exercise. Typically these fixed wing exercise events involve an F/A-18
and AH-1 with Vulcan M61A1/A2, 20 mm cannon; AV-8 with GAU-12, 25 mm
cannon.
Rocket Exercises
Rocket exercises are carried out similar to bombing exercises.
Fixed- and rotary-wing aircraft crews launch rockets at surface
maritime targets, day and night, to train for destroying or disabling
enemy ships or boats. These operations employ 2.75-inch and 5-inch
rockets. Generally, the average number of rockets delivered per sortie
is approximately 14. As with the bombing exercise, there is no set
level or pattern of amount of sorties conducted.
Munitions Descriptions
We refer the reader to Tables 2 and 3 for a complete list of the
ordnance authorized for use at BT-9 and BT-11, respectively. There are
several varieties and net explosive weights (for live munition used at
BT-9) can vary according to the variety. All practice bombs are inert
and used to simulate the same ballistic properties of service type
bombs. They are manufactured as either solid cast metal bodies or thin
sheet metal containers. Since practice bombs contain no explosive
filler, a practice bomb signal cartridge (smoke) is used for visual
observation of weapon target impact. Practice bombs provide a low cost
training device for pilot and ground handling crews. Due to the
relatively small amount of explosive material in practice bombs (small
signal charge), the availability of ranges for training is greatly
increased.
When a high explosive detonates, it is converted almost instantly
into a gas at very high pressure and temperature. Under the pressure of
the gases thus generated, the weapon case expands and breaks into
fragments. The air surrounding the casing is compressed and shock
(blast) wave is transmitted into it. Typical initial values for a high-
explosive weapon are 200 kilobars of pressure (1 bar = 1 atmosphere)
and 5,000 degrees Celsius (9,032 degrees Fahrenheit). There are five
types of explosive sources used at BT-9: 2.75-inch Rocket High
Explosives, 5-inch Rocket High Explosives, 30 mm High Explosives, 40 mm
High Explosives, and G911 grenades. No live munitions are used at BT-
11.
[[Page 19228]]
Table 2--Description of Munitions Used at BT-9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ordnance Description Net explosive weight
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MK-76 Practice Bomb (inert)........... 25-pound teardrop-shaped cast metal (of signal cartridge) varies,
bomb, with a bore tube for installation maximum 0.083800 lbs.
of a signal cartridge.
BDU-33 Practice Bomb (inert).......... Air Force MK 76 practice bomb........... same as above.
BDU-48 Practice Bomb (inert).......... 10-pound metal cylindrical bomb body same as above.
with a bore tube for installation of a
signal cartridge.
BDU-45 Practice Bomb (inert).......... 500-pound metal bomb either sand or (of signal cartridges, total
water filled. Two signal cartridges.. 0.1676 lbs.
BDU-50 Practice Bomb (inert).......... 500-pound metal bomb either sand or same as above.
water filled. Two signal cartridges..
MK-81 Practice Bomb (inert)........... 250-pound bomb.......................... 0.
MK-82 Practice Bomb (inert)........... 500-pound bomb.......................... 0.
MK-83 Practice Bomb (inert)........... 1,000-pound bomb configured like BDU 45. 0.1676 lbs.
MK-84 Practice Bomb (inert) (special 2,000-pound bomb configured like BDU 45. 0.1676 lbs.
exception use only).
2.75-inch (inert)..................... Unguided 2.75 inch diameter rocket...... 0.
5-inch Zuni (inert)................... Unguided 5 inch diameter rocket......... 0.
5-inch Zuni (live).................... Unguided 5-inch diameter rocket......... 15 lbs.
2.75wp (inert)........................ 2.75-inch rocket containing white 0.
phosphorous.
2.75HE................................ High Explosive, 2.75 inch rocket........ 4.8 lbs.
0.50 cal (inert)...................... Machine gun rounds...................... 0.
7.62 mm (inert).......................
20 mm (inert).........................
25mm (inert)..........................
30 mm (inert).........................
40 mm (inert).........................
25 mm HE (live)....................... High Explosive Incendiary, Live machine 0.269 lbs.
gun rounds.
Self Protection Flare................. Aerial flare............................ 0.
Chaff................................. 18-pound chaff canister................. 0.
LUU-2................................. 30-pound high intensity illumination 0.
flare.
Laser Guided Training Round (LGTR) 89-pound inert training bomblet......... 0.
(inert).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3--Description of Munitions Used at BT-11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ordnance Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MK76 Practice Bomb..................... 25-pound teardrop-shaped cast
metal bomb body, with a bore
tube for installation of a
signal cartridge.
BDU 33 Practice Bomb................... Air Force designation for MK 76
practice bomb.
BDU 48 Practice Bomb................... 10-pound metal cylindrical bomb
body with a bore tube for
installation of a signal
cartridge.
BDU 45 Practice Bomb................... 500-pound metal bomb body
either sand or water filled.
Configured with either low
drag conical tail fins or high
drag tail fins for retarded
weapons delivery. Two signal
cartridges installed.
MK 81 Practice Bomb.................... 250-pound inert bomb
MK 82 Practice Bomb.................... 500-pound inert bomb.
2.75-inch.............................. Unguided 2.75 inch diameter
rocket.
5-inch Zuni............................ 5 inch diameter rocket.
WP-2.75-inch........................... White phosphorous 7-pound
rocket.
0.50 cal............................... Inert machine gun rounds.
7.62 mm................................
5.56 mm................................
20 mm..................................
30 mm..................................
40 mm..................................
TOW.................................... Wire guided 56-pound anti-tank
missile.
Self Protection Flare.................. Aerial flare.
SMD SAMS............................... 1.5-pound smoking flare.
LUU-2.................................. 30-pound high-intensity
illumination flare.
Laser Guided Training Round (LGTR)..... 89-pound inert training
bomblet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The amounts of all ordnance to be expended at BT-9 and BT-11 (both
surface-to-surface and air-to-surface) are 1,225,815 and 1,254,684
rounds, respectively (see Table 4 and 5).
[[Page 19229]]
Table 4--Amount of Live and Inert Munitions That Would Be Expended at BT-9, Annually
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed number of
Proposed munitions \1\ Proposed total No. of explosive rounds having Net explosive weight
rounds an impact on the water (lb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Arms Rounds Excluding .50 cal.. 525,610................ N/A.................... N/A.
.50 Cal.............................. 568,515................ N/A.................... N/A.
Large Arms Rounds--Live.............. 5,000.................. 40mm HE: 5,000......... 0.1199.
Large Arms Rounds--Inert............. 117,051................ N/A.................... N/A.
Rockets--Live........................ 48..................... 2.75'' Rocket: 48...... 4.8
20..................... 5'' Rocket: 20......... 15.0.
Rockets--Inert....................... 876.................... N/A.................... N/A.
Bombs and Grenades--Live............. 0...................... G911 Grenade: N/A...... 0.5.
Bombs and Grenades--Inert............ 4,199.................. N/A.................... N/A.
Pyrotechnics......................... 4,496.................. N/A.................... N/A.
Total............................ 1,225,815.............. ....................... N/A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Munitions may be expended from aircraft or small boats.
Table 5--Amount of Inert Munitions That Would Be Expended at BT-11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed total
Proposed munitions \1\ No. of rounds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Arms Rounds Excluding .50 Cal..................... 610,957
.50 Cal................................................. 366,775
Large Arms Rounds....................................... 240,334
Rockets................................................. 5,592
Bombs and Grenades...................................... 22,114
Pyrotechnics............................................ 8,912
---------------
Total............................................... 1,254,684
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Munitions may be expended from aircraft or small boats.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
Forty marine mammal species occur within the nearshore and offshore
waters of North Carolina; however, the majority of these species are
solely oceanic in distribution. Only one marine mammal species, the
bottlenose dolphin, has been repeatedly sighted in Pamlico Sound, while
an additional species, the endangered West Indian manatee (Trichechus
manatus), has been sighted rarely (Lefebvre et al, 2001; DoN 2003). The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service oversees management of the manatee;
therefore, we would not include a proposed authorization to harass
manatees and we will not discuss this species further in this notice.
No sightings of the endangered North Atlantic right whale
(Eubalaena glacialis) or other large whales have been observed within
Pamlico Sound or in vicinity of the bombing targets (Kenney, 2006). No
suitable habitat exists for these species in the shallow Pamlico Sound
or bombing target vicinity; therefore, whales would not be affected by
the specified activities. Thus, we will not discuss them further in
this notice. Other dolphins, such as Atlantic spotted (Stenella
frontalis) and common dolphins (Delphinus delphis), are oceanic in
distribution and do not venture into the shallow, brackish waters of
southern Pamlico Sound.
The specified activity has the potential to affect only one marine
mammal species under our jurisdiction: the bottlenose dolphin. We refer
the public to Waring et al. (2011) for general information on this
species which is presented below this section. The publication is
available at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/ao2011.pdf. We
present a summary of information on the species below this section.
Bottlenose Dolphin
California sea lions are not listed as threatened or endangered
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
however, they are categorized as depleted (and thus strategic) under
the MMPA.
Four out of the seven designated coastal stocks for bottlenose
dolphins may occur in North Carolina waters at some part of the year:
the Northern Migratory stock (NM; winter); the Southern Migratory stock
(SM; winter); the Northern North Carolina Estuarine stock (NNCE;
resident, year round); and the more recently identified Southern North
Carolina Estuarine stock (SNCE; resident, year round).
Dolphins encountered at the BTs likely belong to the NNCE and SNCE
stock; however, this may not always be the case. NMFS' 2011 stock
assessment report provides further detail on stock delineation.
NMFS provides abundance estimates for the four aforementioned
migratory and resident coastal stocks in its 2011 stock assessment
report. The best available abundance estimate for the NNCE stock is the
combined abundance from estuarine (Read et al., 2003) and coastal
(aerial survey data dating from 2002) waters. This combined estimate is
1,387 (Waring et al., 2011). Similarly, the best available abundance
estimate for the SNCE stock is the combined abundance from estuarine
and coastal waters. This combined estimate is 2,454 (Waring et al.,
2011). The best abundance estimate for the NM stock, resulting from
2002 aerial surveys, is 9,604 (Waring et al., 2011). Using the same
information, the resulting best abundance estimate for the SM stock is
12,482 (Waring et al., 2011).
From July 2004 through April 2006, the Services Southeast Fisheries
Science Center conducted 41 aerial surveys to document the seasonal
distribution and estimated density of sea turtles and dolphins within
Core Sound and portions of Pamlico Sound, and coastal waters extending
one mile offshore (Goodman et al, 2007). Pamlico Sound was divided into
two survey areas: western (encompassing BT-9 and BT-11) and eastern
(including Core Sound and the eastern portion of restricted air space
R-5306). In total, 281 dolphins were sighted in the western range. To
account for animals likely missed during sightings (i.e., those below
the surface), Goodman et al. (2007) estimate that, in reality, 415
dolphins were present. Densities for bottlenose dolphins in the western
part of Pamlico Sound were calculated to be 0.0272 per square kilometer
(km\2\) in winter and 0.2158 per km\2\ in autumn. Dolphins were sighted
throughout the entire range when mean sea surface temperature was
7.60[deg] C to 30.82[deg] C (45.6 to 87.5[emsp14][deg]F), with fewer
dolphins sighted as water temperatures increased. Like in Mayer (2003),
dolphins were found in higher numbers around BT-11, a range where no
live firing occurs.
In 2000, Duke University Marine Lab (DUML), conducted a boat-based
mark-recapture survey throughout the estuaries, bays and sounds of
North Carolina (Read et al., 2003). This summer survey yielded a
dolphin density of 0.183/km\2\ (0.071 mi\2\) based on an estimate of
919 dolphins for the northern inshore waters divided by an
[[Page 19230]]
estimated 5,015 km\2\ (1,936 mi\2\) survey area. Additionally, from
July 2002-June 2003, the USMC supported DUML to conduct dolphin surveys
specifically in and around BT-9 and BT-11. During these surveys, one
sighting in the restricted area surrounding BT-9 and two sightings in
proximity to BT-11 were observed, as well as seven sightings in waters
adjacent to the BTs. In total, 276 bottlenose dolphins were sighted
ranging in group size from two to 70 animals with mean dolphin density
in BT-11 more than twice as large as the density of any of the other
areas; however, the daily densities were not significantly different
(Maher, 2003). Estimated dolphin density at BT-9 and BT-11 based on
these surveys were calculated to be 0.11 dolphins/km\2\, and 1.23
dolphins/km\2\, respectively, based on boat surveys conducted from July
2002 through June 2003 (excluding April, May, Sept. and Jan.). However,
the Marine Corps choose to estimate take of dolphins based on the
higher density reported from the summer 2000 surveys (0.183/km\2\).
Although the aerial surveys were conducted year round and therefore
provide for seasonal density estimates, the average year-round density
from the aerial surveys is 0.0936, lower than the 0.183/km\2\ density
chosen to calculate take for purposes of this MMPA authorization.
Additionally, Goodman et al. (2007) acknowledged that boat based
density estimates may be more accurate than the uncorrected estimates
derived from the aerial surveys.
In Pamlico Sound, bottlenose dolphins concentrate in shallow water
habitats along shorelines, and few, if any, individuals are present in
the central portions of the sounds (Gannon, 2003; Read et al., 2003a,
2003b). The dolphins utilize shallow habitats, such as tributary creeks
and the edges of the Neuse River, where the bottom depth is less than
3.5 m (Gannon, 2003). Fine-scale distribution of dolphins seems to
relate to the presence of topography or vertical structure, such as the
steeply-sloping bottom near the shore and oyster reefs, which may be
used to facilitate prey capture (Gannon, 2003). Results of a passive
acoustic monitoring effort conducted from 2006-2007 by Duke University
researchers validated this information. Vocalizations of dolphins in
the BT-11 vicinity were higher in August and September than
vocalization detection at BT-9, an open water area (Read et al., 2007).
Additionally, detected vocalizations of dolphins were more frequent at
night for the BT-9 area and during early morning hours at BT-11.
Unlike migrating whales which display strong temporal foraging and
mating/birthing periods, many bottlenose dolphins in Pamlico Sound are
residents and mate year round. However, dolphins in the southeast U.S.
do display some reproductive seasonality. Based on neonate stranding
records, sighting data, and births by known females, the populations of
dolphins that frequent the North Carolina estuarine waters have calving
peaks in spring but calving continues throughout the summer and is
followed by a smaller number of fall births (Thayer et al., 2003).
Bottlenose dolphins can typically hear within a broad frequency
range of 0.04 to 160 kiloHertz (kHz) (Au, 1993; Turl, 1993).
Electrophysiological experiments suggest that the bottlenose dolphin
brain has a dual analysis system: one specialized for ultrasonic clicks
and another for lower-frequency sounds, such as whistles (Ridgway,
2000). Scientists have reported a range of highest sensitivity between
25 and 70 kHz, with peaks in sensitivity at 25 and 50 kHz (Nachtigall
et al., 2000). Recent research on the same individuals indicates that
auditory thresholds obtained by electrophysiological methods correlate
well with those obtained in behavior studies, except at some lower (10
kHz) and higher (80 and 100 kHz) frequencies (Finneran and Houser,
2006).
Sounds emitted by bottlenose dolphins have been classified into two
broad categories: pulsed sounds (including clicks and burst-pulses) and
narrow-band continuous sounds (whistles), which usually are frequency
modulated. Clicks have a dominant frequency range of 110 to 130 kHz and
a source level of 218 to 228 decibels (dB) re: 1 [mu]Pa (peak-to-peak)
(Au, 1993) and 3.4 to 14.5 kHz at 125 to 173 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (peak-to-
peak) (Ketten, 1998). Whistles are primarily associated with
communication and can serve to identify specific individuals (i.e.,
signature whistles) (Caldwell and Caldwell, 1965; Janik et al., 2006).
Up to 52 percent of whistles produced by bottlenose dolphin groups with
mother-calf pairs can be classified as signature whistles (Cook et al.,
2004). Sound production is also influenced by group type (single or
multiple individuals), habitat, and behavior (Nowacek, 2005). Bray
calls (low-frequency vocalizations; majority of energy below 4 kHz),
for example, are used when capturing fish, specifically sea trout
(Salmo trutta) and Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), in some regions
(i.e., Moray Firth, Scotland) (Janik, 2000). Additionally, whistle
production has been observed to increase while feeding (Acevedo-
Guti[eacute]rrez and Stienessen, 2004; Cook et al., 2004).
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
As mentioned previously, with respect to military readiness
activities, Section 3(18)(B) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: (i)
Any act that injures or has the significant potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A Harassment];
or (ii) any act that disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine mammal
or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of natural
behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration,
surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a point where
such behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly altered [Level
B Harassment].
The Marine Corps concluded that Level B harassment to marine
mammals may occur incidental to munitions firing noise and pressure at
the bombing targets. These military readiness activities would result
in increased noise levels, explosions, and munitions debris within
bottlenose dolphin habitat. In addition, we also considered the
potential for harassment from vessel and aircraft operation. Our
analysis of potential impacts from these factors, including
consideration of the Marine Corps' analysis in its application, is
outlined in the following sections.
Anthropogenic Sound
Marine mammals respond to various types of anthropogenic sounds
introduced in the ocean environment. Responses are highly variable and
depend on a suite of internal and external factors which in turn
results in varying degrees of significance (NRC, 2003; Southall et al.,
2007). Internal factors include: (1) Individual hearing sensitivity,
activity pattern, and motivational and behavioral state (e.g., feeding,
traveling) at the time it receives the stimulus; (2) past exposure of
the animal to the noise, which may lead to habituation or
sensitization; (3) individual noise tolerance; and (4) demographic
factors such as age, sex, and presence of dependent offspring. External
factors include: (1) non-acoustic characteristics of the sound source
(e.g., if it is moving or stationary); (2) environmental variables
(e.g., substrate) which influence sound transmission; and (3) habitat
characteristics and location (e.g., open ocean vs. confined area). To
determine whether an animal perceives the sound, the received level,
frequency, and duration of the sound are compared to ambient noise
levels and the species'
[[Page 19231]]
hearing sensitivity range. That is, if the frequency of an introduced
sound is outside of the species' frequency hearing range, it cannot be
heard. Similarly, if the frequency is on the upper or lower end of the
species hearing range, the sound must be louder in order to be heard.
Marine mammal responses to anthropogenic noise are typically subtle
and can include visible and acoustic reactions such as avoidance,
altered dive patterns and cessation of pre-exposure activities and
vocalization reactions such as increasing or decreasing call rates or
shifting call frequency. Responses can also be unobservable, such as
stress hormone production and auditory trauma or fatigue. It is not
always known how these behavioral and physiological responses relate to
significant effects (e.g., long-term effects or individual/population
consequences); however, individuals and populations can be monitored to
provide some insight into the consequences of exposing marine mammals
to noise. For example, Haviland-Howell et al. (2007) compared sighting
rates of bottlenose dolphins within the Wilmington, NC stretch of the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (ICW) on weekends, when recreational
vessel traffic was high, to weekdays, when vessel traffic was
relatively minimal. The authors found that dolphins were less often
sighted in the ICW during times of increased boat traffic (i.e., on
weekends) and theorized that because vessel noise falls within the
frequencies of dolphin communication whistles and primary energy of
most fish vocalizations, the continuous vessel traffic along that
stretch of the ICW could result in social and foraging impacts.
However, the extent to which these impacts affect individual health and
population structure is unknown.
A full assessment of marine mammal responses and disturbances when
exposed to anthropogenic sound can be found in our proposed rulemaking
for the Navy Cherry Point Range Complex (74 FR 11057, March 16, 2009).
That rulemaking was made final on June 15, 2009 (74 FR 28370). In
summary, sound exposure may result in physiological impacts, stress
responses, and behavioral responses which could affect proximate or
ultimate life functions. Proximate life history functions are the
functions that the animal is engaged in at the time of acoustic
exposure. The ultimate life functions are those that enable an animal
to contribute to the population (or stock, or species, etc.).
I. Physiology-Hearing Threshold Shift
In mammals, high-intensity sound may rupture the eardrum, damage
the small bones in the middle ear, or over stimulate the
electromechanical hair cells that convert the fluid motions caused by
sound into neural impulses that are sent to the brain. Lower level
exposures may cause a loss of hearing sensitivity, termed a threshold
shift (TS) (Miller, 1974). Incidence of TS may be either permanent,
referred to as permanent threshold shift (PTS), or temporary, referred
to as temporary threshold shift (TTS). The amplitude, duration,
frequency, and temporal pattern, and energy distribution of sound
exposure all affect the amount of associated TS and the frequency range
in which it occurs. As amplitude and duration of sound exposure
increase, generally, so does the amount of TS and recovery time. Human
non-impulsive noise exposure guidelines are based on exposures of equal
energy (the same SEL) producing equal amounts of hearing impairment
regardless of how the sound energy is distributed in time (NIOSH 1998).
Until recently, previous marine mammal TTS studies have also generally
supported this equal energy relationship (Southall et al., 2007). Three
newer studies, two by Mooney et al. (2009a, 2009b) on a single
bottlenose dolphin either exposed to playbacks of Navy MFAS or octave-
band noise (4-8 kHz) and one by Kastak et al. (2007) on a single
California sea lion exposed to airborne octave-band noise (centered at
2.5 kHz), concluded that for all noise exposure situations the equal
energy relationship may not be the best indicator to predict TTS onset
levels. Generally, with sound exposures of equal energy, those that
were quieter (lower sound pressure level [SPL]) with longer duration
were found to induce TTS onset more than those of louder (higher SPL)
and shorter duration (more similar to noise from AS Cherry Point
exercises). For intermittent sounds, less TS will occur than from a
continuous exposure with the same energy (some recovery will occur
between exposures) (Kryter et al., 1966; Ward, 1997). Additionally,
though TTS is temporary, very prolonged exposure to sound strong enough
to elicit TTS, or shorter-term exposure to sound levels well above the
TTS threshold, can cause PTS, at least in terrestrial mammals (Kryter,
1985). However, these studies highlight the inherent complexity of
predicting TTS onset in marine mammals, as well as the importance of
considering exposure duration when assessing potential impacts.
PTS consists of non-recoverable physical damage to the sound
receptors in the ear, which can include total or partial deafness, or
an impaired ability to hear sounds in specific frequency ranges; PTS is
considered Level A harassment. TTS is recoverable and is considered to
result from temporary, non-injurious impacts to hearing-related
tissues; TTS is considered Level B harassment.
Permanent Threshold Shift
Auditory trauma represents direct mechanical injury to hearing
related structures, including tympanic membrane rupture,
disarticulation of the middle ear ossicles, and trauma to the inner ear
structures such as the organ of Corti and the associated hair cells.
Auditory trauma is irreversible and considered to be an injury that
could result in PTS. PTS results from exposure to intense sounds that
cause a permanent loss of inner or outer cochlear hair cells or exceed
the elastic limits of certain tissues and membranes in the middle and
inner ears and result in changes in the chemical composition of the
inner ear fluids. In some cases, there can be total or partial deafness
across all frequencies, whereas in other cases, the animal has an
impaired ability to hear sounds in specific frequency ranges. There is
no empirical data for onset of PTS in any marine mammal, and therefore,
PTS-onset must be estimated from TTS-onset measurements and from the
rate of TTS growth with increasing exposure levels above the level
eliciting TTS-onset. PTS is presumed to be likely if the hearing
threshold is reduced by >= 40 dB (i.e., 40 dB of TTS). Relationships
between TTS and PTS thresholds have not been studied in marine mammals,
but are assumed to be similar to those in humans and other terrestrial
mammals.
Temporary Threshold Shift
TTS is the mildest form of hearing impairment that can occur during
exposure to a loud sound (Kryter, 1985). Southall et al. (2007)
indicate that although PTS is a tissue injury, TTS is not because the
reduced hearing sensitivity following exposure to intense sound results
primarily from fatigue, not loss, of cochlear hair cells and supporting
structures and is reversible. Accordingly, NMFS classifies TTS as Level
B Harassment, not Level A Harassment (injury); however, NMFS does not
consider the onset of TTS to be the lowest level at which Level B
Harassment may occur (see III. Behavior section below this section).
Southall et al. (2007) considers a 6 dB TTS (i.e., baseline hearing
thresholds
[[Page 19232]]
are elevated by 6 dB) sufficient to be recognized as an unequivocal
deviation and thus a sufficient definition of TTS onset. TTS in
bottlenose dolphin hearing have been experimentally induced. For
example, Finneran et al. (2002) exposed a trained captive bottlenose
dolphin to a seismic watergun simulator with a single acoustic pulse.
No TTS was observed in the dolphin at the highest exposure condition
(peak: 207 kPa [30psi]; peak-to-peak: 228 dB re: 1 microPa; SEL: 188 dB
re 1 microPa\2\-s). Schludt et al. (2000) demonstrated temporary shifts
in masked hearing thresholds in five bottlenose dolphins occurring
generally between 192 and 201 dB rms (192 and 201 dB SEL) after
exposure to intense, non-pulse, 1-s tones at, 3kHz, 10kHz, and 20 kHz.
TTS onset occurred at mean sound exposure level of 195 dB rms (195 dB
SEL). At 0.4 kHz, no subjects exhibited threshold shifts after SPL
exposures of 193dB re: 1 microPa (192 dB re: 1 microPa\2\-s). In the
same study, at 75 kHz, one dolphin exhibited a TTS after exposure at
182 dB SPL re: 1 microPa but not at higher exposure levels. Another
dolphin experienced no threshold shift after exposure to maximum SPL
levels of 193 dB re: 1 microPa at the same frequency. Frequencies of
explosives used at MCAS Cherry Point range from 1-25 kHz; the range
where dolphin TTS onset occurred at 195 dB rms in the Schlundt et al.
(2000) study.
Preliminary research indicates that TTS and recovery after noise
exposure are frequency dependent and that an inverse relationship
exists between exposure time and sound pressure level associated with
exposure (Mooney et al., 2005; Mooney, 2006). For example, Nachtigall
et al. (2003) measured TTS in a bottlenose dolphin and found an average
11 dB shift following a 30 minute net exposure to OBN at a 7.5 kHz
center frequency (max SPL of 179 dB re: 1 microPa; SEL: 212-214 dB re:1
microPa\2\-s). No TTS was observed after exposure to the same duration
and frequency noise with maximum SPLs of 165 and 171 dB re:1 microPa.
After 50 minutes of exposure to the same 7.5 kHz frequency OBN,
Natchigall et al. (2004) measured a 4-8 dB shift (max SPL: 160dB re
1microPa; SEL: 193-195 dB re:1 microPa\2\-s). Finneran et al. (2005)
concluded that a sound exposure level of 195 dB re 1 [mu]Pa2-s is a
reasonable threshold for the onset of TTS in bottlenose dolphins
exposed to mid-frequency tones.
II. Stress Response
An acoustic source is considered a potential stressor if, by its
action on the animal, via auditory or non-auditory means, it may
produce a stress response in the animal. Here, the stress response will
refer to an increase in energetic expenditure that results from
exposure to the stressor and which is predominantly characterized by
either the stimulation of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) or the
hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis (Reeder and Kramer, 2005).
The SNS response to a stressor is immediate and acute and is
characterized by the release of the catecholamine neurohormones
norepinephrine and epinephrine (i.e., adrenaline). These hormones
produce elevations in the heart and respiration rate, increase
awareness, and increase the availability of glucose and lipids for
energy. The HPA response is ultimately defined by increases in the
secretion of the glucocorticoid steroid hormones, predominantly
cortisol in mammals. The presence and magnitude of a stress response in
an animal depends on a number of factors. These include the animal's
life history stage (e.g., neonate, juvenile, adult), the environmental
conditions, reproductive or developmental state, and experience with
the stressor. Not only will these factors be subject to individual
variation, but they will also vary within an individual over time. The
stress response may or may not result in a behavioral change, depending
on the characteristics of the exposed animal. However, provided a
stress response occurs, we assume that some contribution is made to the
animal's allostatic load. Any immediate effect of exposure that
produces an injury is assumed to also produce a stress response and
contribute to the allostatic load. Allostasis is the ability of an
animal to maintain stability through change by adjusting its physiology
in response to both predictable and unpredictable events (McEwen and
Wingfield, 2003). If the acoustic source does not produce tissue
effects, is not perceived by the animal, or does not produce a stress
response by any other means, we assume that the exposure does not
contribute to the allostatic load. Additionally, without a stress
response or auditory masking, it is assumed that there can be no
behavioral change.
III. Behavior
Changes in marine mammal behavior in response to anthropogenic
noise may include altered travel directions, increased swimming speeds,
changes in dive, surfacing, respiration and feeding patterns, and
changes in vocalizations. As described above, lower level physiological
stress responses could also co-occur with altered behavior; however,
stress responses are more difficult to detect and fewer data exist
relative to specific received levels of sound.
Acoustic Masking
Marine mammals use acoustic signals for a variety of purposes,
which differ among species, but include communication between
individuals, navigation, foraging, reproduction, and learning about
their environment (Erbe and Farmer, 2000; Tyack, 2000). Masking, or
auditory interference, generally occurs when sounds in the environment
are louder than, and of a similar frequency as, auditory signals an
animal is trying to receive. Masking is a phenomenon that affects
animals that are trying to receive acoustic information about their
environment, including sounds from other members of their species,
predators, prey, and sounds that allow them to orient in their
environment. Masking these acoustic signals can disturb the behavior of
individual animals, groups of animals, or entire populations.
Southall et al. (2007) defines auditory masking as the partial or
complete reduction in the audibility of signals due to the presence of
interfering noise with the degree of masking depending on the spectral,
temporal, and spatial relationships between signals and masking noise,
as well as the respective received levels. Masking of sender
communication space can be considered as the amount of change in a
sender's communication space caused by the presence of other sounds,
relative to a pre-industrial ambient noise condition (Clark et al.,
2009). Unlike auditory fatigue, which always results in a stress
response because the sensory tissues are being stimulated beyond their
normal physiological range, masking may or may not result in a stress
response, depending on the degree and duration of the masking effect.
Masking may also result in a unique circumstance where an animal's
ability to detect other sounds is compromised without the animal's
knowledge. This could conceivably result in sensory impairment and
subsequent behavior change; in this case, the change in behavior is the
lack of a response that would normally be made if sensory impairment
did not occur. For this reason, masking also may lead directly to
behavior change without first causing a stress response. Projecting
noise into the marine environment which causes acoustic masking is
considered Level B harassment as it can disrupt natural behavioral
patterns by interrupting or
[[Page 19233]]
limiting the marine mammal's receipt or transmittal of important
information or environmental cues. To compensate for masking, marine
mammals, including bottlenose dolphins, are known to increase their
levels of vocalization as a function of background noise by increasing
call repetition and amplitude, shifting calls higher frequencies, and/
or changing the structure of call content (Lesage et al., 1999;
Scheifele et al., 2005; McIwem, 2006).
While it may occur temporarily, we do not expect auditory masking
to result in detrimental impacts to an individual's or population's
survival, fitness, or reproductive success. Dolphins are not confined
to the BT ranges; allowing for movement out of area to avoid masking
impacts. The Marine Corps would also conduct visual sweeps of the area
before any training exercise and implement training delay mitigation
measures if a dolphin is sighted within designated zones (see Proposed
Mitigation Measures section). As discussed previously, the Marine Corps
has been working with DUML to collect baseline information on dolphins
in Pamlico Sound, specifically dolphin abundance and habitat use around
the BTs.
Assessment of Marine Mammal Impacts from Explosive Ordnances
MCAS Cherry Point plans to use five types of explosive sources
during its training exercises: 2.75-inch Rocket High Explosives, 5-inch
Rocket High Explosives, 30 mm High Explosives, 40 mm High Explosives,
and G911 grenades. The underwater explosions from these weapons would
send a shock wave and blast noise through the water, release gaseous
by-products, create an oscillating bubble, and cause a plume of water
to shoot up from the water surface. The shock wave and blast noise are
of most concern to marine animals. In general, potential impacts from
explosive detonations can range from brief effects (such as short term
behavioral disturbance), tactile perception, physical discomfort,
slight injury of the internal organs and the auditory system, to death
of the animal (Yelverton et al., 1973; O'Keeffe and Young, 1984; DoN,
2001).
Explosives produce significant acoustic energy across several
frequency decades of bandwidth (i.e., broadband). Propagation loss is
sufficiently sensitive to frequency as to require model estimates at
several frequencies over such a wide band. The effects of an underwater
explosion on a marine mammal depend on many factors, including the
size, type, and depth of both the animal and the explosive charge; the
depth of the water column; and the standoff distance between the charge
and the animal, as well as the sound propagation properties of the
environment. The net explosive weight (or NEW) of an explosive is the
weight of TNT required to produce an equivalent explosive power. The
detonation depth of an explosive is particularly important due to a
propagation effect known as surface-image interference. For sources
located near the sea surface, a distinct interference pattern arises
from the coherent sum of the two paths that differ only by a single
reflection from the pressure-release surface. As the source depth and/
or the source frequency decreases, these two paths increasingly,
destructively interfere with each other, reaching total cancellation at
the surface (barring surface-reflection scattering loss). Marine Corps
conservatively estimates that all explosives would detonate at a 1.2 m
(3.9 ft) water depth. This is the worst case scenario as the purpose of
training is to hit the target, resulting in an in-air explosion.
The firing sequence for some of the munitions consists of a number
of rapid bursts, often lasting a second or less. The maximum firing
time is 10-15 second bursts. Due to the tight spacing in time, each
burst can be treated as a single detonation. For the energy metrics,
the impact area of a burst is computed using a source energy spectrum
that is the source spectrum for a single detonation scaled by the
number of rounds in a burst. For the pressure metrics, the impact area
for a burst is the same as the impact area of a single round. For all
metrics, the cumulative impact area of an event consisting of a certain
number of bursts is merely the product of the impact area of a single
burst and the number of bursts, as would be the case if the bursts are
sufficiently spaced in time or location as to insure that each burst is
affecting a different set of marine wildlife.
Physical damage of tissues resulting from a shock wave (from an
explosive detonation) is classified as an injury. Blast effects are
greatest at the gas-liquid interface (Landsberg, 2000) and gas
containing organs, particularly the lungs and gastrointestinal tract,
are especially susceptible to damage (Goertner, 1982; Hill 1978;
Yelverton et al., 1973). Nasal sacs, larynx, pharynx, trachea, and
lungs may be damaged by compression/expansion caused by the
oscillations of the blast gas bubble (Reidenberg and Laitman, 2003).
Severe damage (from the shock wave) to the ears can include tympanic
membrane rupture, fracture of the ossicles, damage to the cochlea,
hemorrhage, and cerebrospinal fluid leakage into the middle ear.
Non-lethal injury includes slight injury to internal organs and the
auditory system; however, delayed lethality can be a result of
individual or cumulative sublethal injuries (DoN, 2001). Immediate
lethal injury would be a result of massive combined trauma to internal
organs as a direct result of proximity to the point of detonation (DoN,
2001). Exposure to distance explosions could result only in behavioral
changes. Masked underwater hearing thresholds in two bottlenose
dolphins and one beluga whale have been measured before and after
exposure to impulsive underwater sounds with waveforms resembling
distant signatures of underwater explosions (Finneran et al., 2000).
The authors found no temporary shifts in masked-hearing thresholds,
defined as a 6-dB or larger increase in threshold over pre-exposure
levels, had been observed at the highest impulse level generated (500
kg at 1.7 km, peak pressure 70 kPa); however, disruptions of the
animals' trained behaviors began to occur at exposures corresponding to
5 kg at 9.3 km and 5 kg at 1.5 km for the dolphins and 500 kg at 1.9 km
for the beluga whale.
Generally, the higher the level of impulse and pressure level
exposure, the more severe the impact to an individual. While, in
general, dolphins could sustain injury or mortality if within very
close proximity to in-water explosion, monitoring and mitigation
measures employed by the Marine Corps before and during training
exercises, as would be required under any Authorization issued, are
designed to avoid any firing if a marine mammal is sighted within
designated BT zones (see Proposed Mitigation and Monitoring section).
No marine mammal injury or death has been attributed to the specified
activities described in the application. As such, and due to
implementation of the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures,
bottlenose dolphin injury, serious injury or mortality is not
anticipated nor would any be authorized.
Inert Ordnances
The potential risk to marine mammals from non-explosive ordnance
entails two possible sources of impacts: elevated sound levels or the
ordnance physically hitting an animal. The latter is discussed below in
the Munition Presence section. The USMC provided information that the
noise fields
[[Page 19234]]
generated in water by the firing of non-explosive ordnance indicate
that the energy radiated is about 1 to 2 percent of the total kinetic
energy of the impact. This energy level (and likely peak pressure
levels) is well below the TTS-energy threshold, even at 1-m from the
impact and is not expected to be audible to marine mammals. As such,
the noise generated by the in-water impact of non-explosive ordnance
will not result in take of marine mammals.
Training Debris
In addition to behavioral and physiological impacts from live fire
and ammunition testing, we have preliminarily analyzed impacts from
presence of munition debris in the water, as described in the Marine
Corps' application and 2009 EA. These impacts include falling debris,
ingestion of expended ordnance, and entanglement in parachute debris.
Ingestion of marine debris by marine mammals can cause digestive
tract blockages or damage the digestive system (Gorzelany, 1998;
Stamper et al., 2006). Debris could be either the expended ordnance or
non-munition related products such as chaff and self protection flares.
Expended ordnance would be small and sink to the bottom. Chaff is
composed of either aluminum foil or aluminum-coated glass fibers
designed to act as a visual smoke screen; hiding the aircraft from
enemy radar. Chaff also serves as a decoy for radar detection, allowing
aircraft to maneuver or egress from the area. The foil type currently
used is no longer manufactured, although it remains in the inventory
and is used primarily by B-52 bombers. Both types of chaff are cut into
dipoles ranging in length from 0.3 to over 2.0 inches. The aluminum
foil dipoles are 0.45 mils (0.00045 inches) thick and 6 to 8 mils wide.
The glass fiber dipoles are generally 1 mil (25.4 microns) in diameter,
including the aluminum coating. Chaff is packed into about 4-ounce
bundles. The major components of chaff are silica, aluminum, and
stearic acid; all naturally prevalent in the environment.
Based on the dispersion characteristics of chaff, concentrations
around the BTs would be low. For example, Hullar et al. (1999)
calculated that a 4.97-mile by 7.46-mile area (37.1 km\2\) would be
affected by deployment of a single cartridge containing 150 grams of
chaff; however, concentration would only be about 5.4 grams per square
nautical mile. This corresponds to fewer than 179,000 fibers per square
nautical mile or fewer than 0.005 fibers per square foot.
Self-protection flares are deployed to mislead or confuse heat-
sensitive or heat-seeking anti-aircraft systems. The flares are
magnesium pellets that, when ignited, burn for a short period of time
(less than 10 seconds) at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Air-deployed LUU-2
high-intensity illumination flares are used to illuminate targets,
enhancing a pilot's ability to see targets while using Night Vision
Goggles. The LUU-2B Flare has a light output rating of 1.8 x 10(6)
candlepower and at 1,000 feet altitude illuminates a circle on the
ground of 500 meters. The LUU-2 is housed in a pod or canister and is
deployed by ejection. The mechanism has a timer on it that deploys the
parachute and ignites the flare candle. The flare candle burns
magnesium at high temperature, emitting an intense bright white light.
The LUU-2 has a burn time of approximately 5 minutes while suspended
from a parachute. The pyrotechnic candle consumes the flare housing,
reducing flare weight, which in turn slows the rate of fall during the
last 2 minutes of burn time. At candle burnout an explosive bolt is
fired, releasing one parachute support cable, which causes the
parachute to collapse.
Ingestion of debris by dolphins is not likely, as dolphins
typically eat fish and other moving prey items. We solicited
information on evidence of debris ingestion from two marine mammal
veterinarians who have performed many necropsies on the protected
species of North Carolina's waters. In their experience, no necropsies
of bottlenose dolphins have revealed evidence of munition, parachute,
or chaff ingestion (pers. comm., Drs. C. Harms and D. Rostein, November
14, 2009). However, it was noted evidence of chaff ingestion would be
difficult to detect. In the chance that dolphins do ingest chaff, the
filaments are so fine they would likely pass through the digestive
system without complication. However, if the chaff is durable enough,
it might act as a linear foreign body. In such case, the intestines
bunch up on the line restricting movement of the line resulting in an
obstruction. The peristalsis on an immovable thin line can cause
intestinal lacerations and perforations (pers. comm., C. Harms,
November 14, 2009). This is a well-known complication in cats when they
ingest thread and which occurs occasionally with sea turtles ingesting
fishing line. The longevity of chaff filaments, based upon dispersion
rates, is unclear. Chaff exposed to synthetic seawater and aqueous
environments in the pH range of 4-10 exhibited varying levels of
degradation suggesting a short lifespan for the outer aluminum coating
(Farrell and Siciliano, 1998). The underlying filament is a flexible
silica core and composed of primarily silica dioxide. While no studies
have been conducted to evaluate the effects of chaff ingestion on
marine mammals, the effects are expected to be negligible based upon
chaff concentration in the environment, size of fibers, and available
toxicity data on fiberglass and aluminum. Given that the size of chaff
fibers are no more than 2 inches long, tidal flushing reduces
concentration in the environment, and chaff degradation rate, the
chance of chaff ingestions is unlikely; however, if swallowed, impacts
would be negligible.
Given that there is no evidence that dolphins ingest military
debris; dolphins in the Sound forage on moving prey suspended in the
water column while expended munition would sink; the property and
dispersion characteristics of chaff make potential for ingestion
discountable; and that Pamlico Sound is a tidal body of water with
continuing flushing, we have preliminarily determined that the presence
of training debris would not have an effect on dolphins in Pamlico
Sound.
Although sometimes large, expended parachutes (e.g., those from the
flares) are flimsy and structurally simple. Thus, we have preliminarily
determined that the probability of entanglement with a dolphin is low.
There are no known reports of live or stranded dolphins entangled in
parachute gear; fishing gear is usually the culprit of reported
entanglements. The Service's Marine Mammal Stranding Network (Network)
has established protocol for reporting marine mammals in peril. Should
any injured, stranded or entangled marine mammal be observed by USMC
personnel during training exercises, the sighting would be reported to
the Network within 24 hours of the observation.
Vessel and Aircraft Presence
The marine mammals most vulnerable to vessel strikes are slow-
moving and/or spend extended periods of time at the surface in order to
restore oxygen levels within their tissues after deep dives (e.g.,
right whales, fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus), and sperm whales
(Physeter macrocephalus)). Smaller marine mammals such as bottlenose
dolphins (the only marine mammal that would be encountered at the BTs)
are agile and move more quickly through the water, making them less
susceptible to ship strikes. We are not aware of any vessel strikes of
bottlenose dolphins in Pamlico Sound
[[Page 19235]]
during training operations. Therefore, we do not anticipate that Marine
Corps vessels engaged in the specified activity would strike any marine
mammals and no take from ship strike would be authorized in the
proposed Authorization.
Behaviorally, marine mammals may or may not respond to the
operation of vessels and associated noise. Responses to vessels vary
widely among marine mammals in general, but also among different
species of small cetaceans. Responses may include attraction to the
vessel (Richardson et al., 1995); altering travel patterns to avoid
vessels (Constantine, 2001; Nowacek et al., 2001; Lusseau, 2003, 2006);
relocating to other areas (Allen and Read, 2000); cessation of feeding,
resting, and social interaction (Baker et al., 1983; Bauer and Herman,
1986; Hall, 1982; Krieger and Wing, 1984; Lusseau, 2003; Constantine et
al., 2004); abandoning feeding, resting, and nursing areas (Jurasz and
Jurasz 1979; Dean et al., 1985; Glockner-Ferrari and Ferrari 1985,
1990; Lusseau, 2005; Norris et al., 1985; Salden, 1988; Forest, 2001;
Morton and Symonds, 2002; Courbis, 2004; Bejder, 2006); stress (Romano
et al., 2004); and changes in acoustic behavior (Van Parijs and
Corkeron, 2001). However, in some studies marine mammals display no
reaction to vessels (Watkins, 1986; Nowacek et al., 2003) and many
odontocetes show considerable tolerance to vessel traffic (Richardson
et al., 1995). Dolphins may actually reduce the energetic cost of
traveling by riding the bow or stern waves of vessels (Williams et al.,
1992; Richardson et al., 1995).
Dolphins within Pamlico Sound are continually exposed to
recreational, commercial, and military vessels. Richardson et al.
(1995) addresses in detail three responses that marine mammals may
experience when exposed to anthropogenic activities: tolerance;
habituation; and sensitization. More recent publications provide
variations on these themes rather than new data (NRC, 2003). Marine
mammals are often seen in regions with much human activity; thus,
certain individuals or populations exhibit some tolerance of
anthropogenic noise and other stimuli. Animals will tolerate a stimulus
they might otherwise avoid if the benefits in terms of feeding, mating,
migrating to traditional habitats, or other factors outweigh the
negative aspects of the stimulus (NRC, 2003). In many cases, tolerance
develops as a result of habituation. The NRC (2003) defines habituation
as a gradual waning of behavioral responsiveness over time as animals
learn that a repeated or ongoing stimulus lacks significant
consequences for the animals. Contrarily, sensitization occurs when an
animal links a stimulus with some degree of negative consequence and as
a result increases responsiveness to that human activity over time
(Richardson et al., 1995). For example, seals and whales are known to
avoid previously encountered vessels involved in subsistence hunts
(Walker, 1949; Ash, 1962; Terhune, 1985) and bottlenose dolphins that
had previously been captured and released from a 7.3 m boat involved in
health studies were documented to flee when that boat approached closer
than 400 m, whereas dolphins that had not been involved in the capture
did not display signs of avoidance of the vessel (Irvine et al., 1981).
Because dolphins in Pamlico Sound are continually exposed to vessel
traffic that does not present immediate danger to them, it is likely
animals are both tolerant and habituated to vessels.
The specified activities also involve aircraft, which marine
mammals are known to react (Richardson et al., 1995). Aircraft produce
noise at frequencies that are well within the frequency range of
cetacean hearing and also produce visual signals such as the aircraft
itself and its shadow (Richardson et al., 1995, Richardson &
W[uuml]rsig, 1997). A major difference between aircraft noise and noise
caused by other anthropogenic sources is that the sound is generated in
the air, transmitted through the water surface and then propagates
underwater to the receiver, diminishing the received levels to
significantly below what is heard above the water's surface. Sound
transmission from air to water is greatest in a sound cone 26 degrees
directly under the aircraft.
Reactions of odontocetes to aircraft have been reported less often
than those of pinnipeds. Responses to aircraft include diving, slapping
the water with pectoral fins or tail fluke, or swimming away from the
track of the aircraft (Richardson et al., 1995). The nature and degree
of the response, or the lack thereof, are dependent upon nature of the
flight (e.g., type of aircraft, altitude, straight vs. circular flight
pattern). W[uuml]rsig et al. (1998) assessed the responses of cetaceans
to aerial surveys in the northcentral and western Gulf of Mexico using
a DeHavilland Twin Otter fixed-wing airplane. The plane flew at an
altitude of 229 m at 204 km/hr. A minimum of 305 m straight line
distance from the cetaceans was maintained. Water depth was 100-1000m.
Bottlenose dolphins most commonly responded by diving (48 percent),
while 14 percent responded by moving away. Other species (e.g., beluga
whale (Delphinapterus leucas), sperm whale) show considerable variation
in reactions to aircraft but diving or swimming away from the aircraft
are the most common reactions to low flights (less than 500 m).
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
Detonations of live ordnance would result in temporary modification
to water properties. As described above, an underwater explosion from
these weapon would send a shock wave and blast noise through the water,
release gaseous by-products, create an oscillating bubble, and cause a
plume of water to shoot up from the water surface. However, these would
be temporary and not expected to last more than a few seconds. Because
dolphins are not expected to be in the area during live firing, due to
monitoring and mitigation measure implementation, they would not be
subject to any short term habitat alterations.
Similarly, no long term impacts with regard to hazardous
constituents are expected to occur. MCAS Cherry Point has an active
Range Environmental Vulnerability Assessment (REVA) program in place to
monitor impacts to habitat from its activities. One goal of REVA is to
determine the horizontal and vertical concentration profiles of heavy
metals, explosives constituents, perchlorate nutrients, and dissolved
salts in the sediment and seawater surrounding BT-9 and BT-11. The
preliminary results of the sampling indicate that explosive
constituents (e.g., trinitrotoluene (TNT),
cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (RDX), and hexahydro-trinitro-triazine
(HMX), as described in Hazardous Constituents [Subchapter 3.2.7.2] of
the MCAS Cherry Point Range Operations EA, were not detected in any
sediment or water sample surrounding the BTs. Metals were not present
above toxicity screening values. Perchlorate was detected in a few
sediment samples above the detection limit (0.21 ppm), but below the
reporting limit (0.6 ppm). The ongoing REVA would continue to evaluate
potential munitions constituent migration from operational range areas
to off-range areas and MCAS Cherry Point.
While it is anticipated that the specified activity may result in
marine mammals avoiding certain areas due to temporary ensonification,
this impact to habitat and prey resources is temporary and reversible
and considered in further detail earlier in this document, as
behavioral modification. The main impact associated with the proposed
activity would be temporarily elevated noise levels and the associated
direct
[[Page 19236]]
effects on marine mammals, previously discussed in this notice.
Summary of Previous Monitoring
The Marine Corps complied with the mitigation and monitoring
required under the previous authorizations (2010-2012). In accordance
with the 2010-11 IHA, USMC submitted a final monitoring report, which
described the activities conducted and observations made. USMC did not
record observations of any marine mammals during training exercises.
The only recorded observations--which were of bottlenose dolphins--were
on two occasions by maintenance vessels engaged in target maintenance.
No marine mammals were observed during range sweeps, air to ground
activities, surface to surface activities (small boats), or ad hoc via
range cameras. Table 6 details the number of sorties conducted, by air
and water, at each target. The number of sorties conducted does not
relate to the total amount of munitions expended, as the training
requirements for the specific military unit conducting the sortie
determine the munitions loading for the air platform or watercraft
during each sortie. In addition, munitions expenditures may be
determined by the loading specifications of the specific aircraft and
vessels used in the training exercise.
Table 6--Sorties Conducted at BT-9 and BT-11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mission type BT-9 BT-11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-to-surface................................ 1,554 4,251
Surface-to-surface (water-to-water)........... 223 105
-------------------------
Total....................................... 1,777 4,356
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The total amount of ordnance expended at BT-9 and BT-11 under the
2010-11 IHA was 878,625 and 693,612 respectively (Table 7). These
amounts represent 98 and 62 percent of the estimated annual maximum
ordnance expenditures. The amounts of ordnance expended at the BTs
account for all use of the targets. There are five types of explosive
sources used at BT-9: 2.75-inc Rocket High Explosives, 5-inch Rocket
High Explosives, 30 mm High Explosives, 40 mm High Explosives, and G911
grenades. No explosive munitions are used at BT-11. Based on this
information, the Marine Corps did not exceed the authorized level of
take.
Table 7--Ordnance Usage at BT-9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total rounds Percentage of maximum
Munitions expenditures -------------------------------------------------------------------------
BT-9 BT-11 BT-9 BT-11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small arms, excluding .50 cal......... 355,718................. 363,899 68 72
.50 cal............................... 410,815................. 246,255 160 75
Large arms (Live)..................... 480 (all 40 mm)......... N/A 4 N/A
Large arms (Inert).................... 108,811................. 79,531 117 33
Rockets (Live)........................ 48 (all 2.75 in)........ N/A 20 N/A
Rockets (Inert)....................... 185..................... 2,018 26 44
Bombs/Grenades (Live)................. 0....................... N/A 0 N/A
Bombs/Grenades (Inert)................ 2,086................... 1,697 51 8
Pyrotechnics.......................... 482..................... 212 11 2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................. 878,625................. 693,612 98 62
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Marine Corps will submit a monitoring report for the 2012
training season which expired on December 31, 2012, to us no later than
March 31, 2013.
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 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 species or
stock for taking for certain subsistence uses.
The NDAA of 2004 amended the MMPA as it relates to military-
readiness activities and the ITA process such that ``least practicable
adverse impact'' shall include consideration of personnel safety,
practicality of implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the
military readiness activity. The training activities described in the
Marine Corp's application are considered military readiness activities.
The Marine Corps, in collaboration with us, has worked to identify
potential practicable and effective mitigation measures, which include
a careful balancing of the likely benefit of any particular measure to
the marine mammals with the likely effect of that measure on personnel
safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the ``military-
readiness activity''. These proposed mitigation measures are listed
below.
(1) Range Sweeps: The VMR-1 squadron, stationed at MCAS Cherry
Point, includes three specially equipped HH-46D helicopters. The
primary mission of these aircraft, known as PEDRO, is to provide search
and rescue for downed 2d Marine Air Wing aircrews. On-board
are a pilot, co-pilot, crew chief, search and rescue swimmer, and a
medical corpsman. Each crew member has received extensive training in
search and rescue techniques, and is therefore particularly capable at
spotting objects floating in the water.
PEDRO crew would conduct a range sweep the morning of each exercise
day prior to the commencement of range operations. The primary goal of
the pre-exercise sweep is to ensure that the target area is clear of
fisherman, other personnel, and protected species. The sweep is flown
at 100-300 meters above the water surface, at airspeeds between 60-100
knots. The path of the sweep runs down the western side of BT-11,
circles around BT-9 and then continues down the eastern side of BT-9
before leaving. The sweep typically takes 20-30 minutes to complete.
The PEDRO crew is able to communicate directly with range personnel and
can provide immediate notification to range operators. The PEDRO
aircraft would remain in the area of a sighting until clear if possible
or as mission requirements dictate.
If marine mammals are sighted during a range sweep, sighting data
will be collected and entered into the US
[[Page 19237]]
Marine Corps sighting database, web-interface, or report generator and
this information would be relayed to the training Commander. Sighting
data includes the following (collected to the best of the observer's
ability): (1) Species identification; (2) group size; (3) the behavior
of marine mammals (e.g., milling, travel, social, foraging); (4)
location and relative distance from the BT; (5) date, time and visual
conditions (e.g., Beaufort sea state, weather) associated with each
observation; (6) direction of travel relative to the BT; and (7)
duration of the observation.
(2) Cold Passes: All aircraft participating in an air-to-surface
exercise would be required to perform a ``cold pass'' immediately prior
to ordnance delivery at the BTs both day and night. That is, prior to
granting a ``First Pass Hot'' (use of ordnance), pilots would be
directed to perform a low, cold (no ordnance delivered) first pass
which serves as a visual sweep of the targets prior to ordnance
delivery to determine if unauthorized civilian vessels or personnel, or
protected species, are present. The cold pass is conducted with the
aircraft (helicopter or fixed-winged) flying straight and level at
altitudes of 200-3000 feet over the target area. The viewing angle is
approximately 15 degrees. A blind spot exists to the immediate rear of
the aircraft. Based upon prevailing visibility, a pilot can see more
than one mile forward upon approach. The aircrew and range personnel
make every attempt to ensure clearance of the area via visual
inspection and remotely operated camera operations (see Proposed
Monitoring and Reporting section). The Range Controller may deny or
approve the First Pass Hot clearance as conditions warrant.
(3) Delay of Exercises: An active range would be considered
``fouled'' and not available for use if a marine mammal is present
within 1000 yards (914 m) of the target area at BT-9 or anywhere within
Rattan Bay (BT-11). Therefore, if a marine mammal is sighted within
1000 yards (914 m) of the target at BT-9 or anywhere within Rattan Bay
at BT-11 during the cold pass or from range camera detection, training
would be delayed until the marine mammal moves beyond and on a path
away from 1000 yards (914 m) from the BT-9 target or out of Rattan Bay
at BT-11. This mitigation applies to both air-to-surface and surface-
to-surface exercises.
(4) Range Camera Use: To increase the safety of persons or property
near the targets, Range Operation and Control personnel monitor the
target area through tower mounted safety and surveillance cameras. The
remotely operated range cameras are high resolution and, according to
range personnel, allow a clear visual of a duck floating near the
target. The cameras allow viewers to see animals at the surface and
breaking the surface, but not underwater.
A new, enhanced camera system has been purchased and will be
installed on BT-11 towers 3 and 7, and on both towers at BT-9. The new
camera system has night vision capabilities with resolution levels near
those during daytime. Lenses on the camera system have focal lengths of
40 mm to 2200 mm (56x), with view angles of 18[deg] 10' and 13[deg]
41', respectively. The field of view when zoomed in on the Rattan Bay
targets will be 23 ft wide by 17 ft high, and on the mouth of Rattan
Bay itself 87 ft wide by 66 ft high.
Again, in the event that a marine mammal is sighted within 1000
yards (914 m) of the BT-9 target, or anywhere within Rattan Bay, the
target would be declared fouled. Operations may commence in the fouled
area after the animal(s) have moved 1000 yards (914 m) from the BT-9
target and/or out of Rattan Bay.
(5) Vessel Operation: All vessels used during training operations
would abide by the Service's Southeast Regional Viewing Guidelines
designed to prevent harassment to marine mammals (https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/education/southeast/).
(6) Stranding Network Coordination: The USMC would coordinate with
the local NMFS Stranding Coordinator for any unusual marine mammal
behavior and any stranding, beached live/dead, or floating marine
mammals that may occur at any time during training activities or within
24 hours after completion of training.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that we must set forth ``requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking''. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for IHAs
must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary
monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the
species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be present.
Proposed Monitoring
The Marine Corps proposes to conduct the following to fulfill the
necessary monitoring and reporting that would result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals expected to be present within the action
area:
(1) Protected Species Observer Training: Pilots, operators of small
boats, and other personnel monitoring for marine mammals would be
required to take the Marine Species Awareness Training (Version 2),
maintained and promoted by the Department of the Navy. This training
would make personnel knowledgeable of marine mammals, protected
species, and visual cues related to the presence of marine mammals and
protected species.
(2) Weekly and Post-Exercise Monitoring: Post-exercise monitoring
would be conducted concomitant to the next regularly scheduled pre-
exercise sweep. Weekly monitoring events would include a maximum of
five pre-exercise and four post-exercise sweeps. The maximum number of
days that would elapse between pre- and post-exercise monitoring events
would be approximately three days, and would normally occur on
weekends. If marine mammals are observed during this monitoring,
sighting data identical to those collected by PEDRO crew would be
recorded.
(3) Long-term Monitoring: The Marine Corps has awarded DUML duties
to obtain abundance, group dynamics (e.g., group size, age census),
behavior, habitat use, and acoustic data on the bottlenose dolphins
which inhabit Pamlico Sound, specifically those around BT-9 and BT-11.
DUML began conducting boat-based surveys and passive acoustic
monitoring of bottlenose dolphins in Pamlico Sound in 2000 (Read et
al., 2003) and specifically at BT-9 and BT-11 in 2003 (Mayer, 2003). To
date, boat-based surveys indicate that bottlenose dolphins may be
resident to Pamlico Sound and use BT restricted areas on a frequent
basis. Passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) is providing more detailed
insight into how dolphins use the two ranges, by monitoring for their
vocalizations year-round, regardless of weather conditions or darkness.
In addition to these surveys, DUML scientists are testing a real-time
passive acoustic monitoring system at BT-9 that will allow automated
detection of bottlenose dolphin whistles, providing yet another method
of detecting dolphins prior to training operations. Although it is
unlikely this PAM system would be active for purposes of implementing
mitigation measures before an exercise prior to expiration of the
proposed Authorization, it could be operational for future MMPA
incidental take authorizations and would be
[[Page 19238]]
evaluated for effectiveness at the appropriate time.
(4) Reporting: The Marine Corps would submit a report to us within
90 days after expiration of the Authorization or, if a subsequent
incidental take authorization is requested, within 120 days prior to
expiration of the Authorization. The report would summarize the type
and amount of training exercises conducted, all marine mammal
observations made during monitoring, and if mitigation measures were
implemented. The report would also address the effectiveness of the
monitoring plan in detecting marine mammals.
General Notification of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
The Marine Corps would systematically observe training operations
for injured or disabled marine mammals. In addition, the Marine Corps
would monitor the principal marine mammal stranding networks and other
media to correlate analysis of any dolphin strandings that could
potentially be associated with MCAS Cherry Point training operations.
Marine Corps personnel would ensure that we are notified
immediately or as soon as clearance procedures allow if an injured,
stranded, or dead marine mammal is found during or shortly after, and
in the vicinity of, any training operations. The Marine Corps would
provide us with species or description of the animal(s), the condition
of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if the animal is dead),
location, time of first discovery, observed behaviors (if alive), and
photo or video (if available).
In the event that an injured, stranded, or dead marine mammal is
found by Marine Corps personnel that is not in the vicinity of, or
found during or shortly after operations, the Marine Corps personnel
would report the same information as listed above as soon as
operationally feasible and clearance procedures allow.
General Notification of a Ship Strike
In the event of a vessel strike, at any time or place, the Marine
Corps shall do the following:
Immediately report to us the species identification (if
known), location (lat/long) of the animal (or the strike if the animal
has disappeared), and whether the animal is alive or dead (or unknown);
Report to us as soon as operationally feasible the size
and length of the animal, an estimate of the injury status (e.g., dead,
injured but alive, injured and moving, unknown, etc.), vessel class/
type and operational status;
Report to us the vessel length, speed, and heading as soon
as feasible; and
Provide us a photo or video, if equipment is available.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
The following provides the Marine Corps' model for take of dolphins
from explosives (without consideration of mitigation and the
conservative assumption that all explosives would land in the water and
not on the targets or land) and potential for direct hits and our
analysis of potential harassment from small vessel and aircraft
operations.
Acoustic Take Criteria
For the purposes of an MMPA incidental take authorization, three
levels of take are identified: Level B harassment; Level A harassment;
and mortality (or serious injury leading to mortality). The categories
of marine mammal responses (physiological and behavioral) that fall
into harassment categories were described previously in this notice. A
method to estimate the number of individuals that will be taken,
pursuant to the MMPA, based on the proposed action has been derived. To
this end, we use acoustic criteria that estimate at what received level
Level B harassment, Level A harassment, and mortality (or serious
injury) of marine mammals would occur. The acoustic criteria for
underwater detonations are comprehensively explained in our proposed
and final rulemakings for the U.S. Navy's Cherry Point Range Operations
(74 FR 11057; 74 FR 28370). We summarize them here:
Criteria and thresholds for estimating the exposures from a single
explosive activity on marine mammals were established for the Seawolf
Submarine Shock Test Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
(``Seawolf'') and subsequently used in the USS Winston S. Churchill
(DDG 81) Ship Shock FEIS (``Churchill'') (DoN, 1998 and 2001). We
adopted these criteria and thresholds in final rule on the
unintentional taking of marine animals occurring incidental to the
shock testing which involved large explosives (65 FR 77546; December
12, 2000). Because no large explosives (greater than 1000 lbs NEW)
would be used at Cherry Point during the specified activities, a
revised acoustic criterion for small underwater explosions (i.e., 23
pounds per square inch [psi] instead of previous acoustic criteria of
12 psi for peak pressure over all exposures) has been established to
predict onset of TTS.
I.1. Thresholds and Criteria for Injurious Physiological Impacts
I.1.a. Single Explosion
For injury, NMFS uses dual criteria, eardrum rupture (i.e.
tympanic-membrane injury) and onset of slight lung injury, to indicate
the onset of injury. The threshold for tympanic-membrane (TM) rupture
corresponds to a 50 percent rate of rupture (i.e., 50 percent of
animals exposed to the level are expected to suffer TM rupture). This
value is stated in terms of an Energy Flux Density Level (EL) value of
1.17 inch pounds per square inch (in-lb/in2), approximately 205 dB re 1
microPa\2\- sec.
The threshold for onset of slight lung injury is calculated for a
small animal (a dolphin calf weighing 26.9 lbs), and is given in terms
of the ``Goertner modified positive impulse,'' indexed to 13 psi-msec
(DoN, 2001). This threshold is conservative since the positive impulse
needed to cause injury is proportional to animal mass, and therefore,
larger animals require a higher impulse to cause the onset of injury.
This analysis assumed the marine species populations were 100 percent
small animals. The criterion with the largest potential impact range
(most conservative), either TM rupture (energy threshold) or onset of
slight lung injury (peak pressure), will be used in the analysis to
determine Level A exposures for single explosive events.
For mortality and serious injury, we use the criterion
corresponding to the onset of extensive lung injury. This is
conservative in that it corresponds to a 1 percent chance of mortal
injury, and yet any animal experiencing onset severe lung injury is
counted as a lethal exposure. For small animals, the threshold is given
in terms of the Goertner modified positive impulse, indexed to 30.5
psi-msec. Since the Goertner approach depends on propagation, source/
animal depths, and animal mass in a complex way, the actual impulse
value corresponding to the 30.5 psi-msec index is a complicated
calculation. To be conservative, the analysis used the mass of a calf
dolphin (at 26.9 lbs) for 100 percent of the populations.
I.1.b. Multiple Explosions
For multiple explosions, the Churchill approach had to be extended
to cover multiple sound events at the same training site. For multiple
exposures, accumulated energy over the entire training time is the
natural extension for energy thresholds since energy accumulates with
each subsequent shot (detonation); this is consistent with the
[[Page 19239]]
treatment of multiple arrivals in Churchill. For positive impulse, it
is consistent with the Churchill final rule to use the maximum value
over all impulses received.
I.2. Thresholds and Criteria for Non-Injurious Physiological Effects
To determine the onset of TTS (non-injurious harassment)--a slight,
recoverable loss of hearing sensitivity, there are dual criteria: an
energy threshold and a peak pressure threshold. The criterion with the
largest potential impact range (most conservative), either the energy
or peak pressure threshold, will be used in the analysis to determine
Level B TTS exposures. We refer the reader to the following sections
for descriptions of the thresholds for each criterion.
I.2.a. Single Explosion--TTS-Energy Threshold
The TTS energy threshold for explosives is derived from the Space
and Naval Warfare Systems Center (SSC) pure-tone tests for TTS
(Schlundt et al., 2000; Finneran and Schlundt, 2004). The pure-tone
threshold (192 dB as the lowest value) is modified for explosives by
(a) interpreting it as an energy metric, (b) reducing it by 10 dB to
account for the time constant of the mammal ear, and (c) measuring the
energy in 1/3-octave bands, the natural filter band of the ear. The
resulting threshold is 182 dB re 1 microPa\2\-sec in any 1/3-octave
band.
I.2.b. Single Explosion--TTS-Peak Pressure Threshold
The second threshold applies to all species and is stated in terms
of peak pressure at 23 psi (about 225 dB re 1 [mu]Pa). This criterion
was adopted for Precision Strike Weapons (PSW) Testing and Training by
Eglin Air Force Base in the Gulf of Mexico (NMFS, 2005). It is
important to note that for small shots near the surface (such as in
this analysis), the 23-psi peak pressure threshold generally will
produce longer impact ranges than the 182-dB energy metric.
Furthermore, it is not unusual for the TTS impact range for the 23-psi
pressure metric to actually exceed the without-TTS (behavioral change
without onset of TTS) impact range for the 177-dB energy metric.
I.3. Thresholds and Criteria for Behavioral Effects
I.3.a. Single Explosion
For a single explosion, to be consistent with Churchill, TTS is the
criterion for Level B harassment. In other words, because behavioral
disturbance for a single explosion is likely to be limited to a short-
lived startle reaction, use of the TTS criterion is considered
sufficient protection and therefore behavioral effects (Level B
behavioral harassment without onset of TTS) are not expected for single
explosions.
I.3.b. Multiple Explosions--Without TTS
For multiple explosions, the Churchill approach had to be extended
to cover multiple sound events at the same training site. For multiple
exposures, accumulated energy over the entire uninterrupted firing time
is the natural extension for energy thresholds since energy accumulates
with each subsequent shot (detonation); this is consistent with the
treatment of multiple arrivals in Churchill. Because multiple
explosions could occur within a discrete time period, a new acoustic
criterion-behavioral disturbance without TTS is used to account for
behavioral effects significant enough to be judged as harassment, but
occurring at lower noise levels than those that may cause TTS.
The threshold is based on test results published in Schlundt et al.
(2000), with derivation following the approach of the Churchill FEIS
for the energy-based TTS threshold. The original Schlundt et al. (2000)
data and the report of Finneran and Schlundt (2004) are the basis for
thresholds for behavioral disturbance without TTS. During this study,
instances of altered behavior sometimes began at lower exposures than
those causing TTS; however, there were many instances when subjects
exhibited no altered behavior at levels above the onset-TTS levels.
Regardless of reactions at higher or lower levels, all instances of
altered behavior were included in the statistical summary. The
behavioral disturbance without TTS threshold for tones is derived from
the SSC tests, and is found to be 5 dB below the threshold for TTS, or
177 dB re 1 microPa\2\-sec maximum energy flux density level in any \1/
3\-octave band at frequencies above 100 Hz for cetaceans.
II. Summary of Thresholds and Criteria for Impulsive Sounds
The effects, criteria, and thresholds used in the assessment for
impulsive sounds are summarized in Table 8. The criteria for behavioral
effects without physiological effects used in this analysis are based
on use of multiple explosives from live, explosive firing at BT-9 only;
no live firing occurs at BT-11.
Table 8--Effects, Criteria, and Thresholds for Impulsive Sounds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effect Criteria Metric Threshold Effect
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mortality....................... Onset of Extensive Goertner modified indexed to 30.5 Mortality.
Lung Injury. positive impulse. psi-msec (assumes
100 percent small
animal at 26.9
lbs).
Injurious Physiological......... 50 percent Tympanic Energy flux density 1.17 in-lb/in\2\ Level A.
Membrane Rupture. (about 205 dB re
1 microPa\2\-sec).
Injurious Physiological......... Onset Slight Lung Goertner modified indexed to 13 psi- Level A.
Injury. positive impulse. msec (assumes 100
percent small
animal at 26.9
lbs).
Non-injurious Physiological..... TTS................ Greatest energy 182 dB re 1 Level B.
flux density level microPa\2\-sec.
in any 1/3-octave
band (> 100 Hz for
toothed whales and
> 10 Hz for baleen
whales)--for total
energy over all
exposures.
Non-injurious Physiological..... TTS................ Peak pressure over 23 psi............ Level B.
all exposures.
Non-injurious Behavioral........ Multiple Explosions Greatest energy 177 dB re 1 Level B.
Without TTS. flux density level microPa\2\-sec.
in any 1/3-octave
(> 100 Hz for
toothed whales and
> 10 Hz for baleen
whales)--for total
energy over all
exposures
(multiple
explosions only).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 19240]]
Take from Explosives
The Marine Corps conservatively modeled that all explosives would
detonate at a 1.2 m (3.9 ft) water depth despite the training goal of
hitting the target, resulting in an above water or on land explosion.
For sources that are detonated at shallow depths, it is frequently the
case that the explosion may breech the surface with some of the
acoustic energy escaping the water column. The source levels presented
in the table above have not been adjusted for possible venting nor does
the subsequent analysis take this into account. Properties of explosive
sources used at BT-9, including NEW, peak one-third-octave (OTO) source
level, the approximate frequency at which the peak occurs, and rounds
per burst are described in Table 9. Refer to Table 10 for distances to
our harassment threshold levels from these sources.
Table 9--Source Weights and Peak Source Levels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rounds
Source type New Peak OTO SL Frequency of Peak OTO per
SL burst
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.75-inch Rocket................... 4.8 lbs.............. 223.9 dB re: 1[mu]Pa. ~ 1500 Hertz (Hz).... 1
5-inch Rocket...................... 15.0 lbs............. 228.9 dB re: 1[mu]Pa. ~ 1000 Hz............ 1
30 mm.............................. 0.1019 lbs........... 212.1 dB re: 1[mu]Pa. ~ 2500 Hz............ 30
40 mm.............................. 0.1199 lbs........... 227.8 dB re: 1[mu]Pa. ~ 1100 Hz............ 5
G911 Grenade....................... 0.5.................. 213.9 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa ~ 2500 Hz............ 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 10--Distances to Our Harassment Thresholds From Explosive Ordnances
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Behavioral
disturbance (177 TTS (23 psi) Level A (13 psi- Mortality (31 psi-
dB energy) msec) ms)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.75-inch Rocket HE................. N/A 172 m (564 ft) 47 m (154 ft) 27 m (89 ft)
5'' Rocket HE....................... N/A 255 m (837 ft) 61 m (200 ft) 39 m (128 ft)
30mm HE............................. 209 m (686 ft) N/A 10 m (33 ft) 5 m (16 ft)
40mm HE............................. 144 m (472 ft) N/A 10 m (33 ft) 5 m (16 ft)
G911 Grenade........................ N/A 83 m (272 ft) 21 m (33 ft) 10 m (33 ft)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To calculate take, the distances to which animals may be harassed
were considered along with dolphin density. The density estimate from
Read et al. (2003) was used to calculate take from munitions firing. As
described in the Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the
Specified Activity section, this density, 0.183/km\2\, was derived from
boat based surveys in 2000 which covered all inland North Carolina
waters. Note that estimated density of dolphins at BT-9 and BT-11,
specifically, were calculated to be 0.11 dolphins/km\2\, and 1.23
dolphins/km\2\ respectively (Maher 2003), based on boat surveys
conducted from July 2002 through June 2003 (excluding April, May, Sept.
and Jan.). However, the USMC chose to estimate take of dolphins based
on the higher density reported from the summer 2000 surveys (0.183/
km\2\). Additionally, take calculations for munition firing are based
on 100 percent water detonation, although the goal of training is to
hit the targets, and no pre-exercise monitoring or mitigation.
Therefore, take estimates can be considered conservative.
Based on dolphin density and amount of munitions expended, there is
very low potential for Level A harassment, serious injury, and
mortality and monitoring and mitigation measures are anticipated to
further negate this potential. Accordingly, we are not proposing to
issue these levels of take. As portrayed in Table 9, the largest
harassment zone (Level B) is within 209 m of a detonation in water;
however, the Marine Corps has implemented a 1,000 m ``foul'' zone for
BT-9 and anywhere within Raritan Bay for BT-11. In total, from firing
of explosive ordnances, the USMC is requesting, and NMFS is proposing
to issue, the incidental take of 25 bottlenose dolphins from Level B
harassment (Table 11).
Table 11--Number of Dolphins Potentially Taken From Exposure to Explosives Based on Threshold Criteria
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A--
Level B-- Injurious (205
Ordnance type behavioral Level B--TTS dB re Mortality
(177dB re (23 psi) 1microPa\2\-s (30.5 psi)
1microPa\2\-s) or 13 psi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.75'' Rocket HE................................ N/A 4.97 0.17 0.06
5'' Rocket HE................................... N/A 3.39 0.09 0.03
30mm HE......................................... 2.55 N/A 0.05 0.00
40mm HE......................................... 12.60 N/A 0.16 0.01
G911 Grenade.................................... N/A 0.87 0.03 0.01
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 15.15 9.23 0.5 0.11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 19241]]
Take from Direct Hit
The potential risk of a direct hit to an animal in the target area
is estimated to be so low it is discountable. A Range Air Installation
Compatible Use Zone (RAICUZ) study generated the surface area or
footprints of weapon impact areas associated with air-to-ground
ordnance delivery (USMC 2001). Statistically, a weapon safety footprint
describes the area needed to contain 99.99 percent of initial and
ricochet impacts at the 95-percent confidence interval for each type of
aircraft and ordnance utilized on the BTs. At both BT-9 and BT-11 the
probability of deployed ordnance landing in the impact footprint is
essentially 1.0, since the footprints were designed to contain 99.99
percent of impacts, including ricochets. However, only 36 percent of
the weapon footprint for BT-11 is over water in Rattan Bay, so the
likelihood of a weapon striking an animal at the BT in Rattan Bay is 64
percent less. Water depths in Rattan Bay range from 3 m (10 ft) in the
deepest part of the bay to 0.5 m (1.6 m) close to shore, so that nearly
the entire habitat in Rattan Bay is suitable for marine mammal use (or
36 percent of the weapon footprint).
The estimated potential risk of a direct hit to an animal in the
target area is extremely low. The probability of hitting a bottlenose
dolphin at the BTs can be derived as follows: Probability = dolphin's
dorsal surface area * density of dolphins. The estimated dorsal surface
area of a bottlenose dolphin is 1.425 m\2\ (or the average length of
2.85 m times the average body width of 0.5 m). Thus, using Read et al.
(2003)'s density estimate of 0.183 dolphins/km\2\, without
consideration of mitigation and monitoring implementation, the
probability of a dolphin being hit in the waters of BT-9 is 2.61 x
10-7 and of BT-11 is 9.4 x 10-8. Using the
proposed levels of ordnance expenditures at each in-water BT (Tables 4
and 5) and taking into account that only 36 percent of the ordnance
deployed at BT-11 is over water, as described in the application, the
estimated potential number of ordnance strikes on a marine mammal per
year is 0.263 at BT-9 and 0.034 at BT-11. It would take approximately
three years of ordnance deployment at the BTs before it would be likely
or probable that one bottlenose dolphin would be struck by deployed
inert ordnance. Again, these estimates are without consideration to
proposed monitoring and mitigation measures.
Take from Vessel and Aircraft Presence
Vessel movement is associated with surface-to-surface exercises, as
described in the Specified Activities section above, which primarily
occurs within BT-11. The USMC is not requesting takes specific to the
act of maneuvering small boats within the BTs; however, NMFS has
analyzed the potential for take from this activity.
The potential impacts from exposure to vessels are described in the
Vessel and Aircraft Presence section above. Interactions with vessels
are not a new experience for bottlenose dolphins in Pamlico Sound.
Pamlico Sound is heavily used by recreational, commercial (fishing,
daily ferry service, tugs, etc.), and military (including the Navy, Air
Force, and Coast Guard) vessels year-round. The NMFS' Southeast
Regional Office has developed marine mammal viewing guidelines to
educate the public on how to responsibly view marine mammals in the
wild and avoid causing a take (https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/education/southeast). The guidelines recommend that vessels should remain a
minimum of 50 yards from a dolphin, operate vessels in a predictable
manner, avoid excessive speed or sudden changes in speed or direction
in the vicinity of animals, and not to pursue, chase, or separate a
group of animals. The Marine Corps would abide by these guidelines to
the fullest extent practicable. The Marine Corps would not engage in
high speed exercises should a marine mammal be detected within the
immediate area of the BTs prior to training commencement and would
never closely approach, chase, or pursue dolphins. Detection of marine
mammals would be facilitated by personnel monitoring on the vessels and
those marking success rate of target hits and monitoring of remote
camera on the BTs (see Proposed Monitoring and Reporting section).
Based on the description of the action, the other activities
regularly occurring in the area, the species that may be exposed to the
activity and their observed behaviors in the presence of vessel
traffic, and the implementation of measures to avoid vessel strikes, we
determined that it is unlikely that the operation of vessels during
surface-to-surface maneuvers will result in the take of any marine
mammals, in the form of either behavioral harassment, injury, serious
injury, or mortality.
Aircraft would move swiftly through the area and would typically
fly approximately 914 m from the water's surface before dropping
unguided munitions and above 4,572 m for precision-guided munitions
bombing. While the aircraft may approach as low as 152 m (500 ft) to
drop a bomb this is not the norm and would never be done around marine
mammals. Regional whale watching guidelines advise aircraft to maintain
a minimum altitude of 300 m (1,000 ft) above all marine mammals,
including small odontocetes, and to not circle or hover over the
animals to avoid harassment. Our approach regulations limit aircraft
from flying below 300 m (1,000 ft) over a humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae) in Hawaii, a known calving ground, and limit aircraft
from flying over North Atlantic right whales closer than 460 m (1509
ft). Given that Marine Corps aircraft would not fly below 300 m on the
approach, would not engage in hovering or circling the animals, and
would not drop to the minimal altitude of 152 m if a marine mammal is
in the area, we believe it unlikely that the operation of aircraft, as
described above, will result in take of bottlenose dolphins in Pamlico
Sound in any manner.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Preliminary Determination
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: any act of pursuit, torment, or
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering [Level B harassment].
The NDAA's definition of harassment as it applies to a military
readiness activity is: (i) any act that injures or has the significant
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
[Level A Harassment]; or (ii) any act that disturbs or is likely to
disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including, but not limited
to, migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to
a point where such behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly
altered [Level B Harassment].
We propose to authorize take by Level B harassment for the proposed
training operations. Acoustic stimuli generated during training
operations may have the potential to result in the behavioral
disturbance of some marine mammals. There is no evidence that planned
activities could result in injury, serious injury, or mortality within
the specified geographic area for the requested authorization. The
required mitigation and monitoring measures would
[[Page 19242]]
minimize any potential risk for serious injury or mortality.
Pursuant to our regulations implementing the MMPA, an applicant is
required to estimate the number of animals that will be ``taken'' by
the specified activities (i.e., takes by harassment only, or takes by
harassment, injury, and/or death). This estimate informs the analysis
that we must perform to determine whether the activity will have a
``negligible impact'' on the species or stock. 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.'' A negligible
impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual
rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-level effects). An
estimate of the number and manner of takes, alone, is not enough
information on which to base a negligible impact determination. We must
also consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses
(their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any responses
(critical reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), or any of
the other variables mentioned in the first paragraph (if known), as
well as the number and nature of estimated Level A takes, the number of
estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat.
The Marine Corps has been conducting gunnery and bombing training
exercises at BT-9 and BT-11 for several years and, to date, no dolphin
injury, serious injury, or mortality has been attributed these military
training exercises. The Marine Corps has a history of notifying the
NMFS stranding network when any injured or stranded animal comes ashore
or is spotted by personnel on the water. Therefore, stranded animals
have been examined by stranding responders, further confirming that it
is unlikely training contributes to marine mammal injuries or deaths.
Due to the implementation of the aforementioned proposed mitigation
measures, no take by Level A harassment or serious injury or mortality
is anticipated nor would any be authorized in the IHA. We are
proposing; however, to authorize 25 Level B harassment takes associated
with training exercises.
The Marine Corps has proposed a 1000 yard (914 m) safety zone
around BT-9 despite the fact that the distance to NMFS explosive Level
B harassment threshold is 228 yards (209 m). They also would consider
an area fouled if any dolphins are spotted within Raritan Bay (where
BT-11 is located). The Level B harassment takes allowed for in the IHA
would be of very low intensity and would likely result in dolphins
being temporarily behaviorally affected by bombing or gunnery
exercises. In addition, takes may be attributed to animals not using
the area when exercises are occurring; however, this is difficult to
calculate. Instead, we look if the specified activities occur during
and within habitat important to vital life functions to better inform
its negligible impact determination.
Read et al. (2003) concluded that dolphins rarely occur in open
waters in the middle of North Carolina sounds and large estuaries, but
instead are concentrated in shallow water habitats along shorelines.
However, no specific areas have been identified as vital reproduction
or foraging habitat. Scientific boat based surveys conducted throughout
Pamlico Sound conclude that dolphins use the areas around the BTs more
frequently than other portions of Pamlico Sound (Maher, 2003) despite
the Marine Corps actively training in a manner identical to the
specified activities described here for years.
As described in the Affected Species section of this notice,
bottlenose dolphin stock segregation is complex with stocks overlapping
throughout the coastal and estuarine waters of North Carolina. It is
not possible for the Marine Corps to determine to which stock any
individual dolphin taken during training activities belong as this can
only be accomplished through genetic testing. However, it is likely
that many of the dolphins encountered would belong to the NNCE or SNCE
stock. These stocks have a population estimate of 1,387 and 2,454,
respectively. We are proposing to authorize 25 takes of bottlenose
dolphins in total; therefore, this number represents 1.8 and 1.0
percent, respectively, of those populations. This species is not listed
as threatened or endangered under the ESA
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 preliminarily find that the specified USMC AS Cherry Point
BT-9 and BT-11 training activities will result in the incidental take
of marine mammals, by Level B harassment only, and that the total
taking from will have a negligible impact on the affected species or
stocks.
Subsistence Harvest of Marine Mammals
Marine mammals are not taken for subsistence uses within Pamlico
Sound; therefore, issuance of an IHA to the USMC for MCAS Cherry Point
training exercises would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the affected species or stocks for subsistence use.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No ESA-listed marine mammals are known to occur within the action
area. Therefore, there is no requirement for NMFS to consult under
Section 7 of the ESA on the issuance of an Authorization under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA. However, ESA-listed sea turtles may be
present within the action area.
On September 27, 2002, NMFS issued a Biological Opinion (BiOp) on
Ongoing Ordnance Delivery at Bombing Target 9 (BT-9) and Bombing Target
11 (BT-11) at Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, North Carolina.
The BiOp, which is still in effect, concluded that that the USMC's
proposed action will not result in adverse impacts to any ESA-listed
marine mammals and is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence
of the endangered green turtle (Chelonia mydas), leatherback turtle
(Dermochelys coriacea), Kemp's ridley turtle (Lepidochelys kempii), or
threatened loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta). The proposed IHA will
not result in effects beyond those considered in the 2002 BiOp and NMFS
does not anticipate the need for further Section 7 consultation for the
Authorization or the underlying activities proposed by the Marines. No
critical habitat has been designated for these species in the action
area; therefore, none will be affected.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
On February 11, 2009, the Marine Corps issued a Finding of No
Significant Impact for its Environmental Assessment (EA) on MCAS Cherry
Point Range Operations. Based on the analysis of the EA, the Marine
Corps determined that the proposed action will not have a significant
impact on the human environment. We adopted the Marine Corps' EA and
signed a Finding of No Significant Impact on August 31, 2010. We have
again reviewed the proposed application and preliminarily determined
that there are no substantial changes to the proposed action or new
environmental impacts or concerns. Therefore, we have determined that a
new or supplemental EA or Environmental Impact Statement is likely
unnecessary. Before making a
[[Page 19243]]
final determination in this regard, we will review public comments and
information submitted by the public and others in response to this
notice. The EA referenced above is available for review at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm.
Dated: March 26, 2013.
Helen M. Golde,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-07305 Filed 3-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P