Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Seabird Monitoring and Research in Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska, 2015, 18359-18369 [2015-07734]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 65 (Monday, April 6, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18359-18369]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07734]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XD815


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Seabird Monitoring and Research in Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska, 
2015

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request 
for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS has received an application from Glacier Bay National 
Park (Glacier Bay NP) to take marine mammals, by harassment, incidental 
to conducting seabird research from May through September, 2015. The 
proposed dates for this action are May 15, 2015, through September 30, 
2015. Per the Marine Mammal Protection Act, we are requesting comments 
on our proposal to issue an Authorization to the Glacier Bay NP to 
incidentally take, by Level B harassment only, one species of marine 
mammal during the specified activity.

DATES: NMFS must receive comments and information on or before May 6, 
2015.

ADDRESSES: Address comments on the application to Jolie Harrison, 
Division Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, 
Silver Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox address for providing email 
comments is ITP.Cody@noaa.gov. Please include 0648-XD815 in the subject 
line. Comments sent via email to ITP.Cody@noaa.gov, including all 
attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. NMFS is not 
responsible for email comments sent to addresses other than the one 
provided here.
    Instructions: All submitted comments are a part of the public 
record and NMFS will post them to https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm without change. All Personal Identifying 
Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by 
the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential 
business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
    To obtain an electronic copy of the application containing a list 
of the references used in this document, write to the previously 
mentioned address, telephone the contact listed here (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT), or visit the Internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm.
    Information in Glacier Bay NP's application, NMFS' 2014 
Environmental Assessment titled, Environmental Assessment for the 
Issuance of an Incidental Harassment Authorization to Take Marine 
Mammals by Harassment Incidental to Conducting Seabird Research in 
Glacier Bay Alaska, and this notice collectively provide the 
environmental information related to proposed issuance of the 
Authorization for public review and comment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeannine Cody, NMFS, Office of 
Protected Resources, NMFS (301) 427-8401.

[[Page 18360]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, 
as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) directs the Secretary of 
Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, 
taking of small numbers of marine mammals of a species or population 
stock, by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than 
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if, after 
NMFS provides a notice of a proposed authorization to the public for 
review and comment: (1) NMFS makes certain findings; and (2) the taking 
is limited to harassment.
    An Authorization shall be granted for the incidental taking of 
small numbers of marine mammals if NMFS finds that the taking will have 
a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), and will not have an 
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or 
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant). The Authorization must 
also set forth the permissible methods of taking; other means of 
effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the species or stock 
and its habitat; and requirements pertaining to the monitoring and 
reporting of such taking. 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.''
    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the 
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or 
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or 
marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the 
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not 
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or 
sheltering [Level B harassment].

Summary of Request

    On January 15, 2015, NMFS received an application from Glacier Bay 
NP requesting that we issue an Authorization for the take of marine 
mammals, incidental to conducting monitoring and research studies on 
glaucus-winged gulls (Larus glaucescens) within Glacier Bay National 
Park and Preserve in Alaska. NMFS determined the application complete 
and adequate on February 27, 2015. NMFS previously issued an 
Authorization to Glacier Bay NP for the same activities in 2014 (79 FR 
56065, September 18, 2014). No seabird research activities occurred 
during the effective period of the prior Authorization.
    Glacier Bay NP proposes to conduct ground-based and vessel-based 
surveys to collect data on the number and distribution of nesting gulls 
within five study sites in Glacier Bay, AK. Glacier Bay NP proposes to 
complete up to five visits per study site, from May through September, 
2015.
    The proposed activities are within the vicinity of pinniped haulout 
sites and the following aspects of the proposed activities are likely 
to result in the take of marine mammals: Noise generated by motorboat 
approaches and departures; noise generated by researchers while 
conducting ground surveys; and human presence during the monitoring and 
research activities. NMFS anticipates that take by Level B harassment 
only, of individuals of harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) would result from 
the specified activity. Although Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) 
may be present in the action area, Glacier Bay NP has proposed to avoid 
any site used by Steller sea lions.

Description of the Specified Activity

Overview

    Glacier Bay NP proposes to identify the onset of gull nesting; 
conduct mid-season surveys of adult gulls, and locate and document gull 
nest sites within the following study areas: Boulder, Lone, and 
Flapjack Islands, and Geikie Rock. Each of these study sites contains 
harbor seal haulout sites and Glacier Bay NP proposes to visit each 
study site up to five times during the research season.
    Glacier Bay NP must conduct the gull monitoring studies to meet the 
requirements of a 2010 Record of Decision for a Legislative 
Environmental Impact Statement (NPS, 2010) which states that Glacier 
Bay NP must initiate a monitoring program for the gulls to inform 
future native egg harvests by the Hoonah Tlingit in Glacier Bay, AK. 
Glacier Bay NP actively monitors harbor seals at breeding and molting 
sites to assess population trends over time (e.g., Mathews & Pendleton, 
2006; Womble et al., 2010). Glacier Bay NP also coordinates pinniped 
monitoring programs with NMFS' National Marine Mammal Laboratory and 
the Alaska Department of Fish & Game and plans to continue these 
collaborations and sharing of monitoring data and observations in the 
future.

Dates and Duration

    Glacier Bay NP proposes to conduct the proposed activities from the 
period of May 15 through September 30, 2015. Glacier Bay NP proposes to 
conduct a maximum of three ground-based surveys per each study site and 
a maximum of two vessel-based surveys per each study site.
    Thus, the proposed Authorization, if issued, would be effective 
from May 15, 2015 through September 30, 2015. NMFS refers the reader to 
the Detailed Description of Activities section later in this notice for 
more information on the scope of the proposed activities.

Specified Geographic Region

    The proposed study sites would occur in the vicinity of the 
following locations: Boulder (58[deg]33'18.08'' N; 136[deg]1'13.36'' 
W), Lone (58[deg]43'17.67'' N; 136[deg]17'41.32'' W), and Flapjack 
(58[deg]35'10.19'' N; 135[deg]58'50.78'' W) Islands, and Geikie Rock 
(58[deg]41'39.75'' N; 136[deg]18'39.06'' W) in Glacier Bay, Alaska. 
Glacier Bay NP will also conduct studies at Tlingit Point Islet located 
at 58[deg]45'16.86'' N; 136[deg]10'41.74'' W; however, there are no 
reported pinniped haulout sites at that location.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C

[[Page 18361]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN06AP15.000

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

Detailed Description of Activities

    Glacier Bay NP proposes to conduct: (1) Ground-based surveys at a 
maximum frequency of three visits per site; and (2) vessel-based 
surveys at a maximum frequency of two visits per site from the period 
of May 15 through September 30, 2015.
    Ground-Based Surveys: These surveys involve two trained observers 
visiting the largest gull colony on each island to: (1) Obtain 
information on the numbers of nests, their location, and contents 
(i.e., eggs or chicks); (2) determine the onset of laying, 
distribution, abundance, and predation of gull nests and eggs; and (3) 
record the proximity of other species relative to colony locations.
    The observers would access each island using a kayak, a 32.8 to 
39.4-foot (ft) (10 to 12 meter (m)) motorboat, or a 12 ft (4 m) 
inflatable rowing dinghy. The landing craft's transit speed would not 
exceed 4 knots (4.6 miles per hour (mph). Ground surveys generally last 
from 30 minutes to up to two hours depending on the size of the island 
and the number of nesting gulls. Glacier Bay NP will discontinue ground 
surveys after they detect the first hatchling to minimize disturbance 
to the gull colonies.
    Vessel-Based Surveys: These surveys involve two trained observers 
observing and counting the number of adult and fledgling gulls from the 
deck of a motorized vessel which would transit around each island at a 
distance of approximately 328 ft (100 m) to avoid flushing the birds 
from the colonies. Vessel-based surveys generally last from 30 minutes 
to up to two hours

[[Page 18362]]

depending on the size of the island and the number of nesting gulls.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity

    Table 1 in this notice provides the following information: All 
marine mammal species with possible or confirmed occurrence in the 
proposed survey areas on land; information on those species' regulatory 
status under the MMPA and the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.); abundance; occurrence and seasonality in the activity 
area.

        Table 1--General Information on Marine Mammals That Could Potentially Haul Out in the Proposed Study Areas in May Through September, 2015
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Regulatory status \1\      Stock/Species
              Species                      Stock name                  \2\               abundance \3\       Occurrence and range          Season
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina).......  Glacier Bay/Icy Strait  MMPA-NC ESA-NL........  5,042................  common coastal.......  year-round
Steller sea lion (Eumetopias         Eastern U.S...........  MMPA-D, S ESA-NL......  63,160-78,198........  uncommon coastal.....  year-round
 jubatus).
Steller sea lion (Eumetopias         Western U.S...........  MMPA-D, S ESA-T.......  52,200...............  rare coastal.........  unknown
 jubatus).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ MMPA: D = Depleted, S = Strategic, NC = Not Classified.
\2\ ESA: EN = Endangered, T = Threatened, DL = Delisted, NL = Not listed.
\3\ 2013 NMFS Stock Assessment Report (Allen and Anglis, 2014).

    NMFS refers the public to the Glacier Bay NP's application and the 
2014 NMFS Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report available online at: 
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.htm for further information on 
the biology and local distribution of these species.

Other Marine Mammals in the Proposed Action Area

    Northern sea otters (Enhydra lutris kenyoni) and polar bears (Ursis 
maritimus) listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act could 
occur in the proposed area. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages 
these species and NMFS does not consider them further in this notice.

Potential Effects of the Specified Activities on Marine Mammals

    This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that the 
types of stressors associated with the specified activity (e.g., 
personnel presence) have been observed to impact marine mammals. This 
discussion may also include reactions that NMFS considers to rise to 
the level of a take and those that we do not consider to rise to the 
level of a take. This section serves as a background of potential 
effects and does not consider either the specific manner in which the 
applicant will carry out the activity or the mitigation that will be 
implemented, and how either of those will shape the anticipated impacts 
from this specific activity. The ``Estimated Take by Incidental 
Harassment'' section later in this document will include a quantitative 
analysis of the number of individuals that NMFS expects Glacier Bay NP 
to take during this activity. The ``Negligible Impact Analysis'' 
section will include the analysis of how this specific activity would 
impact marine mammals. NMFS will consider the content of the following 
sections: Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment; Proposed Mitigation; 
and Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat, to draw conclusions 
regarding the likely impacts of this activity on the reproductive 
success or survivorship of individuals--and from that consideration--
the likely impacts of this activity on the affected marine mammal 
populations or stocks.

Potential Effects of Human Presence on Marine Mammals

    The appearance of Glacier Bay researchers has the potential to 
cause Level B harassment of pinnipeds hauled out on Boulder, Lone, and 
Flapjack Islands, and Geikie Rock. Disturbance includes a variety of 
effects, including subtle to conspicuous changes in behavior, movement, 
and displacement. Disturbance may result in reactions ranging from an 
animal simply becoming alert to the presence of the surveyors (e.g., 
turning the head, assuming a more upright posture) to flushing from the 
haul-out site into the water. NMFS does not consider the lesser 
reactions to constitute behavioral harassment, or Level B harassment 
takes, but rather assumes that pinnipeds that move greater than 1 meter 
(m) (3.3 feet (ft)) or change the speed or direction of their movement 
in response to the presence of surveyors are behaviorally harassed, and 
thus subject to Level B taking. Animals that respond to the presence of 
researchers by becoming alert, but that do not move or change the 
nature of locomotion as described, are not considered to have been 
subject to behavioral harassment.
    Reactions to human presence, if any, depend on species, state of 
maturity, experience, current activity, reproductive state, time of 
day, and many other factors (Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok et al., 
2004; Southall et al., 2007; Weilgart, 2007). These behavioral 
reactions are often shown as: Changing durations of surfacing and 
dives, number of blows per surfacing, or moving direction and/or speed; 
reduced/increased vocal activities; changing/cessation of certain 
behavioral activities (such as socializing or feeding); visible startle 
response or aggressive behavior; avoidance of areas; and/or flight 
responses (e.g., pinnipeds flushing into the water from haul-outs or 
rookeries). If a marine mammal does react briefly to human presence by 
changing its behavior or moving a small distance, the impacts of the 
change are unlikely to be significant to the individual, let alone the 
stock or population. However, if visual stimuli from human presence 
displaces marine mammals from an important feeding or breeding area for 
a prolonged period, impacts on individuals and populations could be 
significant (e.g., Lusseau and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007).
    Disturbances resulting from human activity can impact short- and 
long-term pinniped haul out behavior (Renouf et al., 1981; Schneider 
and Payne, 1983; Terhune and Almon, 1983; Allen et al., 1984; Stewart, 
1984; Suryan and Harvey, 1999; Mortenson et al., 2000; and Kucey and 
Trites, 2006). Numerous studies have shown that human activity can 
flush harbor seals off haulout sites (Allen et al., 1984; Calambokidis 
et al., 1991; Suryan and Harvey, 1999; and Mortenson et al., 2000) or 
lead to Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus schauinslandi) avoidance of beach 
areas (Kenyon, 1972). In one case, human disturbance appeared to cause 
Steller sea lions to desert a breeding area at Northeast Point on St. 
Paul Island, Alaska (Kenyon, 1962).
    In cases where vessels actively approached marine mammals (e.g.,

[[Page 18363]]

whale watching or dolphin watching boats), scientists have documented 
that animals exhibit altered behavior such as increased swimming speed, 
erratic movement, and active avoidance behavior (Bursk, 1983; Acevedo, 
1991; Baker and MacGibbon, 1991; Trites and Bain, 2000; Williams et 
al., 2002; Constantine et al., 2003), reduced blow interval (Ritcher et 
al., 2003), disruption of normal social behaviors (Lusseau, 2003; 
2006), and the shift of behavioral activities which may increase 
energetic costs (Constantine et al., 2003; 2004). In 1997, Henry and 
Hammil (2001) conducted a study to measure the impacts of small boats 
(i.e., kayaks, canoes, motorboats and sailboats) on harbor seal haulout 
behavior in M[eacute]tis Bay, Quebec, Canada. During that study, the 
authors noted that the most frequent disturbances (n=73) were caused by 
lower speed, lingering kayaks, and canoes (33.3 percent) as opposed to 
motorboats (27.8 percent) conducting high speed passes. The seals' 
flight reactions could be linked to a surprise factor by kayaks-canoes 
that approach slowly, quietly and low on water, making them look like 
predators. However, the authors note that once the animals were 
disturbed, there did not appear to be any significant lingering effect 
on the recovery of numbers to their pre-disturbance levels. In 
conclusion, the study showed that boat traffic at current levels has 
only a temporary effect on the haulout behavior of harbor seals in the 
M[eacute]tis Bay area.
    In 2004, Johnson and Acevedo-Gutierrez (2007) evaluated the 
efficacy of buffer zones for watercraft around harbor seal haulout 
sites on Yellow Island, Washington. The authors estimated the minimum 
distance between the vessels and the haul-out sites; categorized the 
vessel types; and evaluated seal responses to the disturbances. During 
the course of the seven-weekend study, the authors recorded 14 human-
related disturbances which were associated with stopped powerboats and 
kayaks. During these events, hauled out seals became noticeably active 
and moved into the water. The flushing occurred when stopped kayaks and 
powerboats were at distances as far as 453 and 1,217 ft (138 and 371 m) 
respectively. The authors note that the seals were unaffected by 
passing powerboats, even those approaching as close as 128 ft (39 m), 
possibly indicating that the animals had become tolerant of the brief 
presence of the vessels and ignored them. The authors reported that on 
average, the seals quickly recovered from the disturbances and returned 
to the haulout site in less than or equal to 60 minutes. Seal numbers 
did not return to pre-disturbance levels within 180 minutes of the 
disturbance less than one quarter of the time observed. The study 
concluded that the return of seal numbers to pre-disturbance levels and 
the relatively regular seasonal cycle in abundance throughout the area 
counter the idea that disturbances from powerboats may result in site 
abandonment (Johnson and Acevedo-Gutierrez, 2007). As a general 
statement from the available information, pinnipeds exposed to intense 
(approximately 110 to 120 decibels re: 20 [mu]Pa) non-pulse sounds 
often leave haulout areas and seek refuge temporarily (minutes to a few 
hours) in the water (Southall et al., 2007).
    There are three ways in which disturbance, as described previously, 
could result in more than Level B harassment of marine mammals. All 
three are most likely to be consequences of stampeding, a potentially 
dangerous occurrence in which large numbers of animals succumb to mass 
panic and rush away from a stimulus. The three situations are: (1) 
Falling when entering the water at high-relief locations; (2) extended 
separation of mothers and pups; and (3) crushing of pups by large males 
during a stampede. However, NMFS does not expect any of these scenarios 
to occur at the proposed survey site.
    Because hauled-out animals may move towards the water when 
disturbed, there is the risk of injury if animals stampede towards 
shorelines with precipitous relief (e.g., cliffs). However, while high-
elevation sites exist on the islands, the haulout sites consist of 
ridges with unimpeded and non-obstructive access to the water. If 
disturbed, the small number of hauled-out adult animals may move toward 
the water without risk of encountering barriers or hazards that would 
otherwise prevent them from leaving the area.
    The probability of vessel and marine mammal interactions (i.e., 
motorboat strike) occurring during the proposed research activities is 
unlikely due to the motorboat's slow operational speed, which is 
typically 2 to 3 knots (2.3 to 3.4 mph) and the researchers continually 
scanning the water for marine mammals presence during transit to the 
islands. Thus, NMFS does not anticipate that strikes or collisions 
would result from the movement of the motorboat.

Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat

    We do not anticipate that the proposed operations would result in 
any temporary or permanent effects on the habitats used by the marine 
mammals in the proposed area, including the food sources they use 
(i.e., fish and invertebrates). While NMFS anticipates that the 
specified activity may result in marine mammals avoiding certain areas 
due to motorboat operations or human presence, this impact to habitat 
is temporary and reversible. NMFS considered these as behavioral 
modification. The main impact associated with the proposed activity 
will be temporarily elevated noise levels and the associated direct 
effects on marine mammals, previously discussed in this notice. Based 
on the preceding discussion, NMFS does not anticipate that the proposed 
activity would have any habitat-related effects that could cause 
significant or long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or 
their populations.

Proposed Mitigation

    In order to issue an incidental take authorization under section 
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods 
of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the 
least practicable adverse impact on such species or stock and its 
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and 
areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species 
or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (where relevant). 
Applications for incidental take authorizations must include the 
availability and feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, 
methods, and manner of conducting the activity or other means of 
effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species 
or stock and their habitat 50 CFR 216.104(a)(11).
    The Glacier Bay NP has reviewed the following source documents and 
has incorporated a suite of proposed mitigation measures into their 
project description.
    (1) Recommended best practices in Womble et al. (2013); Richardson 
et al. (1995); Pierson et al. (1998); and Weir and Dolman, (2007).
    To reduce the potential for disturbance from acoustic and visual 
stimuli associated with the activities Glacier Bay NP and/or its 
designees has proposed to implement the following mitigation measures 
for marine mammals:
     Perform pre-survey monitoring before deciding to access a 
study site;

[[Page 18364]]

     Avoid accessing a site based on a pre-determined threshold 
number of animals present; sites used by pinnipeds for pupping; or 
sites used by Steller sea lions;
     Perform controlled and slow ingress to the study site to 
prevent a stampede and select a pathway of approach to minimize the 
number of marine mammals harassed;
     Monitor for offshore predators at study sites. Avoid 
approaching the study site if killer whales (Orcinus orca) are present. 
If Glacier Bay NP and/or its designees see predators in the area, they 
must not disturb the pinnipeds until the area is free of predators.
     Maintain a quiet research atmosphere in the visual 
presence of pinnipeds.
    Pre-Survey Monitoring: Prior to deciding to land onshore to conduct 
the study, the researchers would use high-powered image stabilizing 
binoculars from the watercraft to document the number, species, and 
location of hauled out marine mammals at each island. The vessels would 
maintain a distance of 328 to 1,640 ft (100 to 500 m) from the 
shoreline to allow the researchers to conduct pre-survey monitoring. 
During every visit, the researchers will examine each study site 
closely using high powered image stabilizing binoculars before 
approaching at distances of greater than 500 m (1,640 ft) to determine 
and document the number, species, and location of hauled out marine 
mammals.
    Site Avoidance: Researchers would decide whether or not to approach 
the island based on the species present, number of individuals, and the 
presence of pups. If there are high numbers (more than 25) harbor seals 
hauled out (with or without young pups present), any time pups are 
present, or any time that Steller sea lions are present, the 
researchers will not approach the island and will not conduct gull 
monitoring research.
    Controlled Landings: The researchers would determine whether to 
approach the island based on the number and type of animals present. If 
the island has 25 or fewer individuals without pups, the researchers 
would approach the island by motorboat at a speed of approximately 2 to 
3 knots (2.3 to 3.4 mph). This would provide enough time for any marine 
mammals present to slowly enter the water without panic or stampede. 
The researchers would also select a pathway of approach farthest from 
the hauled out harbor seals to minimize disturbance.
    Minimize Predator Interactions: If the researchers visually observe 
marine predators (i.e. killer whales) present in the vicinity of hauled 
out marine mammals, the researchers would not approach the study site.
    Noise Reduction Protocols: While onshore at study sites, the 
researchers would remain vigilant for hauled out marine mammals. If 
marine mammals are present, the researchers would move slowly and use 
quiet voices to minimize disturbance to the animals present.

Mitigation Conclusions

    NMFS has carefully evaluated Glacier Bay NP's proposed mitigation 
measures in the context of ensuring that we prescribe 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.
    Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS should be able to 
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on 
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of 
the general goals listed here:
    1. Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals 
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).
    2. A reduction in the numbers of marine mammals (total number or 
number at biologically important time or location) exposed to motorboat 
operations or visual presence that we expect to result in the take of 
marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing 
harassment takes only).
    3. A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at 
biologically important time or location) individuals exposed to 
motorboat operations or visual presence that we expect to result in the 
take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to 
reducing harassment takes only).
    4. A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number 
or number at biologically important time or location) to motorboat 
operations or visual presence that we expect to result in the take of 
marine mammals (this goal may contribute to a, above, or to reducing 
the severity of harassment takes only).
    5. Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal 
habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that 
block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas, 
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/disturbance 
of habitat during a biologically important time.
    6. For monitoring directly related to mitigation--an increase in 
the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more 
effective implementation of the mitigation.
    Based on the evaluation of Glacier Bay NP's proposed measures, NMFS 
has preliminarily determined that the proposed 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.

Proposed Monitoring

    In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of 
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth ``requirements pertaining to 
the monitoring and reporting of such taking.'' The MMPA implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for 
Authorizations 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 we expect to be present in the 
proposed action area. Glacier Bay NP submitted a marine mammal 
monitoring plan in section 13 of their Authorization application.
    Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should accomplish one or 
more of the following general goals:
    1. An increase in our understanding of the likely occurrence of 
marine mammal species in the vicinity of the action, (i.e., presence, 
abundance, distribution, and/or density of species).
    2. An increase in our understanding of the nature, scope, or 
context of the likely exposure of marine mammal species to any of the 
potential stressor(s) associated with the action (e.g., sound or visual 
stimuli), through better understanding of one or more of the following: 
The action itself and its environment (e.g., sound source 
characterization, propagation, and ambient noise levels); the affected 
species (e.g., life history or dive pattern); the likely co-occurrence 
of marine mammal species with the action (in whole or part) associated 
with

[[Page 18365]]

specific adverse effects; and/or the likely biological or behavioral 
context of exposure to the stressor for the marine mammal (e.g., age 
class of exposed animals or known pupping, calving or feeding areas).
    3. An increase in our understanding of how individual marine 
mammals respond (behaviorally or physiologically) to the specific 
stressors associated with the action (in specific contexts, where 
possible, e.g., at what distance or received level).
    4. An increase in our understanding of how anticipated individual 
responses, to individual stressors or anticipated combinations of 
stressors, may impact either: The long-term fitness and survival of an 
individual; or the population, species, or stock (e.g. through effects 
on annual rates of recruitment or survival).
    5. An increase in our understanding of how the activity affects 
marine mammal habitat, such as through effects on prey sources or 
acoustic habitat (e.g., through characterization of longer-term 
contributions of multiple sound sources to rising ambient noise levels 
and assessment of the potential chronic effects on marine mammals).
    6. An increase in understanding of the impacts of the activity on 
marine mammals in combination with the impacts of other anthropogenic 
activities or natural factors occurring in the region.
    7. An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of 
mitigation and monitoring measures.
    8. An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals 
(through improved technology or methodology), both specifically within 
the safety zone (thus allowing for more effective implementation of the 
mitigation) and in general, to better achieve the above goals.
    As part of its Authorization application, Glacier Bay NP proposes 
to sponsor marine mammal monitoring during the project, in order to 
implement the mitigation measures that require real-time monitoring, 
and to satisfy the monitoring requirements of the MMPA.
    The Glacier Bay NP researchers will monitor the area for pinnipeds 
during all research activities. Monitoring activities will consist of 
conducting and recording observations on pinnipeds within the vicinity 
of the proposed research areas. The monitoring notes would provide 
dates and location of the researcher's activities and the number and 
type of species present. The researchers would document the behavioral 
state of animals present, and any apparent disturbance reactions or 
lack thereof.
    Glacier Bay NP can add to the knowledge of pinnipeds in the 
proposed action area by noting observations of: (1) Unusual behaviors, 
numbers, or distributions of pinnipeds, such that any potential follow-
up research can be conducted by the appropriate personnel; (2) tag-
bearing carcasses of pinnipeds, allowing transmittal of the information 
to appropriate agencies and personnel; and (3) rare or unusual species 
of marine mammals for agency follow-up.
    If at any time injury, serious injury, or mortality of the species 
for which take is authorized should occur, or if take of any kind of 
any other marine mammal occurs, and such action may be a result of the 
proposed land survey, Glacier Bay NP would suspend research and 
monitoring activities and contact NMFS immediately to determine how 
best to proceed to ensure that another injury or death does not occur 
and to ensure that the applicant remains in compliance with the MMPA.

Encouraging and Coordinating Research

    Glacier Bay NP actively monitors harbor seals at breeding and 
molting haul out locations to assess trends over time (e.g., Mathews & 
Pendleton, 2006; Womble et al. 2010, Womble and Gende, 2013b). This 
monitoring program involves collaborations with biologists from the 
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and the National Marine Mammal 
Laboratory. Glacier Bay NP will continue these collaborations and 
encourage continued or renewed monitoring of marine mammal species. 
Additionally, they would report vessel-based counts of marine mammals, 
branded, or injured animals, and all observed disturbances to the 
appropriate state and federal agencies.

Proposed Reporting

    Glacier Bay NP will submit a draft monitoring report to us no later 
than 90 days after the expiration of the Incidental Harassment 
Authorization, if we issue it. The report will describe the operations 
conducted and sightings of marine mammals near the proposed project. 
The report will provide full documentation of methods, results, and 
interpretation pertaining to all monitoring. The report will provide:
    1. A summary and table of the dates, times, and weather during all 
research activities.
    2. Species, number, location, and behavior of any marine mammals 
observed throughout all monitoring activities.
    3. An estimate of the number (by species) of marine mammals exposed 
to acoustic or visual stimuli associated with the research activities.
    4. A description of the implementation and effectiveness of the 
monitoring and mitigation measures of the Authorization and full 
documentation of methods, results, and interpretation pertaining to all 
monitoring.
    In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly 
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the 
authorization, such as an injury (Level A harassment), serious injury, 
or mortality (e.g., vessel-strike, stampede, etc.), Glacier Bay NP 
shall immediately cease the specified activities and immediately report 
the incident to the Division Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, 
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and the Alaska 
Regional Stranding Coordinator at (907) 586-7248. The report must 
include the following information:
     Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the 
incident;
     Description and location of the incident (including water 
depth, if applicable);
     Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, 
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
     Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 
hours preceding the incident;
     Species identification or description of the animal(s) 
involved;
     Fate of the animal(s); and
     Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if 
equipment is available).
    Glacier Bay NP shall not resume its activities until NMFS is able 
to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. We will work with 
Glacier Bay to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood 
of further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Glacier Bay NP 
may not resume their activities until notified by us via letter, email, 
or telephone.
    In the event that Glacier Bay NP discovers an injured or dead 
marine mammal, and the lead researcher determines that the cause of the 
injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in 
less than a moderate state of decomposition as we describe in the next 
paragraph), Glacier Bay NP will immediately report the incident to the 
Division Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and the Alaska Regional Stranding 
Coordinator at (907) 586-7248. The report must include the same 
information identified in the paragraph

[[Page 18366]]

above this section. Activities may continue while we review the 
circumstances of the incident. We will work with Glacier Bay NP to 
determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.
    In the event that Glacier Bay NP discovers an injured or dead 
marine mammal, and the lead visual observer determines that the injury 
or death is not associated with or related to the authorized activities 
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced 
decomposition, or scavenger damage), Glacier Bay will report the 
incident to the incident to the Division Chief, Permits and 
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-
8401 and the Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinator at (907) 586-7248 
within 24 hours of the discovery. Glacier Bay NP researchers will 
provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other 
documentation of the stranded animal sighting to us. Glacier Bay NP can 
continue their research activities.

Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment

    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the 
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or 
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or 
marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the 
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not 
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or 
sheltering [Level B harassment].
    All anticipated takes would be by Level B harassment, involving 
temporary changes in behavior. NMFS expects that the proposed 
mitigation and monitoring measures would minimize the possibility of 
injurious or lethal takes. NMFS considers the potential for take by 
injury, serious injury, or mortality as remote. NMFS expects that the 
presence of Glacier Bay NP personnel could disturb animals hauled out 
and that the animals may alter their behavior or attempt to move away 
from the researchers.
    As discussed earlier, NMFS considers an animal to have been 
harassed if it moved greater than 1 m (3.3 ft) in response to the 
surveyors' presence or if the animal was already moving and changed 
direction and/or speed, or if the animal flushed into the water. NMFS 
does not consider animals that became alert without such movements as 
harassed.
    Based on pinniped survey counts conducted by Glacier Bay NP (e.g., 
Mathews & Pendleton, 2006; Womble et al., 2010), NMFS estimates that 
the research activities could potentially affect by Level B behavioral 
harassment 500 harbor seals over the course of the Authorization (Table 
2). This estimate represents 9.9 percent of the Glacier Bay/Icy Strait 
stock of harbor seals and accounts for a maximum disturbance of 25 
harbor seals each per visit at Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack Islands, and 
Geikie Rock, Alaska over a maximum level of five visits.

 Table 2--Estimates of the Possible Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to Acoustic and Visual Stimuli During the
    Proposed Research Activities on Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack Islands, and Geikie Rock, Alaska, May Through
                                                 September, 2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Estimated
                                          number of     Proposed take    Percent of
               Species                   individuals    authorization    species or       Population trend \2\
                                           exposed                        stock \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal..........................             500             500             9.9  Declining.
Steller sea lion.....................               0               0               0  Increasing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Table 1 in this notice lists the stock species abundance estimates that NMFS used to calculate the
  percentage of species/stock.
\2\ The population trend information is from Allen and Angliss, 2014. No data = Insufficient data to determine
  population trend.

    Harbor seals tend to haul out in small numbers (on average, less 
than 50 animals) at most sites with the exception of Flapjack Island 
(Womble, Pers. Comm.). Animals on Flapjack Boulder Islands generally 
haul out on the south side of the Islands and are not located near the 
research sites located on the northern side of the Islands. Aerial 
survey maximum counts show that harbor seals sometimes haul out in 
large numbers at all four locations (see Table 2 in Glacier Bays NP's 
application), and sometimes individuals and mother/pup pairs occupy 
different terrestrial locations than the main haulout (J. Womble, 
personal observation).
    Considering the conservation status for the Western stock of the 
Steller sea lion, the Glacier Bay NP researchers would not conduct 
ground-based or vessel-based surveys if they observe Steller sea lions 
before accessing Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack Islands, and Geikie Rock. 
Thus, NMFS expects no takes to occur for this species during the 
proposed activities.
    NMFS does not propose to authorize any injury, serious injury, or 
mortality. NMFS expect all potential takes to fall under the category 
of Level B harassment only.

Analysis and Preliminary Determinations

Negligible Impact

    Negligible impact' is ``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'' (50 CFR 216.103). The lack of 
likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival 
(i.e., population level effects) forms the basis of a negligible impact 
finding. An estimate of the number of Level B harassment takes alone is 
not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In 
addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that 
might be ``taken'' through behavioral harassment, NMFS considers other 
factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, 
duration), the context of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive 
time or location, migration), as well as the number and nature of 
estimated Level A harassment takes, the number of estimated 
mortalities, and effects on habitat.
    Although Glacier Bay NP's survey activities may disturb harbor 
seals hauled out at the survey sites, NMFS expects those impacts to 
occur to a small, localized group of animals for a limited duration 
(e.g., 30 minutes to two hours each visit). Pinnipeds would likely 
become alert or, at most, flush into the water in reaction to the 
presence of Glacier Bay NP personnel during the proposed activities.

[[Page 18367]]

Disturbance will be limited to a short duration, allowing the animals 
to reoccupy the island within a short amount of time. Thus, the 
proposed action is unlikely to result in long-term impacts such as 
permanent abandonment of the haul-out.
    For reasons stated previously in this document and based on the 
following factors, Glacier Bay NP's specified activities are not likely 
to cause long-term behavioral disturbance, injury, serious injury, or 
death. These reasons include:
    1. The effects of the research activities would be limited to 
short-term responses and temporary behavioral changes due to the short 
and sporadic duration of the research activities. Minor and brief 
responses are not likely to constitute disruption of behavioral 
patterns, such as migration, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering.
    2. The availability of alternate areas for pinnipeds to avoid the 
resultant disturbances from the research operations. Anecdotal reports 
from previous Glacier Bay NP activities have shown that the pinnipeds 
returned to the various sites and did not permanently abandon haul-out 
sites after Glacier Bay NP conducted their research activities.
    3. There is no potential for large-scale movements leading to 
injury, serious injury, or mortality because the researchers would 
delay ingress into the landing areas only after the pinnipeds have 
slowly entered the water.
    4. Glacier Bay NP will limit access to Boulder, Lone, and Flapjack 
Islands, and Geikie Rock when there are high numbers (more than 25) 
harbor seals hauled out (with or without young pups present), any time 
pups are present, or any time that Steller sea lions are present, the 
researchers will not approach the island and will not conduct gull 
monitoring research.
    NMFS does not anticipate that any injuries, serious injuries, or 
mortalities would occur as a result of Glacier Bay NP's proposed 
activities with the mitigation and related monitoring, and NMFS does 
not propose to authorize injury, serious injury, or mortality at this 
time. In addition, the research activities would not take place in 
areas of significance for marine mammal feeding, resting, breeding, or 
calving and would not adversely impact marine mammal habitat.
    Due to the nature, degree, and context of Level B (behavioral) 
harassment anticipated and described (see ``Potential Effects on Marine 
Mammals'' section in this notice), we do not expect the activity to 
impact annual rates of recruitment or survival for any affected species 
or stock.
    In summary, NMFS anticipates that impacts to hauled-out harbor 
seals during Glacier Bay NP's research activities would be behavioral 
harassment of limited duration (i.e., up to two hours per visit) and 
limited intensity (i.e., temporary flushing at most). NMFS does not 
expect stampeding, and therefore injury or mortality, to occur (see 
``Mitigation'' for more details). 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 proposed monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS 
preliminarily finds that the total marine mammal take from Glacier 
Bay's proposed research activities will have a negligible impact on the 
affected marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers

    As mentioned previously, NMFS estimates that Glacier Bay NP's 
activities could potentially affect, by Level B harassment only, one 
species of marine mammal under our jurisdiction. For harbor seals, this 
estimate is small (9.9 percent) relative to the population size and we 
have provided the percentage of the harbor seal's regional population 
estimate that the activities may take by Level B harassment in Table 2 
in this notice.
    Based on the analysis contained in this notice of the likely 
effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, 
and taking into consideration the implementation of the mitigation and 
monitoring measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that Glacier Bay NP's 
proposed activities would take small numbers of marine mammals relative 
to the populations of 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. Glacier Bay National Park prohibits subsistence harvest 
of harbor seals within the Park (Catton, 1995).

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    NMFS does not expect that Glacier Bay NP's proposed research 
activities (which includes mitigation measures to avoid harassment of 
Steller sea lions) would affect any species listed under the ESA. 
Therefore, NMFS has determined that a section 7 consultation under the 
ESA is not required.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    In 2014, NMFS prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) analyzing 
the potential effects to the human environment from NMFS' issuance of a 
Authorization to Glacier Bay NP for their seabird research activities.
    In September 2014, NMFS issued a Finding of No Significant Impact 
(FONSI) on the issuance of an Authorization for Point Blue's research 
activities in accordance with section 6.01 of the NOAA Administrative 
Order 216-6 (Environmental Review Procedures for Implementing the 
National Environmental Policy Act, May 20, 1999). Glacier Bay NP's 
proposed activities and impacts for 2015 are within the scope of the 
2014 EA and FONSI. NMFS provided relevant environmental information to 
the public through a previous notice for the proposed Authorization (79 
FR 32226, June 4, 2014) and considered public comments received in 
response prior to finalizing the 2014 EA and deciding whether or not to 
issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
    NMFS has reviewed the 2014 EA and determined that there are no new 
direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to the human and natural 
environment associated with the Authorization requiring evaluation in a 
supplemental EA and NMFS, therefore, proposes to reaffirm the 2014 
FONSI. NMFS' EA and FONSI for this activity are available upon request 
(see ADDRESSES).

Proposed Authorization

    As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes 
issuing an Incidental Harassment Authorization to Glacier Bay National 
Park for conducting seabird research May through September, 2015, 
provided they incorporate the previously mentioned mitigation, 
monitoring, and reporting requirements.

Draft Proposed Authorization

    This section contains the draft text for the proposed 
Authorization. NMFS proposes to include this language in the 
Authorization if issued.

Proposed Authorization Language

    Glacier Bay National Park, P.O. Box 140, Gustavus, Alaska 99826 
and/or its designees (holders of the Authorization) are hereby 
authorized under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection 
Act (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) to harass small numbers of marine mammals 
incidental to conducting monitoring and research studies on glaucus-
winged gulls (Larus

[[Page 18368]]

glaucescens) within Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve in Alaska.
    1. This Authorization is valid from May 15 through September 30, 
2015.
    2. This Authorization is valid only for research activities that 
occur in the following specified geographic areas: Boulder 
(58[deg]33'18.08'' N; 136[deg]1'13.36'' W); Lone (58[deg]43'17.67'' N; 
136[deg]17'41.32'' W), and Flapjack (58[deg]35'10.19'' N; 
135[deg]58'50.78'' W) Islands, and Geikie Rock (58[deg]41'39.75'' N; 
136[deg]18'39.06'' W); and Tlingit Point Islet (58[deg]45'16.86'' N; 
136[deg]10'41.74'' W) in Glacier Bay, Alaska.
3. Species Authorized and Level of Takes
    a. The taking, by Level B harassment only, is limited to the 
following species: 500 Pacific harbor seals (Phoca vitulina).
    b. The taking by injury (Level A harassment), serious injury or 
death of any of the species listed in Condition 3(a) or the taking of 
any kind of any other species of marine mammal is prohibited and may 
result in the modification, suspension or revocation of this 
Authorization.
    c. The taking of any marine mammal in a manner prohibited under 
this Authorization must be reported immediately to the Chief, Permits 
and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 
(301) 427-8401.
4. General Conditions
    A copy of this Authorization must be in the possession of Glacier 
Bay National Park, its designees, and field crew personnel (including 
research collaborators) operating under the authority of this 
Authorization at all times.
5. Mitigation Measures
    The Holder of this Authorization is required to implement the 
following mitigation measures:
    a. Conduct pre-survey monitoring before deciding to access a study 
site. Prior to deciding to land onshore of Boulder, Lone, or Flapjack 
Island or Geikie Rock, the Holder of this Authorization will use high-
powered image stabilizing binoculars before approaching at distances of 
greater than 500 m (1,640 ft) to determine and document the number, 
species, and location of hauled out marine mammals.. The vessels will 
maintain a distance of 328 to 1,640 ft (100 to 500 m) from the 
shoreline.
    i. If the Holder of the Authorization determines that there are 25 
or more harbor seals (with or without young pups present) hauled out on 
the shoreline, the holder will not access the island and will not 
conduct the study at that time.
    ii. If the Holder of the Authorization determines that any Steller 
sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) are present at the study site, the 
Holder will not access the island and will not conduct the study at 
that time.
    iii. If the Holder of the Authorization determines that there are 
any pups hauled out on the shoreline and vulnerable to being separated 
from their mothers, the Holder will not access the island and will not 
conduct the study at that time.
    b. Minimize the potential for disturbance by: (1) Performing 
controlled and slow ingress to the study site to prevent a stampede; 
and (2) selecting a pathway of approach farthest from the hauled out 
harbor seals to minimize disturbance.
    c. Monitor for offshore predators at the study sites and avoid 
research activities when predators area present. Avoid approaching the 
study site if killer whales (Orcinus orca) are present. If the Holder 
of this Authorization observes predators in the area, they must not 
disturb the pinnipeds until the area is free of predators.
    d. Maintain a quiet working atmosphere, avoid loud noises, and use 
hushed voices in the presence of hauled out pinnipeds.
6. Monitoring
    Glacier Bay NP is required to record the following:
    a. BLM and/or its designees shall record the following:
    i. Species counts (with numbers of adults/juveniles); and:
    ii. Numbers of disturbances, by species and age, according to a 
three-point scale of intensity including: (1) Head orientation in 
response to disturbance, which may include turning head towards the 
disturbance, craning head and neck while holding the body rigid in a u-
shaped position, or changing from a lying to a sitting position and/or 
slight movement of less than 1 meter; ``alert''; (2) Movements in 
response to or away from disturbance, typically over short distances 
(1-3 meters) and including dramatic changes in direction or speed of 
locomotion for animals already in motion; ``movement''; and (3) All 
flushes to the water as well as lengthier retreats (>3 meters); 
``flight''.
    iii. Information on the weather, including the tidal state and 
horizontal visibility.
    b. If applicable, the observer shall note observations of marked or 
tag-bearing pinnipeds or carcasses, as well as any rare or unusual 
species of marine mammal.
    c. If applicable, the observer shall note the presence of any 
offshore predators (date, time, number, and species).
7. Reporting
    The holder of this Authorization is required to:
    a. Draft Report: Submit a draft monitoring report to the Division 
Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service within 90 days after the 
Authorization expires. NMFS will review the Draft Report which is 
subject to review and comment by NMFS. Glacier Bay NP must address any 
recommendations made by NMFS in the Final Report prior to submission to 
NMFS. If NMFS decides that the draft final report needs no comments, 
NMFS will consider the draft report as the Final Report.
    b. Final Report: Glacier Bay shall prepare and submit a Final 
Report to NMFS within 30 days following resolution of any comments on 
the draft report from NMFS.
8. Reporting Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
    In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly 
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the 
authorization, such as an injury (Level A harassment), serious injury, 
or mortality (e.g., vessel-strike, stampede, etc.), BLM and/or its 
designees shall immediately cease the specified activities and 
immediately report the incident to the Division Chief, Permits and 
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-
8401 and the Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinator at (907) 586-7248. 
The report must include the following information:
     Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the 
incident;
     Description and location of the incident (including water 
depth, if applicable);
     Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, 
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
     Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 
hours preceding the incident;
     Species identification or description of the animal(s) 
involved;
     Fate of the animal(s); and
     Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if 
equipment is available).
    Glacier Bay NP shall not resume its activities until NMFS is able 
to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS will work with 
Glacier Bay

[[Page 18369]]

NP to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further 
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Glacier Bay NP may not 
resume their activities until notified by us via letter, email, or 
telephone.
    In the event that Glacier Bay NP discovers an injured or dead 
marine mammal, and the marine mammal observer determines that the cause 
of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent 
(i.e., in less than a moderate state of decomposition as we describe in 
the next paragraph), Glacier Bay NP will immediately report the 
incident to the Division Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, 
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and the Alaska 
Regional Stranding Coordinator at (907) 586-7248. The report must 
include the same information identified in the paragraph above this 
section. Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances 
of the incident. NMFS would work with Glacier Bay NP to determine 
whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.
    In the event that Glacier Bay NP discovers an injured or dead 
marine mammal, and the lead visual observer determines that the injury 
or death is not associated with or related to the authorized activities 
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced 
decomposition, or scavenger damage), Glacier Bay NP will report the 
incident to the Division Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, 
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and the Alaska 
Regional Stranding Coordinator at (907) 586-7248 within 24 hours of the 
discovery. Glacier Bay NP personnel will provide photographs or video 
footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal 
sighting to us. Glacier Bay NP can continue their survey activities 
while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident.

Request for Public Comments

    NMFS invites comments on our analysis, the draft authorization, and 
any other aspect of the notice of proposed Authorization for Glacier 
Bay NP's activities. Please include any supporting data or literature 
citations with your comments to help inform our final decision on 
Glacier Bay NP's request for an Authorization.

    Dated: March 31, 2015.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-07734 Filed 4-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P