Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Navy Training Conducted at the Silver Strand Training Complex, San Diego Bay, 40436-40442 [2013-16156]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
40436
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2013 / Notices
Dated: June 28, 2013.
Gwellnar Banks,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013–16094 Filed 7–3–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Proposed Information Collection;
Comment Request; Mandatory Shrimp
Vessel and Gear Characterization
Survey
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Commerce, as part of its continuing
effort to reduce paperwork and
respondent burden, invites the general
public and other Federal agencies to
take this opportunity to comment on
proposed and/or continuing information
collections, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Written comments must be
submitted on or before September 3,
2013.
SUMMARY:
Direct all written comments
to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental
Paperwork Clearance Officer,
Department of Commerce, Room 6616,
14th and Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20230 (or via the
Internet at JJessup@doc.gov).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection
instrument and instructions should be
directed to Anik Clemens, (727) 551–
5611 or Anik.Clemens@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
I. Abstract
This request is for extension of a
current information collection.
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) authorizes the
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Council (Council) to prepare and amend
fishery management plans for any
fishery in waters under its jurisdiction.
National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) manages the shrimp fishery in
the waters of the Gulf of Mexico under
the Shrimp Fishery Management Plan
(FMP). The regulations for the Gulf
Shrimp Vessel and Gear
Characterization Form may be found at
50 CFR 622.51(a)(3).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:06 Jul 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
Owners or operators of vessels
applying for or renewing a commercial
vessel moratorium permit for Gulf
shrimp must complete an annual Gulf
Shrimp Vessel and Gear
Characterization Form. The form will be
provided by NMFS at the time of permit
application and renewal. Compliance
with this reporting requirement is
required for permit issuance and
renewal.
Through this form, NMFS is
collecting census-level information on
fishing vessel and gear characteristics in
the Gulf of Mexico Exclusive Economic
Zone (EEZ) shrimp fishery to conduct
analyses that will improve fishery
management decision-making in this
fishery; ensure that national goals,
objectives, and requirements of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
Endangered Species Act (ESA), and
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 are met;
and quantify achievement of the
performance measures in the NMFS’
Operating Plans. This information is
vital in assessing the economic, social,
and environmental effects of fishery
management decisions and regulations
on individual shrimp fishing
enterprises, fishing communities, and
the nation as a whole.
There has been a minor adjustment to
responses and burden. Currently, there
are approximately 1,529 permitted
vessels in the Gulf shrimp fishery.
Respondents are mailed hard copies
of the form. The forms must be
completed and mailed back to NMFS
before their permits expire.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 0648–0542.
Form Number: None.
Type of Review: Regular submission
(extension of a current information
collection).
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
1,529.
Estimated Time per Response:
Reports, 20 minutes.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 510.
Estimated Total Annual Cost to
Public: $0 in recordkeeping/reporting
costs.
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: June 28, 2013.
Gwellnar Banks,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013–16095 Filed 7–3–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XC533
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Navy Training
Conducted at the Silver Strand
Training Complex, San Diego Bay
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of issuance of an
incidental harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
II. Method of Collection
PO 00000
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
included in the request for OMB
approval of this information collection;
they also will become a matter of public
record.
In accordance with provisions
of the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) as amended, notification is
hereby given that an Incidental
Harassment Authorization (IHA) has
been issued to the U.S. Navy (Navy) to
take marine mammals, by harassment,
incidental to conducting training
exercises at the Silver Strand Training
Complex (SSTC) in the vicinity of San
Diego Bay, California.
DATES: This authorization is effective
from July 18, 2013, until July 17, 2014.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the application,
IHA, and/or a list of references used in
this document may be obtained by
visiting the internet at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm. Documents cited in this
notice may also be viewed, by
appointment, during regular business
hours, at the Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05JYN1.SGM
05JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2013 / Notices
Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver
Spring, MD 20910–3225.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michelle Magliocca, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary)
to allow, upon request, the incidental,
but not intentional taking of small
numbers of marine mammals by U.S.
citizens who engage in a specified
activity (other than commercial fishing)
if certain findings are made and
regulations are issued or, if the taking is
limited to harassment, notice of a
proposed authorization is provided to
the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings
shall be granted if NMFS finds that the
taking will have a negligible impact on
the species or stock(s), will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
subsistence uses (where relevant), and if
the permissible methods of taking and
requirements pertaining to the
mitigation, monitoring and reporting of
such taking are set forth. NMFS has
defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR
216.103 as: ‘‘. . . an impact resulting
from the specified activity that cannot
be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’
The National Defense Authorization Act
of 2004 (NDAA) (Pub. L. 108–136)
removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and
‘‘specified geographical region’’
limitations and amended the definition
of ‘‘harassment’’ as it applies to a
‘‘military readiness activity’’ to read as
follows (Section 3(18)(B) of the MMPA):
(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].
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) establishes a 45-day
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:06 Jul 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
time limit for NMFS review of an
application followed by a 30-day public
notice and comment period on any
proposed authorizations for the
incidental harassment of marine
mammals. Within 45 days of the close
of the comment period, NMFS must
either issue or deny the authorization.
Summary of Request
NMFS received an application on
December 19, 2012, from the Navy for
the taking, by harassment, of marine
mammals incidental to conducting
training exercises at the Navy’s Silver
Strand Training Complex (SSTC) in the
vicinity of San Diego Bay, California. On
April 24, 2013, NMFS published a
Federal Register notice (78 FR 24161)
requesting comments from the public
concerning the Navy’s proposed training
activities and NMFS’ proposed
authorization.
Description of the Specific Activity
The Navy has conducted a review of
its continuing and proposed training
conducted at the SSTC to determine
whether there is a potential for
harassment of marine mammals.
Underwater detonation training and pile
driving, as summarized below (and
detailed in the proposed IHA Federal
Register notice), may result in the
incidental take of marine mammals from
elevated levels of sound. Other training
events conducted at the SSTC, which
are not expected to rise to the level of
harassment, are described in the SSTC
Final Environmental Impact Statement
(https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm#applications).
Underwater Detonations
Underwater detonations are
conducted by Explosive Ordnance
Disposal (EOD) units, Naval Special
Warfare (NSW) units, MH–60S Mine
Countermeasure helicopter squadrons,
and Mobile Diving and Salvage units at
the SSTC. The training provides Navy
personnel with hands-on experience
with the design, deployment, and
detonation of underwater clearance
devices of the general type and size that
they are required to understand and
utilize in combat. EOD units conduct
most of the underwater detonation
training at the SSTC as part of their
training in the detection, avoidance, and
neutralization of mines. Tables 1–3 and
2–1 in the Navy’s LOA application
describe in detail the types of
underwater detonation training events
conducted at the SSTC. Below is a basic
description of some underwater
detonation procedures that typically
apply to underwater training events at
the SSTC, with the exception of the
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40437
Unmanned Underwater Vehicle
Neutralization and Airborne Mine
Neutralization System.
• Prior to getting underway, all EOD
and NSW personnel conduct a detailed
safety and procedure briefing to
familiarize everyone with the goals,
objectives, and safety requirements
(including mitigation zones) applicable
to the particular training event.
• For safety reasons, and in
accordance with Navy directives, given
the training nature of many of these
events, underwater detonations only
occur during daylight and are only
conducted in sea-states of up to Beaufort
3 (presence of large wavelets, crests
beginning to break, presence of glassy
foam, and/or perhaps scattered
whitecaps).
• EOD or NSW personnel can be
transported to the planned detonation
site via small boat or helicopter
depending on the training event. Small
boats can include 7-m Rigid Hull
Inflatable Boats (RHIB), zodiacs, or other
similar craft as available to the
particular unit.
• Once on site, the applicable
mitigation zone is established and
visual survey commences for 30
minutes. Divers enter the water to
conduct the training objective which
could include searching for a training
object such as a simulated mine or
mine-like shape.
• For the detonation part of the
training, the explosive charge and
associate charge initiating device are
taken to the detonation point. The
explosives used are military forms of C–
4. In order to detonate C–4, a fusing and
initiating device is required.
• Following a particular underwater
detonation, additional personnel in the
support boats (or helicopter) keep watch
within the mitigation zone for 30
minutes.
• Concurrent with the postdetonation survey, divers return to the
detonation site to confirm the
explosives detonated correctly and
retrieve any residual material (pieces of
wire, tape, large fragments, etc.).
The Navy uses both time-delay and
positive control to initiate underwater
detonations, depending on the training
event and objectives. The time-delay
method uses a Time-delay Firing Device
(TDFD) and the positive control method
most commonly uses a Remote Firing
Device (RFD). TDFDs are the simplest,
safest, least expensive, most
operationally acceptable method of
initiating an underwater detonation.
TDFDs are preferred due to their light
weight, low magnetic signature (in cases
of mines sensitive to magnetic fields),
and reduced risk of accidental
E:\FR\FM\05JYN1.SGM
05JYN1
40438
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2013 / Notices
Authorization under regulations for the
Navy’s Hawaii-Southern California
Training and Testing (HSTT) (which
would include the SSTC) prior to
expiration of the IHA.
Pile Driving
Installation and removal of Elevated
Causeway System (ELCAS) support
piles may also result in the harassment
of marine mammals. The ELCAS is a
modular pre-fabricated causeway pier
that links offshore amphibious supply
ships with associated lighterage (i.e.,
small cargo boats and barges). Offloaded
vehicles and supplies can be driven on
the causeway to and from shore.
During ELCAS training events, 24inch wide hollow steel piles would be
driven into the sand in the surf zone
with an impact hammer. About 101
piles would be driven into the beach
and surf zone with a diesel impact
hammer over the course of about 10
days, 24-hours per day (i.e., day and
night). Each pile takes an average of 10
minutes to install, with around 250 to
300 impacts per pile. Pile driving
includes a semi-soft start as part of the
normal operating procedure based on
the design of the drive equipment. The
pile driver increases impact strength as
resistance goes up. At first, the pile
driver piston drops a few inches. As
resistance goes up, the pile driver piston
drops from a higher distance, providing
more impact due to gravity. The pile
driver can take 5 to 7 minutes to reach
full impact strength. As chapters of piles
are installed, causeway platforms are
then hoisted and secured onto the piles
with hydraulic jacks and cranes. At the
end of training, the ELCAS piles would
be removed with a vibratory extractor.
Removal takes about 15 minutes per pile
over a period of around 3 days. ELCAS
training may occur along both the ocean
side (SSTC-North boat and beach lanes)
and with the designated training lane
within Bravo beach on the bayside of
SSTC. Up to four ELCAS training/
installation events may occur during the
year.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
detonation from nearby radios or other
electronics. The Navy considers it
critical that EOD and NSW platoons
qualify annually with necessary timedelay certification, maintain
proficiency, and train to face real-world
scenarios that require use of TDFDs.
The SSTC (Figure 1–1 of the Navy’s
IHA application) is located in and
adjacent to San Diego Bay, south of
Coronado, California and north of
Imperial Beach, California. The complex
is composed of ocean and bay training
lanes, adjacent beach training areas,
ocean anchorages, and inland training
areas. To facilitate range management
and scheduling, the SSTC is divided
into numerous training sub-areas. A
more detailed description of the area
can be found in the proposed IHA
Federal Register notice (78 FR 24161,
April 24, 2013).
Dates and Duration of Activities
The Navy’s activities will occur
between July 2013 and July 2014. Most
underwater detonation training events
include one or two detonations. Table
2–1 in the Navy’s LOA application
shows the 19 different types and
number of training events per year in
the SSTC. Pile installation and removal
would occur over an approximate 13day period, up to four times per year.
NMFS has issued a 1-year IHA that may
be superseded if we issue a Letter of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:06 Jul 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
Location of Activities
Comments and Responses
A notice of proposed authorization
and request for public comment was
published on April 24, 2013 (78 FR
24161). During the 30-day public
comment period, we received comments
from the Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission), the Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management (BOEM), and two
private citizens. BOEM’s comments
related to typos in the proposed IHA
notice and recommended clarifications.
One of the private citizens was generally
opposed to naval activities, while the
other commended the Navy for
minimizing threats to marine mammals.
NMFS’ responses to specific comments
on the proposed mitigation and
monitoring measures are provided
below.
Comment 1: The Commission
recommends that the Navy ensure
protection of marine mammals in the
areas where detonations will occur by
(1) conducting in-situ sound
measurements of underwater
detonations and (2) using that
information to establish appropriately
sized mitigation and buffer zones.
Response: The Navy conducted
empirical field measurements of
underwater detonations at San Clemente
Island and the SSTC in 2002. During
these tests, 2-pound and 15-pound net
explosive weight charges were placed at
6 and 15 feet of water and peak
pressures and energies were measured
for both bottom placed detonations and
detonations off the bottom. The Navy
found that, in general, single-charge
underwater detonations, empirically
measured, were similar to or less than
propagation model predictions. Results
from these tests were used to determine
ZOIs and mitigation zones for Very
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Shallow Water (VSW) underwater
detonations.
The Navy plans to conduct a new set
of empirical underwater detonation
propagation measurements at SSTC in
the summer/fall of 2013 and winter of
2014. Data from that study will be
incorporated into the Navy’s model for
future actions.
As described in the proposed IHA
notice (78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013), the
Navy will conduct an underwater
acoustic propagation monitoring project
during the first available ELCAS
deployment at the SSTC. The acoustic
monitoring will provide empirical field
data on actual ELCAS pile driving and
removal underwater source levels, and
propagation specific to ELCAS training
at the SSTC. These results will be used
to either confirm or refine the Navy’s
exposure predictions and expand the
mitigation zones if necessary.
Comment 2: The Commission
recommends that the Navy adjust the
size of the mitigation zones (and
subsequent monitoring) using the
average swim speed of the fastest
swimming marine mammal occurring in
the area during the use of TDFDs.
Response: NMFS disagrees that the
size of the mitigation zones needs to be
adjusted.
The Navy already accounts for swim
speeds above 3 knots by including at
least an additional 200 yards when
practicable. NMFS believes that there is
a very low likelihood of an animal
entering the buffer zone during the brief
amount of time that exposure may occur
without being detected. Even in the
absence of mitigation, the Navy’s
modeling suggests that zero animals are
likely to randomly enter the safety
radius in the small amount of times that
the detonations actually occur and no
take by Level A harassment or mortality
was requested or authorized. It is
unlikely that an animal will swim into
the zone during the brief amount of time
that it might be exposed to a detonation
without being detected by the multiple
boats encircling the detonation area and
observing the mitigation zone.
Additionally, given the Navy’s
available resources, and considering the
small size of boats typically used for
monitoring, the required mitigation
zones are the maximum distances that
can be effectively monitored. Due to the
type of training required during the use
of TDFDs, the Navy has limited survey
vessels and manpower available for
monitoring. Scheduling additional
vessels and crews would degrade the
overall training readiness of the other
unit(s) involved. If the Navy adopted a
more precautionary swim speed and
implemented larger mitigation zones,
E:\FR\FM\05JYN1.SGM
05JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
surveillance resources could not be
increased and the same number of boats
would be spread out over a larger area,
diluting the Navy’s ability to effectively
monitor the mitigation zone.
Comment 3: The Commission
recommends that the Navy monitor the
extent of the Level B harassment zones
using additional shore- or vessel-based
observers to (1) determine the numbers
of marine mammals taken during pile
driving and removal activities and (2)
characterize the effects on them.
Response: Consistent with previous
authorizations for activities at SSTC, the
Navy proposed to monitor a 50-yard
radius during ELCAS pile driving and
removal events. This mitigation zone is
based on the predicted range to Level A
harassment (180 dB) for cetaceans, and
is applied conservatively to both
cetaceans and pinnipeds. The Navy
proposed to monitor for the presence of
marine mammals beginning 30 minutes
before any ELCAS pile driving or
removal event, continuing during pile
driving and removal, and ending 30
minutes after completion of any pile
driving or removal event. At least one
observer would monitor the mitigation
zone from shore. If a marine mammal is
seen within the 50-yard radius, pile
driving and removal events would be
shutdown or delayed until the animal
has voluntarily left the mitigation zone.
The 50-yard mitigation zone for
ELCAS mitigation is practical for the
Navy and NMFS believes that this
distance will prevent Level A
harassment and reduce the potential for
Level B harassment. Monitoring of the
Level B harassment zone is impractical
for the Navy given the size of the zone
(>1,000 yards) and limited number of
resources (e.g., small boats and
personnel). NMFS believes that the 50yard mitigation zone will prevent Level
A harassment and reduce the potential
for Level B harassment, especially
considering the limited duration of the
activity (about 3 days of pile driving and
10 days of pile removal) and the close
proximity to shore (1,000 yards).
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
The Potential Effects on Marine
Mammals section of the proposed IHA
included a qualitative discussion of the
different ways that underwater
detonation events and pile driving and
removal activities would impact marine
mammals without consideration of
mitigation and monitoring measures (78
FR 24161, April 24, 2013; pages 24167–
24172). Marine mammals may
experience direct physiological effects
(e.g., threshold shift and non-acoustic
injury), acoustic masking, impaired
communication, and behavioral
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:06 Jul 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
disturbance. The information contained
in this section of the proposed IHA has
not changed.
Mitigation Measures
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization under section 101(a)(5)(D)
of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the
permissible methods of taking pursuant
to such activity, and other means of
effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on such species or stock and its
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance, and on 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 authorization 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
activities described in the Navy’s LOA
application and summarized earlier in
this document are considered military
readiness activities.
NMFS reviewed the proposed
activities and the proposed mitigation
measures as described in the Navy’s
LOA application to determine if they
would result in the least practicable
adverse effect on marine mammals,
which includes 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
effectiveness of the military readiness
activity. NMFS described the Navy’s
proposed mitigation measures in detail
in the proposed IHA (78 FR 24161,
April 24, 2013; pages 24172–24175).
These required mitigation measures,
summarized below, have not changed.
Mitigation zones for all underwater
detonation events and pile driving and
removal activities;
Underwater detonations will only
occur during daylight hours;
Anchored floats will be used to mark
the outer limits of the mitigation zone
(vsw, pos);
A safety observer will ensure the
detonation site is clear before an
underwater detonation event;
Boat-based and shore-based observers
will monitor for marine mammals
before, during, and after underwater
detonation events, depending on the
type of activity;
Any observed injured or stressed
marine mammal will be reported to the
Navy and NMFS;
Time-delays longer than 10 minutes
will not be used;
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40439
If a marine mammals is sighted within
a mitigation zone, underwater
detonation events and ELCAS training
will be delayed or stopped until the
animal voluntarily leaves or the zone is
clear from sightings for 30 minutes,
depending on the type of activity; and
The Navy will implement a soft start
for all ELCAS pile driving.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth,
where applicable, ‘‘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
ITAs must include the suggested means
of accomplishing the necessary
monitoring and reporting that will result
in increased knowledge of the species
and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are
expected to be present in the proposed
action area.
This section of the proposed IHA
included a detailed description of the
Navy’s proposed monitoring measures
(78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013; pages
24175–24176). These required
monitoring measures, summarized
below, have not changed. In addition to
the mitigation monitoring described
above, the Navy will monitor a subset of
SSTC underwater detonation events to
validate the Navy’s pre- and post-event
mitigation effectiveness, and observe
marine mammal reaction, or lack of
reaction to SSTC training events. The
Navy will also conduct an acoustic
monitoring project during the first field
deployment of the ELCAS.
Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(A) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth
‘‘requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such
taking.’’ Effective reporting is critical
both to compliance as well as ensuring
that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring. This section of the
proposed IHA included a detailed
description of the Navy’s proposed
reporting measures. These required
reporting measures, summarized below,
have not changed.
General notification of injured or dead
marine mammals; and
Monitoring/exercise report due 90
days after the expiration of the IHA.
Past Monitoring and Reporting
The Navy has complied with
monitoring and reporting requirements
under their previous IHAs for the SSTC.
E:\FR\FM\05JYN1.SGM
05JYN1
40440
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2013 / Notices
To date, two underwater demolition
training events have been observed by
protected species observers between
July 2012 and November 2012. Broad
scale Navy-funded monitoring in
support of the Navy’s Southern
California (SOCAL) Range Complex
Letter of Authorization has typically
focused on the offshore waters north
and west of the SSTC. The Navy
obtained special flight permission to
survey the vicinity of the SSTC during
part of three aerial surveys under the
SOCAL monitoring plan in 2011–2012.
As anticipated, marine mammal
sightings were limited and included
several California sea lions and a few
unidentified dolphins, although the
dolphin sightings were several miles
offshore from the normal SSTC training
area.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
In the Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment section of the proposed
IHA, NMFS provided a detailed
description of the potential effects to
marine mammals from underwater
detonations and ELCAS pile driving and
removal under the MMPA’s definitions
of Level A and Level B harassment and
attempted to quantify the effects that
might occur from the specified activities
(78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013; pages
24176–24178). The proposed IHA also
included a description of the Navy’s
quantitative exposure modeling
methodology. That information has not
changed; however, there was an error in
the column headlines of Table 6, which
were corrected and are provided below.
In summary, for all underwater
detonations and ELCAS pile driving
activities, the Navy’s impact model
predicts that no mortality and/or Level
A harassment (injury) will occur to
marine mammal species and stocks
within the action area (Tables 5 and 6).
TABLE 5—THE NAVY’S MODELED ESTIMATES OF SPECIES EXPOSED TO UNDERWATER DETONATIONS WITHOUT
IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES
Annual marine mammal exposure (all sources)
Level B behavior
(multiple successive explosive
events only)
Level B TTS
Level A
177 dB re 1 μPa
Species
182 dB re 1
μPa2¥s/23 psi
205 dB re 1
μPa2¥s/13.0
psi-ms
Gray Whale:
Warm ..................................................................................................
Cold ....................................................................................................
Bottlenose Dolphin:
Warm ..................................................................................................
Cold ....................................................................................................
California Sea Lion:
Warm ..................................................................................................
Cold ....................................................................................................
Harbor Seal:
Warm ..................................................................................................
Cold ....................................................................................................
Long-beaked common dolphin:
Warm ..................................................................................................
Cold ....................................................................................................
Pacific white-sided dolphin:
Warm ..................................................................................................
Cold ....................................................................................................
Risso’s dolphin:
Warm ..................................................................................................
Cold ....................................................................................................
Short-beaked common dolphin:
Warm ..................................................................................................
Cold ....................................................................................................
Mortality
30.5 psi-ms
N/A
0
N/A
0
N/A
0
30
40
43
55
0
0
0
0
4
40
4
51
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
7
21
10
0
0
0
0
2
3
3
4
0
0
0
0
3
11
4
15
0
0
0
0
123
62
177
86
0
0
0
0
339
Total Annual Exposures ..............................................................
N/A
0
473
0
0
TABLE 6—EXPOSURE ESTIMATES FROM ELCAS PILE DRIVING AND REMOVAL PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION
Annual marine mammal exposure (all sources)
Level B behavior
(Non-Impulse)
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Level B Behavior
(Impulse)
Level A
(Cetacean)
Level A
(Pinniped)
120 dBrms re 1
μPa
Species
160 dBrms re 1
μPa
180 dBrms re 1
μPa
190 dBrms re 1
μPa
N/A
6
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
168
40
N/A
0
0
0
0
Gray Whale:
Installation ...........................................................................................
Removal ..............................................................................................
Bottlenose Dolphin:
Installation ...........................................................................................
Removal ..............................................................................................
California Sea Lion:.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:06 Jul 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05JYN1.SGM
05JYN1
40441
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 6—EXPOSURE ESTIMATES FROM ELCAS PILE DRIVING AND REMOVAL PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION OF
MITIGATION—Continued
Annual marine mammal exposure (all sources)
Level B behavior
(Non-Impulse)
Level B Behavior
(Impulse)
Level A
(Cetacean)
Level A
(Pinniped)
120 dBrms re 1
μPa
Species
160 dBrms re 1
μPa
180 dBrms re 1
μPa
190 dBrms re 1
μPa
Installation ...........................................................................................
Removal ..............................................................................................
Harbor Seal:
Installation ...........................................................................................
Removal ..............................................................................................
Long-beaked common dolphin:
Installation ...........................................................................................
Removal ..............................................................................................
Pacific white-sided dolphin:
Installation ...........................................................................................
Removal ..............................................................................................
Risso’s dolphin:
Installation ...........................................................................................
Removal ..............................................................................................
Short-beaked common dolphin:
Installation ...........................................................................................
Removal ..............................................................................................
N/A
102
20
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
12
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
54
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
12
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
30
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
462
80
N/A
0
0
0
0
Total Annual Exposures .....................................................................
846
140
0
0
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
The Anticipated Effects on Habitat
section of the proposed IHA included a
detailed discussion of the potential
impacts on habitats used by marine
mammals (78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013;
pages 24178–24179). The information
contained in the proposed IHA has not
changed. In summary, the specified
activities are not expected to result in
any permanent impact on marine
mammal habitat or food resources.
Subsistence Harvest of Marine
Mammals
NMFS has determined that the Navy’s
training activities at the SSTC will not
have an unmitigable adverse impact on
the availability of the affected species or
stocks for subsistence use since there
are no such uses in the specified area.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination
Pursuant to NMFS’ 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 NMFS
must perform to determine whether the
activity will have a ‘‘negligible impact’’
on the species or stock. Level B
(behavioral) harassment occurs at the
level of the individual(s) and does not
assume any resulting population-level
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:06 Jul 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
consequences, though there are known
avenues through which behavioral
disturbance of individuals can result in
population-level effects. A negligible
impact finding is based on the lack of
likely adverse effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of Level B harassment takes, alone, is
not enough information on which to
base an impact determination. In
addition to considering estimates of the
number of marine mammals that might
be ‘‘taken’’ through behavioral
harassment, NMFS must 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 proposed IHA included a section
that addressed the analysis and
negligible impact determination of the
Navy’s activities on the affected species
or stocks (78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013;
pages 24179–24180). The information in
the proposed IHA has not changed and
our determination is summarized here.
Taking the discussion in the proposed
IHA into account, we have determined
that the Navy’s underwater detonations
and ELCAS pile driving and removal
will have a negligible impact on the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
marine mammal species and stocks
present in the SSTC. This determination
is based on relatively small zones of
influence for the underwater
detonations; shallow water areas that
will contain the spreading of explosive
energy; low marine mammal densities
within the action area; NMFS’
anticipation that no mortalities or
injuries to marine mammals will occur;
and the required mitigation and
monitoring measures detailed in the
IHA.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No marine mammal species are listed
as endangered or threatened under the
ESA with confirmed or possible
occurrence in the study area. Therefore,
section 7 consultation under the ESA for
NMFS’s issuance of an MMPA
authorization is not warranted.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
The Navy prepared a Final
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the proposed SSTC training
activities, which was released in
January 2011 and is available at
https://www.silverstrandtraining
complexeis.com/EIS.aspx/. NMFS is a
cooperating agency (as defined by the
Council on Environmental Quality (40
CFR 1501.6)) in the preparation of the
EIS. NMFS has subsequently adopted
the FEIS for the SSTC training activities.
As a result of these determinations,
NMFS has issued an IHA to the Navy to
E:\FR\FM\05JYN1.SGM
05JYN1
40442
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 129 / Friday, July 5, 2013 / Notices
conduct training activities at the SSTC
Study Area, provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: July 1, 2013.
Helen M. Golde,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–16156 Filed 7–3–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. CPSC 2009–0088]
Submission for OMB Review;
Comment Request—Third Party
Conformity Assessment Body
Registration Form
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In the Federal Register of
April 19, 2013 (76 FR 23545), the
Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC or Commission) published a
notice in accordance with provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), to announce the
CPSC’s intention to seek extension of an
approval of information collection
regarding a form used to evaluate
whether third party conformity
assessment bodies meet the
requirements to test for compliance to
specified children’s product safety
rules.
No comments were received in
response to that notice. Therefore, by
publication of this notice, the
Commission announces that it has
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), a request for
SUMMARY:
extension of approval of those
collections of information, without
change.
DATES: Fax comments to OMB not later
than August 5, 2013.
ADDRESSES: OMB recommends that
written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
OMB, Attn: CPSC Desk Officer, FAX:
202–395–6974, or emailed to
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. All
comments should be identified by
Docket No. CPSC–2009–0088. In
addition, written comments also should
be submitted at: https://
www.regulations.gov, under Docket No.
CPSC–2009–0088, or by mail/hand
delivery/courier (for paper, disk, or CD–
ROM submissions), preferably in five
copies, to: Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission,
Room 820, 4330 East West Highway,
Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301)
504–7923. For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert H. Squibb, Consumer Product
Safety Commission, 4330 East West
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; (301)
504–7815, or by email to:
rsquibb@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Renewal of Approval of
Collection of Information. The
Consumer Product Safety Improvement
Act of 2008 (CPSIA) requires third party
testing to be conducted by a third party
conformity assessment body for any
children’s product that is subject to a
children’s product safety rule before
importing for consumption or
warehousing or distributing in
commerce. To assess a third party
conformity assessment body’s
qualifications for acceptance by CPSC,
information related to location,
accreditation, and ownership must be
collected from the third party
conformity assessment body. The CPSC
uses an online collection form, CPSC
Form 223, to gather information from
third party conformity assessment
bodies seeking acceptance by CPSC. The
information collected relates to location,
accreditation, and ownership.
Commission staff uses this information
to assess:
• A third party conformity
assessment body’s status as either an
independent third party conformity
assessment body, a government-owned
or government-controlled conformity
assessment body, or a firewalled
conformity assessment body;
• Qualifications for acceptance by
CPSC to test for compliance to specified
children’s product safety rules; and
• Eligibility for acceptance on the
CPSC Web site.
On March 12, 2013, the Commission
published a final rule (16 CFR part
1112) in the Federal Register regarding
the requirements for third party
conformity assessment bodies. The final
rule became effective on June 10, 2013.
Now that 16 CFR part 1112 is in effect,
the rule will require the collection of
information in CPSC Form 223:
• Upon initial application by the
third party conformity assessment body
for acceptance by CPSC;
• At the time any of the information
on the CPSC Form 223 changes; and
• At least every two years, as part of
a regular audit process.
A. Estimated Burden
The CPSC estimates the burden of the
collection of information in CPSC Form
223 is as follows:
ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN
Number of
respondents
Activity
Total
annual
responses
Frequency of
responses
Hours per
response
Total
hours
55
204
3
1
1
1
55
204
3
1
1
0.25
55
204
0.75
Total ................................................
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Initial Registration ..................................
Re-Registration ......................................
Changes in Information ..........................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
259.75
These estimates are based on the
following information:
• From March 19, 2012 to March 19,
2013, 56 new third party conformity
assessment bodies were accepted by the
CPSC. Since 2011, the number of new
third party conformity assessment
bodies (53) accepted by the CPSC has
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:06 Jul 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
remained stable. Based on these
historical levels of acceptance, the
estimated number of third party
conformity assessment bodies that
would be accepted by CPSC would be
55.
• Under the final rule, 16 CFR part
1112, third party conformity assessment
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
bodies are required to resubmit CPSC
Form 223 every two years. Because all
third party conformity assessment
bodies have not submitted their initial
CPSC Form 223s at the same time, only
some portion would be expected to
resubmit a CPSC Form 223 in any one
year. Based on the two year
E:\FR\FM\05JYN1.SGM
05JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 129 (Friday, July 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40436-40442]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16156]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XC533
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Navy
Training Conducted at the Silver Strand Training Complex, San Diego Bay
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection
Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that an Incidental
Harassment Authorization (IHA) has been issued to the U.S. Navy (Navy)
to take marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to conducting
training exercises at the Silver Strand Training Complex (SSTC) in the
vicinity of San Diego Bay, California.
DATES: This authorization is effective from July 18, 2013, until July
17, 2014.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the application, IHA, and/or a list of references
used in this document may be obtained by visiting the internet at:
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. Documents cited in
this notice may also be viewed, by appointment, during regular business
hours, at the Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
[[Page 40437]]
Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Magliocca, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to allow, upon request,
the incidental, but not intentional taking of small numbers of marine
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) if certain findings are made and regulations are
issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking
are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103
as: ``. . . an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot
be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.'' The National Defense Authorization Act of
2004 (NDAA) (Pub. L. 108-136) removed the ``small numbers'' and
``specified geographical region'' limitations and amended the
definition of ``harassment'' as it applies to a ``military readiness
activity'' to read as follows (Section 3(18)(B) of the MMPA): (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].
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) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS review of
an application followed by a 30-day public notice and comment period on
any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of marine
mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the comment period, NMFS must
either issue or deny the authorization.
Summary of Request
NMFS received an application on December 19, 2012, from the Navy
for the taking, by harassment, of marine mammals incidental to
conducting training exercises at the Navy's Silver Strand Training
Complex (SSTC) in the vicinity of San Diego Bay, California. On April
24, 2013, NMFS published a Federal Register notice (78 FR 24161)
requesting comments from the public concerning the Navy's proposed
training activities and NMFS' proposed authorization.
Description of the Specific Activity
The Navy has conducted a review of its continuing and proposed
training conducted at the SSTC to determine whether there is a
potential for harassment of marine mammals. Underwater detonation
training and pile driving, as summarized below (and detailed in the
proposed IHA Federal Register notice), may result in the incidental
take of marine mammals from elevated levels of sound. Other training
events conducted at the SSTC, which are not expected to rise to the
level of harassment, are described in the SSTC Final Environmental
Impact Statement (https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications).
Underwater Detonations
Underwater detonations are conducted by Explosive Ordnance Disposal
(EOD) units, Naval Special Warfare (NSW) units, MH-60S Mine
Countermeasure helicopter squadrons, and Mobile Diving and Salvage
units at the SSTC. The training provides Navy personnel with hands-on
experience with the design, deployment, and detonation of underwater
clearance devices of the general type and size that they are required
to understand and utilize in combat. EOD units conduct most of the
underwater detonation training at the SSTC as part of their training in
the detection, avoidance, and neutralization of mines. Tables 1-3 and
2-1 in the Navy's LOA application describe in detail the types of
underwater detonation training events conducted at the SSTC. Below is a
basic description of some underwater detonation procedures that
typically apply to underwater training events at the SSTC, with the
exception of the Unmanned Underwater Vehicle Neutralization and
Airborne Mine Neutralization System.
Prior to getting underway, all EOD and NSW personnel
conduct a detailed safety and procedure briefing to familiarize
everyone with the goals, objectives, and safety requirements (including
mitigation zones) applicable to the particular training event.
For safety reasons, and in accordance with Navy
directives, given the training nature of many of these events,
underwater detonations only occur during daylight and are only
conducted in sea-states of up to Beaufort 3 (presence of large
wavelets, crests beginning to break, presence of glassy foam, and/or
perhaps scattered whitecaps).
EOD or NSW personnel can be transported to the planned
detonation site via small boat or helicopter depending on the training
event. Small boats can include 7-m Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats (RHIB),
zodiacs, or other similar craft as available to the particular unit.
Once on site, the applicable mitigation zone is
established and visual survey commences for 30 minutes. Divers enter
the water to conduct the training objective which could include
searching for a training object such as a simulated mine or mine-like
shape.
For the detonation part of the training, the explosive
charge and associate charge initiating device are taken to the
detonation point. The explosives used are military forms of C-4. In
order to detonate C-4, a fusing and initiating device is required.
Following a particular underwater detonation, additional
personnel in the support boats (or helicopter) keep watch within the
mitigation zone for 30 minutes.
Concurrent with the post-detonation survey, divers return
to the detonation site to confirm the explosives detonated correctly
and retrieve any residual material (pieces of wire, tape, large
fragments, etc.).
The Navy uses both time-delay and positive control to initiate
underwater detonations, depending on the training event and objectives.
The time-delay method uses a Time-delay Firing Device (TDFD) and the
positive control method most commonly uses a Remote Firing Device
(RFD). TDFDs are the simplest, safest, least expensive, most
operationally acceptable method of initiating an underwater detonation.
TDFDs are preferred due to their light weight, low magnetic signature
(in cases of mines sensitive to magnetic fields), and reduced risk of
accidental
[[Page 40438]]
detonation from nearby radios or other electronics. The Navy considers
it critical that EOD and NSW platoons qualify annually with necessary
time-delay certification, maintain proficiency, and train to face real-
world scenarios that require use of TDFDs.
Pile Driving
Installation and removal of Elevated Causeway System (ELCAS)
support piles may also result in the harassment of marine mammals. The
ELCAS is a modular pre-fabricated causeway pier that links offshore
amphibious supply ships with associated lighterage (i.e., small cargo
boats and barges). Offloaded vehicles and supplies can be driven on the
causeway to and from shore.
During ELCAS training events, 24-inch wide hollow steel piles would
be driven into the sand in the surf zone with an impact hammer. About
101 piles would be driven into the beach and surf zone with a diesel
impact hammer over the course of about 10 days, 24-hours per day (i.e.,
day and night). Each pile takes an average of 10 minutes to install,
with around 250 to 300 impacts per pile. Pile driving includes a semi-
soft start as part of the normal operating procedure based on the
design of the drive equipment. The pile driver increases impact
strength as resistance goes up. At first, the pile driver piston drops
a few inches. As resistance goes up, the pile driver piston drops from
a higher distance, providing more impact due to gravity. The pile
driver can take 5 to 7 minutes to reach full impact strength. As
chapters of piles are installed, causeway platforms are then hoisted
and secured onto the piles with hydraulic jacks and cranes. At the end
of training, the ELCAS piles would be removed with a vibratory
extractor. Removal takes about 15 minutes per pile over a period of
around 3 days. ELCAS training may occur along both the ocean side
(SSTC-North boat and beach lanes) and with the designated training lane
within Bravo beach on the bayside of SSTC. Up to four ELCAS training/
installation events may occur during the year.
Dates and Duration of Activities
The Navy's activities will occur between July 2013 and July 2014.
Most underwater detonation training events include one or two
detonations. Table 2-1 in the Navy's LOA application shows the 19
different types and number of training events per year in the SSTC.
Pile installation and removal would occur over an approximate 13-day
period, up to four times per year. NMFS has issued a 1-year IHA that
may be superseded if we issue a Letter of Authorization under
regulations for the Navy's Hawaii-Southern California Training and
Testing (HSTT) (which would include the SSTC) prior to expiration of
the IHA.
Location of Activities
The SSTC (Figure 1-1 of the Navy's IHA application) is located in
and adjacent to San Diego Bay, south of Coronado, California and north
of Imperial Beach, California. The complex is composed of ocean and bay
training lanes, adjacent beach training areas, ocean anchorages, and
inland training areas. To facilitate range management and scheduling,
the SSTC is divided into numerous training sub-areas. A more detailed
description of the area can be found in the proposed IHA Federal
Register notice (78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013).
Comments and Responses
A notice of proposed authorization and request for public comment
was published on April 24, 2013 (78 FR 24161). During the 30-day public
comment period, we received comments from the Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission), the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), and two
private citizens. BOEM's comments related to typos in the proposed IHA
notice and recommended clarifications. One of the private citizens was
generally opposed to naval activities, while the other commended the
Navy for minimizing threats to marine mammals. NMFS' responses to
specific comments on the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures
are provided below.
Comment 1: The Commission recommends that the Navy ensure
protection of marine mammals in the areas where detonations will occur
by (1) conducting in-situ sound measurements of underwater detonations
and (2) using that information to establish appropriately sized
mitigation and buffer zones.
Response: The Navy conducted empirical field measurements of
underwater detonations at San Clemente Island and the SSTC in 2002.
During these tests, 2-pound and 15-pound net explosive weight charges
were placed at 6 and 15 feet of water and peak pressures and energies
were measured for both bottom placed detonations and detonations off
the bottom. The Navy found that, in general, single-charge underwater
detonations, empirically measured, were similar to or less than
propagation model predictions. Results from these tests were used to
determine ZOIs and mitigation zones for Very Shallow Water (VSW)
underwater detonations.
The Navy plans to conduct a new set of empirical underwater
detonation propagation measurements at SSTC in the summer/fall of 2013
and winter of 2014. Data from that study will be incorporated into the
Navy's model for future actions.
As described in the proposed IHA notice (78 FR 24161, April 24,
2013), the Navy will conduct an underwater acoustic propagation
monitoring project during the first available ELCAS deployment at the
SSTC. The acoustic monitoring will provide empirical field data on
actual ELCAS pile driving and removal underwater source levels, and
propagation specific to ELCAS training at the SSTC. These results will
be used to either confirm or refine the Navy's exposure predictions and
expand the mitigation zones if necessary.
Comment 2: The Commission recommends that the Navy adjust the size
of the mitigation zones (and subsequent monitoring) using the average
swim speed of the fastest swimming marine mammal occurring in the area
during the use of TDFDs.
Response: NMFS disagrees that the size of the mitigation zones
needs to be adjusted.
The Navy already accounts for swim speeds above 3 knots by
including at least an additional 200 yards when practicable. NMFS
believes that there is a very low likelihood of an animal entering the
buffer zone during the brief amount of time that exposure may occur
without being detected. Even in the absence of mitigation, the Navy's
modeling suggests that zero animals are likely to randomly enter the
safety radius in the small amount of times that the detonations
actually occur and no take by Level A harassment or mortality was
requested or authorized. It is unlikely that an animal will swim into
the zone during the brief amount of time that it might be exposed to a
detonation without being detected by the multiple boats encircling the
detonation area and observing the mitigation zone.
Additionally, given the Navy's available resources, and considering
the small size of boats typically used for monitoring, the required
mitigation zones are the maximum distances that can be effectively
monitored. Due to the type of training required during the use of
TDFDs, the Navy has limited survey vessels and manpower available for
monitoring. Scheduling additional vessels and crews would degrade the
overall training readiness of the other unit(s) involved. If the Navy
adopted a more precautionary swim speed and implemented larger
mitigation zones,
[[Page 40439]]
surveillance resources could not be increased and the same number of
boats would be spread out over a larger area, diluting the Navy's
ability to effectively monitor the mitigation zone.
Comment 3: The Commission recommends that the Navy monitor the
extent of the Level B harassment zones using additional shore- or
vessel-based observers to (1) determine the numbers of marine mammals
taken during pile driving and removal activities and (2) characterize
the effects on them.
Response: Consistent with previous authorizations for activities at
SSTC, the Navy proposed to monitor a 50-yard radius during ELCAS pile
driving and removal events. This mitigation zone is based on the
predicted range to Level A harassment (180 dB) for cetaceans, and is
applied conservatively to both cetaceans and pinnipeds. The Navy
proposed to monitor for the presence of marine mammals beginning 30
minutes before any ELCAS pile driving or removal event, continuing
during pile driving and removal, and ending 30 minutes after completion
of any pile driving or removal event. At least one observer would
monitor the mitigation zone from shore. If a marine mammal is seen
within the 50-yard radius, pile driving and removal events would be
shutdown or delayed until the animal has voluntarily left the
mitigation zone.
The 50-yard mitigation zone for ELCAS mitigation is practical for
the Navy and NMFS believes that this distance will prevent Level A
harassment and reduce the potential for Level B harassment. Monitoring
of the Level B harassment zone is impractical for the Navy given the
size of the zone (>1,000 yards) and limited number of resources (e.g.,
small boats and personnel). NMFS believes that the 50-yard mitigation
zone will prevent Level A harassment and reduce the potential for Level
B harassment, especially considering the limited duration of the
activity (about 3 days of pile driving and 10 days of pile removal) and
the close proximity to shore (1,000 yards).
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
The Potential Effects on Marine Mammals section of the proposed IHA
included a qualitative discussion of the different ways that underwater
detonation events and pile driving and removal activities would impact
marine mammals without consideration of mitigation and monitoring
measures (78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013; pages 24167-24172). Marine
mammals may experience direct physiological effects (e.g., threshold
shift and non-acoustic injury), acoustic masking, impaired
communication, and behavioral disturbance. The information contained in
this section of the proposed IHA has not changed.
Mitigation Measures
In order to issue an incidental take authorization under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods
of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the
least practicable adverse impact on such species or stock and its
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and
areas of similar significance, and on 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
authorization 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 activities described in the Navy's LOA
application and summarized earlier in this document are considered
military readiness activities.
NMFS reviewed the proposed activities and the proposed mitigation
measures as described in the Navy's LOA application to determine if
they would result in the least practicable adverse effect on marine
mammals, which includes 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 effectiveness of the military readiness activity. NMFS
described the Navy's proposed mitigation measures in detail in the
proposed IHA (78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013; pages 24172-24175). These
required mitigation measures, summarized below, have not changed.
Mitigation zones for all underwater detonation events and pile
driving and removal activities;
Underwater detonations will only occur during daylight hours;
Anchored floats will be used to mark the outer limits of the
mitigation zone (vsw, pos);
A safety observer will ensure the detonation site is clear before
an underwater detonation event;
Boat-based and shore-based observers will monitor for marine
mammals before, during, and after underwater detonation events,
depending on the type of activity;
Any observed injured or stressed marine mammal will be reported to
the Navy and NMFS;
Time-delays longer than 10 minutes will not be used;
If a marine mammals is sighted within a mitigation zone, underwater
detonation events and ELCAS training will be delayed or stopped until
the animal voluntarily leaves or the zone is clear from sightings for
30 minutes, depending on the type of activity; and
The Navy will implement a soft start for all ELCAS pile driving.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, where applicable,
``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 ITAs must include the suggested means of
accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result
in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or
impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be
present in the proposed action area.
This section of the proposed IHA included a detailed description of
the Navy's proposed monitoring measures (78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013;
pages 24175-24176). These required monitoring measures, summarized
below, have not changed. In addition to the mitigation monitoring
described above, the Navy will monitor a subset of SSTC underwater
detonation events to validate the Navy's pre- and post-event mitigation
effectiveness, and observe marine mammal reaction, or lack of reaction
to SSTC training events. The Navy will also conduct an acoustic
monitoring project during the first field deployment of the ELCAS.
Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(A) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth ``requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such taking.'' Effective reporting is
critical both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is
obtained from the required monitoring. This section of the proposed IHA
included a detailed description of the Navy's proposed reporting
measures. These required reporting measures, summarized below, have not
changed.
General notification of injured or dead marine mammals; and
Monitoring/exercise report due 90 days after the expiration of the
IHA.
Past Monitoring and Reporting
The Navy has complied with monitoring and reporting requirements
under their previous IHAs for the SSTC.
[[Page 40440]]
To date, two underwater demolition training events have been observed
by protected species observers between July 2012 and November 2012.
Broad scale Navy-funded monitoring in support of the Navy's Southern
California (SOCAL) Range Complex Letter of Authorization has typically
focused on the offshore waters north and west of the SSTC. The Navy
obtained special flight permission to survey the vicinity of the SSTC
during part of three aerial surveys under the SOCAL monitoring plan in
2011-2012. As anticipated, marine mammal sightings were limited and
included several California sea lions and a few unidentified dolphins,
although the dolphin sightings were several miles offshore from the
normal SSTC training area.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
In the Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment section of the
proposed IHA, NMFS provided a detailed description of the potential
effects to marine mammals from underwater detonations and ELCAS pile
driving and removal under the MMPA's definitions of Level A and Level B
harassment and attempted to quantify the effects that might occur from
the specified activities (78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013; pages 24176-
24178). The proposed IHA also included a description of the Navy's
quantitative exposure modeling methodology. That information has not
changed; however, there was an error in the column headlines of Table
6, which were corrected and are provided below. In summary, for all
underwater detonations and ELCAS pile driving activities, the Navy's
impact model predicts that no mortality and/or Level A harassment
(injury) will occur to marine mammal species and stocks within the
action area (Tables 5 and 6).
Table 5--The Navy's Modeled Estimates of Species Exposed to Underwater Detonations Without Implementation of
Mitigation Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual marine mammal exposure (all sources)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B behavior Level B TTS Level A Mortality
(multiple -----------------------------------------------
successive
Species explosive events
only) 182 dB re 1 205 dB re 1
------------------- [mu]Pa\2\-s/23 [mu]Pa\2\-s/ 30.5 psi-ms
177 dB re 1 psi 13.0 psi-ms
[mu]Pa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray Whale:
Warm..................................... N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cold..................................... 0 0 0 0
Bottlenose Dolphin:
Warm..................................... 30 43 0 0
Cold..................................... 40 55 0 0
California Sea Lion:
Warm..................................... 4 4 0 0
Cold..................................... 40 51 0 0
Harbor Seal:
Warm..................................... 0 0 0 0
Cold..................................... 0 0 0 0
Long-beaked common dolphin:
Warm..................................... 14 21 0 0
Cold..................................... 7 10 0 0
Pacific white-sided dolphin:
Warm..................................... 2 3 0 0
Cold..................................... 3 4 0 0
Risso's dolphin:
Warm..................................... 3 4 0 0
Cold..................................... 11 15 0 0
Short-beaked common dolphin:
Warm..................................... 123 177 0 0
Cold..................................... 62 86 0 0
------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Annual Exposures............... 339 473 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--Exposure Estimates From ELCAS Pile Driving and Removal Prior to Implementation of Mitigation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual marine mammal exposure (all sources)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B behavior Level B Level A Level A
(Non-Impulse) Behavior (Cetacean) (Pinniped)
Species ------------------- (Impulse) -------------------------------
----------------
120 dBrms re 1 160 dBrms re 1 180 dBrms re 1 190 dBrms re 1
[mu]Pa [mu]Pa [mu]Pa [mu]Pa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray Whale:
Installation............................. N/A 0 0 0
Removal.................................. 6 N/A 0 0
Bottlenose Dolphin:
Installation............................. N/A 40 0 0
Removal.................................. 168 N/A 0 0
California Sea Lion:.........................
[[Page 40441]]
Installation............................. N/A 20 0 0
Removal.................................. 102 N/A 0 0
Harbor Seal:
Installation............................. N/A 0 0 0
Removal.................................. 12 N/A 0 0
Long-beaked common dolphin:
Installation............................. N/A 0 0 0
Removal.................................. 54 N/A 0 0
Pacific white-sided dolphin:
Installation............................. N/A 0 0 0
Removal.................................. 12 N/A 0 0
Risso's dolphin:
Installation............................. N/A 0 0 0
Removal.................................. 30 N/A 0 0
Short-beaked common dolphin:
Installation............................. N/A 80 0 0
Removal.................................. 462 N/A 0 0
------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Annual Exposures................... 846 140 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
The Anticipated Effects on Habitat section of the proposed IHA
included a detailed discussion of the potential impacts on habitats
used by marine mammals (78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013; pages 24178-
24179). The information contained in the proposed IHA has not changed.
In summary, the specified activities are not expected to result in any
permanent impact on marine mammal habitat or food resources.
Subsistence Harvest of Marine Mammals
NMFS has determined that the Navy's training activities at the SSTC
will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the
affected species or stocks for subsistence use since there are no such
uses in the specified area.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
Pursuant to NMFS' 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 NMFS must perform to determine whether the activity will have a
``negligible impact'' on the species or stock. Level B (behavioral)
harassment occurs at the level of the individual(s) and does not assume
any resulting population-level consequences, though there are known
avenues through which behavioral disturbance of individuals can result
in population-level effects. 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 of
Level B harassment takes, alone, is not enough information on which to
base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of
the number of marine mammals that might be ``taken'' through behavioral
harassment, NMFS must 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 proposed IHA included a section that addressed the analysis and
negligible impact determination of the Navy's activities on the
affected species or stocks (78 FR 24161, April 24, 2013; pages 24179-
24180). The information in the proposed IHA has not changed and our
determination is summarized here. Taking the discussion in the proposed
IHA into account, we have determined that the Navy's underwater
detonations and ELCAS pile driving and removal will have a negligible
impact on the marine mammal species and stocks present in the SSTC.
This determination is based on relatively small zones of influence for
the underwater detonations; shallow water areas that will contain the
spreading of explosive energy; low marine mammal densities within the
action area; NMFS' anticipation that no mortalities or injuries to
marine mammals will occur; and the required mitigation and monitoring
measures detailed in the IHA.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No marine mammal species are listed as endangered or threatened
under the ESA with confirmed or possible occurrence in the study area.
Therefore, section 7 consultation under the ESA for NMFS's issuance of
an MMPA authorization is not warranted.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
The Navy prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for
the proposed SSTC training activities, which was released in January
2011 and is available at https://www.silverstrandtrainingcomplexeis.com/EIS.aspx/. NMFS is a cooperating agency (as defined by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1501.6)) in the preparation of the EIS.
NMFS has subsequently adopted the FEIS for the SSTC training
activities.
As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an IHA to the
Navy to
[[Page 40442]]
conduct training activities at the SSTC Study Area, provided the
previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements
are incorporated.
Dated: July 1, 2013.
Helen M. Golde,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-16156 Filed 7-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
