Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental To Conducting Maritime Strike Operations by Eglin Air Force Base in the Gulf of Mexico, 52135-52148 [2013-20521]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
June 20–25, 2014, meeting in Garden
Grove, California (Hyatt Regency Orange
County, 11999 Harbor Blvd., Garden
Grove, CA 92840). For further
information on these meetings, visit the
Council’s Web site, https://
www.pcouncil.org/council-operations/
council-meetings/future-meetings/.
Special Accommodations
The meetings are physically
accessible to people with disabilities.
Requests for sign language
interpretation or other auxiliary aids
should be directed to Kris Kleinschmidt
Kris.Kleinschmidt@noaa.gov (503)820–
2280 at least 5 days prior to the meeting
date.
Management Council, 800 N. State
Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901;
telephone: (302) 526–5255.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
original notice published in the Federal
Register on August 8, 2013 (78 FR
48421). The original notice stated that
the meeting ends at 12 noon. This notice
corrects the time of the webinar. All
other previously-published information
remains unchanged.
The Advisory Panel will develop a
Fishery Performance Report for
consideration by the Council and the
Council’s SSC as they review spiny
dogfish management measures
established for the 2014 fishing year.
Special Accommodations
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: August 19, 2013.
Emily H. Menashes,
Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–20523 Filed 8–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
The meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to M.
Jan Saunders at the Mid-Atlantic
Council Office, (302) 526–5251, at least
5 days prior to the meeting date.
Dated: August 16, 2013.
William D. Chappell,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[FR Doc. 2013–20448 Filed 8–21–13; 8:45 am]
RIN 0648–XC797
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management
Council (MAFMC); Public Meeting;
Correction
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of correction to a public
meeting.
RIN 0648–XC561
AGENCY:
The Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council’s (Council) Spiny
Dogfish Advisory Panel (AP) will meet
to develop a Fishery Performance
Report for the Spiny Dogfish fishery in
preparation for the Council and the
Council’s Scientific and Statistical
Committee review of specifications that
have been set for the 2014 fishing year.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
Wednesday, August 28, 2013 at 1 a.m.
until 4 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held
via webinar with a listening station also
available at the Council address below.
Webinar link: https://
mafmc.adobeconnect.com/dogfish/
Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, 800 N. State
Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901;
telephone: (302) 674–2331.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher M. Moore Ph.D., Executive
Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental To Conducting
Maritime Strike Operations by Eglin Air
Force Base in the Gulf of Mexico
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of incidental
harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) regulations, notification is
hereby given that NMFS has issued an
Incidental Harassment Authorization
(IHA) to the U.S. Air Force (USAF),
Eglin Air Force Base (Eglin AFB), to take
marine mammals, by harassment,
incidental to Maritime Strike Operations
in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM). The
USAF’s activities are considered
military readiness activities.
DATES: Effective August 19, 2013,
through August 18, 2014.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52135
An electronic copy of the
authorization, the application
containing a list of the references used
in this document, and the
Environmental Assessment (EA) and
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) may be obtained by writing to
Michael Payne, Chief, Permits,
Conservation and Education Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910–3225, telephoning the contact
listed below (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT), or 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 aforementioned address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian D. Hopper, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce 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) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and either regulations are
issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, a 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 takings 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.’’
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
established an expedited process by
which citizens of the U.S. 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
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
52136
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
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.
The National Defense Authorization
Act (NDAA) (Pub. L. 108–136) removed
the ‘‘small numbers’’ and ‘‘specified
geographical region’’ provisions 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].
Summary of Request
NMFS received an application on
December 11, 2012, from Eglin AFB for
the taking, by harassment, of marine
mammals incidental to Maritime Strike
Operations within the Eglin Gulf Test
and Training Range (EGTTR). A revised
application was submitted on January
22, 2013, which provided updated
marine mammal information. The
EGTTR is described as the airspace over
the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) that is
controlled by Eglin AFB. The planned
test location in the EGTTR is Warning
Area 151 (W–151), which is located
approximately 17 miles offshore from
Santa Rosa Island, specifically sub-area
W–151A.
The Maritime Strike operations may
potentially impact marine mammals at
or near the water surface. Marine
mammals could potentially be harassed,
injured, or killed by exploding and nonexploding projectiles, and falling debris.
However, based on analyses provided in
the USAF’s Environmental Assessment
(EA), Eglin’s IHA application, including
the required mitigation, and for reasons
discussed later in this document, NMFS
does not anticipate that Eglin’s Maritime
Strike exercises will result in any
serious injury or mortality to marine
mammals. Eglin AFB has requested
authorization to take two cetacean
species by Level A and Level B
harassment. The requested species
include: Atlantic bottlenose dolphin
(Tursiops truncatus) and Atlantic
spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis).
Description of the Specified Activity
This section describes the Maritime
Strike missions that have the potential
to affect marine mammals present
within the test area. Maritime Strike
operations, a ‘‘military readiness
activity’’ as defined under 16 U.S.C. 703
note, involve detonations above the
water, near the water surface, and under
water within the EGTTR. These
missions involve multiple types of live
munitions identified in Tables 1 and 2
below. The Maritime Strike operations
are described in more detail in the
following paragraphs.
The Maritime Strike program was
developed in response to the increasing
threats at sea posed by operations
conducted from small boats. The first
phase of the Maritime Strike program
focused on detecting and tracking boats
using various sensors, simulated
weapons engagements, and testing with
inert munitions. The final phase, and
the subject of this notice, consists of
testing the effectiveness of live
munitions on small boat threats. The
proposed Maritime Strike activities
would involve the use of multiple types
of live munitions in the EGTTR against
small boat targets, at all desired surface
and water depth scenarios (maximum
depth of 10 feet below the surface)
necessary to carry out the Tactics
Development and Evaluation (TD&E)
Program. Multiple munitions (bombs,
missiles, and gunner rounds) and
aircraft would be used to meet the
objectives of the Maritime Strike
program (Table 1). Because the tests
focus on weapon/target interaction,
particular aircraft are not specified for a
given test as long as it meets the
delivery parameters. The munitions
would be deployed against static,
towed, and remotely controlled boat
targets. Static and controlled targets
consist of stripped boat hulls with
plywood simulated crews and systems.
Damaged boats would be recovered for
data collection. Test data collection and
operation of remotely controlled boats
would be conducted from an
instrumentation barge anchored on-site,
which would also provide a platform for
cameras and weapon-tracking
equipment. Target boats would be
positioned 300 to 600 feet from the
instrument barge, depending on the
munition.
TABLE 1—LIVE MUNITIONS AND AIRCRAFT
Aircraft (not associated with specific
munitions)
Munitions
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
GBU–10 laser-guided Mk-84 bomb ..................................................................................................................
GBU–24 laser-guided Mk-84 bomb ..................................................................................................................
GBU–31 Joint Direct Attack Munition, global positioning system guided Mk-84 bomb ...................................
GBU–12 laser-guided Mk-82 bomb ..................................................................................................................
GBU–38 Joint Direct Attack Munition, global positioning system guided Mk-82 bomb ...................................
GBU–54 Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition, laser-guided Mk-82 bomb ..........................................................
CBU–103/B bomb .............................................................................................................................................
AGM–65E/L/K/G2 Maverick air-to-surface missile ...........................................................................................
AGM–114 Hellfire air-to-surface missile.
M–117 bomb.
PGU–12 high explosive incendiary 30 mm rounds.
M56/PGU–28 high explosive incendiary 20mm rounds.
Live testing will include three
detonation options: (1) Above the water
surface; (2) at the water surface; and (3)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
below the water surface (two depths).
The number of each type of munition,
height or depth of detonation, explosive
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
F–16C fighter aircraft.
F–16C+ fighter aircraft.
F–15E fighter aircraft.
A–10 fighter aircraft.
B–1B bomber aircraft.
B–52H bomber aircraft.
MQ–1/9 unmanned aerial vehicle.
material, and net explosive weight
(NEW) of each munition is provided in
Table 2.
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
52137
TABLE 2—MARITIME STRIKE MUNITIONS
Type of munition
Total number of
live munitions
Number of detonations by height/
depth
Warhead—explosive material
GBU–10 ..............
GBU–24 ..............
GBU–31 (JDAM)
1 .........................
1 .........................
13 .......................
20 feet AGL: 3
5 feet underwater: 3
10 feet underwater: 3
1 .........................
13 .......................
20 feet AGL: 3
5 feet underwater: 3
10 feet underwater: 3
1 .........................
2 each (8 total) ...
Water Surface: all ...........................
Water Surface: all ...........................
Water Surface: 4 .............................
MK–84—Tritonal .............................
MK–84—Tritonal .............................
MK–84—Tritonal .............................
945 lbs.
945 lbs.
945 lbs (MK–84).
Water Surface: all ...........................
Water Surface: 4 .............................
MK–82—Tritonal .............................
MK–82—Tritonal .............................
192 lbs.
192 lbs (MK–82).
Water Surface: all ...........................
Water Surface: all ...........................
192 lbs (MK–82).
86 lbs.
4 .........................
Water Surface: all ...........................
AGM–114
(Hellfire).
4 .........................
Water Surface: all ...........................
M–117 .................
6 .........................
20 feet AGL: 3 ................................
MK–82—Tritonal .............................
WDU–24/B penetrating blast-fragmentation warhead.
202 Blu-97/B Combined Effects
Bomblets (0.63 lbs each).
High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT)
tandem anti-armor metal augmented charge.
750 lb blast/fragmentation bomb,
used the same way as MK–82—
Tritonal.
Water Surface: 3
1,000 ..................
Water Surface: all ...........................
0.1 lbs.
1,500 ..................
Water Surface: all ...........................
30x173 mm caliber with aluminized
RDX explosive. Designed for
GAU–8/A Gun System.
20x120 mm caliber with aluminized
Comp A–4 HEI. Designed for
M61 and M197 Gun System.
GBU–12 ..............
GBU–38 (JDAM)
GBU–54 (LJDAM)
AGM–65E/L/K/G2
(Maverick).
CBU–103 .............
PGU–12 HEI 30
mm.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
M56/PGU–28 HEI
20 mm.
Maritime Strike missions are
scheduled to occur over an approximate
two- to three-week period in August
2013. Missions will occur on weekdays
during daytime hours only, with one or
two missions occurring per day. All
activities will take place within the
EGTTR. Activities will occur only in
Warning Area W–151, and specifically
in sub-area W–151A. W–151A extends
approximately 60 nm offshore and has
a surface area of 2,565 nm2 (8,797 km2).
Water depths range from about 30 to 350
m and include continental shelf and
slope zones; however, most of W–151A
occurs over the continental shelf, in
water depths less than 250 m. Maritime
Strike operations will occur in the
shallower, northern inshore portion of
W–151A, in water depth of about 35 m
(see Figure 2–1 in Eglin’s IHA
application for a map of the test area).
To ensure safety, prior to conducting
Maritime Strike exercises, Eglin will
conduct a pre-test target area clearance
procedure for people and protected
species. Support vessels will be
deployed around a defined safety zone
to ensure that commercial and
recreational boats do not accidentally
enter the area. Before delivering the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
ordnance, mission aircraft will make a
dry run over the target area to ensure
that it is clear of commercial and
recreational boats (at least two aircraft
would participate in each test). Due to
the limited duration of the flyover and
potentially high speed and altitude,
pilots will not be able to survey for
marine species. In addition, an E–9A
surveillance aircraft will survey the
target area for nonparticipating vessels
and other objects on the water surface.
Based on the results from an acoustic
impacts analysis for live ordnance
detonations, a separate disturbance zone
around the target will be established for
the protection of marine species. The
size of the zone will be based on the
distance to which energy- and pressurerelated impacts will extend for the
various type of ordnance listed in Table
2 and will not necessarily be the same
size as the human safety zone. Based on
the acoustic modeling result, the largest
possible distance from the target will be
3,526 m (2.2 miles), which corresponds
to the 177 dB Level B harassment
threshold for 945 lb NEW munitions
detonated at 10 ft underwater (Table 5).
At least two of the support vessels will
monitor for marine mammals around
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Net explosive weight per
munition
127 lbs.
20 lbs.
386 lbs (Tritonal).
0.02 lbs (Comp A–4 HEI).
the target area. Maritime Strike missions
will not proceed until the target area is
determined to be clear of unauthorized
personnel and protected species.
In addition to vessel-based
monitoring, one to three video cameras
will be positioned on an
instrumentation barge anchored on-site.
The camera configuration and actual
number of cameras used would depend
on the specific test being conducted.
The cameras are typically used for
situational awareness of the target area
and surrounding area, and could also be
used for monitoring the test site for the
presence of marine species. A marine
species observer will be located in the
Eglin control tower, along with mission
personnel, to monitor the video feed
before and during test activities.
After each test, floating targets will be
inspected to identify and render safe
any unexploded ordnance (UXO),
including fuzes or intact munitions. The
Eglin Air Force Explosive Disposal
Team will be on hand for each test.
UXO that cannot be removed will be
detonated in place, which could result
in the sinking of the target vessel. Once
the area has been cleared for re-entry,
test personnel will retrieve target debris
and marine species observers will
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
52138
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
survey the area for any evidence of
adverse impacts to protected species.
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of Eglin AFB’s
application and NMFS’ proposal to
issue an IHA to the USAF, Eglin AFB,
published in the Federal Register on
June 4, 2013 (78 FR 33357). During the
30-day public comment period, NMFS
received comments from the Marine
Mammal Commission (MMC) and a
member of the public. The comment
from the private citizen opposed the
issuance of an authorization without
any specific substantiation for why the
authorization should not be issued.
Following are the comments from the
MMC and NMFS’ responses.
Comment 1: The MMC expressed
their belief that all permanent hearing
loss should be considered a serious
injury and recommends that NMFS
propose to issue regulations under
section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA and a
letter of authorization, rather than an
incidental harassment authorization, for
any proposed activities expected to
cause a permanent threshold shift (PTS).
Response: PTS is considered an injury
to the auditory system, but not a serious
injury. NMFS PTS thresholds are based
on the onset of PTS, meaning about a
30% incident of PTS (Ketten 1995; DON
1998) and a 50% likelihood of eardrum
rupture (which is often recoverable
(Kerr and Byrne, 1975). An animal
would either need to be exposed to the
sound above this threshold for a long
amount of time (not likely with
explosives) or a much higher level
(meaning being closer to the source)
than the threshold in order to incur a
significantly more serious degree of
PTS. Because of the short duration of
the proposed activity (few weeks)
combined with the density of marine
mammals, it is unlikely that a marine
mammal would even randomly enter
the area where more severe PTS would
be a risk. However, when mitigation
measures and likely avoidance of an
area of high levels of training activities
are considered, it becomes highly
unlikely. Additionally, some degree of
presbycusis is fairly common in the
wild (i.e., high-frequency hearing loss),
especially with older animals, and there
is no data suggesting whether, or at
what significantly greater degree of PTS,
this reduced hearing might potentially
lead to mortality. NMFS does not
believe that serious injury will result
from this activity and that therefore it is
not necessary to issue regulations
through section 101(a)(5)(A), rather, an
IHA may be issued.
Comment 2: The MMC expressed
concern regarding Eglin AFB’s use of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
two different, and seemingly contrary,
methods (i.e., total net explosive weight
of all ordnance in a single burst versus
net explosive weight of a single bomblet
as numerous individual burts) for
estimating zones of exposure. The MMC
recommended that NMFS withhold
issuing the IHA until (1) the USAF has
modeled the various scenarios
consistently for all operations that
involve more than one bomb, bomblet,
missile, or round and (2) has consulted
with the MMC regarding resolution of
this issue.
Response: The MMC may be
confusing calculation methods for
determining zones of exposures (the
area of potential impact defined as a
radius in the application) with
estimating takes of each species for each
threshold and criteria (total number of
animals exposed to noise levels that
may result in Level A or Level B
harassment). These calculations are two
separate processes. With the exception
of the gunnery rounds and CBU–103
cluster bombs, the zones of exposure for
all other munitions were based on the
detonation/burst of one munition at a
given depth; not the total number of
munitions planned to be detonated for
the duration of the test. On the other
hand, Level A and Level B take
estimates of each species were
calculated by summing together all
detonations proposed to occur for each
munition at a given depth. The
methodology and analytical approach
for determining the exposure zones and
estimating the number of marine
mammal takes was fully explained in
the IHA application, the Notice of
Proposed IHA (78 FR 33357, June 4,
2013), as well as in the previous IHAs
issued to Eglin AFB, and supporting
documents issued for this activity.
Readers should refer to those documents
for additional information, but a
summary follows.
Zones of exposure to determine Level
A and Level B Harassment impact areas
were calculated as the product of the
impact area of a single burst of each
munition and the number of bursts
planned to occur during each testing
scenario. For this analysis, a ‘‘burst’’
must be sufficiently spaced in time or
location such that it could: (1) Affect a
different set of marine mammals; or (2)
affect the same individuals multiple
times. The firing sequence for the 20mm and 30-mm rounds consists of
expending a large number of individual
rounds at one target, all of which
detonate within one second of each
other. Due to the tight spacing in time
and location, for modeling purposes,
each burst of 1,000 or 1,500 rounds is
treated as a single detonation. On the
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
other hand, the CBU–103 cluster bombs
are treated differently based on the
dispersed pattern and timing of
individual bomblet detonations. The
CBU–103’s 202 bomblets are released
mid-air and spread out to cover a larger
target area, and may detonate over the
course of a few to several seconds.
Therefore the 202 bomblets are not
combined as a single burst for
calculating the zones of exposure for
Level A and Level B Harassment.
Using this approach, Eglin AFB
estimated the number of marine
mammal takes using the adjusted
density estimates for each species, the
ZOI of each type of ordnance deployed,
and the total number of live ordnance
events. The results are presented in
Table 8.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
There are 28 species of marine
mammals documented as occurring in
Federal waters of the northern GOM.
However, species with likely occurrence
in the test area, and the subject of
Eglin’s incidental take request, are the
Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops
truncatus) and Atlantic spotted dolphin
(Stenella frontalis). These two species
are frequently sighted in the northern
GOM over the continental shelf, in a
water depth range that encompasses the
Maritime Strike test location (Garrison
et al., 2008; Navy, 2007; Davis et al.,
2000). Dwarf sperm whales (Kogia sima)
and pygmy sperm whales (K. breviceps)
are occasionally sighted over the shelf,
but are not considered regular
inhabitants (Davis et al., 2000). The
remaining cetacean species are
primarily considered to occur at or
beyond the shelf break (water depth of
approximately 200 m), and are not
included in the proposed take
authorization. Of the 28 marine
mammal species or stocks that may
occur in the northern GOM, only the
sperm whale is listed as endangered
under the ESA and as depleted under
the MMPA. Sperm whale occurrence in
the area of the proposed activity is
unlikely because almost all reported
sightings have occurred in water depths
greater than 200 m. Occurrence in the
deeper portions of W–151 is possible,
although based on reported sightings
locations, density is expected to be low.
Therefore, Eglin AFB has not requested
and NMFS has not proposed the
issuance of take authorizations for this
species. Eglin AFB’s MMPA application
contains a detailed discussion on the
description, status, distribution,
regional distribution, diving behavior,
and acoustics and hearing for the
marine mammals in the action area.
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
More detailed information on these
species can be found in Wursig et al.
(2000), Eglin’s EA (see ADDRESSES), and
in the NMFS U.S. Atlantic and GOM
Stock Assessment Reports (SARs;
Waring et al., 2011). This latter
document is available at: https://
www.nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/tm/
tm210/. The West Indian manatee
(Trichechus manatus) is managed by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and is
not considered further in this proposed
IHA Federal Register notice.
Density estimates for bottlenose
dolphin and spotted dolphin were
derived from two sources. Bottlenose
dolphin density estimates were derived
from a habitat modeling project
conducted for portions of the EGTTR,
including the Maritime Strike project
area (Garrison, 2008). NMFS developed
habitat models using recent aerial
survey line transect data collected
during winter and summer. The surveys
covered nearshore and continental shelf
waters (to a maximum depth of 200
meters), with the majority of effort
concentrated in waters from the
shoreline to 20 meters depth. Marine
species encounter rates during the
surveys were corrected for sighting
probability and the probability that
animals were available on the surface to
be seen. In combination with remotely
sensed environmental data/habitat
parameters (water depth, sea surface
temperature and chlorophyll), these
data were used to develop habitat
models for cetaceans within the
continental shelf and coastal waters of
the eastern GOM. The technical
approach, described as Generalized
Regression and Spatial Prediction,
spatially projects the species-habitat
relationship based on distribution of
environmental factors, resulting in
predicted densities for un-sampled
locations and times. The spatial density
model can therefore be used to predict
density in unobserved areas and at
different times of year based upon the
monthly composite SST and
chlorophyll datasets derived from
satellite data. Similarly, the spatial
density model can be used to predict
relative density for any sub-region
within the surveyed area.
Garrison (2008) produced bottlenose
dolphin density estimates at various
spatial scales within the EGTTR. At the
largest scale, density data were
aggregated into four principal strata
categories: North-Inshore, NorthOffshore, South-Inshore, and SouthOffshore. Densities for these strata were
provided in the published survey report.
Unpublished densities were also
provided for smaller blocks (sub-areas)
corresponding to airspace units and a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
number of these sub-areas were
combined to form larger zones.
Densities in these smaller areas were
provided to Eglin AFB in Excel©
spreadsheets by the report author.
For both large areas and sub-areas,
regions occurring entirely within waters
deeper than 200 meters were excluded
from predictions, and those straddling
the 200 meter isobath were clipped to
remove deep water areas. In addition,
because of limited survey effort, density
estimates beyond 150 meters water
depth are considered invalid. The
environmental conditions encountered
during the survey periods (February and
July/August) do not necessarily reflect
the range of conditions potentially
encountered throughout the year. In
particular, the transition seasons of
spring (April–May) and fall (October–
November) have a very different range
of water temperatures. Accordingly, for
predictions outside of the survey period
or spatial range, it is necessary to
evaluate the statistical variance in
predicted values when attempting to
apply the model. The coefficient of
variation (CV) of the predicted quantity
is used to measure the validity of model
predictions. According to Garrison
(2008), the best predictions have CV
values of approximately 0.2. When CVs
approach 0.7, and particularly when
they exceed 1.0, the resulting model
predictions are extremely uncertain and
are considered invalid.
Based upon the preceding discussion,
the bottlenose dolphin density estimate
used in this document is the median
density corresponding to sub-area 137
(see Figure 3–1 in Eglin AFB’s IHA
application). The planned Maritime
Strike test location lies within this subarea. Within this block, Garrison (2008)
provided densities based upon one year
(2007) and five-year monthly averages
for SST and chlorophyll. The 5-year
average is considered preferable. Only
densities with a CV rounded to 0.7 or
lower (i.e., 0.64 and below) were
considered. The CV for June in this
particular block is 0.62. Density
estimates for bottlenose dolphin are
provided in Table 3.
Atlantic spotted dolphin density was
derived from Fulling et al. (2003),
which describes the results of mammal
surveys conducted in association with
fall ichthyoplankton surveys from 1998
to 2001. The surveys were conducted by
NMFS personnel from the U.S.-Mexico
border to southern Florida, in water
depths of 20 to 200 meters. Using the
software program DISTANCE©, density
estimates were generated for East and
West regions, with Mobile Bay as the
dividing point. The East region is used
in this document. Densities were
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52139
provided for Atlantic spotted dolphins
and unidentified T. truncatus/S.
frontalis (among other species). The
unidentified T. truncatus/S. frontalis
category is treated as a separate species
group with a unique density. Density
estimates from Fulling et al. (2003) were
not adjusted for sighting probability
(perception bias) or surface availability
(availability bias) [g(0) = 1] in the
original survey report, likely resulting in
underestimation of true density.
Perception bias refers to the failure of
observers to detect animals, although
they are present in the survey area and
available to be seen. Availability bias
refers to animals that are in the survey
area, but are not able to be seen because
they are submerged when observers are
present. Perception bias and availability
bias result in the underestimation of
abundance and density numbers
(negative bias).
Fulling et al. (2003) did not collect
data to correct density for perception
and availability bias. However, in order
to address this negative bias, Eglin AFB
has adjusted density estimates based on
information provided in available
literature. There are no published g(0)
correction factors for Atlantic spotted
dolphins. However, Barlow (2006)
estimated g(0) for numerous marine
mammal species near the Hawaiian
Islands, including offshore pantropical
spotted dolphins (Stenella attenuata).
Separate estimates for this species were
provided for group sizes of 1 to 20
animals [g(0) = 0.76], and greater than
20 animals [g(0) = 1.00]. Although
Fulling et al. (2003) sighted some
spotted dolphin groups of more than 20
individuals, the 0.76 value is used as a
more conservative approach. Barlow
(2006) provides the following equation
for calculating density:
Where
n = number of animal group sightings on
effort
S = mean group size
f(0) = sighting probability density at zero
perpendicular distance (influenced by
species detectability and sighting cues such
as body size, blows, and number of animals
in a group)
L = transect length completed (km)
g(0) = probability of seeing a group directly
on a trackline (influenced by perception bias
and availability bias)
Because (n), (S), and (f0) cannot be
directly incorporated as independent
values due to lack of the original
information, we substitute the variable
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
EN22AU13.003
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
52140
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
a given species. This changes the
density equation to:
Using the same method, adjusted
density for the unidentified T.
truncatus/S. frontalis species group is
0.009 animals/km2. There are no
variances attached to either of these
recalculated density values, so overall
confidence in these values is unknown.
(Level A harassment) and disturbance
(Level B harassment). Takes in the form
of mortality are neither anticipated nor
requested. The number of marine
mammals potentially impacted by
Maritime Strike operations is based on
impulsive noise and pressure waves
generated by ordinance detonation at or
near the water surface. Exposure to
energy or pressure resulting from these
detonations could result in injury or
harassment of marine mammal species.
The number of Maritime Strike missions
generally corresponds to the number of
live ordnance expenditures shown in
Table 2. However, the number of bursts
modeled for the CBU–103 cluster bomb
is 202, which is the number of
individual bomblets per bomb. Also, the
20 mm and 30 mm gunnery rounds were
modeled as one burst each.
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
TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL DENSITY
ESTIMATES
Species
Density
(animals/km 2)
Bottlenose dolphin 1 ..............
Atlantic spotted dolphin 2 ......
Unidentified bottlenose dolphin/Atlantic spotted dolphin 2 .................................
0.455
0.265
0.009
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
1 Source:
Garrison, 2008; adjusted for observer and availability bias by the author.
2 Source: Fulling et al., 2003; adjusted for
negative bias based on information provided
by Barlow (2003; 2006).
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals
Potential impacts from the detonation
of explosives include non-lethal injury
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
WINSTON S. CHURCHILL (DDG 81)
Ship Shock FEIS (‘‘CHURCHILL’’) (DoN,
1998 and 2001). We adopted these
criteria and thresholds in a 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 by Eglin AFB 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.
Thresholds and Criteria for Injurious
Physiological Impacts
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
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
EN22AU13.002
Xspecies which incorporates all three
values, such that Xspecies = (n)(S)(f0) for
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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.
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 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
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.
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.
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.
Thresholds and Criteria for Behavioral
Effects
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
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52141
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.
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
microPa2-sec maximum energy flux
density level in any 1/3-octave band at
frequencies above 100 Hz for cetaceans.
Summary of Thresholds and Criteria for
Impulsive Sounds
The effects, criteria, and thresholds
used in the assessment for impulsive
sounds are summarized in Table 4. The
criteria for behavioral effects without
physiological effects used in this
analysis are based on use of multiple
explosives from live, explosive firing
during Maritime Strike exercises.
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
52142
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 4—CURRENT NMFS ACOUSTIC CRITERIA WHEN ADDRESSING HARASSMENT FROM EXPLOSIVES
Effect
Criteria
Metric
Threshold
Mortality ..................
Onset of Extensive
Lung Injury.
50 percent Tympanic Membrane
Rupture.
Onset Slight Lung
Injury.
TTS .........................
Goertner modified positive impulse ........
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).
Mortality.
indexed to 13 psi-msec (assumes 100
percent small animal at 26.9 lbs).
182 dB re 1 microPa2-sec ......................
Level A.
23 psi ......................................................
Level B.
177 dB re 1 microPa2-sec ......................
Level B.
Injurious Physiological.
Injurious Physiological.
Non-injurious Physiological.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Non-injurious Physiological.
Non-injurious Behavioral.
TTS .........................
Multiple Explosions
Without TTS.
Energy flux density .................................
Goertner modified positive impulse ........
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 ..........
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).
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
The primary source of marine
mammal habitat impact is noise
resulting from live Maritime Strike
missions. However, the noise does not
constitute a long-term physical
alteration of the water column or bottom
topography. In addition, the activity is
not expected to affect prey availability,
is of limited duration, and is
intermittent in time. Surface vessels
associated with the missions are present
in limited duration and are intermittent
as well. Therefore, it is not anticipated
that marine mammal utilization of the
waters in the project area will be
affected, either temporarily or
permanently, as a result of mission
activities.
Other sources that could potentially
impact marine mammal habitat were
considered and include the introduction
of fuel, debris, ordnance, and chemical
materials into the water column. The
potential effects of each were analyzed
in the Environmental Assessment and
determined to be insignificant. The
analyses are summarized in the
following paragraphs (for a complete
discussion of potential effects, please
refer to section 3.3 in the EA).
Metals typically used to construct
bombs, missiles, and gunnery rounds
include copper, aluminum, steel, and
lead, among others. Aluminum is also
present in some explosive materials.
These materials would settle to the
seafloor after munitions detonate. Metal
ions would slowly leach into the
substrate and the water column, causing
elevated concentrations in a small area
around the munitions fragments. Some
of the metals, such as aluminum, occur
naturally in the ocean at varying
concentrations and would not
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
necessarily impact the substrate or
water column. Other metals, such as
lead, could cause toxicity in microbial
communities in the substrate. However,
such effects would be localized to a very
small distance around munitions
fragments and would not significantly
affect the overall habitat quality of
sediments in the northeastern GOM. In
addition, metal fragments would
corrode, degrade, and become encrusted
over time.
Chemical materials include explosive
byproducts and also fuel, oil, and other
fluids associated with remotely
controlled target boats. Explosive
byproducts would be introduced into
the water column through detonation of
live munitions. Explosive materials
would include 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene
(TNT) and RDX, among others. Various
byproducts are produced during and
immediately after detonation of TNT
and RDX. During the very brief time that
a detonation is in progress, intermediate
products may include carbon ions,
nitrogen ions, oxygen ions, water,
hydrogen cyanide, carbon monoxide,
nitrogen gas, nitrous oxide, cyanic acid,
and carbon dioxide (Becker, 1995).
However, reactions quickly occur
between the intermediates, and the final
products consist mainly of water,
carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and
nitrogen gas, although small amounts of
other compounds are typically
produced as well.
Chemicals introduced into the water
column would be quickly dispersed by
waves, currents, and tidal action, and
eventually become uniformly
distributed. A portion of the carbon
compounds such as carbon monoxide
and carbon dioxide would likely
become integrated into the carbonate
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Effect
Level A.
Level B.
system (alkalinity and pH buffering
capacity of seawater). Some of the
nitrogen and carbon compounds,
including petroleum products, would be
metabolized or assimilated by
phytoplankton and bacteria. Most of the
gas products that do not react with the
water or become assimilated by
organisms would be released into the
atmosphere. Due to dilution, mixing,
and transformation, none of these
chemicals are expected to have
significant impacts on the marine
environment.
Explosive material that is not
consumed in a detonation could sink to
the substrate and bind to sediments.
However, the quantity of such materials
is expected to be inconsequential.
Research has shown that if munitions
function properly, nearly full
combustion of the explosive materials
will occur, and only extremely small
amounts of raw material will remain. In
addition, any remaining materials
would be naturally degraded. TNT
decomposes when exposed to sunlight
(ultraviolet radiation), and is also
degraded by microbial activity (Becker,
1995). Several types of microorganisms
have been shown to metabolize TNT.
Similarly, RDX decomposes by
hydrolysis, ultraviolet radiation
exposure, and biodegradation.
Based on this information, the
proposed Maritime Strike activities
would not have any impact on the food
or feeding success of marine mammals
in the northern GOM. Additionally, no
loss or modification of the habitat used
by cetaceans in the GOM is expected.
Marine mammals are anticipated to
temporarily vacate the area of live fire
events. However, these events usually
do not last more than 90 to 120 min at
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
a time, and animals are anticipated to
return to the activity area during periods
of non-activity. Thus, the proposed
activity is not expected to have any
habitat-related effects that could cause
significant or long-term consequences
for individual marine mammals or on
the food sources that they utilize.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization (ITA) under sections
101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must, where applicable, set forth
the permissible methods of taking
pursuant to such activity and other
means of effecting the least practicable
impact on such species or stock and its
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance, and on the
availability of such species or stock for
taking for certain subsistence uses
(where relevant). The NDAA of 2004
amended the MMPA as it relates to
military readiness activities and the ITA
process such that ‘‘least practicable
impact’’ shall include consideration of
personnel safety, practicality of
implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the ‘‘military readiness
activity’’. The Maritime Strike activities
described in Eglin AFB’s application are
considered military readiness activities.
Visual Mitigation
Areas to be used for Maritime Strike
operations would be visually monitored
for marine mammal presence from
several platforms before, during, and
after the commencement of the mission.
Eglin AFB would provide experienced
protected species survey personnel,
vessels, and equipment as required for
vessel-based surveys. The primary
observers would be marine scientists
with over 1,000 hours of marine
mammal surveying experience
collectively. Additionally, all range
clearance personnel involved with the
missions would receive NMFSapproved training developed by the
Eglin Natural Resources Section. The
designated protected species survey
vessels would be two 25-ft (7.6 m)
Parker 2520 boats with a fully enclosed
pilothouse and tower. These vessels
provide large viewing areas and
observers would be stationed
approximately 16-ft (4.9 m) above the
water surface. Each vessel will have two
observers and each observer will be
equipped with binoculars. Observers
will rotate on a regular basis to prevent
eye fatigue as needed. Additional
protected species survey vessels can be
made available if required.
If the presence of one or more marine
mammals is detected, the target area
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
52143
will be avoided. In addition, monitoring
will continue during the mission. If
marine mammals are detected at any
time, the mission will halt immediately
and relocate as necessary or be
suspended until the marine mammal
has left the area. The visual mitigation
procedures for Maritime Strike
operations are outlined below.
Pre-mission: The purposes of premission monitoring are to: (1) Evaluate
the test site for environmental
suitability of the mission; and (2) verify
that the Zone of Influence (ZOI) is free
of visually detectable marine mammals,
as well as potential indicators of these
species. The area of the ZOI surveyed
would be based on the distance to the
largest Level B harassment threshold for
the specific ordnance involved in a
given test. For example, the largest ZOI
would be 3,526 m (2.2 mi), which
corresponds to the distance to the Level
B threshold (177 dB) for 945 lb
munitions detonated at 3 m (10 ft)
underwater. The smallest ZOI would be
37 m (0.02 mi), which is the distance to
the Level B threshold (23 psi) for 20 mm
gunnery rounds. Table 5 provides the
ZOI ranges for all the ordnance types
and detonation depths proposed for
Maritime Strike operations. On the
morning of the Maritime Strike mission,
the test director and safety officer would
confirm that there are no issues that
would preclude mission execution and
that weather is adequate to support
mitigation measures.
to mission personnel that conditions are
such that a live ordnance drop cannot
occur (e.g., protected species or civilian
vessels are in the test area). If no marine
mammals or indicators are observed, the
range will be declared ‘‘green.’’
(A) Two Hours Prior to Mission
Mission-related surface vessels would
be on site at least two hours prior to the
mission. Observers on board at least one
vessel would assess the overall
suitability of the test site based on
environmental conditions (e.g., sea
state) and presence/absence of marine
mammals or marine mammal indicators.
This information would be related to the
safety officer.
(D) Execution of Mission
Immediately prior to live weapons
drop, the test director and safety officer
will communicate to confirm the results
of marine mammal surveys and the
appropriateness of proceeding with the
mission. The safety officer will have
final authority to proceed with,
postpone, move, or cancel the mission.
The mission will be postponed or
moved if:
(1) Any marine mammal is visually
detected within the applicable ZOI.
Postponement will continue until the
animal(s) that caused the postponement
is confirmed to be outside of the
applicable ZOI due to the animal
swimming out of the range.
(2) Large schools of fish or large flocks
of birds feeding at the surface are
observed within the applicable ZOI.
Postponement will continue until these
potential indicators are confirmed to be
outside the applicable ZOI.
In the event of a postponement, premission monitoring will continue as
long as weather and daylight hours
allow.
Post-mission Monitoring: Post
mission monitoring will be designed to
(B) One and One-half Hours Prior to
Mission
Vessel-based surveys and video
camera surveillance would begin one
and one-half hours prior to live weapon
deployment. Surface vessel observers
would survey the applicable ZOI and
relay all marine species and indicator
sightings, including the time of sighting
and direction of travel, if known, to the
safety officer. Surveys would continue
for approximately one hour. During this
time, mission personnel in the test area
would also observe for marine species
as feasible. If marine mammals or
indicators are observed within the
applicable ZOI, the test range would be
declared ‘‘fouled,’’ which would signify
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(C) One-Half Hour Prior to Mission
At approximately 30 minutes prior to
live weapon deployment, marine
species observers would be instructed to
leave the test site and remain outside
the safety zone, which on average would
be 9.5 miles from the detonation point,
(the actual size would be determined by
weapon NEW and method of delivery)
during conduct of the mission. Once the
survey vessels have arrived at the
perimeter of the safety zone
(approximately 30 minutes after being
instructed to leave, depending on actual
travel time) the mission would be
allowed to proceed. Monitoring for
protected species would continue from
the periphery of the safety zone while
the mission is in progress. The other
safety boat crews would also be
instructed to observe for marine
mammals. Due to the distance from the
target site, these observations would be
considered supplemental and would not
be relied upon as the primary
monitoring method. After survey vessels
leave the area, marine species
monitoring would continue from the
tower through the video feed received
from the high definition cameras on the
instrument barge.
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
52144
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
determine the effectiveness of premission visual mitigation by reporting
sightings of any dead or injured marine
mammals. If post-mission surveys
determine that an injury or lethal take
of a marine mammal has occurred, the
next Maritime Strike mission will be
suspended until the test procedure and
the monitoring methods have been
reviewed with NMFS and appropriate
changes made. Post-mission monitoring
surveys will be conducted by the same
observers that conducted pre-mission
surveys, and will commence as soon as
EOD personnel declare the test area safe.
Vessels will move into the applicable
ZOI from outside the safety zone and
monitor for at least 30 minutes,
concentrating on the area down-current
of the test site. The monitoring team
will document any marine mammals
that were killed or injured as a result of
the test and immediately contact the
local marine mammal stranding network
and NMFS to coordinate recovery and
examination of any dead animals. The
species, number, location, and behavior
of any animals observed will be
documented and reported to the Eglin
Natural Resources Section.
Multiple offshore Air Force missions
have been successfully executed in the
general vicinity of the proposed
Maritime Strike test location (W–151 of
the EGTTR). These missions have
involved both inert (no explosives) and
live weapons testing, and include the
following:
• 2009 Stand-off Precision Guided
Munitions (SOPGM) live missile tests
• 2012 Maritime Strike inert drops
• 2013 Longbow live missile test (inair detonation)
• 2013 Combat Hammer Maritime
WESP missions (inert drops in the Gulf
and strafing in the Choctawhatchee Bay)
During these missions, vessel-based
observers surveyed for protected marine
species (marine mammals and sea
turtles) and species indicators. They
also provided support to enforce human
safety exclusion zones.
All live and inert missions were
conducted in a variety of sea states and
weather conditions that encompass the
environmental conditions likely to be
encountered during Maritime Strike
activities. While no marine mammals
were sighted within the various take
threshold zones (mortality, Level A and
B harassment zones) during any of the
live tests (i.e., SOPGM and Longbow
missile), survey personnel judged that
they were able to adequately observe the
sea surface and there was reasonable
likelihood that marine mammals would
have been detected if present. There
have been no documented marine
mammal takes throughout Eglin’s
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
history of activities in the Gulf of
Mexico. Therefore, based on these
factors, Eglin AFB and NMFS expect
that trained protected species observers
would be able to adequately survey and
clear mortality zones (maximum of 457
m) and effectively communicate any
marine mammal sightings to test
directors. Further, we expect that test
directors would be able to act quickly to
delay live weapon drops should
protected species be observed.
NMFS has carefully evaluated the
applicant’s proposed mitigation
measures and considered a range of
other measures in the context of
ensuring that NMFS prescribes the
means of effecting the least practicable
impact on the affected marine mammal
species and stocks and their habitat. Our
evaluation of potential measures
included consideration of the following
factors in relation to one another:
• The manner in which, and the
degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure is
expected to minimize adverse impacts
to marine mammals;
• The proven or likely efficacy of the
specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned; and
• The practicability of the measure
for applicant implementation, including
consideration of personnel safety,
practicability of implementation, and
impact on the effectiveness of the
military-readiness activity.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s proposed measures, as well
as other measures considered by NMFS,
the required mitigation measures
provide the means of effecting the least
practicable impact on marine mammal
species or stocks and their habitat,
paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, while also considering
personnel safety, practicability of
implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military-readiness
activity.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must, where
applicable, 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
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NMFS has included the following
measures in the Maritime Strike IHA.
They are:
(1) Eglin will track their use of the
EGTTR for test firing missions and
protected species observations, through
the use of mission reporting forms.
(2) A summary annual report of
marine mammal observations and
Maritime Strike activities will be
submitted to the NMFS Southeast
Regional Office (SERO) and the Office of
Protected Resources either at the time of
a request for renewal of an IHA or 90
days after expiration of the current IHA
if a new IHA is not requested. This
annual report must include the
following information: (i) Date and time
of each Maritime Strike exercise; (ii) a
complete description of the pre-exercise
and post-exercise activities related to
mitigating and monitoring the effects of
Maritime Strike exercises on marine
mammal populations; and (iii) results of
the Maritime Strike exercise monitoring,
including numbers by species/stock of
any marine mammals noted injured or
killed as a result of the missions and
number of marine mammals (by species
if possible) that may have been harassed
due to presence within the activity
zone.
(3) If any dead or injured marine
mammals are observed or detected prior
to testing, or injured or killed during
live fire, a report must be made to
NMFS by the following business day.
(4) Any unauthorized takes of marine
mammals (i.e., injury or mortality) must
be immediately reported to NMFS and
to the respective stranding network
representative.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
As it applies to a ‘‘military readiness
activity’’, the definition of harassment is
(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].
Takes by Level A and B harassment
are anticipated as a result of the
Maritime Strike mission activities. The
exercises are expected to only affect
animals at or very near the surface of the
water. Cetaceans in the vicinity of the
exercises may incur temporary changes
in behavior, and/or temporary changes
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
52145
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
in their hearing thresholds. Based on the
proposed mitigation and monitoring
measures described earlier in this
document, no serious injury or mortality
of marine mammals is anticipated as a
result of Maritime Strike activities, and
no takes by serious injury or mortality
are proposed to be authorized.
Estimating the impacts to marine
mammals from underwater detonations
is difficult due to complexities of the
physics of explosive sound under water
and the limited understanding with
respect to hearing in marine mammals.
Assessments of impacts from Maritime
Strike exercises use, and improve upon,
the criteria and thresholds for marine
mammal impacts that were developed
for the shock trials of the USS
SEAWOLF and the USS WINSTON S.
CHURCHILL (DDG–81) (Navy, 1998;
2001). The criteria and thresholds used
in those actions were adopted by NMFS
for use in calculating incidental takes
from explosives. Criteria for assessing
impacts from Eglin AFB’s Maritime
Strike exercises include: (1) mortality,
as determined by exposure to a certain
level of positive impulse pressure
(expressed as pounds per square inch
per millisecond or psi-msec); (2) injury,
both hearing-related and non-hearing
related; and (3) harassment, as
determined by a temporary loss of some
hearing ability and behavioral reactions.
Due to the mitigation measures
proposed by NMFS for implementation,
mortality resulting from the resulting
sounds generated into the water column
from detonations was determined to be
highly unlikely and was not considered
further by Eglin AFB or NMFS.
Permanent hearing loss is considered
an injury and is termed permanent
threshold shift (PTS). NMFS, therefore,
categorizes PTS as Level A harassment.
Temporary loss of hearing ability is
termed TTS, meaning a temporary
reduction of hearing sensitivity which
abates following noise exposure. TTS is
considered non-injurious and is
categorized as Level B harassment.
NMFS recognizes dual criteria for TTS,
one based on peak pressure and one
based on the greatest 1/3 octave sound
exposure level (SEL) or energy flux
density level (EFDL), with the more
conservative (i.e., larger) of the two
criteria being selected for impacts
analysis (note: SEL and EFDL are used
interchangeably, but with increasing
scientific preference for SEL). The peak
pressure metric used to predict TTS is
23 pounds per square inch (psi).
Documented behavioral reactions
occur at noise levels below those
considered to cause TTS in marine
mammals (Finneran et al., 2002;
Schlundt et al., 2000; Finneran and
Schlundt, 2004). In controlled
experimental situations, behavioral
effects are typically defined as
alterations of trained behaviors.
Behavioral effects in wild animals are
more difficult to define but may include
decreased ability to feed, communicate,
migrate, or reproduce. Abandonment of
an area due to repeated noise exposure
is also considered a behavioral effect.
Analyses in other sections of this
document refer to such behavioral
effects as ‘‘sub-TTS Level B
harassment.’’ Schlundt et al. (2000)
exposed bottlenose dolphins and beluga
whales to various pure-tone sound
frequencies and intensities in order to
measure underwater hearing thresholds.
Masking is considered to have occurred
because of the ambient noise
environment in which the experiments
took place. Sound levels were
progressively increased until behavioral
alterations were noted (at which point
the onset of TTS was presumed). It was
found that decreasing the sound
intensity by 4 to 6 dB greatly decreased
the occurrence of anomalous behaviors.
The lowest sound pressure levels, over
all frequencies, at which altered
behaviors were observed, ranged from
178 to 193 dB re 1 mPa for the bottlenose
dolphins and from 180 to 196 dB re 1
mPa for the beluga whales. Thus, it is
reasonable to consider that sub-TTS
(behavioral) effects occur at
approximately 6 dB below the TTSinducing sound level, or at
approximately 177 dB in the greatest 1/
3 octave band EFDL/SEL.
Table 4 (earlier in this document)
summarizes the relevant thresholds for
levels of noise that may result in Level
A harassment (injury) or Level B
harassment via TTS or behavioral
disturbance to marine mammals.
Mortality and injury thresholds are
designed to be conservative by
considering the impacts that would
occur to the most sensitive life stage
(e.g., a dolphin calf).
The following three factors were used
to estimate the potential noise effects on
marine mammals from Maritime Strike
operations: (1) The zone of influence,
which is the distance from the
explosion to which a particular energy
or pressure threshold extends; (2) the
density of animals potentially occurring
within the zone of influence; and (3) the
number of events.
The zone of influence is defined as
the area or volume of ocean in which
marine mammals could potentially be
exposed to various noise thresholds
associated with exploding ordnance.
Table 5 provides the estimated ZOI radii
for the Maritime Strike ordnance. At
this time, there are no empirical data or
information that would allow NMFS to
establish a peak pressure criterion for
sub-TTS behavioral disruption.
TABLE 5—ESTIMATED RANGE FOR A ZONE OF IMPACT (ZOI) DISTANCE FOR THE MARITIME STRIKE ORDNANCE
[In meters]
Height/depth of
detonation
Munition
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
GBU–10 .............
GBU–24 .............
GBU–31 (JDAM)
GBU–12 .............
GBU–38 (JDAM)
GBU–54
(LJDAM).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Mortality
30.5 psi-msec
Water Surface ....
Water Surface ....
Water Surface ....
20 feet AGL .......
5 feet underwater
10 feet underwater.
Water Surface ....
Water Surface ....
20 feet AGL .......
5 feet underwater
10 feet underwater.
Water Surface ....
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
Level A harassment
205 dB EFD *
Level B harassment
13 psi-msec
182 dB EFD *
23 psi
177 dB EFD *
202
202
202
0
385
457
362
362
362
0
700
836
1023
1023
1023
0
2084
2428
1280
1280
1280
0
1281
1280
1361
1361
1361
0
2775
3526
114
114
0
239
279
161
161
0
280
345
243
243
0
445
532
744
744
0
1411
1545
752
752
0
752
752
1020
1020
0
2070
2336
114
PO 00000
275
275
275
0
468
591
161
243
744
752
1020
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
52146
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 5—ESTIMATED RANGE FOR A ZONE OF IMPACT (ZOI) DISTANCE FOR THE MARITIME STRIKE ORDNANCE—
Continued
[In meters]
Height/depth of
detonation
Munition
AGM–65E/L/K/
G2 (Maverick).
CBU–103 ...........
AGM–114
(Hellfire).
M–117 ................
Mortality
Level A harassment
30.5 psi-msec
205 dB EFD *
Level B harassment
13 psi-msec
182 dB EFD *
23 psi
177 dB EFD *
Water Surface ....
124
187
618
575
846
Water Surface ....
Water Surface ....
9
46
231
70
21
105
947
425
111
353
1335
618
20 feet AGL .......
Water Surface ....
Water Surface ....
0
147
0
0
203
6
0
293
7
0
847
31
0
950
60
0
1125
55
Water Surface ....
PGU–13 HEI 30
mm.
M56/PGU–28
HEI 20 mm.
84
0
0
0
16
37
27
* In greatest 1/3-octave band above 10 Hz or 100 Hz.
Density estimates for marine
mammals occurring in the EGTTR are
provided in Table 3. As discussed
above, densities were derived from the
results of published documents
authored by NMFS personnel. Density is
nearly always reported for an area (e.g.,
animals per square kilometer). Analyses
of survey results may include correction
factors for negative bias, such as the
Garrison (2008) report for bottlenose
dolphins. Even though Fulling et al.
(2003) did not provide a correction for
Atlantic spotted dolphins or
unidentified bottlenose/spotted
dolphins, Eglin AFB adjusted those
densities based on information provided
in other published literature (Barlow
2003; 2006). Although the study area
appears to represent only the surface of
the water (two-dimensional), density
actually implicitly includes animals
anywhere within the water column
under that surface area. Density
estimates usually assume that animals
are uniformly distributed within the
prescribed area, even though this is
likely rarely true. Marine mammals are
often clumped in areas of greater
importance, for example, in areas of
high productivity, lower predation, safe
calving, etc. Density can occasionally be
calculated for smaller areas, but usually
there are insufficient data to calculate
density for such areas. Therefore,
assuming an even distribution within
the prescribed area is the typical
approach.
In addition, assuming that marine
mammals are distributed evenly within
the water column does not accurately
reflect behavior. Databases of behavioral
and physiological parameters obtained
through tagging and other technologies
have demonstrated that marine animals
use the water column in various ways.
Some species conduct regular deep
dives while others engage in much
shallower dives, regardless of bottom
depth. Assuming that all species are
evenly distributed from surface to
bottom is almost never appropriate and
can present a distorted view of marine
mammal distribution in any region.
Therefore, a depth distribution
adjustment is applied to marine
mammal densities in this document
(Table 6). By combining marine
mammal density with depth
distribution information, a threedimensional density estimate is
possible. These estimates allow more
accurate modeling of potential marine
mammal exposures from specific noise
sources.
TABLE 6—DEPTH DISTRIBUTION OF MARINE MAMMALS IN THE MARITIME STRIKE TEST AREA
Species
Depth distribution
Bottlenose dolphin ...............
Daytime: 96% at <50 m, 4% at >50 m; Nightime: 51% at <50 m, 8% at 50–100 m,
19% at 101–250 m, 13% at 251–450 m, and 9% at >450 m.
76% at <10 m, 20% at 10–20 m, and 4% at 21–60 m.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Atlantic spotted dolphin ........
As mentioned previously, the number
of Maritime Strike activities generally
corresponds to the number of live
ordnance expenditures, as shown in
Table 2. However, the number of bursts
modeled for the CBU–103 cluster bomb
is 202, which is the number of
individual bomblets per bomb. Also, the
20 mm and 30 mm gunnery rounds were
modeled as one burst each.
Table 7 indicates the modeled
potential for lethality, injury, and non-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
Reference
injurious harassment (including
behavioral harassment) to marine
mammals in the absence of mitigation
measures. The numbers represent total
impacts for all detonations combined.
Mortality was calculated as
approximately one-half an animal for
bottlenose dolphins and about 0.1
animals for spotted dolphins. It is
expected that, with implementation of
the management practices described
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Klatsky et al. (2007)
Davis et al. (1996)
below, potential impacts would be
mitigated to the point that there would
be no mortality takes. Based on the low
mortality exposure estimates calculated
by the acoustic model combined with
the implementation of mitigation
measures, zero marine mammals are
expected to be affected by pressure
levels associated with mortality.
Therefore, Eglin AFB has requested an
IHA, as opposed to an LOA.
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
52147
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 7—MODELED NUMBER OF MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY MARITIME STRIKE MISSIONS
Species
Mortality
Level B harassment
(TTS)
Level A harassment
Level B harassment
(behavioral)
Bottlenose dolphin ...........................................................................................
Atlantic spotted dolphin ...................................................................................
Unidentified bottlenose dolphin/Atlantic spotted dolphin .................................
0.524
0.145
0.010
2.008
1.050
0.040
30.187
16.565
0.597
61.069
31.345
1.208
Total ..........................................................................................................
0.679
3.098
47.349
93.622
Table 8 provides Eglin AFB’s the
annual number of marine mammals, by
species, authorized for taking by Level
A harassment and Level B harassment,
incidental to Maritime Strike
operations. It should be noted that these
takes are authorized without
consideration of the effectiveness of
Eglin AFB’s proposed mitigation
measures. As indicated in Table 8, Eglin
AFB and NMFS estimate that
approximately three marine mammals
could potentially be exposed to
injurious Level A harassment noise
levels (205 dB re 1 mPa 2-s or higher).
TABLE 8—NUMBER OF MARINE MAMMALS TAKES
Level B harassment
(TTS)
Level A harassment
Species
Level B harassment
(behavioral)
Bottlenose dolphin .......................................................................................................................
Atlantic spotted dolphin ...............................................................................................................
Unidentified bottlenose dolphin/Atlantic spotted dolphin .............................................................
2
1
0
30
16
1
61
32
1
Total ......................................................................................................................................
3
47
94
Approximately 47 marine mammals
may be exposed annually to noninjurious (TTS) Level B harassment
associated with the 182 dB re 1 mPa2-s
threshold. TTS results from fatigue or
damage to hair cells or supporting
structures and may cause disruption in
the processing of acoustic cues;
however, hearing sensitivity is
recovered within a relatively short time.
Based on Eglin AFB and NMFS’
estimates, up to 94 marine mammals
may experience a behavioral response to
these exercises associated with the 177
dB re 1 mPa 2-s threshold (see Table 8).
NMFS has determined that this number
will be significantly lower due to the
expected effectiveness of the mitigation
measures included in the IHA.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Negligible Impact and Determinations
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘. . . an
impact resulting from the specified
activity that cannot be reasonably
expected to, and is not reasonably likely
to, adversely affect the species or stock
through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.’’ In making a
negligible impact determination, NMFS
considers a variety of factors, including
but not limited to: (1) The number of
anticipated mortalities; (2) the number
and nature of anticipated injuries; (3)
the number, nature, and intensity, and
duration of harassment; and (4) the
context in which the takes occur.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
The takes from Level B harassment
will be due to potential behavioral
disturbance and TTS. The takes from
Level A harassment will be due to
potential tympanic-membrane (TM)
rupture. Activities would only occur
over a timeframe of two to three weeks
in August 2013, with one or two
missions occurring per day. It is
possible that some individuals may be
taken more than once if those
individuals are located in the exercise
area on two different days when
exercises are occurring. However,
multiple exposures are not anticipated
to have effects beyond
Level A and Level B harassment
While animals may be impacted in
the immediate vicinity of the activity,
because of the small ZOIs (compared to
the vast size of the GOM ecosystem
where these species live) and the short
duration of the Maritime Strike
operations, NMFS has determined that
there will not be a substantial impact on
marine mammals. The activity is not
expected to impact rates of recruitment
or survival of marine mammals because
neither mortality (which would remove
individuals from the population) nor
serious injury are anticipated to occur.
In addition, the activity will not occur
in areas (and/or times) of significance
for the marine mammal populations
potentially affected by the exercises
(e.g., feeding or resting areas,
reproductive areas), and the activities
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
will only occur in a small part of their
overall range, so the impact of any
potential temporary displacement will
be negligible and animals are expected
to return to the area after the cessations
of activities. Although the activity could
result in Level A (TM rupture) and
Level B (behavioral disturbance and
TTS) harassment of marine mammals,
the level of harassment is not
anticipated to impact rates of
recruitment or survival of marine
mammals because the number of
exposed animals is expected to be low
due to the short term and site specific
nature of the activity, and the type of
effect would not be detrimental to rates
of recruitment and survival.
Additionally, the mitigation and
monitoring measures to be implemented
(described earlier in this document) are
expected to further minimize the
potential for harassment. The protected
species surveys will require Eglin AFB
to search the area for marine mammals,
and if any are found in the live fire area,
then the exercise will be suspended
until the animal(s) has left the area or
relocated. Moreover, marine species
observers located in the Eglin control
tower will monitor the high-definition
video feed from cameras located on the
instrument barge anchored on-site for
the presence of protected species.
Furthermore, Maritime Strike missions
will be delayed or rescheduled if the sea
state is greater than a 4 on the Beaufort
Scale at the time of the test. In addition,
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
52148
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2013 / Notices
Maritime Strike missions will occur no
earlier than two hours after sunrise and
no later than two hours prior to sunset
to ensure adequate daylight for pre- and
post-mission monitoring.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
mitigation and monitoring measures,
NMFS finds that Eglin AFB’s Maritime
Strike operations will result in the
incidental take of marine mammals, by
Level A and Level B harassment, and
that the taking from the Maritime Strike
exercises will have a negligible impact
on the affected species or stocks.
Environmental Policy Act, May 20,
1999), NMFS reviewed the information
contained in Eglin AFB’s EA and
determined the EA accurately and
completely described the preferred
action alternative, a reasonable range of
alternatives, and the potential impacts
on marine mammals, endangered
species, and other marine life that could
be impacted by the preferred and nonpreferred alternatives. Based on this
review and analysis, NMFS adopted
Eglin AFB’s PEA under 40 CFR 1506.3,
and issued its own FONSI statement on
issuance of an annual authorization
under section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by this
action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of
affected species or stocks would not
have an unmitigable adverse impact on
the availability of such species or stocks
for taking for subsistence purposes.
As a result of these determinations,
NMFS authorizes the take of two species
of marine mammals incidental to Eglin
AFB’s Maritime Strike operations in the
GOM provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Eglin AFB initiated consultation with
the Southeast Region, NMFS, under
section 7 of the ESA regarding the
effects of this action on ESA-listed
species and critical habitat under the
jurisdiction of NMFS. The consultation
was completed and a biological opinion
issued on May 6, 2013. The biological
opinion analyzed the effects of the
exercise on five species of sea turtles,
Gulf sturgeon, smalltooth sawfish,
sperm whales, and Gulf sturgeon critical
habitat. The biological opinion
concluded that the action, as proposed,
may adversely affect four species of sea
turtles (loggerhead, Kemp’s ridley,
green, and leatherback). In addition, the
project may affect, but is not likely to
adversely affect, hawksbill sea turtles,
smalltooth sawfish, Gulf sturgeon,
sperm whales, and Gulf sturgeon critical
habitat.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
Eglin AFB released a Draft
Environmental Assessment (EA) on the
Maritime Strike Operations. NMFS
made this EA available on the permits
Web page. On May 30, 2013, Eglin AFB
issued a Final EA and a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) on the
Maritime Strike Operations.
In accordance with NOAA
Administrative Order 216–6
(Environmental Review Procedures for
Implementing the National
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Aug 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
Proposed Authorization
Dated: August 13, 2013.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–20521 Filed 8–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XC762
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to a Wharf
Recapitalization Project
Comments on this proposal
should be addressed to Michael Payne,
Chief, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
Physical comments should be sent to
1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring,
MD 20910 and electronic comments
should be sent to ITP.Laws@noaa.gov.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered. Comments received
electronically, including all
attachments, must not exceed a 25megabyte file size. All comments
received are a part of the public record.
All personal identifying information
(e.g., name, address) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter may be
publicly accessible. Do not submit
confidential business information or
otherwise sensitive or protected
information. Attachments to electronic
comments will be accepted in Microsoft
Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats
only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Laws, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Availability
A copy of the Navy’s application and
any supporting documents, as well as a
list of the references cited in this
document, may be obtained by visiting
the internet at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm. In the case of problems
accessing these documents, please call
the contact listed above.
AGENCY:
National Environmental Policy Act
NMFS has received a request
from the U.S. Navy (Navy) for
authorization to take marine mammals
incidental to construction activities as
part of a wharf recapitalization project.
Pursuant to the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is
requesting public comment on its
proposal to issue an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to the
Navy to take, by harassment only, two
species of marine mammal during the
specified activity.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than September 23,
2013.
The Navy has prepared a draft
Environmental Assessment (Wharf C–2
Recapitalization at Naval Station
Mayport, FL) in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and the regulations published
by the Council on Environmental
Quality. It is posted at the
aforementioned site. NMFS will
independently evaluate the EA and
determine whether or not to adopt it.
We may prepare a separate NEPA
analysis and incorporate relevant
portions of Navy’s EA by reference.
Information in the Navy’s application,
EA, and this notice collectively provide
the environmental information related
to proposed issuance of this IHA for
public review and comment. We will
review all comments submitted in
response to this notice as we complete
the NEPA process, including a decision
of whether to sign a Finding of No
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
harassment authorization; request for
comments.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 163 (Thursday, August 22, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52135-52148]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20521]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XC561
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental To Conducting Maritime Strike
Operations by Eglin Air Force Base in the Gulf of Mexico
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)
regulations, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an
Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to the U.S. Air Force (USAF),
Eglin Air Force Base (Eglin AFB), to take marine mammals, by
harassment, incidental to Maritime Strike Operations in the Gulf of
Mexico (GOM). The USAF's activities are considered military readiness
activities.
DATES: Effective August 19, 2013, through August 18, 2014.
ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the authorization, the application
containing a list of the references used in this document, and the
Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) may be obtained by writing to Michael Payne, Chief, Permits,
Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver
Spring, MD 20910-3225, telephoning the contact listed below (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or 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 aforementioned address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian D. Hopper, 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 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) within a specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking
is limited to harassment, a 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 takings
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.''
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process
by which citizens of the U.S. 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
[[Page 52136]]
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.
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) (Pub. L. 108-136)
removed the ``small numbers'' and ``specified geographical region''
provisions 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].
Summary of Request
NMFS received an application on December 11, 2012, from Eglin AFB
for the taking, by harassment, of marine mammals incidental to Maritime
Strike Operations within the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range
(EGTTR). A revised application was submitted on January 22, 2013, which
provided updated marine mammal information. The EGTTR is described as
the airspace over the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) that is controlled by Eglin
AFB. The planned test location in the EGTTR is Warning Area 151 (W-
151), which is located approximately 17 miles offshore from Santa Rosa
Island, specifically sub-area W-151A.
The Maritime Strike operations may potentially impact marine
mammals at or near the water surface. Marine mammals could potentially
be harassed, injured, or killed by exploding and non-exploding
projectiles, and falling debris. However, based on analyses provided in
the USAF's Environmental Assessment (EA), Eglin's IHA application,
including the required mitigation, and for reasons discussed later in
this document, NMFS does not anticipate that Eglin's Maritime Strike
exercises will result in any serious injury or mortality to marine
mammals. Eglin AFB has requested authorization to take two cetacean
species by Level A and Level B harassment. The requested species
include: Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and Atlantic
spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis).
Description of the Specified Activity
This section describes the Maritime Strike missions that have the
potential to affect marine mammals present within the test area.
Maritime Strike operations, a ``military readiness activity'' as
defined under 16 U.S.C. 703 note, involve detonations above the water,
near the water surface, and under water within the EGTTR. These
missions involve multiple types of live munitions identified in Tables
1 and 2 below. The Maritime Strike operations are described in more
detail in the following paragraphs.
The Maritime Strike program was developed in response to the
increasing threats at sea posed by operations conducted from small
boats. The first phase of the Maritime Strike program focused on
detecting and tracking boats using various sensors, simulated weapons
engagements, and testing with inert munitions. The final phase, and the
subject of this notice, consists of testing the effectiveness of live
munitions on small boat threats. The proposed Maritime Strike
activities would involve the use of multiple types of live munitions in
the EGTTR against small boat targets, at all desired surface and water
depth scenarios (maximum depth of 10 feet below the surface) necessary
to carry out the Tactics Development and Evaluation (TD&E) Program.
Multiple munitions (bombs, missiles, and gunner rounds) and aircraft
would be used to meet the objectives of the Maritime Strike program
(Table 1). Because the tests focus on weapon/target interaction,
particular aircraft are not specified for a given test as long as it
meets the delivery parameters. The munitions would be deployed against
static, towed, and remotely controlled boat targets. Static and
controlled targets consist of stripped boat hulls with plywood
simulated crews and systems. Damaged boats would be recovered for data
collection. Test data collection and operation of remotely controlled
boats would be conducted from an instrumentation barge anchored on-
site, which would also provide a platform for cameras and weapon-
tracking equipment. Target boats would be positioned 300 to 600 feet
from the instrument barge, depending on the munition.
Table 1--Live Munitions and Aircraft
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Munitions Aircraft (not associated with specific munitions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GBU-10 laser-guided Mk-84 bomb................... F-16C fighter aircraft.
GBU-24 laser-guided Mk-84 bomb................... F-16C+ fighter aircraft.
GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munition, global F-15E fighter aircraft.
positioning system guided Mk-84 bomb.
GBU-12 laser-guided Mk-82 bomb................... A-10 fighter aircraft.
GBU-38 Joint Direct Attack Munition, global B-1B bomber aircraft.
positioning system guided Mk-82 bomb.
GBU-54 Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition, laser- B-52H bomber aircraft.
guided Mk-82 bomb.
CBU-103/B bomb................................... MQ-1/9 unmanned aerial vehicle.
AGM-65E/L/K/G2 Maverick air-to-surface missile... .............................................................
AGM-114 Hellfire air-to-surface missile..........
M-117 bomb.......................................
PGU-12 high explosive incendiary 30 mm rounds....
M56/PGU-28 high explosive incendiary 20mm rounds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live testing will include three detonation options: (1) Above the
water surface; (2) at the water surface; and (3) below the water
surface (two depths). The number of each type of munition, height or
depth of detonation, explosive material, and net explosive weight (NEW)
of each munition is provided in Table 2.
[[Page 52137]]
Table 2--Maritime Strike Munitions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total number of live Number of detonations by Warhead--explosive
Type of munition munitions height/depth material Net explosive weight per munition
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GBU-10............................ 1.................... Water Surface: all........ MK-84--Tritonal.......... 945 lbs.
GBU-24............................ 1.................... Water Surface: all........ MK-84--Tritonal.......... 945 lbs.
GBU-31 (JDAM)..................... 13................... Water Surface: 4.......... MK-84--Tritonal.......... 945 lbs (MK-84).
20 feet AGL: 3
5 feet underwater: 3
10 feet underwater: 3
GBU-12............................ 1.................... Water Surface: all........ MK-82--Tritonal.......... 192 lbs.
GBU-38 (JDAM)..................... 13................... Water Surface: 4.......... MK-82--Tritonal.......... 192 lbs (MK-82).
20 feet AGL: 3
5 feet underwater: 3
10 feet underwater: 3
GBU-54 (LJDAM).................... 1.................... Water Surface: all........ MK-82--Tritonal.......... 192 lbs (MK-82).
AGM-65E/L/K/G2 (Maverick)......... 2 each (8 total)..... Water Surface: all........ WDU-24/B penetrating 86 lbs.
blast-fragmentation
warhead.
CBU-103........................... 4.................... Water Surface: all........ 202 Blu-97/B Combined 127 lbs.
Effects Bomblets (0.63
lbs each).
AGM-114 (Hellfire)................ 4.................... Water Surface: all........ High Explosive Anti-Tank 20 lbs.
(HEAT) tandem anti-armor
metal augmented charge.
M-117............................. 6.................... 20 feet AGL: 3............ 750 lb blast/ 386 lbs (Tritonal).
fragmentation bomb, used
the same way as MK-82--
Tritonal.
Water Surface: 3
PGU-12 HEI 30 mm.................. 1,000................ Water Surface: all........ 30x173 mm caliber with 0.1 lbs.
aluminized RDX
explosive. Designed for
GAU-8/A Gun System.
M56/PGU-28 HEI 20 mm.............. 1,500................ Water Surface: all........ 20x120 mm caliber with 0.02 lbs (Comp A-4 HEI).
aluminized Comp A-4 HEI.
Designed for M61 and
M197 Gun System.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maritime Strike missions are scheduled to occur over an approximate
two- to three-week period in August 2013. Missions will occur on
weekdays during daytime hours only, with one or two missions occurring
per day. All activities will take place within the EGTTR. Activities
will occur only in Warning Area W-151, and specifically in sub-area W-
151A. W-151A extends approximately 60 nm offshore and has a surface
area of 2,565 nm\2\ (8,797 km\2\). Water depths range from about 30 to
350 m and include continental shelf and slope zones; however, most of
W-151A occurs over the continental shelf, in water depths less than 250
m. Maritime Strike operations will occur in the shallower, northern
inshore portion of W-151A, in water depth of about 35 m (see Figure 2-1
in Eglin's IHA application for a map of the test area).
To ensure safety, prior to conducting Maritime Strike exercises,
Eglin will conduct a pre-test target area clearance procedure for
people and protected species. Support vessels will be deployed around a
defined safety zone to ensure that commercial and recreational boats do
not accidentally enter the area. Before delivering the ordnance,
mission aircraft will make a dry run over the target area to ensure
that it is clear of commercial and recreational boats (at least two
aircraft would participate in each test). Due to the limited duration
of the flyover and potentially high speed and altitude, pilots will not
be able to survey for marine species. In addition, an E-9A surveillance
aircraft will survey the target area for nonparticipating vessels and
other objects on the water surface. Based on the results from an
acoustic impacts analysis for live ordnance detonations, a separate
disturbance zone around the target will be established for the
protection of marine species. The size of the zone will be based on the
distance to which energy- and pressure-related impacts will extend for
the various type of ordnance listed in Table 2 and will not necessarily
be the same size as the human safety zone. Based on the acoustic
modeling result, the largest possible distance from the target will be
3,526 m (2.2 miles), which corresponds to the 177 dB Level B harassment
threshold for 945 lb NEW munitions detonated at 10 ft underwater (Table
5). At least two of the support vessels will monitor for marine mammals
around the target area. Maritime Strike missions will not proceed until
the target area is determined to be clear of unauthorized personnel and
protected species.
In addition to vessel-based monitoring, one to three video cameras
will be positioned on an instrumentation barge anchored on-site. The
camera configuration and actual number of cameras used would depend on
the specific test being conducted. The cameras are typically used for
situational awareness of the target area and surrounding area, and
could also be used for monitoring the test site for the presence of
marine species. A marine species observer will be located in the Eglin
control tower, along with mission personnel, to monitor the video feed
before and during test activities.
After each test, floating targets will be inspected to identify and
render safe any unexploded ordnance (UXO), including fuzes or intact
munitions. The Eglin Air Force Explosive Disposal Team will be on hand
for each test. UXO that cannot be removed will be detonated in place,
which could result in the sinking of the target vessel. Once the area
has been cleared for re-entry, test personnel will retrieve target
debris and marine species observers will
[[Page 52138]]
survey the area for any evidence of adverse impacts to protected
species.
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of Eglin AFB's application and NMFS' proposal
to issue an IHA to the USAF, Eglin AFB, published in the Federal
Register on June 4, 2013 (78 FR 33357). During the 30-day public
comment period, NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal
Commission (MMC) and a member of the public. The comment from the
private citizen opposed the issuance of an authorization without any
specific substantiation for why the authorization should not be issued.
Following are the comments from the MMC and NMFS' responses.
Comment 1: The MMC expressed their belief that all permanent
hearing loss should be considered a serious injury and recommends that
NMFS propose to issue regulations under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the
MMPA and a letter of authorization, rather than an incidental
harassment authorization, for any proposed activities expected to cause
a permanent threshold shift (PTS).
Response: PTS is considered an injury to the auditory system, but
not a serious injury. NMFS PTS thresholds are based on the onset of
PTS, meaning about a 30% incident of PTS (Ketten 1995; DON 1998) and a
50% likelihood of eardrum rupture (which is often recoverable (Kerr and
Byrne, 1975). An animal would either need to be exposed to the sound
above this threshold for a long amount of time (not likely with
explosives) or a much higher level (meaning being closer to the source)
than the threshold in order to incur a significantly more serious
degree of PTS. Because of the short duration of the proposed activity
(few weeks) combined with the density of marine mammals, it is unlikely
that a marine mammal would even randomly enter the area where more
severe PTS would be a risk. However, when mitigation measures and
likely avoidance of an area of high levels of training activities are
considered, it becomes highly unlikely. Additionally, some degree of
presbycusis is fairly common in the wild (i.e., high-frequency hearing
loss), especially with older animals, and there is no data suggesting
whether, or at what significantly greater degree of PTS, this reduced
hearing might potentially lead to mortality. NMFS does not believe that
serious injury will result from this activity and that therefore it is
not necessary to issue regulations through section 101(a)(5)(A),
rather, an IHA may be issued.
Comment 2: The MMC expressed concern regarding Eglin AFB's use of
two different, and seemingly contrary, methods (i.e., total net
explosive weight of all ordnance in a single burst versus net explosive
weight of a single bomblet as numerous individual burts) for estimating
zones of exposure. The MMC recommended that NMFS withhold issuing the
IHA until (1) the USAF has modeled the various scenarios consistently
for all operations that involve more than one bomb, bomblet, missile,
or round and (2) has consulted with the MMC regarding resolution of
this issue.
Response: The MMC may be confusing calculation methods for
determining zones of exposures (the area of potential impact defined as
a radius in the application) with estimating takes of each species for
each threshold and criteria (total number of animals exposed to noise
levels that may result in Level A or Level B harassment). These
calculations are two separate processes. With the exception of the
gunnery rounds and CBU-103 cluster bombs, the zones of exposure for all
other munitions were based on the detonation/burst of one munition at a
given depth; not the total number of munitions planned to be detonated
for the duration of the test. On the other hand, Level A and Level B
take estimates of each species were calculated by summing together all
detonations proposed to occur for each munition at a given depth. The
methodology and analytical approach for determining the exposure zones
and estimating the number of marine mammal takes was fully explained in
the IHA application, the Notice of Proposed IHA (78 FR 33357, June 4,
2013), as well as in the previous IHAs issued to Eglin AFB, and
supporting documents issued for this activity. Readers should refer to
those documents for additional information, but a summary follows.
Zones of exposure to determine Level A and Level B Harassment
impact areas were calculated as the product of the impact area of a
single burst of each munition and the number of bursts planned to occur
during each testing scenario. For this analysis, a ``burst'' must be
sufficiently spaced in time or location such that it could: (1) Affect
a different set of marine mammals; or (2) affect the same individuals
multiple times. The firing sequence for the 20-mm and 30-mm rounds
consists of expending a large number of individual rounds at one
target, all of which detonate within one second of each other. Due to
the tight spacing in time and location, for modeling purposes, each
burst of 1,000 or 1,500 rounds is treated as a single detonation. On
the other hand, the CBU-103 cluster bombs are treated differently based
on the dispersed pattern and timing of individual bomblet detonations.
The CBU-103's 202 bomblets are released mid-air and spread out to cover
a larger target area, and may detonate over the course of a few to
several seconds. Therefore the 202 bomblets are not combined as a
single burst for calculating the zones of exposure for Level A and
Level B Harassment.
Using this approach, Eglin AFB estimated the number of marine
mammal takes using the adjusted density estimates for each species, the
ZOI of each type of ordnance deployed, and the total number of live
ordnance events. The results are presented in Table 8.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
There are 28 species of marine mammals documented as occurring in
Federal waters of the northern GOM. However, species with likely
occurrence in the test area, and the subject of Eglin's incidental take
request, are the Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and
Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis). These two species are
frequently sighted in the northern GOM over the continental shelf, in a
water depth range that encompasses the Maritime Strike test location
(Garrison et al., 2008; Navy, 2007; Davis et al., 2000). Dwarf sperm
whales (Kogia sima) and pygmy sperm whales (K. breviceps) are
occasionally sighted over the shelf, but are not considered regular
inhabitants (Davis et al., 2000). The remaining cetacean species are
primarily considered to occur at or beyond the shelf break (water depth
of approximately 200 m), and are not included in the proposed take
authorization. Of the 28 marine mammal species or stocks that may occur
in the northern GOM, only the sperm whale is listed as endangered under
the ESA and as depleted under the MMPA. Sperm whale occurrence in the
area of the proposed activity is unlikely because almost all reported
sightings have occurred in water depths greater than 200 m. Occurrence
in the deeper portions of W-151 is possible, although based on reported
sightings locations, density is expected to be low. Therefore, Eglin
AFB has not requested and NMFS has not proposed the issuance of take
authorizations for this species. Eglin AFB's MMPA application contains
a detailed discussion on the description, status, distribution,
regional distribution, diving behavior, and acoustics and hearing for
the marine mammals in the action area.
[[Page 52139]]
More detailed information on these species can be found in Wursig et
al. (2000), Eglin's EA (see ADDRESSES), and in the NMFS U.S. Atlantic
and GOM Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; Waring et al., 2011). This
latter document is available at: https://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/tm/tm210/. The West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) is
managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and is not considered
further in this proposed IHA Federal Register notice.
Density estimates for bottlenose dolphin and spotted dolphin were
derived from two sources. Bottlenose dolphin density estimates were
derived from a habitat modeling project conducted for portions of the
EGTTR, including the Maritime Strike project area (Garrison, 2008).
NMFS developed habitat models using recent aerial survey line transect
data collected during winter and summer. The surveys covered nearshore
and continental shelf waters (to a maximum depth of 200 meters), with
the majority of effort concentrated in waters from the shoreline to 20
meters depth. Marine species encounter rates during the surveys were
corrected for sighting probability and the probability that animals
were available on the surface to be seen. In combination with remotely
sensed environmental data/habitat parameters (water depth, sea surface
temperature and chlorophyll), these data were used to develop habitat
models for cetaceans within the continental shelf and coastal waters of
the eastern GOM. The technical approach, described as Generalized
Regression and Spatial Prediction, spatially projects the species-
habitat relationship based on distribution of environmental factors,
resulting in predicted densities for un-sampled locations and times.
The spatial density model can therefore be used to predict density in
unobserved areas and at different times of year based upon the monthly
composite SST and chlorophyll datasets derived from satellite data.
Similarly, the spatial density model can be used to predict relative
density for any sub-region within the surveyed area.
Garrison (2008) produced bottlenose dolphin density estimates at
various spatial scales within the EGTTR. At the largest scale, density
data were aggregated into four principal strata categories: North-
Inshore, North-Offshore, South-Inshore, and South-Offshore. Densities
for these strata were provided in the published survey report.
Unpublished densities were also provided for smaller blocks (sub-areas)
corresponding to airspace units and a number of these sub-areas were
combined to form larger zones. Densities in these smaller areas were
provided to Eglin AFB in Excel(copyright) spreadsheets by
the report author.
For both large areas and sub-areas, regions occurring entirely
within waters deeper than 200 meters were excluded from predictions,
and those straddling the 200 meter isobath were clipped to remove deep
water areas. In addition, because of limited survey effort, density
estimates beyond 150 meters water depth are considered invalid. The
environmental conditions encountered during the survey periods
(February and July/August) do not necessarily reflect the range of
conditions potentially encountered throughout the year. In particular,
the transition seasons of spring (April-May) and fall (October-
November) have a very different range of water temperatures.
Accordingly, for predictions outside of the survey period or spatial
range, it is necessary to evaluate the statistical variance in
predicted values when attempting to apply the model. The coefficient of
variation (CV) of the predicted quantity is used to measure the
validity of model predictions. According to Garrison (2008), the best
predictions have CV values of approximately 0.2. When CVs approach 0.7,
and particularly when they exceed 1.0, the resulting model predictions
are extremely uncertain and are considered invalid.
Based upon the preceding discussion, the bottlenose dolphin density
estimate used in this document is the median density corresponding to
sub-area 137 (see Figure 3-1 in Eglin AFB's IHA application). The
planned Maritime Strike test location lies within this sub-area. Within
this block, Garrison (2008) provided densities based upon one year
(2007) and five-year monthly averages for SST and chlorophyll. The 5-
year average is considered preferable. Only densities with a CV rounded
to 0.7 or lower (i.e., 0.64 and below) were considered. The CV for June
in this particular block is 0.62. Density estimates for bottlenose
dolphin are provided in Table 3.
Atlantic spotted dolphin density was derived from Fulling et al.
(2003), which describes the results of mammal surveys conducted in
association with fall ichthyoplankton surveys from 1998 to 2001. The
surveys were conducted by NMFS personnel from the U.S.-Mexico border to
southern Florida, in water depths of 20 to 200 meters. Using the
software program DISTANCE(copyright), density estimates were
generated for East and West regions, with Mobile Bay as the dividing
point. The East region is used in this document. Densities were
provided for Atlantic spotted dolphins and unidentified T. truncatus/S.
frontalis (among other species). The unidentified T. truncatus/S.
frontalis category is treated as a separate species group with a unique
density. Density estimates from Fulling et al. (2003) were not adjusted
for sighting probability (perception bias) or surface availability
(availability bias) [g(0) = 1] in the original survey report, likely
resulting in underestimation of true density. Perception bias refers to
the failure of observers to detect animals, although they are present
in the survey area and available to be seen. Availability bias refers
to animals that are in the survey area, but are not able to be seen
because they are submerged when observers are present. Perception bias
and availability bias result in the underestimation of abundance and
density numbers (negative bias).
Fulling et al. (2003) did not collect data to correct density for
perception and availability bias. However, in order to address this
negative bias, Eglin AFB has adjusted density estimates based on
information provided in available literature. There are no published
g(0) correction factors for Atlantic spotted dolphins. However, Barlow
(2006) estimated g(0) for numerous marine mammal species near the
Hawaiian Islands, including offshore pantropical spotted dolphins
(Stenella attenuata). Separate estimates for this species were provided
for group sizes of 1 to 20 animals [g(0) = 0.76], and greater than 20
animals [g(0) = 1.00]. Although Fulling et al. (2003) sighted some
spotted dolphin groups of more than 20 individuals, the 0.76 value is
used as a more conservative approach. Barlow (2006) provides the
following equation for calculating density:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU13.003
Where
n = number of animal group sightings on effort
S = mean group size
f(0) = sighting probability density at zero perpendicular
distance (influenced by species detectability and sighting cues such
as body size, blows, and number of animals in a group)
L = transect length completed (km)
g(0) = probability of seeing a group directly on a trackline
(influenced by perception bias and availability bias)
Because (n), (S), and (f0) cannot be directly
incorporated as independent values due to lack of the original
information, we substitute the variable
[[Page 52140]]
Xspecies which incorporates all three values, such that
Xspecies = (n)(S)(f0) for a given species. This
changes the density equation to:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU13.002
Using the same method, adjusted density for the unidentified T.
truncatus/S. frontalis species group is 0.009 animals/km\2\. There are
no variances attached to either of these recalculated density values,
so overall confidence in these values is unknown.
Table 3--Marine Mammal Density Estimates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Density
Species (animals/km
\2\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin \1\.................................. 0.455
Atlantic spotted dolphin \2\............................ 0.265
Unidentified bottlenose dolphin/Atlantic spotted dolphin 0.009
\2\....................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Source: Garrison, 2008; adjusted for observer and availability bias
by the author.
\2\ Source: Fulling et al., 2003; adjusted for negative bias based on
information provided by Barlow (2003; 2006).
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals
Potential impacts from the detonation of explosives include non-
lethal injury (Level A harassment) and disturbance (Level B
harassment). Takes in the form of mortality are neither anticipated nor
requested. The number of marine mammals potentially impacted by
Maritime Strike operations is based on impulsive noise and pressure
waves generated by ordinance detonation at or near the water surface.
Exposure to energy or pressure resulting from these detonations could
result in injury or harassment of marine mammal species. The number of
Maritime Strike missions generally corresponds to the number of live
ordnance expenditures shown in Table 2. However, the number of bursts
modeled for the CBU-103 cluster bomb is 202, which is the number of
individual bomblets per bomb. Also, the 20 mm and 30 mm gunnery rounds
were modeled as one burst each.
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 a 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 by Eglin AFB 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.
Thresholds and Criteria for Injurious Physiological Impacts
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
[[Page 52141]]
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Thresholds and Criteria for Behavioral Effects
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.
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.
Summary of Thresholds and Criteria for Impulsive Sounds
The effects, criteria, and thresholds used in the assessment for
impulsive sounds are summarized in Table 4. The criteria for behavioral
effects without physiological effects used in this analysis are based
on use of multiple explosives from live, explosive firing during
Maritime Strike exercises.
[[Page 52142]]
Table 4--Current NMFS Acoustic Criteria When Addressing Harassment From Explosives
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effect Criteria Metric Threshold Effect
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mortality.................... Onset of Goertner modified indexed to 30.5 psi- Mortality.
Extensive Lung positive impulse. msec (assumes 100
Injury. percent small animal
at 26.9 lbs).
Injurious Physiological...... 50 percent Energy flux density.. 1.17 in-lb/in\2\ Level A.
Tympanic (about 205 dB re 1
Membrane microPa\2\-sec).
Rupture.
Injurious Physiological...... Onset Slight Goertner modified indexed to 13 psi- Level A.
Lung Injury. positive impulse. msec (assumes 100
percent small animal
at 26.9 lbs).
Non-injurious Physiological.. TTS............. Greatest energy flux 182 dB re 1 Level B.
density level in any microPa\2\-sec.
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 Greatest energy flux 177 dB re 1 Level B.
Explosions density level in any microPa\2\-sec.
Without TTS. 1/3-octave (> 100 Hz
for toothed whales
and > 10 Hz for
baleen whales)--for
total energy over
all exposures
(multiple explosions
only).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
The primary source of marine mammal habitat impact is noise
resulting from live Maritime Strike missions. However, the noise does
not constitute a long-term physical alteration of the water column or
bottom topography. In addition, the activity is not expected to affect
prey availability, is of limited duration, and is intermittent in time.
Surface vessels associated with the missions are present in limited
duration and are intermittent as well. Therefore, it is not anticipated
that marine mammal utilization of the waters in the project area will
be affected, either temporarily or permanently, as a result of mission
activities.
Other sources that could potentially impact marine mammal habitat
were considered and include the introduction of fuel, debris, ordnance,
and chemical materials into the water column. The potential effects of
each were analyzed in the Environmental Assessment and determined to be
insignificant. The analyses are summarized in the following paragraphs
(for a complete discussion of potential effects, please refer to
section 3.3 in the EA).
Metals typically used to construct bombs, missiles, and gunnery
rounds include copper, aluminum, steel, and lead, among others.
Aluminum is also present in some explosive materials. These materials
would settle to the seafloor after munitions detonate. Metal ions would
slowly leach into the substrate and the water column, causing elevated
concentrations in a small area around the munitions fragments. Some of
the metals, such as aluminum, occur naturally in the ocean at varying
concentrations and would not necessarily impact the substrate or water
column. Other metals, such as lead, could cause toxicity in microbial
communities in the substrate. However, such effects would be localized
to a very small distance around munitions fragments and would not
significantly affect the overall habitat quality of sediments in the
northeastern GOM. In addition, metal fragments would corrode, degrade,
and become encrusted over time.
Chemical materials include explosive byproducts and also fuel, oil,
and other fluids associated with remotely controlled target boats.
Explosive byproducts would be introduced into the water column through
detonation of live munitions. Explosive materials would include 2,4,6-
trinitrotoluene (TNT) and RDX, among others. Various byproducts are
produced during and immediately after detonation of TNT and RDX. During
the very brief time that a detonation is in progress, intermediate
products may include carbon ions, nitrogen ions, oxygen ions, water,
hydrogen cyanide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen gas, nitrous oxide, cyanic
acid, and carbon dioxide (Becker, 1995). However, reactions quickly
occur between the intermediates, and the final products consist mainly
of water, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen gas, although
small amounts of other compounds are typically produced as well.
Chemicals introduced into the water column would be quickly
dispersed by waves, currents, and tidal action, and eventually become
uniformly distributed. A portion of the carbon compounds such as carbon
monoxide and carbon dioxide would likely become integrated into the
carbonate system (alkalinity and pH buffering capacity of seawater).
Some of the nitrogen and carbon compounds, including petroleum
products, would be metabolized or assimilated by phytoplankton and
bacteria. Most of the gas products that do not react with the water or
become assimilated by organisms would be released into the atmosphere.
Due to dilution, mixing, and transformation, none of these chemicals
are expected to have significant impacts on the marine environment.
Explosive material that is not consumed in a detonation could sink
to the substrate and bind to sediments. However, the quantity of such
materials is expected to be inconsequential. Research has shown that if
munitions function properly, nearly full combustion of the explosive
materials will occur, and only extremely small amounts of raw material
will remain. In addition, any remaining materials would be naturally
degraded. TNT decomposes when exposed to sunlight (ultraviolet
radiation), and is also degraded by microbial activity (Becker, 1995).
Several types of microorganisms have been shown to metabolize TNT.
Similarly, RDX decomposes by hydrolysis, ultraviolet radiation
exposure, and biodegradation.
Based on this information, the proposed Maritime Strike activities
would not have any impact on the food or feeding success of marine
mammals in the northern GOM. Additionally, no loss or modification of
the habitat used by cetaceans in the GOM is expected. Marine mammals
are anticipated to temporarily vacate the area of live fire events.
However, these events usually do not last more than 90 to 120 min at
[[Page 52143]]
a time, and animals are anticipated to return to the activity area
during periods of non-activity. Thus, the proposed activity is not
expected to have any habitat-related effects that could cause
significant or long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or
on the food sources that they utilize.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization (ITA) under
sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA, NMFS must, where applicable,
set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity
and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on such
species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses (where relevant). The NDAA of 2004 amended the MMPA as
it relates to military readiness activities and the ITA process such
that ``least practicable impact'' shall include consideration of
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the ``military readiness activity''. The Maritime
Strike activities described in Eglin AFB's application are considered
military readiness activities.
Visual Mitigation
Areas to be used for Maritime Strike operations would be visually
monitored for marine mammal presence from several platforms before,
during, and after the commencement of the mission. Eglin AFB would
provide experienced protected species survey personnel, vessels, and
equipment as required for vessel-based surveys. The primary observers
would be marine scientists with over 1,000 hours of marine mammal
surveying experience collectively. Additionally, all range clearance
personnel involved with the missions would receive NMFS-approved
training developed by the Eglin Natural Resources Section. The
designated protected species survey vessels would be two 25-ft (7.6 m)
Parker 2520 boats with a fully enclosed pilothouse and tower. These
vessels provide large viewing areas and observers would be stationed
approximately 16-ft (4.9 m) above the water surface. Each vessel will
have two observers and each observer will be equipped with binoculars.
Observers will rotate on a regular basis to prevent eye fatigue as
needed. Additional protected species survey vessels can be made
available if required.
If the presence of one or more marine mammals is detected, the
target area will be avoided. In addition, monitoring will continue
during the mission. If marine mammals are detected at any time, the
mission will halt immediately and relocate as necessary or be suspended
until the marine mammal has left the area. The visual mitigation
procedures for Maritime Strike operations are outlined below.
Pre-mission: The purposes of pre-mission monitoring are to: (1)
Evaluate the test site for environmental suitability of the mission;
and (2) verify that the Zone of Influence (ZOI) is free of visually
detectable marine mammals, as well as potential indicators of these
species. The area of the ZOI surveyed would be based on the distance to
the largest Level B harassment threshold for the specific ordnance
involved in a given test. For example, the largest ZOI would be 3,526 m
(2.2 mi), which corresponds to the distance to the Level B threshold
(177 dB) for 945 lb munitions detonated at 3 m (10 ft) underwater. The
smallest ZOI would be 37 m (0.02 mi), which is the distance to the
Level B threshold (23 psi) for 20 mm gunnery rounds. Table 5 provides
the ZOI ranges for all the ordnance types and detonation depths
proposed for Maritime Strike operations. On the morning of the Maritime
Strike mission, the test director and safety officer would confirm that
there are no issues that would preclude mission execution and that
weather is adequate to support mitigation measures.
(A) Two Hours Prior to Mission
Mission-related surface vessels would be on site at least two hours
prior to the mission. Observers on board at least one vessel would
assess the overall suitability of the test site based on environmental
conditions (e.g., sea state) and presence/absence of marine mammals or
marine mammal indicators. This information would be related to the
safety officer.
(B) One and One-half Hours Prior to Mission
Vessel-based surveys and video camera surveillance would begin one
and one-half hours prior to live weapon deployment. Surface vessel
observers would survey the applicable ZOI and relay all marine species
and indicator sightings, including the time of sighting and direction
of travel, if known, to the safety officer. Surveys would continue for
approximately one hour. During this time, mission personnel in the test
area would also observe for marine species as feasible. If marine
mammals or indicators are observed within the applicable ZOI, the test
range would be declared ``fouled,'' which would signify to mission
personnel that conditions are such that a live ordnance drop cannot
occur (e.g., protected species or civilian vessels are in the test
area). If no marine mammals or indicators are observed, the range will
be declared ``green.''
(C) One-Half Hour Prior to Mission
At approximately 30 minutes prior to live weapon deployment, marine
species observers would be instructed to leave the test site and remain
outside the safety zone, which on average would be 9.5 miles from the
detonation point, (the actual size would be determined by weapon NEW
and method of delivery) during conduct of the mission. Once the survey
vessels have arrived at the perimeter of the safety zone (approximately
30 minutes after being instructed to leave, depending on actual travel
time) the mission would be allowed to proceed. Monitoring for protected
species would continue from the periphery of the safety zone while the
mission is in progress. The other safety boat crews would also be
instructed to observe for marine mammals. Due to the distance from the
target site, these observations would be considered supplemental and
would not be relied upon as the primary monitoring method. After survey
vessels leave the area, marine species monitoring would continue from
the tower through the video feed received from the high definition
cameras on the instrument barge.
(D) Execution of Mission
Immediately prior to live weapons drop, the test director and
safety officer will communicate to confirm the results of marine mammal
surveys and the appropriateness of proceeding with the mission. The
safety officer will have final authority to proceed with, postpone,
move, or cancel the mission. The mission will be postponed or moved if:
(1) Any marine mammal is visually detected within the applicable
ZOI. Postponement will continue until the animal(s) that caused the
postponement is confirmed to be outside of the applicable ZOI due to
the animal swimming out of the range.
(2) Large schools of fish or large flocks of birds feeding at the
surface are observed within the applicable ZOI. Postponement will
continue until these potential indicators are confirmed to be outside
the applicable ZOI.
In the event of a postponement, pre-mission monitoring will
continue as long as weather and daylight hours allow.
Post-mission Monitoring: Post mission monitoring will be designed
to
[[Page 52144]]
determine the effectiveness of pre-mission visual mitigation by
reporting sightings of any dead or injured marine mammals. If post-
mission surveys determine that an injury or lethal take of a marine
mammal has occurred, the next Maritime Strike mission will be suspended
until the test procedure and the monitoring methods have been reviewed
with NMFS and appropriate changes made. Post-mission monitoring surveys
will be conducted by the same observers that conducted pre-mission
surveys, and will commence as soon as EOD personnel declare the test
area safe. Vessels will move into the applicable ZOI from outside the
safety zone and monitor for at least 30 minutes, concentrating on the
area down-current of the test site. The monitoring team will document
any marine mammals that were killed or injured as a result of the test
and immediately contact the local marine mammal stranding network and
NMFS to coordinate recovery and examination of any dead animals. The
species, number, location, and behavior of any animals observed will be
documented and reported to the Eglin Natural Resources Section.
Multiple offshore Air Force missions have been successfully
executed in the general vicinity of the proposed Maritime Strike test
location (W-151 of the EGTTR). These missions have involved both inert
(no explosives) and live weapons testing, and include the following:
2009 Stand-off Precision Guided Munitions (SOPGM) live
missile tests
2012 Maritime Strike inert drops
2013 Longbow live missile test (in-air detonation)
2013 Combat Hammer Maritime WESP missions (inert drops in
the Gulf and strafing in the Choctawhatchee Bay)
During these missions, vessel-based observers surveyed for
protected marine species (marine mammals and sea turtles) and species
indicators. They also provided support to enforce human safety
exclusion zones.
All live and inert missions were conducted in a variety of sea
states and weather conditions that encompass the environmental
conditions likely to be encountered during Maritime Strike activities.
While no marine mammals were sighted within the various take threshold
zones (mortality, Level A and B harassment zones) during any of the
live tests (i.e., SOPGM and Longbow missile), survey personnel judged
that they were able to adequately observe the sea surface and there was
reasonable likelihood that marine mammals would have been detected if
present. There have been no documented marine mammal takes throughout
Eglin's history of activities in the Gulf of Mexico. Therefore, based
on these factors, Eglin AFB and NMFS expect that trained protected
species observers would be able to adequately survey and clear
mortality zones (maximum of 457 m) and effectively communicate any
marine mammal sightings to test directors. Further, we expect that test
directors would be able to act quickly to delay live weapon drops
should protected species be observed.
NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation
measures and considered a range of other measures in the context of
ensuring that NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least
practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and
their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included
consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:
The manner in which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize
adverse impacts to marine mammals;
The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to
minimize adverse impacts as planned; and
The practicability of the measure for applicant
implementation, including consideration of personnel safety,
practicability of implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of
the military-readiness activity.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, the required mitigation
measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on
marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, while also considering personnel safety, practicability
of implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the military-
readiness activity.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must, where applicable, 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 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.
NMFS has included the following measures in the Maritime Strike
IHA. They are:
(1) Eglin will track their use of the EGTTR for test firing
missions and protected species observations, through the use of mission
reporting forms.
(2) A summary annual report of marine mammal observations and
Maritime Strike activities will be submitted to the NMFS Southeast
Regional Office (SERO) and the Office of Protected Resources either at
the time of a request for renewal of an IHA or 90 days after expiration
of the current IHA if a new IHA is not requested. This annual report
must include the following information: (i) Date and time of each
Maritime Strike exercise; (ii) a complete description of the pre-
exercise and post-exercise activities related to mitigating and
monitoring the effects of Maritime Strike exercises on marine mammal
populations; and (iii) results of the Maritime Strike exercise
monitoring, including numbers by species/stock of any marine mammals
noted injured or killed as a result of the missions and number of
marine mammals (by species if possible) that may have been harassed due
to presence within the activity zone.
(3) If any dead or injured marine mammals are observed or detected
prior to testing, or injured or killed during live fire, a report must
be made to NMFS by the following business day.
(4) Any unauthorized takes of marine mammals (i.e., injury or
mortality) must be immediately reported to NMFS and to the respective
stranding network representative.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
As it applies to a ``military readiness activity'', the definition
of harassment is (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].
Takes by Level A and B harassment are anticipated as a result of
the Maritime Strike mission activities. The exercises are expected to
only affect animals at or very near the surface of the water. Cetaceans
in the vicinity of the exercises may incur temporary changes in
behavior, and/or temporary changes
[[Page 52145]]
in their hearing thresholds. Based on the proposed mitigation and
monitoring measures described earlier in this document, no serious
injury or mortality of marine mammals is anticipated as a result of
Maritime Strike activities, and no takes by serious injury or mortality
are proposed to be authorized.
Estimating the impacts to marine mammals from underwater
detonations is difficult due to complexities of the physics of
explosive sound under water and the limited understanding with respect
to hearing in marine mammals. Assessments of impacts from Maritime
Strike exercises use, and improve upon, the criteria and thresholds for
marine mammal impacts that were developed for the shock trials of the
USS SEAWOLF and the USS WINSTON S. CHURCHILL (DDG-81) (Navy, 1998;
2001). The criteria and thresholds used in those actions were adopted
by NMFS for use in calculating incidental takes from explosives.
Criteria for assessing impacts from Eglin AFB's Maritime Strike
exercises include: (1) mortality, as determined by exposure to a
certain level of positive impulse pressure (expressed as pounds per
square inch per millisecond or psi-msec); (2) injury, both hearing-
related and non-hearing related; and (3) harassment, as determined by a
temporary loss of some hearing ability and behavioral reactions. Due to
the mitigation measures proposed by NMFS for implementation, mortality
resulting from the resulting sounds generated into the water column
from detonations was determined to be highly unlikely and was not
considered further by Eglin AFB or NMFS.
Permanent hearing loss is considered an injury and is termed
permanent threshold shift (PTS). NMFS, therefore, categorizes PTS as
Level A harassment. Temporary loss of hearing ability is termed TTS,
meaning a temporary reduction of hearing sensitivity which abates
following noise exposure. TTS is considered non-injurious and is
categorized as Level B harassment. NMFS recognizes dual criteria for
TTS, one based on peak pressure and one based on the greatest 1/3
octave sound exposure level (SEL) or energy flux density level (EFDL),
with the more conservative (i.e., larger) of the two criteria being
selected for impacts analysis (note: SEL and EFDL are used
interchangeably, but with increasing scientific preference for SEL).
The peak pressure metric used to predict TTS is 23 pounds per square
inch (psi).
Documented behavioral reactions occur at noise levels below those
considered to cause TTS in marine mammals (Finneran et al., 2002;
Schlundt et al., 2000; Finneran and Schlundt, 2004). In controlled
experimental situations, behavioral effects are typically defined as
alterations of trained behaviors. Behavioral effects in wild animals
are more difficult to define but may include decreased ability to feed,
communicate, migrate, or reproduce. Abandonment of an area due to
repeated noise exposure is also considered a behavioral effect.
Analyses in other sections of this document refer to such behavioral
effects as ``sub-TTS Level B harassment.'' Schlundt et al. (2000)
exposed bottlenose dolphins and beluga whales to various pure-tone
sound frequencies and intensities in order to measure underwater
hearing thresholds. Masking is considered to have occurred because of
the ambient noise environment in which the experiments took place.
Sound levels were progressively increased until behavioral alterations
were noted (at which point the onset of TTS was presumed). It was found
that decreasing the sound intensity by 4 to 6 dB greatly decreased the
occurrence of anomalous behaviors. The lowest sound pressure levels,
over all frequencies, at which altered behaviors were observed, ranged
from 178 to 193 dB re 1 [micro]Pa for the bottlenose dolphins and from
180 to 196 dB re 1 [micro]Pa for the beluga whales. Thus, it is
reasonable to consider that sub-TTS (behavioral) effects occur at
approximately 6 dB below the TTS-inducing sound level, or at
approximately 177 dB in the greatest 1/3 octave band EFDL/SEL.
Table 4 (earlier in this document) summarizes the relevant
thresholds for levels of noise that may result in Level A harassment
(injury) or Level B harassment via TTS or behavioral disturbance to
marine mammals. Mortality and injury thresholds are designed to be
conservative by considering the impacts that would occur to the most
sensitive life stage (e.g., a dolphin calf).
The following three factors were used to estimate the potential
noise effects on marine mammals from Maritime Strike operations: (1)
The zone of influence, which is the distance from the explosion to
which a particular energy or pressure threshold extends; (2) the
density of animals potentially occurring within the zone of influence;
and (3) the number of events.
The zone of influence is defined as the area or volume of ocean in
which marine mammals could potentially be exposed to various noise
thresholds associated with exploding ordnance. Table 5 provides the
estimated ZOI radii for the Maritime Strike ordnance. At this time,
there are no empirical data or information that would allow NMFS to
establish a peak pressure criterion for sub-TTS behavioral disruption.
Table 5--Estimated Range for a Zone of Impact (ZOI) Distance for the Maritime Strike Ordnance
[In meters]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mortality Level A harassment Level B harassment
Munition Height/depth of --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
detonation 30.5 psi-msec 205 dB EFD * 13 psi-msec 182 dB EFD * 23 psi 177 dB EFD *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GBU-10.......................... Water Surface...... 202 275 362 1023 1280 1361
GBU-24.......................... Water Surface...... 202 275 362 1023 1280 1361
GBU-31 (JDAM)................... Water Surface...... 202 275 362 1023 1280 1361
20 feet AGL........ 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 feet underwater.. 385 468 700 2084 1281 2775
10 feet underwater. 457 591 836 2428 1280 3526
GBU-12.......................... Water Surface...... 114 161 243 744 752 1020
GBU-38 (JDAM)................... Water Surface...... 114 161 243 744 752 1020
20 feet AGL........ 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 feet underwater.. 239 280 445 1411 752 2070
10 feet underwater. 279 345 532 1545 752 2336
GBU-54 (LJDAM).................. Water Surface...... 114 161 243 744 752 1020
[[Page 52146]]
AGM-65E/L/K/G2 (Maverick)....... Water Surface...... 84 124 187 618 575 846
CBU-103......................... Water Surface...... 9 231 21 947 111 1335
AGM-114 (Hellfire).............. Water Surface...... 46 70 105 425 353 618
M-117........................... 20 feet AGL........ 0 0 0 0 0 0
Water Surface...... 147 203 293 847 950 1125
PGU-13 HEI 30 mm................ Water Surface...... 0 6 7 31 60 55
M56/PGU-28 HEI 20 mm............ Water Surface...... 0 0 0 16 37 27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* In greatest 1/3-octave band above 10 Hz or 100 Hz.
Density estimates for marine mammals occurring in the EGTTR are
provided in Table 3. As discussed above, densities were derived from
the results of published documents authored by NMFS personnel. Density
is nearly always reported for an area (e.g., animals per square
kilometer). Analyses of survey results may include correction factors
for negative bias, such as the Garrison (2008) report for bottlenose
dolphins. Even though Fulling et al. (2003) did not provide a
correction for Atlantic spotted dolphins or unidentified bottlenose/
spotted dolphins, Eglin AFB adjusted those densities based on
information provided in other published literature (Barlow 2003; 2006).
Although the study area appears to represent only the surface of the
water (two-dimensional), density actually implicitly includes animals
anywhere within the water column under that surface area. Density
estimates usually assume that animals are uniformly distributed within
the prescribed area, even though this is likely rarely true. Marine
mammals are often clumped in areas of greater importance, for example,
in areas of high productivity, lower predation, safe calving, etc.
Density can occasionally be calculated for smaller areas, but usually
there are insufficient data to calculate density for such areas.
Therefore, assuming an even distribution within the prescribed area is
the typical approach.
In addition, assuming that marine mammals are distributed evenly
within the water column does not accurately reflect behavior. Databases
of behavioral and physiological parameters obtained through tagging and
other technologies have demonstrated that marine animals use the water
column in various ways. Some species conduct regular deep dives while
others engage in much shallower dives, regardless of bottom depth.
Assuming that all species are evenly distributed from surface to bottom
is almost never appropriate and can present a distorted view of marine
mammal distribution in any region. Therefore, a depth distribution
adjustment is applied to marine mammal densities in this document
(Table 6). By combining marine mammal density with depth distribution
information, a three-dimensional density estimate is possible. These
estimates allow more accurate modeling of potential marine mammal
exposures from specific noise sources.
Table 6--Depth Distribution of Marine Mammals in the Maritime Strike Test Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Depth distribution Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin................ Daytime: 96% at <50 m, 4% at >50 m; Klatsky et al. (2007)
Nightime: 51% at <50 m, 8% at 50-
100 m, 19% at 101-250 m, 13% at 251-
450 m, and 9% at >450 m.
Atlantic spotted dolphin.......... 76% at <10 m, 20% at 10-20 m, and 4% Davis et al. (1996)
at 21-60 m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As mentioned previously, the number of Maritime Strike activities
generally corresponds to the number of live ordnance expenditures, as
shown in Table 2. However, the number of bursts modeled for the CBU-103
cluster bomb is 202, which is the number of individual bomblets per
bomb. Also, the 20 mm and 30 mm gunnery rounds were modeled as one
burst each.
Table 7 indicates the modeled potential for lethality, injury, and
non-injurious harassment (including behavioral harassment) to marine
mammals in the absence of mitigation measures. The numbers represent
total impacts for all detonations combined. Mortality was calculated as
approximately one-half an animal for bottlenose dolphins and about 0.1
animals for spotted dolphins. It is expected that, with implementation
of the management practices described below, potential impacts would be
mitigated to the point that there would be no mortality takes. Based on
the low mortality exposure estimates calculated by the acoustic model
combined with the implementation of mitigation measures, zero marine
mammals are expected to be affected by pressure levels associated with
mortality. Therefore, Eglin AFB has requested an IHA, as opposed to an
LOA.
[[Page 52147]]
Table 7--Modeled Number of Marine Mammals Potentially Affected by Maritime Strike Missions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Level B
Species Mortality Level A harassment harassment
harassment (TTS) (behavioral)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin.............................. 0.524 2.008 30.187 61.069
Atlantic spotted dolphin........................ 0.145 1.050 16.565 31.345
Unidentified bottlenose dolphin/Atlantic spotted 0.010 0.040 0.597 1.208
dolphin........................................
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 0.679 3.098 47.349 93.622
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 8 provides Eglin AFB's the annual number of marine mammals,
by species, authorized for taking by Level A harassment and Level B
harassment, incidental to Maritime Strike operations. It should be
noted that these takes are authorized without consideration of the
effectiveness of Eglin AFB's proposed mitigation measures. As indicated
in Table 8, Eglin AFB and NMFS estimate that approximately three marine
mammals could potentially be exposed to injurious Level A harassment
noise levels (205 dB re 1 [micro]Pa \2\-s or higher).
Table 8--Number of Marine Mammals Takes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Level B
Species Level A harassment harassment
harassment (TTS) (behavioral)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin.............................................. 2 30 61
Atlantic spotted dolphin........................................ 1 16 32
Unidentified bottlenose dolphin/Atlantic spotted dolphin........ 0 1 1
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 3 47 94
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approximately 47 marine mammals may be exposed annually to non-
injurious (TTS) Level B harassment associated with the 182 dB re 1
[micro]Pa\2\-s threshold. TTS results from fatigue or damage to hair
cells or supporting structures and may cause disruption in the
processing of acoustic cues; however, hearing sensitivity is recovered
within a relatively short time. Based on Eglin AFB and NMFS' estimates,
up to 94 marine mammals may experience a behavioral response to these
exercises associated with the 177 dB re 1 [micro]Pa \2\-s threshold
(see Table 8). NMFS has determined that this number will be
significantly lower due to the expected effectiveness of the mitigation
measures included in the IHA.
Negligible Impact and Determinations
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as ``. . .
an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.'' In making a negligible impact determination,
NMFS considers a variety of factors, including but not limited to: (1)
The number of anticipated mortalities; (2) the number and nature of
anticipated injuries; (3) the number, nature, and intensity, and
duration of harassment; and (4) the context in which the takes occur.
The takes from Level B harassment will be due to potential
behavioral disturbance and TTS. The takes from Level A harassment will
be due to potential tympanic-membrane (TM) rupture. Activities would
only occur over a timeframe of two to three weeks in August 2013, with
one or two missions occurring per day. It is possible that some
individuals may be taken more than once if those individuals are
located in the exercise area on two different days when exercises are
occurring. However, multiple exposures are not anticipated to have
effects beyond
Level A and Level B harassment
While animals may be impacted in the immediate vicinity of the
activity, because of the small ZOIs (compared to the vast size of the
GOM ecosystem where these species live) and the short duration of the
Maritime Strike operations, NMFS has determined that there will not be
a substantial impact on marine mammals. The activity is not expected to
impact rates of recruitment or survival of marine mammals because
neither mortality (which would remove individuals from the population)
nor serious injury are anticipated to occur. In addition, the activity
will not occur in areas (and/or times) of significance for the marine
mammal populations potentially affected by the exercises (e.g., feeding
or resting areas, reproductive areas), and the activities will only
occur in a small part of their overall range, so the impact of any
potential temporary displacement will be negligible and animals are
expected to return to the area after the cessations of activities.
Although the activity could result in Level A (TM rupture) and Level B
(behavioral disturbance and TTS) harassment of marine mammals, the
level of harassment is not anticipated to impact rates of recruitment
or survival of marine mammals because the number of exposed animals is
expected to be low due to the short term and site specific nature of
the activity, and the type of effect would not be detrimental to rates
of recruitment and survival.
Additionally, the mitigation and monitoring measures to be
implemented (described earlier in this document) are expected to
further minimize the potential for harassment. The protected species
surveys will require Eglin AFB to search the area for marine mammals,
and if any are found in the live fire area, then the exercise will be
suspended until the animal(s) has left the area or relocated. Moreover,
marine species observers located in the Eglin control tower will
monitor the high-definition video feed from cameras located on the
instrument barge anchored on-site for the presence of protected
species. Furthermore, Maritime Strike missions will be delayed or
rescheduled if the sea state is greater than a 4 on the Beaufort Scale
at the time of the test. In addition,
[[Page 52148]]
Maritime Strike missions will occur no earlier than two hours after
sunrise and no later than two hours prior to sunset to ensure adequate
daylight for pre- and post-mission monitoring.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring
measures, NMFS finds that Eglin AFB's Maritime Strike operations will
result in the incidental take of marine mammals, by Level A and Level B
harassment, and that the taking from the Maritime Strike exercises will
have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of
affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Eglin AFB initiated consultation with the Southeast Region, NMFS,
under section 7 of the ESA regarding the effects of this action on ESA-
listed species and critical habitat under the jurisdiction of NMFS. The
consultation was completed and a biological opinion issued on May 6,
2013. The biological opinion analyzed the effects of the exercise on
five species of sea turtles, Gulf sturgeon, smalltooth sawfish, sperm
whales, and Gulf sturgeon critical habitat. The biological opinion
concluded that the action, as proposed, may adversely affect four
species of sea turtles (loggerhead, Kemp's ridley, green, and
leatherback). In addition, the project may affect, but is not likely to
adversely affect, hawksbill sea turtles, smalltooth sawfish, Gulf
sturgeon, sperm whales, and Gulf sturgeon critical habitat.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Eglin AFB released a Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) on the
Maritime Strike Operations. NMFS made this EA available on the permits
Web page. On May 30, 2013, Eglin AFB issued a Final EA and a Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI) on the Maritime Strike Operations.
In accordance with NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 (Environmental
Review Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act, May 20, 1999), NMFS reviewed the information contained in Eglin
AFB's EA and determined the EA accurately and completely described the
preferred action alternative, a reasonable range of alternatives, and
the potential impacts on marine mammals, endangered species, and other
marine life that could be impacted by the preferred and non-preferred
alternatives. Based on this review and analysis, NMFS adopted Eglin
AFB's PEA under 40 CFR 1506.3, and issued its own FONSI statement on
issuance of an annual authorization under section 101(a)(5) of the
MMPA.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these determinations, NMFS authorizes the take of
two species of marine mammals incidental to Eglin AFB's Maritime Strike
operations in the GOM provided the previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: August 13, 2013.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-20521 Filed 8-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P