Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the U.S. Air Force Conducting Maritime Weapon Systems Evaluation Program Operational Testing Within the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range, 7307-7319 [2016-02801]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
Approximately 15 minutes will be
reserved for public comments at the end
of the meeting. Speaking times will be
assigned on a first-come, first-served
basis. The amount of time per speaker
will be determined by the number of
requests received but is likely to be no
more than three to five minutes each.
The exact time for public comments will
be included in the final agenda that will
be posted on the MEP Advisory Board
Web site at https://www.nist.gov/mep/
about/advisory-board.cfm. Questions
from the public will not be considered
during this period. Speakers who wish
to expand upon their oral statements,
those who had wished to speak but
could not be accommodated on the
agenda, and those who were unable to
attend in person are invited to submit
written statements to the MEP Advisory
Board, National Institute of Standards
and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail
Stop 4800, Gaithersburg, Maryland
20899–4800, via fax at (301) 963–6556,
or electronically by email to
zara.brunner@nist.gov.
Kevin Kimball,
Chief of Staff.
[FR Doc. 2016–02768 Filed 2–10–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XE343
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to the U.S. Air
Force Conducting Maritime Weapon
Systems Evaluation Program
Operational Testing Within the Eglin
Gulf Test and Training Range
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) implementing regulations,
NMFS, we, hereby give notice that we
have issued an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (Authorization) to the
U.S. Air Force, Eglin Air Force Base
(Eglin AFB), to take two species of
marine mammals, the Atlantic
bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)
and Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella
frontalis), by harassment, incidental to a
Maritime Weapon Systems Evaluation
Program (Maritime WSEP) within the
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range in
the Gulf of Mexico from February 4,
2016 through February 3, 2017. Eglin
AFB’s activities are military readiness
activities per the MMPA, as amended by
the National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2004.
DATES: Effective February 4, 2016,
through February 3, 2017.
ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the
final Authorization, Eglin AFB’s
application and their final
Environmental Assessment (EA) titled,
‘‘Maritime Weapons System Evaluation
Program are available by writing to Jolie
Harrison, Chief, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910; by
telephoning the contacts listed here, or
by visiting the internet at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/military.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeannine Cody, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended (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 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 for incidental
takings for marine mammals shall be
granted if NMFS finds that the taking
will have a negligible impact on the
species or stock(s), will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
subsistence uses (where relevant), and if
the permissible methods of taking and
requirements pertaining to the
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting of
such taking are set forth. NMFS has
defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR
216.103 as ‘‘an impact resulting from
the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’
The National Defense Authorization
Act of 2004 (NDAA; Pub. L. 108–136)
removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7307
‘‘specified geographical region’’
limitations indicated earlier 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
On February 5, 2015, we issued an
Authorization to Eglin AFB to take
marine mammals, by harassment,
incidental to a Maritime Weapon
Systems Evaluation Program (Maritime
WSEP) within the Eglin Gulf Test and
Training Range (EGTTR) in the Gulf of
Mexico from February through April
2015 (see 80 FR 17394, April 1, 2015).
Eglin AFB conducted the Maritime
WSEP training activities between
February 9–12, and March 16–19, 2015.
However, due to unavailability of some
of the live munitions, Eglin AFB
released only 1.05 percent of the
munitions proposed for the 2015
military readiness activities. On May 28,
2015, we received a renewal request for
an Authorization from Eglin AFB to
complete the missions authorized in
2015. Following the initial application
submission, Eglin AFB submitted a
revised version of the renewal request
on December 3, 2015. We considered
the revised renewal request as adequate
and complete on December 10, 2015 and
published a notice of proposed
Authorization on December 23, 2015 (80
FR 79843). The notice afforded the
public a 30-day comment period on the
proposed MMPA Authorization.
Eglin AFB proposes to conduct
Maritime WESP missions within the
EGTTR airspace over the Gulf of
Mexico, specifically within Warning
Area 151 (W–151). The proposed
Maritime WSEP training activities
would occur February through April
(spring) in the daytime; however, the
activities could occur between February
2016 and February 2017.
Eglin AFB proposes to use multiple
types of live munitions (e.g., gunnery
rounds, rockets, missiles, and bombs)
against small boat targets in the EGTTR.
These activities qualify as a military
readiness activities under the MMPA
and NDAA.
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
7308
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
The following aspects of the proposed
Maritime WSEP training activities have
the potential to take marine mammals:
exposure to impulsive noise and
pressure waves generated by live
ordnance detonation at or near the
surface of the water. Take, by Level B
harassment of individuals of common
bottlenose dolphin or Atlantic spotted
dolphin could potentially result from
the specified activity. Additionally,
although NMFS does not expect it to
occur, Eglin AFB has also requested
authorization for Level A Harassment of
a small number of individuals of either
common bottlenose dolphins or Atlantic
spotted dolphins. Therefore, Eglin AFB
has requested authorization to take
individuals of two cetacean species by
Level A and Level B harassment.
Eglin AFB’s Maritime WSEP training
activities may potentially impact marine
mammals at or near the water surface in
the absence of mitigation. Marine
mammals could potentially be harassed,
injured, or killed by exploding
projectiles. However, based on analyses
provided in Eglin AFB’s 2015
Authorization renewal request; 2014
application; 2015 Environmental
Assessment (EA); the 2015 monitoring
report for the authorized activities
conducted in February and March 2015;
and for reasons discussed later in this
document, we do not anticipate that
Eglin AFB’s Maritime WSEP activities
would result in any serious injury or
mortality to marine mammals.
For Eglin AFB, this would be the
second issued Authorization following
the Authorization issued effective from
February through April 2015 (80 FR
17394, April 1, 2015). The monitoring
report associated with the 2015
Authorization is available at
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/military.htm and provides
additional environmental information
related to proposed issuance of this
Authorization for public review and
comment.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
Eglin AFB proposes to conduct live
ordnance testing and training in the
Gulf of Mexico as part of the Maritime
WSEP operational testing missions. The
Maritime WSEP test objectives are to
evaluate maritime deployment data,
evaluate tactics, techniques and
procedures, and to determine the impact
of techniques and procedures on combat
Air Force training. The need to conduct
this type of testing has developed in
response to increasing threats at sea
posed by operations conducted from
small boats which can carry a variety of
weapons; can form in large or small
numbers; and may be difficult to locate,
track, and engage in the marine
environment. Because of limited Air
Force aircraft and munitions testing on
engaging and defeating small boat
threats, Eglin AFB proposes to employ
live munitions against boat targets in the
EGTTR in order to continue
development of techniques and
procedures to train Air Force strike
aircraft to counter small maneuvering
surface vessels. Thus, the Department of
Defense considers the Maritime WSEP
training activities as a high priority for
national security.
Dates and Duration
Eglin AFB proposes to schedule the
Maritime WSEP training missions over
an approximate three-week period that
would begin in early February 2016.
The proposed missions would occur in
the spring, on weekdays, during
daytime hours only, with one or two
missions occurring per day. Some minor
deviation from Eglin AFB’s requested
dates is possible and the proposed
Authorization, if issued, would be
effective from February 4, 2016 through
February 3, 2017.
Specified Geographic Region
The specific planned mission location
is approximately 17 miles (mi) (27.3
kilometers [km]) offshore from Santa
Rosa Island, Florida, in nearshore
waters of the continental shelf in the
Gulf of Mexico. All activities would take
place within the EGTTR, defined as the
airspace over the Gulf of Mexico
controlled by Eglin AFB, beginning at a
point three nautical miles (nmi) (3.5
miles [mi]; 5.5 kilometers [km]) from
shore. The EGTTR consists of
subdivided blocks including Warning
Area 151 (W–151) where the proposed
activities would occur, specifically in
sub-area W–151A.
NMFS provided detailed descriptions
of the activity area in a previous notice
for the proposed Authorization (80 FR
7984, December 23, 2015). The
information has not changed between
the notice of proposed Authorization
and this final notice announcing the
issuance of the Authorization.
Detailed Description of Activities
The Maritime WSEP training
missions, classified as military
readiness activities, include the release
of multiple types of inert and live
munitions from fighter and bomber
aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, and
gunships against small, static, towed,
and remotely-controlled boat targets.
Munition types include bombs, missiles,
rockets, and gunnery rounds (Table 1).
TABLE 1—LIVE MUNITIONS AND AIRCRAFT
Aircraft
(not associated with specific munitions)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Munitions
GBU–10 laser-guided Mk-84 bomb .....................................................................................................
GBU–24 laser-guided Mk-84 bomb .....................................................................................................
GBU–12 laser-guided Mk-82 bomb .....................................................................................................
GBU–54 Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition (LJDAM), laser-guided Mk-82 bomb .............................
CBU–105 (WCMD) (inert) ....................................................................................................................
AGM–65 Maverick air-to-surface missile .............................................................................................
GBU–38 Small Diameter Bomb II (Laser SDB) ..................................................................................
AGM–114 Hellfire air-to-surface missile ..............................................................................................
AGM–176 Griffin air-to-surface missile.
2.75 Rockets.
PGU–13/B high explosive incendiary 30 mm rounds.
7.62 mm/.50 Cal (inert).
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.
AC–130 gunship.
Key: AGM = air-to-ground missile; CBU = Cluster Bomb Unit; GBU = Guided Bomb Unit; LJDAM = Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition; Laser
SDB = Laser Small Diameter Bomb; mm = millimeters; PGU = Projectile Gun Unit; WCMD = wind corrected munition dispenser.
The proposed Maritime WSEP
training activities involve detonations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
above the water, near the water surface,
and under water within the EGTTR.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
However, because the tests will focus on
weapons/target interaction, Eglin AFB
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
7309
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
will not specify a particular aircraft for
a given test as long as it meets the
delivery parameters.
Eglin AFB would deploy the
munitions against static, towed, and
remotely-controlled boat targets within
the W–151A. Eglin AFB would operate
the remote-controlled boats from an
instrumentation barge (i.e., the Gulf
Range Armament Test Vessel; GRATV)
anchored on site within the test area.
The GRATV would provide a platform
for video cameras and weapons-tracking
equipment. Eglin AFB would position
the target boats approximately 182.8 m
(600 ft) from the GRATV, depending on
the munition type.
Table 2 lists the number, height, or
depth of detonation, explosive material,
and net explosive weight (NEW) in
pounds (lbs) of each munition proposed
for use during the Maritime WSEP
activities.
TABLE 2—MARITIME WSEP MUNITIONS PROPOSED FOR USE IN THE W–151A TEST AREA
Total # of live
munitions
Type of munition
Net explosive
weight per
munition
Detonation
type
Warhead—explosive material
MK–84—Tritonal ............................................
MK–82—Tritonal ............................................
WDU–24/B penetrating blast-fragmentation
warhead.
10 BLU–108 sub-munitions each containing
4 projectiles parachute, rocket motor and
altimeter.
AFX–757 (Insensitive munition) .....................
High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) tandem
anti-armor metal augmented charge.
945 lbs.
192 lbs.
86 lbs.
Blast fragmentation ........................................
Comp B–4 HEI ...............................................
30 x 173 mm caliber with aluminized RDX
explosive. Designed for GAU–8/A Gun
System.
N/A .................................................................
13 lbs.
Up to 12 lbs.
0.1 lbs.
GBU–10 or GBU–24 ......................................
GBU–12 or GBU–54 (LJDAM) .......................
AGM–65 (Maverick) .......................................
2
6
6
Surface ..........
Surface ..........
Surface ..........
CBU–105 (WCMD) .........................................
4
Airburst ..........
GBU–38 (Laser Small Diameter Bomb) .........
AGM–114 (Hellfire) .........................................
4
15
AGM–176 (Griffin) ..........................................
2.75 Rockets ..................................................
PGU–12 HEI 30 mm ......................................
10
100
1,000
Surface ..........
Subsurface
(10 msec
delay).
Surface ..........
Surface ..........
Surface ..........
7.62 mm/.50 cal ..............................................
5,000
Surface ..........
Inert.
37 lbs.
20 lbs.
Inert.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Key: AGL = above ground level; AGM = air-to-ground missile; CBU = Cluster Bomb Unit; GBU = Guided Bomb Unit; JDAM = Joint Direct Attack Munition; LJDAM = Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition; mm = millimeters; msec = millisecond; lbs = pounds; PGU = Projectile Gun Unit; HEI
= high explosive incendiary.
At least two ordnance delivery aircraft
will participate in each live weapons
release training mission which lasts
approximately four hours. Before
delivering the ordnance, mission aircraft
would make a dry run over the target
area to ensure that it is clear of
commercial and recreational boats. Jets
will fly at a minimum air speed of 300
knots (approximately 345 miles per
hour, depending on atmospheric
conditions) and at a minimum altitude
of 305 m (1,000 ft). Due to the limited
flyover duration and potentially high
speed and altitude, the pilots would not
participate in visual surveys for
protected species.
NMFS provided detailed descriptions
of the WSEP training operations in a
previous notice for the proposed
Authorization (80 FR 7984, December
23, 2015). This information has not
changed between the notice of proposed
Authorization and this final notice
announcing the issuance of the
Authorization.
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of Eglin AFB’s
application and NMFS’ proposal to
issue an Authorization to the USAF,
Eglin AFB, published in the Federal
Register on December 23, 2015 (80 FR
7984). During the 30-day public
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
comment period, NMFS received
comments from the Marine Mammal
Commission (Commission) only.
Following are the comments from the
Commission and NMFS’ responses.
Comment 1: The Commission notes
that Eglin AFB has applied for MMPA
authorizations to take marine mammals
on an activity-by-activity basis (e.g.,
naval explosive ordnance disposal
school, precision strike weapon, air-tosurface gunnery, and maritime strike
operations) rather than through a
programmatic basis. The Commission
believes that the agencies should
evaluate the impacts of all training and
testing activities under a single letter of
authorization application and National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
document rather than segmenting the
analyses based on specific types of
missions under various authorizations.
Response: Both Eglin AFB and NMFS
concur with the Commission’s
recommendation to streamline the
rulemaking process for future activities
conducted within the EGGTR. In 2015,
Eglin AFB developed a Programmatic
Environmental Assessment as for all
testing and training activities that would
occur in the EGGTR over the next five
years. Eglin AFB has also developed and
submitted a request for a Letter of
Authorization under the MMPA to
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NMFS for all testing and training
activities that would also occur in the
EGGTR over the same five year period.
Both of these efforts will facilitate a
more comprehensive review of actions
occurring within the EGGTR that have
the potential to take marine mammals
incidental to military readiness
activities and NMFS will be able to
evaluate the impacts of all training and
testing activities under a single letter of
authorization application rather than
segmenting our analyses based on
specific types of missions under
separate authorizations.
Comment 2: The Commission states
that Eglin AFB overestimated marine
mammal take because they based
estimates on a single detonation event of
each munition type which multiplied
the number of animals estimated to be
taken by a single detonation event for
each munition type by the total number
of munitions that would be detonated,
irrespective of when those detonations
would occur. The Commission states
that this method does not consider the
accumulation of energy in a 24-hour
period which would more accurately
correspond to zones of exposure for the
representative scenario and serve as
more a realistic estimate of the numbers
of animals that Eglin AFB could
potentially take during the WSEP
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
7310
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
activities. In estimating take, the
Commission commented Eglin AFB’s
model approach was an additive process
for estimating each zone of exposure,
and thus the associated takes.
Effectively, The Commission states that
Eglin AFB overestimated the number of
take but is unsure to what degree.
Further, the Commission recommends
that Eglin AFB and NMFS should treat
fractions of estimated take
appropriately, that is generally, round
down if less than 0.50 and round up if
greater than or equal to 0.50 before
summing the estimates for each species.
Response: NMFS and Eglin AFB
acknowledge that this approach
contributes to the overestimation of take
estimates. Eglin AFB’s modeling
approach for take estimates treated each
munition detonation as a separate event
impacting a new set of animals which
results in a worst case scenario of
potential take and is an overestimate of
potential harassment.
NMFS agrees with the Commission’s
recommendations and has recalculated
the takes by accounting for the
accumulation of energy in a 24-hour
period and by eliminating the double
counting of the estimated take for each
species and appropriately rounding take
estimates before summing the total take.
Table 8 in this notice provides the
revised number of marine mammals, by
species, that Eglin AFB could
potentially take incidental to the
conduct of Maritime WSEP operations.
The re-calculation results in zero take
by mortality, zero take by slight lung
injury, and zero take by gastrointestinal
tract injury. Compared to the take levels
that NMFS previously presented in the
notice for the proposed Authorization
(80 FR 7984, December 23, 2015), our
re-estimation has reduced take estimates
for Level A harassment (PTS) from 38 to
14 marine mammals. Based on the
remodeling of the number of marine
mammals potentially affected by the
Maritime WSEP missions, NMFS would
authorize take for Level A and Level B
harassment presented in Table 8 of this
notice.
Comment 3: The Commission states
that Eglin AFB proposes to use live-feed
video cameras to supplement its
effectiveness in detecting marine
mammals when implementing
mitigation measures. However, the
Commission is not convinced that those
measures are sufficient to effectively
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
monitor for marine mammals entering
the training areas during the 30 minute
timeframe prior to detonation. In
addition, the Commission states that it
does not believe that Eglin AFB cannot
deem the Level A harassment zone clear
of marine mammals when using only
three video cameras for monitoring.
Thus, the Commission recommends that
NMFS require Eglin AFB to supplement
its mitigation measures with passive
acoustic monitoring and determine the
effectiveness of its suite of mitigation
measures for activities at Eglin prior to
incorporating presumed mitigation
effectiveness into its take estimation
analyses or negligible impact
determinations.
Response: NMFS has worked closely
with Eglin AFB over the past several
Authorization cycles to develop proper
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements designed to minimize and
detect impacts from the specified
activities and ensure that NMFS can
make the findings necessary for
issuance of an Authorization.
Monitoring also includes vessel-based
observers for marine species up to 30
minutes prior to deploying live
munitions in the area. Eglin AFB has
submitted annual reports to NMFS
every year that describes all activities
that occur in the EGTTR. In addition,
Eglin AFB submitted annual reports to
NMFS at the conclusion of the Maritime
Strike Operations These missions are
similar in nature to the proposed
maritime WSEP operations and the
Eglin AFB provided information on
sighting information and results from
post-mission survey observations. Based
on those results, NMFS determined that
the mitigation measures ensured the
least practicable adverse impact to
marine mammals. There were no
observations of injured marine
mammals and no reports of marine
mammal mortality during the Maritime
Strike Operation activities. The
measures proposed for Maritime WSEP
are similar, except they will include
larger survey areas based on updated
acoustic analysis and previous
discussions with the Commission and
NMFS.
Eglin AFB will continue to research
the feasibility of supplementing existing
monitoring efforts with passive acoustic
monitoring devices for future missions
and is in the process of discussing
alternatives with the Commission and
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NMFS during the review of the
environmental planning efforts
discussed earlier in Comment 1.
Comment 4: 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: NMFS considers PTS to fall
under the injury category (Level A
Harassment). However, an animal
would need to stay very close to the
sound source for an extended amount of
time to incur a serious degree of PTS,
which could increase the probability of
mortality. In this case, it would be
highly unlikely for this scenario to
unfold given the nature of any
anticipated acoustic exposures that
could potentially result from a mobile
marine mammal that NMFS generally
expects to exhibit avoidance behavior to
loud sounds within the EGTTR.
NMFS has recalculated the takes
presented in the notice for the proposed
Authorization (80 FR 7984, December
23, 2015) and the results of the
recalculation show zero takes for
mortality, zero takes by slight lung
injury, and zero takes by gastrointestinal
tract injury. Further, the re-estimation
has reduced the number of take by Level
A harassment (from PTS) from 38 to 14.
Based on this re-estimation, 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 Incidental Harassment
Authorization may be issued.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
Table 3 lists marine mammal species
with potential or confirmed occurrence
in the proposed activity area during the
project timeframe and summarizes key
information regarding stock status and
abundance. Please see NMFS’ draft 2015
and 2014 Stock Assessment Reports
(SAR), available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
pr/sars and Garrison et al., 2008; Navy,
2007; Davis et al., 2000 for more
detailed accounts of these stocks’ status
and abundance.
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
7311
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMALS THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY AREA
Relative
occurrence
in W–151
Species
Stock name
Regulatory status 1 2
Estimated abundance
Common bottlenose dolphin ......
Choctawatchee Bay ...................
Pensacola/East Bay ...................
St. Andrew Bay ..........................
Gulf of Mexico Northern Coastal
Northern Gulf of Mexico Continental Shelf.
Northern Gulf of Mexico Oceanic.
Northern Gulf of Mexico .............
MMPA—S, ESA—NL .................
MMPA—S, ESA—NL .................
MMPA—S, ESA—NL .................
MMPA—S, ESA—NL .................
MMPA—NC, ESA—NL ..............
179, CV = 0.04 3 ........
33, CV = 0.80 4 ..........
124, CV = 0.57 4 ........
7,185, CV = 0.21 3 .....
51,192, CV = 0.10 3 ...
Uncommon.
Uncommon.
Uncommon.
Common.
Uncommon.
MMPA—NC, ESA—NL ..............
5,806, CV = 0.39 4 .....
Uncommon.
MMPA—NC, ESA—NL ..............
37,611 4, CV = 0.28 ...
Common.
Atlantic spotted dolphin ..............
1
2
3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
4
MMPA: D = Depleted, S = Strategic, NC = Not Classified.
ESA: EN = Endangered, T = Threatened, DL = Delisted, NL = Not listed.
NMFS Draft 2015 SAR (Waring et al., 2015).
NMFS 2014 SAR (Waring et al., 2014).
An additional 19 cetacean species
could occur within the northeastern
Gulf of Mexico, mainly occurring at or
beyond the shelf break (i.e., water depth
of approximately 200 m (656.2 ft))
located beyond the W–151A test area.
NMFS and Eglin AFB consider these 19
species to be rare or extralimital within
the W–151A test location area. These
species are the Bryde’s whale
(Balaenoptera edeni), sperm whale
(Physeter macrocephalus), dwarf sperm
whale (Kogia sima), pygmy sperm whale
(K. breviceps), pantropical spotted
dolphin (Stenella atenuarta),
Blainville’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon
densirostris), Cuvier’s beaked whale
(Ziphius cavirostris), Gervais’ beaked
whale (M. europaeus), Clymene dolphin
(S. clymene), spinner dolphin (S.
longirostris), striped dolphin (S.
coeruleoalba), killer whale (Orcinus
orca), false killer whale (Pseudorca
crassidens), pygmy killer whale (Feresa
attenuata), Risso’s dolphin (Grampus
griseus), Fraser’s dolphin
(Lagenodelphis hosei), melon-headed
whale (Peponocephala electra), roughtoothed dolphin (Steno bredanensis),
and short-finned pilot whale
(Globicephala macrorhynchus).
Of these species, only the sperm
whale is listed as endangered under the
ESA and as depleted throughout its
range under the MMPA. Sperm whale
occurrence within W–151A is unlikely
because almost all reported sightings
have occurred in water depths greater
than 200 m (656.2 ft).
Because these species are unlikely to
occur within the W–151A area, Eglin
AFB has not requested and NMFS has
not issued take authorizations for them.
Thus, NMFS does not consider these
species further in this notice.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
Other Marine Mammals in the Proposed
Action Area
The endangered West Indian manatee
(Trichechus manatus) rarely occurs in
the area (USAF, 2014). The U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service has jurisdiction
over the manatee; therefore, we would
not include a proposed Authorization to
harass manatees and do not discuss this
species further in this notice.
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section of the notice of the
proposed Authorization (80 FR 7984,
December 23, 2015) included a
summary and discussion of the ways
that components (e.g., exposure to
impulsive noise and pressure waves
generated by live ordnance detonation
at or near the surface of the water) of the
specified activity, including mitigation
may impact marine mammals and their
habitat. The ‘‘Estimated Take by
Incidental Harassment’’ section later in
this document will include a
quantitative analysis of the number of
individuals that we expect Eglin AFB to
take during this activity. The
‘‘Negligible Impact Analysis’’ section
will include the analysis of how this
specific activity would impact marine
mammals. We will consider the content
of the following sections: ‘‘Estimated
Take by Incidental Harassment’’ and
‘‘Proposed Mitigation’’ to draw
conclusions regarding the likely impacts
of these activities 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.
In summary, the Maritime WSEP
training exercises proposed for taking of
marine mammals under an
Authorization have the potential to take
marine mammals by exposing them to
impulsive noise and pressure waves
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
generated by live ordnance detonation
at or near the surface of the water.
Exposure to energy or pressure resulting
from these detonations could result in
Level A harassment (PTS) and by Level
B harassment (TTS and behavioral). In
addition, NMFS also considered the
potential for harassment from vessel
operations.
The potential effects of impulsive
sound sources (underwater detonations)
from the proposed training activities
may include one or more of the
following: Tolerance, masking,
disturbance, hearing threshold shift,
stress response, and mortality. NMFS
provided detailed information on these
potential effects in the notice of the
proposed Authorization (80 FR 7984,
December 23, 2015). The information
presented in that notice has not
changed.
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
Detonations of live ordnance would
result in temporary changes to the water
environment. Munitions could hit the
targets and not explode in the water.
However, because the targets are located
over the water, in water explosions
could occur. An underwater explosion
from these weapons could send a shock
wave and blast noise through the water,
release gaseous by-products, create an
oscillating bubble, and cause a plume of
water to shoot up from the water
surface. However, these effects would be
temporary and not expected to last more
than a few seconds.
Similarly, Eglin AFB does not expect
any long-term impacts with regard to
hazardous constituents to occur. Eglin
AFB considered the introduction of fuel,
debris, ordnance, and chemical
materials into the water column within
its EA and determined the potential
effects of each to be insignificant. Eglin
AFB analyzed the potential effects of
each in their EA and determined them
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
7312
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
to be insignificant. NMFS provided a
summary of the analyses in the notice
for the proposed Authorization (80 FR
7984, December 23, 2015). The
information presented in that notice has
not changed.
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 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 incidental take
authorization process such that ‘‘least
practicable adverse impact’’ shall
include consideration of personnel
safety, practicality of implementation,
and impact on the effectiveness of the
military readiness activity.
NMFS and Eglin AFB have worked to
identify potential practicable and
effective mitigation measures, which
include a careful balancing of the likely
benefit of any particular measure to the
marine mammals with the likely effect
of that measure on personnel safety,
practicality of implementation, and
impact on the ‘‘military-readiness
activity.’’ We refer the reader to Section
11 of Eglin AFB’s application for more
detailed information on the proposed
mitigation measures which include the
following:
Vessel-Based Monitoring: Eglin AFB
would station a large number of range
clearing boats (approximately 20 to 25)
around the test site to prevent nonparticipating vessels from entering the
human safety zone. Based on the
composite footprint, range clearing
boats will be located approximately (see
Figure 11–1 in Eglin AFB’s application).
However, the actual distance will vary
based on the size of the munition being
deployed.
Trained protected species observers
would be aboard five of these boats and
will conduct protected species surveys
before and after each test. The protected
species survey vessels will be dedicated
solely to observing for marine species
during the pre-mission surveys while
the remaining safety boats clear the area
of non-authorized vessels. The protected
species survey vessels will begin
surveying the area at sunrise. The area
to be surveyed will encompass the zone
of influence (ZOI), which is 5 km (3.1
mi). Animals that may enter the area
after Eglin AFB has completed the premission surveys and prior to detonation
would not reach the predicted smaller
slight lung injury and/or mortality
zones.
Because of human safety issues,
observers will be required to leave the
test area at least 30 minutes in advance
of live weapon deployment and move to
a position on the safety zone periphery,
approximately 15.28 km (9.5 mi) from
the detonation point. Observers will
continue to scan for marine mammals
from the periphery.
Determination of the Zone of Influence
Eglin AFB has created a sample day
reflecting the maximum number of
munitions that could be released and
resulting in the greatest impact in a
single mission day. However, this
scenario is only a representation and
may not accurately reflect how Eglin
AFB may conduct actual operations.
However, NMFS and Eglin AFB are
considering this conservative
assumption to calculate the impact
range for mitigation monitoring
measures. Thus, Eglin AFB has
modeled, combined, and compared the
sum of all energies from these
detonations against thresholds with
energy metric criteria to generate the
accumulated energy ranges for this
scenario. Table 4 lists these ranges
which form the basis of the mitigation
monitoring.
TABLE 4—DISTANCES (m) TO HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS FOR AN EXAMPLE MISSION DAY
Level A
harassment
Munition
NEW
(lbs)
GBU–10 or GBU–24 ...........
GBU–12 or GBU–54 ...........
AGM–65 (Maverick) ............
GBU–39 (LSDB) .................
AGM–114 (Hellfire) .............
AGM–175 (Griffin) ...............
2.75 Rockets .......................
PGU–13 HEI 30 mm ...........
Total #
per day
945
192
86
37
20
13
12
0.1
Detonation scenario
1
1
1
1
3
2
12
125
PTS
187 dB
SEL
Surface ...............................
Surface.
Surface.
Surface.
(10 ft depth).
Surface.
Surface.
Surface.
5,120
Level B
harassment
TTS
Behavioral
172 dB
SEL
167 dB
SEL
12,384
15,960
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGM = air-to-ground missile; cal = caliber; CBU = Cluster Bomb Unit; ft = feet; GBU = Guided Bomb Unit; HEI = high explosive incendiary; lbs
= pounds; mm = millimeters; N/A = not applicable; NEW = net explosive weight; PGU = Projectile Gun Unit; SDB = small diameter bomb; PTS =
permanent threshold shift; TTS = temporary threshold shift; WCMD = wind corrected munition dispenser.
Based on the ranges presented in
Table 4 and factoring operational
limitations associated with survey-based
vessel support for the missions, Eglin
AFB estimates that during pre-mission
surveys, the proposed monitoring area
would be approximately 5 km (3.1
miles) from the target area, which
corresponds to the Level A harassment
threshold range. Eglin AFB proposes to
survey the same-sized area for each
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
mission day, regardless of the planned
munition expenditures. By clearing the
Level A harassment threshold range of
protected species, animals that may
enter the area after the completed premission surveys but prior to detonation
would not reach the smaller slight lung
injury or mortality zones (presented in
Table 6 later in this document). Because
of human safety issues, Eglin AFB
would require observers to leave the test
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
area at least 30 minutes in advance of
live weapon deployment and move to a
position on the safety zone periphery,
approximately 15 km (9.5 miles) from
the detonation point. Observers would
continue to scan for marine mammals
from the periphery, but effectiveness
would be limited as the boat would
remain at a designated station.
Video Monitoring: In addition to
vessel-based monitoring, Eglin AFB
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
would position three high-definition
video cameras on the GRATV anchored
on-site, as described earlier, to allow for
real-time monitoring for the duration of
the mission. The camera configuration
and actual number of cameras used
would depend on specific mission
requirements. In addition to monitoring
the area for mission objective issues, the
camera(s) would also monitor for the
presence of protected species. A trained
marine species observer from Eglin
Natural Resources would be located in
Eglin AFB’s Central Control Facility,
along with mission personnel, to view
the video feed before and during test
activities. The distance to which objects
can be detected at the water surface by
use of the cameras is considered
generally comparable to that of the
human eye.
The GRATV will be located about 183
m (600 ft) from the target. The larger
mortality threshold ranges correspond
to the modified Goertner model adjusted
for the weight of an Atlantic spotted
dolphin calf, and extend from 0 to 237
m (0 to 778 ft) from the target,
depending on the ordnance, and the
Level A ranges for both common
bottlenose and Atlantic spotted
dolphins extend from 7 to 965 m (23 to
3,166 ft) from the target, depending on
the ordnance and harassment criterion.
Given these distances, observers could
reasonably be expected to view a
substantial portion of the mortality zone
in front of the camera, although a small
portion would be behind or to the side
of the camera view. Based on previous
monitoring reports for this activity, the
pre-training surveys for delphinids and
other protected species within the
mission area are effective. Observers can
view some portion of the Level A
harassment zone, although the view
window would be less than that of the
mortality zone (a large percentage
would be behind or to the side of the
camera view).
If the high-definition video cameras
are not operational for any reason, Eglin
AFB will not conduct Maritime WSEP
missions.
In addition to the two types of visual
monitoring discussed earlier in this
section, Eglin AFB personnel are
present within the mission area (on
boats and the GRATV) on each day of
testing well in advance of weapon
deployment, typically near sunrise.
They will perform a variety of tasks
including target preparation, equipment
checks, etc., and will opportunistically
observe for marine mammals and
indicators as feasible throughout test
preparation. However, we consider
these observations as supplemental to
the proposed mitigation monitoring and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
would only occur as time and schedule
permits. Eglin AFB personnel would
relay information on these types of
sightings to the Lead Biologist, as
described in the following mitigation
sections.
Pre-Mission Monitoring
The purposes of pre-mission
monitoring are to: (1) Evaluate the
mission site for environmental
suitability, and (2) verify that the ZOI
(in this case, 5 km [3.1 mi]) is free of
visually detectable marine mammals, as
well as potential indicators of these
species. On the morning of the mission,
the Test Director and Safety Officer will
confirm that there are no issues that
would preclude mission execution and
that weather is adequate to support
mitigation measures.
Sunrise or Two Hours Prior to Mission
Eglin AFB range clearing vessels and
protected species survey vessels will be
on site at least two hours prior to the
mission. The Lead Biologist on board
one survey vessel will assess the overall
suitability of the mission site based on
environmental conditions (sea state) and
presence/absence of marine mammal
indicators. Eglin AFB personnel will
communicate this information to Tower
Control and personnel will relay the
information to the Safety Officer in
Central Control Facility.
One and One-Half Hours Prior to
Mission
Vessel-based surveys will begin
approximately one and one-half hours
prior to live weapons deployment.
Surface vessel observers will survey the
ZOI (in this case, 5 km [3.1 mi]) and
relay all marine species and indicator
sightings, including the time of sighting,
GPS location, and direction of travel, if
known, to the Lead Biologist. The lead
biologist will document all sighting
information on report forms which he/
she will submit to Eglin Natural
Resources after each mission. Surveys
would continue for approximately one
hour. During this time, Eglin AFB
personnel in the mission area will also
observe for marine species as feasible. If
marine mammals or indicators are
observed within the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]),
the range will be declared ‘‘fouled,’’ a
term that signifies to mission personnel
that conditions are such that a live
ordnance drop cannot occur (e.g.,
protected species or civilian vessels are
in the mission area). If there are no
observations of marine mammals or
indicators of marine mammals, Eglin
AFB would declare the range clear of
protected species.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7313
One-Half Hour Prior to Mission
At approximately 30 minutes to one
hour prior to live weapon deployment,
marine species observers will be
instructed to leave the mission site and
remain outside the safety zone, which
on average will be 15.28 km (9.5 mi)
from the detonation point. The actual
size is determined by weapon net
explosive weight and method of
delivery. The survey team will continue
to monitor for protected species while
leaving the area. As the survey vessels
leave the area, marine species
monitoring of the immediate target areas
will continue at the Central Control
Facility through the live video feed
received from the high definition
cameras on the GRATV. Once the
survey vessels have arrived at the
perimeter of the safety zone
(approximately 30 minutes after leaving
the area per instructions from Eglin
AFB, depending on actual travel time),
Eglin AFB will declare the range as
‘‘green’’ and the mission will proceed,
assuming all non-participating vessels
have left the safety zone as well.
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, or cancel the mission. Eglin
AFB would postpone the mission if:
• Any of the high-definition video
cameras are not operational for any
reason;
• Any marine mammal is visually
detected within the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]).
Postponement would continue until the
animal(s) that caused the postponement
is: (1) confirmed to be outside of the ZOI
(5 km [3.1 mi]) on a heading away from
the targets; or (2) not seen again for 30
minutes and presumed to be outside the
ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]) due to the animal
swimming out of the range;
• Any large schools of fish or large
flocks of birds feeding at the surface are
within the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]).
Postponement would continue until
Eglin AFB personnel confirm that these
potential indicators are outside the ZOI
(5 km [3.1 mi]):
• Any technical or mechanical issues
related to the aircraft or target boats; or
• Any non-participating vessel enters
the human safety zone prior to weapon
release.
In the event of a postponement,
protected species monitoring would
continue from the Central Control
Facility through the live video feed.
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
7314
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Post-Mission Monitoring
Post-mission monitoring determines
the effectiveness of pre-mission
mitigation by reporting sightings of any
marine mammals. Post-detonation
monitoring surveys will commence once
the mission has ended or, if required, as
soon as personnel declare the mission
area safe. Vessels will move into the
survey area from outside the safety zone
and monitor for at least 30 minutes,
concentrating on the area down-current
of the test site. This area is easily
identifiable because of the floating
debris in the water from impacted
targets. Up to 10 Eglin AFB support
vessels will be cleaning debris and
collecting damaged targets from this
area thus spending several hours in the
area once Eglin AFB completes the
mission. Observers will document and
report any marine mammal species,
number, location, and behavior of any
animals observed to Eglin Natural
Resources.
Mission Delays Due to Weather
Eglin AFB would delay or reschedule
Maritime WSEP missions if the Beaufort
sea state is greater than number 4 at the
time of the testing activities. The Lead
Biologist aboard one of the survey
vessels will make the final
determination of whether conditions are
conducive for sighting protected species
or not.
We have carefully evaluated Eglin
AFB’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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
number at biologically important time
or location) exposed to stimuli expected
to result in incidental take (this goal
may contribute to 1, above, or to
reducing takes by behavioral harassment
only).
3. A reduction in the number of times
(total number or number at biologically
important time or location) individuals
would be exposed to stimuli 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 training exercises that we
expect to result in the take of marine
mammals (this goal may contribute to 1,
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 our evaluation of Eglin
AFB’s proposed measures, as well as
other measures that may be relevant to
the specified activity, we have
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. while also
considering personnel safety,
practicality of implementation, and the
impact of effectiveness of the military
readiness activity.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an Authorization for
an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that we must set forth
‘‘requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such
taking.’’ The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13)
indicate that requests for an
authorization must include the
suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that
will result in increased knowledge of
the species and our expectations of the
level of taking or impacts on
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
populations of marine mammals present
in the proposed action area.
Eglin AFB submitted a marine
mammal monitoring plan in their
Authorization application. We have not
modified or supplemented the plan
based on comments or new information
received from the public during the
public comment period. Any monitoring
requirement we prescribe should
improve our understanding of one or
more of the following:
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species in action area (e.g., presence,
abundance, distribution, density).
• Nature, scope, or context of likely
marine mammal exposure to potential
stressors/impacts (individual or
cumulative, acute or chronic), through
better understanding of: (1) Action or
environment (e.g., source
characterization, propagation, ambient
noise); (2) Affected species (e.g., life
history, dive patterns); (3) Cooccurrence of marine mammal species
with the action; or (4) Biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age,
calving or feeding areas).
• Individual responses to acute
stressors, or impacts of chronic
exposures (behavioral or physiological).
• How anticipated responses to
stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
fitness and survival of an individual; or
(2) Population, species, or stock.
• Effects on marine mammal habitat
and resultant impacts to marine
mammals.
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
The Authorization for Maritime WSEP
operations will require the following
measures. They are:
(1) Eglin AFB will track the use of the
EGTTR for test firing missions and
protected species observations, through
the use of mission reporting forms.
(2) Eglin AFB will submit a summary
report of marine mammal observations
and Maritime WSEP activities to the
NMFS Southeast Regional Office (SERO)
and the Office of Protected Resources 90
days after expiration of the current
Authorization. This report must include
the following information: (i) Date and
time of each Maritime WSEP exercise;
(ii) a complete description of the preexercise and post-exercise activities
related to mitigating and monitoring the
effects of Maritime WSEP exercises on
marine mammal populations; and (iii)
results of the Maritime WSEP exercise
monitoring, including number of marine
mammals (by species) that may have
been harassed due to presence within
the activity zone.
(3) Eglin AFB will monitor for marine
mammals in the proposed action area. If
Eglin AFB personnel observe or detect
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
any dead or injured marine mammals
prior to testing, or detects any injured or
dead marine mammal during live fire
exercises, Eglin AFB must cease
operations and submit a report to NMFS
within 24 hours.
(4) Eglin AFB must immediately
report any unauthorized takes of marine
mammals (i.e., serious injury or
mortality) to NMFS and to the
respective Southeast Region stranding
network representative. Eglin AFB must
cease operations and submit a report to
NMFS within 24 hours.
Monitoring Results From Previously
Authorized Activities
Eglin AFB complied with the
mitigation and monitoring required
under the previous Authorization for
2015 WSEP activities. Marine mammal
monitoring occurred before, during, and
after each Maritime WSEP mission.
During the course of these activities,
Eglin AFB’s monitoring did not suggest
that they had exceeded the take levels
authorized under Authorization. In
accordance with the 2015
Authorization, Eglin AFB submitted a
monitoring report (available at:
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/military.htm).
Under the 2015 Authorization, Eglin
AFB anticipated conducting Maritime
WSEP training missions over
approximately two to three weeks, but
actually conducted a total of eight
mission days: four days (February 9, 10,
11, and 12, 2015) associated with inert
ordnance delivery and four days (March
16, 17, 18, and 19, 2015) associated with
live ordnance delivery.
During the February 2015 missions,
Eglin AFB released two inert CBU–105s
in air which resulted in no acoustic
impacts to marine mammals. The CBU–
105 is a cluster bomb unit that detonates
in air (airburst), contains 10
submunition cylinders with each
cylinder containing four subsubmunitions (skeets) which fire inert
projectiles.
During the March 2015 live fire
missions, Eglin AFB expended four
AGM–65 Mavericks and six AGM–114
Hellfire missiles against remotelycontrolled boats approximately 27 km
(17 mi) offshore Santa Rosa Island, FL.
Net explosive weights of the munitions
that detonated at the water surface or up
to 3 m (10 ft) below the surface are 86
lbs for the AGM–65 Maverick missiles
and 13 pounds for the AGM–114
Hellfire missiles. Eglin AFB conducted
the required monitoring for marine
mammals or indicators of marine
mammals (e.g., flocks of birds, baitfish
schools, or large fish schools) before,
during, and after each mission and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
observed only two species of marine
mammals: the common bottlenose
dolphin and Atlantic spotted dolphin.
Total protected species observed during
pre-mission surveys ranged between 149
and 156 individuals and Eglin AFB
confirmed that marine mammals were
outside of the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]) at the
conclusion of each pre-mission survey.
For one mission day (March 17, 2015),
Eglin AFB personnel extended the
duration of the pre-mission surveys to
continue to monitoring a pod of 10
bottlenose dolphins until the vessel
captain could confirm that the pod
remained outside the ZOI (5 km [3.1
mi]) and did not change travel direction.
Eglin AFB delayed weapons delivery as
required by the Authorization. Eglin
AFB continued with their mission
activities after all animals cleared the
ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]).
After each mission, Eglin AFB reentered the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]) to begin
post-mission surveys for marine
mammals and debris-clean-up
operations. Eglin AFB personnel did not
observe reactions indicative of
disturbance during the pre-mission
surveys and did not observe any marine
mammals during the post-mission
surveys. In summary, Eglin AFB reports
that no observable instances of take of
marine mammals occurred incidental to
the Maritime WSEP training activities
under the 2015 Authorization.
Estimated Numbers of Marine
Mammals Taken by Harassment
The NDAA 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].
NMFS’ analysis identified the
physiological responses, and behavioral
responses that could potentially result
from exposure to underwater explosive
detonations. In this section, we will
relate the potential effects to marine
mammals from underwater detonation
of explosives to the MMPA regulatory
definitions of Level A and Level B
harassment. This section will also
quantify the effects that might occur
from the proposed military readiness
activities in W–151.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7315
At NMFS’ recommendation, Eglin
AFB updated the thresholds used for
onset of temporary threshold shift (TTS;
Level B Harassment) and onset of
permanent threshold shift (PTS; Level A
Harassment) to be consistent with the
thresholds outlined in the Navy’s report
titled, ‘‘Criteria and Thresholds for U.S.
Navy Acoustic and Explosive Effects
Analysis Technical Report,’’ which the
Navy coordinated with NMFS. NMFS
believes that the thresholds outlined in
the Navy’s report represent the best
available science. The report is available
on the Internet at: https://aftteis.com/
Portals/4/aftteis/
Supporting%20Technical%20
Documents/Criteria_and_Thresholds_
for_US_Navy_Acoustic_and_Explosive_
Effects_Analysis-Apr_2012.pdf.
Level B Harassment
Of the potential effects described
earlier in this document, the following
are the types of effects that fall into the
Level B harassment category:
Behavioral Harassment—Behavioral
disturbance that rises to the level
described in the above definition, when
resulting from exposures to nonimpulsive or impulsive sound, is Level
B harassment. Some of the lower level
physiological stress responses discussed
earlier would also likely co-occur with
the predicted harassments, although
these responses are more difficult to
detect and fewer data exist relating
these responses to specific received
levels of sound. When predicting Level
B harassment based on estimated
behavioral responses, those takes may
have a stress-related physiological
component.
Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS)—As
discussed previously, TTS can affect
how an animal behaves in response to
the environment, including
conspecifics, predators, and prey. NMFS
classifies TTS (when resulting from
exposure to explosives and other
impulsive sources) as Level B
harassment, not Level A harassment
(injury).
Level A Harassment
Of the potential effects that were
described earlier, the following are the
types of effects that fall into the Level
A Harassment category:
Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS)—
PTS (resulting either from exposure to
explosive detonations) is irreversible
and NMFS considers this to be an
injury.
Table 5 in this document outlines the
acoustic thresholds used by NMFS for
this Authorization when addressing
noise impacts from explosives.
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
7316
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
TABLE 5—IMPULSIVE SOUND EXPLOSIVE THRESHOLDS USED BY EGLIN AFB IN ITS CURRENT ACOUSTICS IMPACTS
MODELING
Behavior
Slight injury
Group
GastroIntestinal
Tract
Behavioral
Mid-frequency
Cetaceans.
TTS
PTS
167 dB SEL
172 dB SEL or
23 psi.
187 dB SEL or
45.86 psi.
Eglin AFB modeled that all explosives
would detonate at a 1.2 m (3.9 ft) water
depth despite the training goal of hitting
the target, resulting in an above water or
on land explosion. For sources
Mortality
Lung
104 psi ......
39.1 M1/3 (1+[DRm/10.081])1/2
Pa-sec Where: M = mass
of the animals in kg DRm =
depth of the receiver (animal) in meters.
detonated at shallow depths, it is
frequently the case that the explosion
may breech the surface with some of the
acoustic energy escaping the water
column. Table 6 provides the estimated
91.4 M1/3 (1+DRm/10.081])1/2
Pa-sec Where: M = mass
of the animals in kg DRm =
depth of the receiver (animal) in meters
maximum range or radius, from the
detonation point to the various
thresholds described in Table 5.
TABLE 6—DISTANCES (m) TO HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS FROM EGLIN AFB’S EXPLOSIVE ORDNANCE
Mortality
NEW
(lbs)
Munition
Total
#
Detonation
scenario
Modified
Goertner
Model 1
Level A harassment
Slight
Lung
Injury
GI
Track
Injury
Modified
Goertner
Model 2
237 dB
SPL
Level B harassment
TTS
Behavioral
PTS
187 dB
SEL
230 dB
peak
SPL
172 dB
SEL
224 dB
peak SPL
167 dB
SEL
Bottlenose Dolphin
GBU–10 or GBU–24 ...
GBU–12 or GBU–54 ...
AGM–65 (Maverick) ....
GBU–39 (LSDB) .........
AGM–114 (Hellfire) .....
AGM–175 (Griffin) .......
2.75 Rockets ...............
PGU–13 HEI 30 mm ...
945
192
86
37
20
13
12
0.1
2
6
6
4
15
10
100
1,000
Surface ..............
Surface ..............
Surface ..............
Surface ..............
(10 ft depth) .......
Surface ..............
Surface ..............
Surface ..............
199
111
82
59
110
38
36
0
350
233
177
128
229
83
81
7
340
198
150
112
95
79
77
16
965
726
610
479
378
307
281
24
698
409
312
234
193
165
161
33
1,582
2,027
1,414
1,212
2,070
1,020
1,010
247
1,280
752
575
433
354
305
296
60
2,549
2,023
1,874
1,543
3,096
1,343
1,339
492
698
409
312
234
193
165
161
33
1,582
2,027
1,414
1,212
2,070
1,020
1,010
247
1,280
752
575
433
354
305
296
60
2,549
2,023
1,874
1,543
3,096
1,343
1,339
492
Atlantic Spotted Dolphin and Unidentified Dolphin 1
GBU–10 or GBU–24 ...
GBU–12 or GBU–54 ...
AGM–65 (Maverick) ....
GBU–39 (LSDB) .........
AGM–114 (Hellfire) .....
AGM–175 (Griffin) .......
2.75 Rockets ...............
PGU–13 HEI 30 mm ...
945
192
86
37
20
13
12
0.1
2
6
6
4
15
10
100
1,000
Surface ..............
Surface ..............
Surface ..............
Surface ..............
(10 ft depth) .......
Surface ..............
Surface ..............
Surface ..............
237
138
101
73
135
47
45
0
400
274
216
158
277
104
100
9
340
198
150
112
95
79
77
16
965
726
610
479
378
307
281
24
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGM = air-to-ground missile; cal = caliber; CBU = Cluster Bomb Unit; ft = feet; GBU = Guided Bomb Unit; HEI = high explosive incendiary; lbs = pounds; mm =
millimeters; N/A = not applicable; NEW = net explosive weight; PGU = Projectile Gun Unit; SDB = small diameter bomb; PTS = permanent threshold shift; TTS = temporary threshold shift; WCMD = wind corrected munition dispenser.
1 Unidentified dolphin can be either bottlenose or Atlantic spotted dolphin. Eglin AFB based the mortality and slight lung injury criteria on the mass of a newborn Atlantic spotted dolphin.
Eglin AFB uses the distance
information shown in Table 6 to
calculate the radius of impact for a
given threshold from a single detonation
of each munition/detonation scenario,
then combine the calculated impact
radii with density estimates (adjusted
for depth distribution) and the number
of live munitions to provide an estimate
of the number of marine mammals
potentially exposed to the various
impact thresholds. The ranges presented
in Table 6 represent a radius of impact
for a given threshold from a single
detonation of each munition/detonation
scenario. They do not consider
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
accumulated energies from multiple
detonation occurring within the same
24-hour time period.
Density Estimation
Density estimates for bottlenose
dolphin and spotted dolphin were
derived from two sources (see Table 7).
NMFS provided detailed information on
Eglin AFB’s derivation of density
estimates for the common bottlenose
and Atlantic spotted dolphins in a
previous Federal Register notice for a
proposed Authorization to Eglin AFB
for the same activities (79 FR 72631,
December 8, 2014). The information
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
presented in that notice has not changed
and NMFS refers the reader to Section
3 of Eglin AFB’s application for detailed
information on all equations used to
calculate densities presented in Table 7.
TABLE 7—MARINE MAMMAL DENSITY
ESTIMATES WITHIN EGLIN AFB’S
EGTTR
Species
Bottlenose dolphin 1 ..............
Atlantic spotted dolphin 2 ......
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
Density
(animals/km2)
1.194
0.265
7317
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
TABLE 7—MARINE MAMMAL DENSITY
ESTIMATES WITHIN EGLIN AFB’S
EGTTR—Continued
Species
Unidentified bottlenose dolphin/Atlantic spotted dolphin 2 .................................
Density
(animals/km2)
0.009
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).
Take Estimation
NMFS recalculated the takes
proposed in previous notice for the
proposed Authorization (80 FR 7984,
December 23, 2015) based upon the
Commission’s recommendations to
eliminate the double counting of the
estimated take for each species and
appropriately rounding take estimates
before summing the total take. Table 8
indicates the modeled potential for
lethality, injury, and non-injurious
harassment (including behavioral
harassment) to marine mammals in the
absence of mitigation measures. Eglin
AFB and NMFS estimate that
approximately 14 marine mammals
could be exposed to injurious Level A
harassment noise levels (187 dB SEL)
and approximately 671 animals could
be exposed to Level B harassment (TTS
and Behavioral) noise levels in the
absence of mitigation measures.
TABLE 8—MODELED NUMBER OF MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY MARITIME WSEP OPERATIONS
Species
Level A
Harassment
(PTS only)
Mortality
Level B
Harassment
(TTS)
Level B
Harassment
(Behavioral)
0
0
0
14
0
0
255
23
0
353
40
0
Total ..........................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Bottlenose dolphin ...........................................................................................
Atlantic spotted dolphin ...................................................................................
Unidentified bottlenose dolphin/Atlantic spotted dolphin .................................
0
14
278
393
Based on the mortality exposure
estimates calculated by the acoustic
model, zero marine mammals are
expected to be affected by pressure
levels associated with mortality or
serious injury. Zero marine mammals
are expected to be exposed to pressure
levels associated with slight lung injury
or gastrointestinal tract injury.
NMFS generally considers PTS to fall
under the injury category (Level A
Harassment). An animal would need to
stay very close to the sound source for
an extended amount of time to incur a
serious degree of PTS, which could
increase the probability of mortality. In
this case, it would be highly unlikely for
this scenario to unfold given the nature
of any anticipated acoustic exposures
that could potentially result from a
mobile marine mammal that NMFS
generally expects to exhibit avoidance
behavior to loud sounds within the
EGTTR.
NMFS has relied on the best available
scientific information to support the
issuance of Eglin AFB’s authorization.
In the case of authorizing Level A
harassment, NMFS has estimated that
no more than 14 bottlenose dolphins
and no Atlantic spotted dolphins could,
although unlikely, experience minor
permanent threshold shifts of hearing
sensitivity (PTS). The available data and
analyses, as described more fully in a
previous notice for a proposed
Authorization (80 FR 7984, December
23, 2015) and this notice include
extrapolation results of many studies on
marine mammal noise-induced
temporary threshold shifts of hearing
sensitivities. An extensive review of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
TTS studies and experiments prompted
NMFS to conclude that possibility of
minor PTS in the form of slight upward
shift of hearing threshold at certain
frequency bands by a few individuals of
marine mammals is extremely low, but
not unlikely.
Negligible Impact Analysis 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.’’ A negligible
impact finding is based on the lack of
likely adverse effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of Level B harassment takes alone is not
enough information on which to base an
impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of
marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’
through behavioral harassment, we
consider 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.
To avoid repetition, the discussion
below applies to all the species listed in
Table 8 for which we propose to
authorize incidental take for Eglin
AFB’s activities.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
In making a negligible impact
determination, we consider:
• The number of anticipated injuries,
serious injuries, or mortalities;
• The number, nature, and intensity,
and duration of Level B harassment;
• The context in which the takes
occur (e.g., impacts to areas of
significance, impacts to local
populations, and cumulative impacts
when taking into account successive/
contemporaneous actions when added
to baseline data);
• The status of stock or species of
marine mammals (i.e., depleted, not
depleted, decreasing, increasing, stable,
impact relative to the size of the
population);
• Impacts on habitat affecting rates of
recruitment/survival; and
• The effectiveness of monitoring and
mitigation measures to reduce the
number or severity of incidental take.
For reasons stated previously in this
document and based on the following
factors, Eglin AFB’s specified activities
are not likely to cause long-term
behavioral disturbance, serious injury,
or death.
The takes from Level B harassment
would be due to potential behavioral
disturbance and TTS. The takes from
Level A harassment would be due to
some form of PTS. Activities would
only occur over a timeframe of two to
three weeks in beginning in February
2016, 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.
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
7318
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
Noise-induced threshold shifts (TS,
which includes PTS) are defined as
increases in the threshold of audibility
(i.e., the sound has to be louder to be
detected) of the ear at a certain
frequency or range of frequencies (ANSI
1995; Yost 2000). Several important
factors relate to the magnitude of TS,
such as level, duration, spectral content
(frequency range), and temporal pattern
(continuous, intermittent) of exposure
(Yost 2000; Henderson et al. 2008). TS
occurs in terms of frequency range (Hz
or kHz), hearing threshold level (dB), or
both frequency and hearing threshold
level (CDC, 2004).
In addition, there are different degrees
of PTS: ranging from slight/mild to
moderate and from severe to profound
(Clark, 1981). Profound PTS or the
complete loss of the ability to hear in
one or both ears is commonly referred
to as deafness (CDC, 2004; WHO, 2006).
High-frequency PTS, presumably as a
normal process of aging that occurs in
humans and other terrestrial mammals,
has also been demonstrated in captive
cetaceans (Ridgway and Carder, 1997;
Yuen et al. 2005; Finneran et al., 2005;
Houser and Finneran, 2006; Finneran et
al. 2007; Schlundt et al., 2011) and in
stranded individuals (Mann et al.,
2010).
In terms of what is analyzed for the
potential PTS (Level A harassment) in
marine mammals as a result of Eglin
AFB’s Maritime WSEP operations, if it
occurs, NMFS has determined that the
levels would be slight/mild because
research shows that most cetaceans
show relatively high levels of
avoidance. Further, it is uncommon to
sight marine mammals within the target
area, especially for prolonged durations.
Results from monitoring programs
associated other Eglin AFB activities
and for Eglin AFB’s 2015 Maritime
WSEP activities have shown the absence
of marine mammals within the EGTTR
during and after maritime operations.
Avoidance varies among individuals
and depends on their activities or
reasons for being in the area.
NMFS’ predicted estimates for Level
A harassment take are likely
overestimates of the likely injury that
will occur. NMFS expects that
successful implementation of the
required vessel-based and video-based
mitigation measures would avoid Level
A take in some instances. Also, NMFS
expects that some individuals would
avoid the source at levels expected to
result in injury. Nonetheless, although
NMFS expects that Level A harassment
is unlikely to occur at the numbers
proposed to be authorized, because it is
difficult to quantify the degree to which
the mitigation and avoidance will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
reduce the number of animals that
might incur PTS, we are proposing to
authorize (and analyze) the modeled
number of Level A takes (14), which
does not take the mitigation or
avoidance into consideration. However,
we anticipate that any PTS incurred
because of mitigation and the likely
short duration of exposures, would be in
the form of only a small degree of
permanent threshold shift and not total
deafness.
While animals may be impacted in
the immediate vicinity of the activity,
because of the short duration of the
actual individual explosions themselves
(versus continual sound source
operation) combined with the short
duration of the Maritime WSEP
operations, NMFS has determined that
there will not be a substantial impact on
marine mammals or on the normal
functioning of the nearshore or offshore
Gulf of Mexico ecosystems. We do not
expect that the proposed activity would
impact rates of recruitment or survival
of marine mammals since we do not
expect mortality (which would remove
individuals from the population) or
serious injury to occur. In addition, the
proposed activity would 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
would only occur in a small part of their
overall range, so the impact of any
potential temporary displacement
would be negligible and animals would
be expected to return to the area after
the cessations of activities. Although the
proposed activity could result in Level
A (PTS only, not slight lung injury or
gastrointestinal tract injury) 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 (i.e., four
hours a day or less) and site-specific
nature of the activity. We do not
anticipate that the effects would be
detrimental to rates of recruitment and
survival because we do not expect
serious of extended behavioral
responses that would result in energetic
effects at the level to impact fitness.
Moreover, the mitigation and
monitoring measures proposed for the
Authorization (described earlier in this
document) are expected to further
minimize the potential for harassment.
The protected species surveys would
require Eglin AFB to search the area for
marine mammals, and if any are found
in the live fire area, then the exercise
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
would be suspended until the animal(s)
has left the area or relocated. Moreover,
marine species observers located in the
Eglin control tower would monitor the
high-definition video feed from cameras
located on the instrument barge
anchored on-site for the presence of
protected species. Furthermore,
Maritime WSEP missions would 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,
Maritime WSEP missions would 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
WSEP operations will result in the
incidental take of marine mammals, by
Level A and Level B harassment only,
and that the taking from the Maritime
WSEP 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)
Due to the location of the activity, no
ESA-listed marine mammal species are
likely to be affected; therefore, NMFS
has determined that this proposed
Authorization would have no effect on
ESA-listed species. Therefore, NMFS
has determined that a section 7
consultation under the ESA is not
required for the issuance of an MMPA
Authorization to Eglin AFB.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
In 2015, Eglin AFB provided NMFS
with an EA titled, Maritime Weapon
Systems Evaluation Program (WSEP)
Operational Testing in the Eglin Gulf
Testing and Training Range (EGTTR),
Florida. The EA analyzed the direct,
indirect, and cumulative environmental
impacts of the specified activities on
marine mammals. NMFS, after review
and evaluation of the Eglin AFB EA for
consistency with the regulations
published by the Council of
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 28 / Thursday, February 11, 2016 / Notices
Environmental Quality (CEQ) and
NOAA Administrative Order 216–6,
Environmental Review Procedures for
Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, adopted the
EA. After considering the EA, the
information in the 2014 IHA
application, and the Federal Register
notice, as well as public comments,
NMFS has determined that the issuance
of the 2015 Authorization was not likely
to result in significant impacts on the
human environment; adopted Eglin
AFB’s EA under 40 CFR 1506.3; and
issued a FONSI statement on issuance of
an Authorization under section
101(a)(5) of the MMPA.
In accordance with NOAA
Administrative Order 216–6
(Environmental Review Procedures for
Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, May 20,
1999), NMFS will again review the
information contained in Eglin AFB’s
EA and determine whether the EA
accurately and completely describes the
preferred action alternative and the
potential impacts on marine mammals.
Based on this review and analysis,
NMFS has reaffirmed the 2015 FONSI
statement on issuance of an annual
authorization under section 101(a)(5) of
the MMPA or supplement the EA if
necessary.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations,
NMFS has issued an Incidental
Harassment Authorization to Eglin AFB
for conducting Maritime WSEP
activities, for a period of one year from
the date of issuance, provided the
previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements
are incorporated.
Dated: February 8, 2016.
Perry F. Gayaldo,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–02801 Filed 2–10–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
RIN 0648–XE282
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Rocky Intertidal
Monitoring Surveys Along the Oregon
and California Coasts
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Feb 10, 2016
Jkt 238001
Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
ACTION:
In accordance with the
regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as
amended, notification is hereby given
that we have issued an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to the
Partnership for Interdisciplinary Study
of Coastal Oceans (PISCO) at the
University of California (UC) Santa Cruz
for an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to take three
species of marine mammals, by
harassment, incidental to rocky
intertidal monitoring surveys.
DATES: This authorization is effective
from February 3, 2016, through
February 2, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Pauline, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Availability
An electronic copy of PISCO’s
application and supporting documents,
as well as a list of the references cited
in this document, may be obtained by
visiting the Internet at:
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/research.htm. In case of
problems accessing these documents,
please call the contact listed above (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
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
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7319
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
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. 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 August 10, 2015 NMFS received
an application from PISCO for the
taking of marine mammals incidental to
rocky intertidal monitoring surveys
along the Oregon and California coasts.
NMFS determined that the application
was adequate and complete on October
9, 2015. In December 2012, NMFS
issued a 1-year IHA to PISCO to take
marine mammals incidental to these
same proposed activities (77 FR 72327,
December 5, 2012). In December 2013,
NMFS issued a second 1-year IHA to
PISCO to take marine mammals
incidental to these same proposed
activities (78 FR 79403, December 30,
2013). The 2013 IHA expired on
December 16, 2014. A third IHA was
issued to PISCO with an effective date
of December 17, 2014 (79 FR 73048,
December 9, 2014) to take animals for
these identical activities and expires on
December 16, 2015. The IHA announced
in this notice is valid from February 3,
2016 through February 2, 2017.
The research group at UC Santa Cruz
operates in collaboration with two largescale marine research programs: PISCO
and the Multi-agency Rocky Intertidal
Network (MARINe). The research group
at UC Santa Cruz (PISCO) is responsible
for many of the ongoing rocky intertidal
monitoring programs along the Pacific
coast. Monitoring occurs at rocky
intertidal sites, often large bedrock
benches, from the high intertidal to the
water’s edge. Long-term monitoring
E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM
11FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 28 (Thursday, February 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7307-7319]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02801]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XE343
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the U.S. Air Force Conducting
Maritime Weapon Systems Evaluation Program Operational Testing Within
the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)
implementing regulations, NMFS, we, hereby give notice that we have
issued an Incidental Harassment Authorization (Authorization) to the
U.S. Air Force, Eglin Air Force Base (Eglin AFB), to take two species
of marine mammals, the Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)
and Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis), by harassment,
incidental to a Maritime Weapon Systems Evaluation Program (Maritime
WSEP) within the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range in the Gulf of
Mexico from February 4, 2016 through February 3, 2017. Eglin AFB's
activities are military readiness activities per the MMPA, as amended
by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2004.
DATES: Effective February 4, 2016, through February 3, 2017.
ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the final Authorization, Eglin AFB's
application and their final Environmental Assessment (EA) titled,
``Maritime Weapons System Evaluation Program are available by writing
to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910; by telephoning the contacts listed
here, or by visiting the internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/military.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeannine Cody, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act
of 1972, as amended (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 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 for incidental takings for marine mammals shall be
granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on
the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on
the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting of such taking
are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103
as ``an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.''
The National Defense Authorization Act of 2004 (NDAA; Pub. L. 108-
136) removed the ``small numbers'' and ``specified geographical
region'' limitations indicated earlier 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
On February 5, 2015, we issued an Authorization to Eglin AFB to
take marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to a Maritime Weapon
Systems Evaluation Program (Maritime WSEP) within the Eglin Gulf Test
and Training Range (EGTTR) in the Gulf of Mexico from February through
April 2015 (see 80 FR 17394, April 1, 2015). Eglin AFB conducted the
Maritime WSEP training activities between February 9-12, and March 16-
19, 2015. However, due to unavailability of some of the live munitions,
Eglin AFB released only 1.05 percent of the munitions proposed for the
2015 military readiness activities. On May 28, 2015, we received a
renewal request for an Authorization from Eglin AFB to complete the
missions authorized in 2015. Following the initial application
submission, Eglin AFB submitted a revised version of the renewal
request on December 3, 2015. We considered the revised renewal request
as adequate and complete on December 10, 2015 and published a notice of
proposed Authorization on December 23, 2015 (80 FR 79843). The notice
afforded the public a 30-day comment period on the proposed MMPA
Authorization.
Eglin AFB proposes to conduct Maritime WESP missions within the
EGTTR airspace over the Gulf of Mexico, specifically within Warning
Area 151 (W-151). The proposed Maritime WSEP training activities would
occur February through April (spring) in the daytime; however, the
activities could occur between February 2016 and February 2017.
Eglin AFB proposes to use multiple types of live munitions (e.g.,
gunnery rounds, rockets, missiles, and bombs) against small boat
targets in the EGTTR. These activities qualify as a military readiness
activities under the MMPA and NDAA.
[[Page 7308]]
The following aspects of the proposed Maritime WSEP training
activities have the potential to take marine mammals: exposure to
impulsive noise and pressure waves generated by live ordnance
detonation at or near the surface of the water. Take, by Level B
harassment of individuals of common bottlenose dolphin or Atlantic
spotted dolphin could potentially result from the specified activity.
Additionally, although NMFS does not expect it to occur, Eglin AFB has
also requested authorization for Level A Harassment of a small number
of individuals of either common bottlenose dolphins or Atlantic spotted
dolphins. Therefore, Eglin AFB has requested authorization to take
individuals of two cetacean species by Level A and Level B harassment.
Eglin AFB's Maritime WSEP training activities may potentially
impact marine mammals at or near the water surface in the absence of
mitigation. Marine mammals could potentially be harassed, injured, or
killed by exploding projectiles. However, based on analyses provided in
Eglin AFB's 2015 Authorization renewal request; 2014 application; 2015
Environmental Assessment (EA); the 2015 monitoring report for the
authorized activities conducted in February and March 2015; and for
reasons discussed later in this document, we do not anticipate that
Eglin AFB's Maritime WSEP activities would result in any serious injury
or mortality to marine mammals.
For Eglin AFB, this would be the second issued Authorization
following the Authorization issued effective from February through
April 2015 (80 FR 17394, April 1, 2015). The monitoring report
associated with the 2015 Authorization is available at
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/military.htm and provides
additional environmental information related to proposed issuance of
this Authorization for public review and comment.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
Eglin AFB proposes to conduct live ordnance testing and training in
the Gulf of Mexico as part of the Maritime WSEP operational testing
missions. The Maritime WSEP test objectives are to evaluate maritime
deployment data, evaluate tactics, techniques and procedures, and to
determine the impact of techniques and procedures on combat Air Force
training. The need to conduct this type of testing has developed in
response to increasing threats at sea posed by operations conducted
from small boats which can carry a variety of weapons; can form in
large or small numbers; and may be difficult to locate, track, and
engage in the marine environment. Because of limited Air Force aircraft
and munitions testing on engaging and defeating small boat threats,
Eglin AFB proposes to employ live munitions against boat targets in the
EGTTR in order to continue development of techniques and procedures to
train Air Force strike aircraft to counter small maneuvering surface
vessels. Thus, the Department of Defense considers the Maritime WSEP
training activities as a high priority for national security.
Dates and Duration
Eglin AFB proposes to schedule the Maritime WSEP training missions
over an approximate three-week period that would begin in early
February 2016. The proposed missions would occur in the spring, on
weekdays, during daytime hours only, with one or two missions occurring
per day. Some minor deviation from Eglin AFB's requested dates is
possible and the proposed Authorization, if issued, would be effective
from February 4, 2016 through February 3, 2017.
Specified Geographic Region
The specific planned mission location is approximately 17 miles
(mi) (27.3 kilometers [km]) offshore from Santa Rosa Island, Florida,
in nearshore waters of the continental shelf in the Gulf of Mexico. All
activities would take place within the EGTTR, defined as the airspace
over the Gulf of Mexico controlled by Eglin AFB, beginning at a point
three nautical miles (nmi) (3.5 miles [mi]; 5.5 kilometers [km]) from
shore. The EGTTR consists of subdivided blocks including Warning Area
151 (W-151) where the proposed activities would occur, specifically in
sub-area W-151A.
NMFS provided detailed descriptions of the activity area in a
previous notice for the proposed Authorization (80 FR 7984, December
23, 2015). The information has not changed between the notice of
proposed Authorization and this final notice announcing the issuance of
the Authorization.
Detailed Description of Activities
The Maritime WSEP training missions, classified as military
readiness activities, include the release of multiple types of inert
and live munitions from fighter and bomber aircraft, unmanned aerial
vehicles, and gunships against small, static, towed, and remotely-
controlled boat targets. Munition types include bombs, missiles,
rockets, and gunnery rounds (Table 1).
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-12 laser-guided Mk-82 bomb............. F-15E fighter aircraft.
GBU-54 Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition A-10 fighter aircraft.
(LJDAM), laser-guided Mk-82 bomb.
CBU-105 (WCMD) (inert)..................... B-1B bomber aircraft.
AGM-65 Maverick air-to-surface missile..... B-52H bomber aircraft.
GBU-38 Small Diameter Bomb II (Laser SDB).. MQ-1/9 unmanned aerial vehicle.
AGM-114 Hellfire air-to-surface missile.... AC-130 gunship.
AGM-176 Griffin air-to-surface missile.....
2.75 Rockets...............................
PGU-13/B high explosive incendiary 30 mm
rounds.
7.62 mm/.50 Cal (inert)....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: AGM = air-to-ground missile; CBU = Cluster Bomb Unit; GBU = Guided Bomb Unit; LJDAM = Laser Joint Direct
Attack Munition; Laser SDB = Laser Small Diameter Bomb; mm = millimeters; PGU = Projectile Gun Unit; WCMD =
wind corrected munition dispenser.
The proposed Maritime WSEP training activities involve detonations
above the water, near the water surface, and under water within the
EGTTR. However, because the tests will focus on weapons/target
interaction, Eglin AFB
[[Page 7309]]
will not specify a particular aircraft for a given test as long as it
meets the delivery parameters.
Eglin AFB would deploy the munitions against static, towed, and
remotely-controlled boat targets within the W-151A. Eglin AFB would
operate the remote-controlled boats from an instrumentation barge
(i.e., the Gulf Range Armament Test Vessel; GRATV) anchored on site
within the test area. The GRATV would provide a platform for video
cameras and weapons-tracking equipment. Eglin AFB would position the
target boats approximately 182.8 m (600 ft) from the GRATV, depending
on the munition type.
Table 2 lists the number, height, or depth of detonation, explosive
material, and net explosive weight (NEW) in pounds (lbs) of each
munition proposed for use during the Maritime WSEP activities.
Table 2--Maritime WSEP Munitions Proposed for use in the W-151A Test Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total # of Warhead--explosive Net explosive
Type of munition live munitions Detonation type material weight per munition
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GBU-10 or GBU-24.............. 2 Surface............. MK-84--Tritonal..... 945 lbs.
GBU-12 or GBU-54 (LJDAM)...... 6 Surface............. MK-82--Tritonal..... 192 lbs.
AGM-65 (Maverick)............. 6 Surface............. WDU-24/B penetrating 86 lbs.
blast-fragmentation
warhead.
CBU-105 (WCMD)................ 4 Airburst............ 10 BLU-108 sub- Inert.
munitions each
containing 4
projectiles
parachute, rocket
motor and altimeter.
GBU-38 (Laser Small Diameter 4 Surface............. AFX-757 (Insensitive 37 lbs.
Bomb). munition).
AGM-114 (Hellfire)............ 15 Subsurface (10 msec High Explosive Anti- 20 lbs.
delay). Tank (HEAT) tandem
anti-armor metal
augmented charge.
AGM-176 (Griffin)............. 10 Surface............. Blast fragmentation. 13 lbs.
2.75 Rockets.................. 100 Surface............. Comp B-4 HEI........ Up to 12 lbs.
PGU-12 HEI 30 mm.............. 1,000 Surface............. 30 x 173 mm caliber 0.1 lbs.
with aluminized RDX
explosive. Designed
for GAU-8/A Gun
System.
7.62 mm/.50 cal............... 5,000 Surface............. N/A................. Inert.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: AGL = above ground level; AGM = air-to-ground missile; CBU = Cluster Bomb Unit; GBU = Guided Bomb Unit;
JDAM = Joint Direct Attack Munition; LJDAM = Laser Joint Direct Attack Munition; mm = millimeters; msec =
millisecond; lbs = pounds; PGU = Projectile Gun Unit; HEI = high explosive incendiary.
At least two ordnance delivery aircraft will participate in each
live weapons release training mission which lasts approximately four
hours. Before delivering the ordnance, mission aircraft would make a
dry run over the target area to ensure that it is clear of commercial
and recreational boats. Jets will fly at a minimum air speed of 300
knots (approximately 345 miles per hour, depending on atmospheric
conditions) and at a minimum altitude of 305 m (1,000 ft). Due to the
limited flyover duration and potentially high speed and altitude, the
pilots would not participate in visual surveys for protected species.
NMFS provided detailed descriptions of the WSEP training operations
in a previous notice for the proposed Authorization (80 FR 7984,
December 23, 2015). This information has not changed between the notice
of proposed Authorization and this final notice announcing the issuance
of the Authorization.
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of Eglin AFB's application and NMFS' proposal
to issue an Authorization to the USAF, Eglin AFB, published in the
Federal Register on December 23, 2015 (80 FR 7984). During the 30-day
public comment period, NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal
Commission (Commission) only. Following are the comments from the
Commission and NMFS' responses.
Comment 1: The Commission notes that Eglin AFB has applied for MMPA
authorizations to take marine mammals on an activity-by-activity basis
(e.g., naval explosive ordnance disposal school, precision strike
weapon, air-to-surface gunnery, and maritime strike operations) rather
than through a programmatic basis. The Commission believes that the
agencies should evaluate the impacts of all training and testing
activities under a single letter of authorization application and
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document rather than
segmenting the analyses based on specific types of missions under
various authorizations.
Response: Both Eglin AFB and NMFS concur with the Commission's
recommendation to streamline the rulemaking process for future
activities conducted within the EGGTR. In 2015, Eglin AFB developed a
Programmatic Environmental Assessment as for all testing and training
activities that would occur in the EGGTR over the next five years.
Eglin AFB has also developed and submitted a request for a Letter of
Authorization under the MMPA to NMFS for all testing and training
activities that would also occur in the EGGTR over the same five year
period. Both of these efforts will facilitate a more comprehensive
review of actions occurring within the EGGTR that have the potential to
take marine mammals incidental to military readiness activities and
NMFS will be able to evaluate the impacts of all training and testing
activities under a single letter of authorization application rather
than segmenting our analyses based on specific types of missions under
separate authorizations.
Comment 2: The Commission states that Eglin AFB overestimated
marine mammal take because they based estimates on a single detonation
event of each munition type which multiplied the number of animals
estimated to be taken by a single detonation event for each munition
type by the total number of munitions that would be detonated,
irrespective of when those detonations would occur. The Commission
states that this method does not consider the accumulation of energy in
a 24-hour period which would more accurately correspond to zones of
exposure for the representative scenario and serve as more a realistic
estimate of the numbers of animals that Eglin AFB could potentially
take during the WSEP
[[Page 7310]]
activities. In estimating take, the Commission commented Eglin AFB's
model approach was an additive process for estimating each zone of
exposure, and thus the associated takes. Effectively, The Commission
states that Eglin AFB overestimated the number of take but is unsure to
what degree. Further, the Commission recommends that Eglin AFB and NMFS
should treat fractions of estimated take appropriately, that is
generally, round down if less than 0.50 and round up if greater than or
equal to 0.50 before summing the estimates for each species.
Response: NMFS and Eglin AFB acknowledge that this approach
contributes to the overestimation of take estimates. Eglin AFB's
modeling approach for take estimates treated each munition detonation
as a separate event impacting a new set of animals which results in a
worst case scenario of potential take and is an overestimate of
potential harassment.
NMFS agrees with the Commission's recommendations and has
recalculated the takes by accounting for the accumulation of energy in
a 24-hour period and by eliminating the double counting of the
estimated take for each species and appropriately rounding take
estimates before summing the total take. Table 8 in this notice
provides the revised number of marine mammals, by species, that Eglin
AFB could potentially take incidental to the conduct of Maritime WSEP
operations. The re-calculation results in zero take by mortality, zero
take by slight lung injury, and zero take by gastrointestinal tract
injury. Compared to the take levels that NMFS previously presented in
the notice for the proposed Authorization (80 FR 7984, December 23,
2015), our re-estimation has reduced take estimates for Level A
harassment (PTS) from 38 to 14 marine mammals. Based on the remodeling
of the number of marine mammals potentially affected by the Maritime
WSEP missions, NMFS would authorize take for Level A and Level B
harassment presented in Table 8 of this notice.
Comment 3: The Commission states that Eglin AFB proposes to use
live-feed video cameras to supplement its effectiveness in detecting
marine mammals when implementing mitigation measures. However, the
Commission is not convinced that those measures are sufficient to
effectively monitor for marine mammals entering the training areas
during the 30 minute timeframe prior to detonation. In addition, the
Commission states that it does not believe that Eglin AFB cannot deem
the Level A harassment zone clear of marine mammals when using only
three video cameras for monitoring. Thus, the Commission recommends
that NMFS require Eglin AFB to supplement its mitigation measures with
passive acoustic monitoring and determine the effectiveness of its
suite of mitigation measures for activities at Eglin prior to
incorporating presumed mitigation effectiveness into its take
estimation analyses or negligible impact determinations.
Response: NMFS has worked closely with Eglin AFB over the past
several Authorization cycles to develop proper mitigation, monitoring,
and reporting requirements designed to minimize and detect impacts from
the specified activities and ensure that NMFS can make the findings
necessary for issuance of an Authorization.
Monitoring also includes vessel-based observers for marine species
up to 30 minutes prior to deploying live munitions in the area. Eglin
AFB has submitted annual reports to NMFS every year that describes all
activities that occur in the EGTTR. In addition, Eglin AFB submitted
annual reports to NMFS at the conclusion of the Maritime Strike
Operations These missions are similar in nature to the proposed
maritime WSEP operations and the Eglin AFB provided information on
sighting information and results from post-mission survey observations.
Based on those results, NMFS determined that the mitigation measures
ensured the least practicable adverse impact to marine mammals. There
were no observations of injured marine mammals and no reports of marine
mammal mortality during the Maritime Strike Operation activities. The
measures proposed for Maritime WSEP are similar, except they will
include larger survey areas based on updated acoustic analysis and
previous discussions with the Commission and NMFS.
Eglin AFB will continue to research the feasibility of
supplementing existing monitoring efforts with passive acoustic
monitoring devices for future missions and is in the process of
discussing alternatives with the Commission and NMFS during the review
of the environmental planning efforts discussed earlier in Comment 1.
Comment 4: 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: NMFS considers PTS to fall under the injury category
(Level A Harassment). However, an animal would need to stay very close
to the sound source for an extended amount of time to incur a serious
degree of PTS, which could increase the probability of mortality. In
this case, it would be highly unlikely for this scenario to unfold
given the nature of any anticipated acoustic exposures that could
potentially result from a mobile marine mammal that NMFS generally
expects to exhibit avoidance behavior to loud sounds within the EGTTR.
NMFS has recalculated the takes presented in the notice for the
proposed Authorization (80 FR 7984, December 23, 2015) and the results
of the recalculation show zero takes for mortality, zero takes by
slight lung injury, and zero takes by gastrointestinal tract injury.
Further, the re-estimation has reduced the number of take by Level A
harassment (from PTS) from 38 to 14. Based on this re-estimation, 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 Incidental Harassment Authorization may be
issued.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
Table 3 lists marine mammal species with potential or confirmed
occurrence in the proposed activity area during the project timeframe
and summarizes key information regarding stock status and abundance.
Please see NMFS' draft 2015 and 2014 Stock Assessment Reports (SAR),
available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars and Garrison et al., 2008; Navy,
2007; Davis et al., 2000 for more detailed accounts of these stocks'
status and abundance.
[[Page 7311]]
Table 3--Marine Mammals That Could Occur in the Proposed Activity Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Relative
Species Stock name status \1\ \2\ Estimated abundance occurrence in W-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------151-------
Common bottlenose dolphin.... Choctawatchee MMPA--S, ESA-- 179, CV = 0.04 \3\........ Uncommon.
Bay. NL.
Pensacola/East MMPA--S, ESA-- 33, CV = 0.80 \4\......... Uncommon.
Bay. NL.
St. Andrew Bay.. MMPA--S, ESA-- 124, CV = 0.57 \4\........ Uncommon.
NL.
Gulf of Mexico MMPA--S, ESA-- 7,185, CV = 0.21 \3\...... Common.
Northern NL.
Coastal.
Northern Gulf of MMPA--NC, ESA-- 51,192, CV = 0.10 \3\..... Uncommon.
Mexico NL.
Continental
Shelf.
Northern Gulf of MMPA--NC, ESA-- 5,806, CV = 0.39 \4\...... Uncommon.
Mexico Oceanic. NL.
Atlantic spotted dolphin..... Northern Gulf of MMPA--NC, ESA-- 37,611 \4\, CV = 0.28..... Common.
Mexico. NL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ MMPA: D = Depleted, S = Strategic, NC = Not Classified.
\2\ ESA: EN = Endangered, T = Threatened, DL = Delisted, NL = Not listed.
\3\ NMFS Draft 2015 SAR (Waring et al., 2015).
\4\ NMFS 2014 SAR (Waring et al., 2014).
An additional 19 cetacean species could occur within the
northeastern Gulf of Mexico, mainly occurring at or beyond the shelf
break (i.e., water depth of approximately 200 m (656.2 ft)) located
beyond the W-151A test area. NMFS and Eglin AFB consider these 19
species to be rare or extralimital within the W-151A test location
area. These species are the Bryde's whale (Balaenoptera edeni), sperm
whale (Physeter macrocephalus), dwarf sperm whale (Kogia sima), pygmy
sperm whale (K. breviceps), pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella
atenuarta), Blainville's beaked whale (Mesoplodon densirostris),
Cuvier's beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris), Gervais' beaked whale (M.
europaeus), Clymene dolphin (S. clymene), spinner dolphin (S.
longirostris), striped dolphin (S. coeruleoalba), killer whale (Orcinus
orca), false killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens), pygmy killer whale
(Feresa attenuata), Risso's dolphin (Grampus griseus), Fraser's dolphin
(Lagenodelphis hosei), melon-headed whale (Peponocephala electra),
rough-toothed dolphin (Steno bredanensis), and short-finned pilot whale
(Globicephala macrorhynchus).
Of these species, only the sperm whale is listed as endangered
under the ESA and as depleted throughout its range under the MMPA.
Sperm whale occurrence within W-151A is unlikely because almost all
reported sightings have occurred in water depths greater than 200 m
(656.2 ft).
Because these species are unlikely to occur within the W-151A area,
Eglin AFB has not requested and NMFS has not issued take authorizations
for them. Thus, NMFS does not consider these species further in this
notice.
Other Marine Mammals in the Proposed Action Area
The endangered West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) rarely
occurs in the area (USAF, 2014). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has
jurisdiction over the manatee; therefore, we would not include a
proposed Authorization to harass manatees and do not discuss this
species further in this notice.
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section of the notice of the proposed Authorization (80 FR
7984, December 23, 2015) included a summary and discussion of the ways
that components (e.g., exposure to impulsive noise and pressure waves
generated by live ordnance detonation at or near the surface of the
water) of the specified activity, including mitigation may impact
marine mammals and their habitat. The ``Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment'' section later in this document will include a quantitative
analysis of the number of individuals that we expect Eglin AFB to take
during this activity. The ``Negligible Impact Analysis'' section will
include the analysis of how this specific activity would impact marine
mammals. We will consider the content of the following sections:
``Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment'' and ``Proposed Mitigation''
to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities 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.
In summary, the Maritime WSEP training exercises proposed for
taking of marine mammals under an Authorization have the potential to
take marine mammals by exposing them to impulsive noise and pressure
waves generated by live ordnance detonation at or near the surface of
the water. Exposure to energy or pressure resulting from these
detonations could result in Level A harassment (PTS) and by Level B
harassment (TTS and behavioral). In addition, NMFS also considered the
potential for harassment from vessel operations.
The potential effects of impulsive sound sources (underwater
detonations) from the proposed training activities may include one or
more of the following: Tolerance, masking, disturbance, hearing
threshold shift, stress response, and mortality. NMFS provided detailed
information on these potential effects in the notice of the proposed
Authorization (80 FR 7984, December 23, 2015). The information
presented in that notice has not changed.
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
Detonations of live ordnance would result in temporary changes to
the water environment. Munitions could hit the targets and not explode
in the water. However, because the targets are located over the water,
in water explosions could occur. An underwater explosion from these
weapons could send a shock wave and blast noise through the water,
release gaseous by-products, create an oscillating bubble, and cause a
plume of water to shoot up from the water surface. However, these
effects would be temporary and not expected to last more than a few
seconds.
Similarly, Eglin AFB does not expect any long-term impacts with
regard to hazardous constituents to occur. Eglin AFB considered the
introduction of fuel, debris, ordnance, and chemical materials into the
water column within its EA and determined the potential effects of each
to be insignificant. Eglin AFB analyzed the potential effects of each
in their EA and determined them
[[Page 7312]]
to be insignificant. NMFS provided a summary of the analyses in the
notice for the proposed Authorization (80 FR 7984, December 23, 2015).
The information presented in that notice has not changed.
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 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 incidental take authorization process such
that ``least practicable adverse impact'' shall include consideration
of personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
NMFS and Eglin AFB have worked to identify potential practicable
and effective mitigation measures, which include a careful balancing of
the likely benefit of any particular measure to the marine mammals with
the likely effect of that measure on personnel safety, practicality of
implementation, and impact on the ``military-readiness activity.'' We
refer the reader to Section 11 of Eglin AFB's application for more
detailed information on the proposed mitigation measures which include
the following:
Vessel-Based Monitoring: Eglin AFB would station a large number of
range clearing boats (approximately 20 to 25) around the test site to
prevent non-participating vessels from entering the human safety zone.
Based on the composite footprint, range clearing boats will be located
approximately (see Figure 11-1 in Eglin AFB's application). However,
the actual distance will vary based on the size of the munition being
deployed.
Trained protected species observers would be aboard five of these
boats and will conduct protected species surveys before and after each
test. The protected species survey vessels will be dedicated solely to
observing for marine species during the pre-mission surveys while the
remaining safety boats clear the area of non-authorized vessels. The
protected species survey vessels will begin surveying the area at
sunrise. The area to be surveyed will encompass the zone of influence
(ZOI), which is 5 km (3.1 mi). Animals that may enter the area after
Eglin AFB has completed the pre-mission surveys and prior to detonation
would not reach the predicted smaller slight lung injury and/or
mortality zones.
Because of human safety issues, observers will be required to leave
the test area at least 30 minutes in advance of live weapon deployment
and move to a position on the safety zone periphery, approximately
15.28 km (9.5 mi) from the detonation point. Observers will continue to
scan for marine mammals from the periphery.
Determination of the Zone of Influence
Eglin AFB has created a sample day reflecting the maximum number of
munitions that could be released and resulting in the greatest impact
in a single mission day. However, this scenario is only a
representation and may not accurately reflect how Eglin AFB may conduct
actual operations. However, NMFS and Eglin AFB are considering this
conservative assumption to calculate the impact range for mitigation
monitoring measures. Thus, Eglin AFB has modeled, combined, and
compared the sum of all energies from these detonations against
thresholds with energy metric criteria to generate the accumulated
energy ranges for this scenario. Table 4 lists these ranges which form
the basis of the mitigation monitoring.
Table 4--Distances (m) to Harassment Thresholds for an Example Mission Day
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A Level B harassment
harassment -------------------------------
Munition NEW (lbs) Total # per Detonation scenario ---------------- TTS Behavioral
day -------------------------------
PTS 187 dB SEL 172 dB SEL 167 dB SEL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GBU-10 or GBU-24.......................... 945 1 Surface..................... 5,120 12,384 15,960
GBU-12 or GBU-54.......................... 192 1 Surface.....................
AGM-65 (Maverick)......................... 86 1 Surface.....................
GBU-39 (LSDB)............................. 37 1 Surface.....................
AGM-114 (Hellfire)........................ 20 3 (10 ft depth)...............
AGM-175 (Griffin)......................... 13 2 Surface.....................
2.75 Rockets.............................. 12 12 Surface.....................
PGU-13 HEI 30 mm.......................... 0.1 125 Surface.....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AGM = air-to-ground missile; cal = caliber; CBU = Cluster Bomb Unit; ft = feet; GBU = Guided Bomb Unit; HEI = high explosive incendiary; lbs = pounds;
mm = millimeters; N/A = not applicable; NEW = net explosive weight; PGU = Projectile Gun Unit; SDB = small diameter bomb; PTS = permanent threshold
shift; TTS = temporary threshold shift; WCMD = wind corrected munition dispenser.
Based on the ranges presented in Table 4 and factoring operational
limitations associated with survey-based vessel support for the
missions, Eglin AFB estimates that during pre-mission surveys, the
proposed monitoring area would be approximately 5 km (3.1 miles) from
the target area, which corresponds to the Level A harassment threshold
range. Eglin AFB proposes to survey the same-sized area for each
mission day, regardless of the planned munition expenditures. By
clearing the Level A harassment threshold range of protected species,
animals that may enter the area after the completed pre-mission surveys
but prior to detonation would not reach the smaller slight lung injury
or mortality zones (presented in Table 6 later in this document).
Because of human safety issues, Eglin AFB would require observers to
leave the test area at least 30 minutes in advance of live weapon
deployment and move to a position on the safety zone periphery,
approximately 15 km (9.5 miles) from the detonation point. Observers
would continue to scan for marine mammals from the periphery, but
effectiveness would be limited as the boat would remain at a designated
station.
Video Monitoring: In addition to vessel-based monitoring, Eglin AFB
[[Page 7313]]
would position three high-definition video cameras on the GRATV
anchored on-site, as described earlier, to allow for real-time
monitoring for the duration of the mission. The camera configuration
and actual number of cameras used would depend on specific mission
requirements. In addition to monitoring the area for mission objective
issues, the camera(s) would also monitor for the presence of protected
species. A trained marine species observer from Eglin Natural Resources
would be located in Eglin AFB's Central Control Facility, along with
mission personnel, to view the video feed before and during test
activities. The distance to which objects can be detected at the water
surface by use of the cameras is considered generally comparable to
that of the human eye.
The GRATV will be located about 183 m (600 ft) from the target. The
larger mortality threshold ranges correspond to the modified Goertner
model adjusted for the weight of an Atlantic spotted dolphin calf, and
extend from 0 to 237 m (0 to 778 ft) from the target, depending on the
ordnance, and the Level A ranges for both common bottlenose and
Atlantic spotted dolphins extend from 7 to 965 m (23 to 3,166 ft) from
the target, depending on the ordnance and harassment criterion. Given
these distances, observers could reasonably be expected to view a
substantial portion of the mortality zone in front of the camera,
although a small portion would be behind or to the side of the camera
view. Based on previous monitoring reports for this activity, the pre-
training surveys for delphinids and other protected species within the
mission area are effective. Observers can view some portion of the
Level A harassment zone, although the view window would be less than
that of the mortality zone (a large percentage would be behind or to
the side of the camera view).
If the high-definition video cameras are not operational for any
reason, Eglin AFB will not conduct Maritime WSEP missions.
In addition to the two types of visual monitoring discussed earlier
in this section, Eglin AFB personnel are present within the mission
area (on boats and the GRATV) on each day of testing well in advance of
weapon deployment, typically near sunrise. They will perform a variety
of tasks including target preparation, equipment checks, etc., and will
opportunistically observe for marine mammals and indicators as feasible
throughout test preparation. However, we consider these observations as
supplemental to the proposed mitigation monitoring and would only occur
as time and schedule permits. Eglin AFB personnel would relay
information on these types of sightings to the Lead Biologist, as
described in the following mitigation sections.
Pre-Mission Monitoring
The purposes of pre-mission monitoring are to: (1) Evaluate the
mission site for environmental suitability, and (2) verify that the ZOI
(in this case, 5 km [3.1 mi]) is free of visually detectable marine
mammals, as well as potential indicators of these species. On the
morning of the mission, the Test Director and Safety Officer will
confirm that there are no issues that would preclude mission execution
and that weather is adequate to support mitigation measures.
Sunrise or Two Hours Prior to Mission
Eglin AFB range clearing vessels and protected species survey
vessels will be on site at least two hours prior to the mission. The
Lead Biologist on board one survey vessel will assess the overall
suitability of the mission site based on environmental conditions (sea
state) and presence/absence of marine mammal indicators. Eglin AFB
personnel will communicate this information to Tower Control and
personnel will relay the information to the Safety Officer in Central
Control Facility.
One and One-Half Hours Prior to Mission
Vessel-based surveys will begin approximately one and one-half
hours prior to live weapons deployment. Surface vessel observers will
survey the ZOI (in this case, 5 km [3.1 mi]) and relay all marine
species and indicator sightings, including the time of sighting, GPS
location, and direction of travel, if known, to the Lead Biologist. The
lead biologist will document all sighting information on report forms
which he/she will submit to Eglin Natural Resources after each mission.
Surveys would continue for approximately one hour. During this time,
Eglin AFB personnel in the mission area will also observe for marine
species as feasible. If marine mammals or indicators are observed
within the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]), the range will be declared ``fouled,''
a term that signifies to mission personnel that conditions are such
that a live ordnance drop cannot occur (e.g., protected species or
civilian vessels are in the mission area). If there are no observations
of marine mammals or indicators of marine mammals, Eglin AFB would
declare the range clear of protected species.
One-Half Hour Prior to Mission
At approximately 30 minutes to one hour prior to live weapon
deployment, marine species observers will be instructed to leave the
mission site and remain outside the safety zone, which on average will
be 15.28 km (9.5 mi) from the detonation point. The actual size is
determined by weapon net explosive weight and method of delivery. The
survey team will continue to monitor for protected species while
leaving the area. As the survey vessels leave the area, marine species
monitoring of the immediate target areas will continue at the Central
Control Facility through the live video feed received from the high
definition cameras on the GRATV. Once the survey vessels have arrived
at the perimeter of the safety zone (approximately 30 minutes after
leaving the area per instructions from Eglin AFB, depending on actual
travel time), Eglin AFB will declare the range as ``green'' and the
mission will proceed, assuming all non-participating vessels have left
the safety zone as well.
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, or
cancel the mission. Eglin AFB would postpone the mission if:
Any of the high-definition video cameras are not
operational for any reason;
Any marine mammal is visually detected within the ZOI (5
km [3.1 mi]). Postponement would continue until the animal(s) that
caused the postponement is: (1) confirmed to be outside of the ZOI (5
km [3.1 mi]) on a heading away from the targets; or (2) not seen again
for 30 minutes and presumed to be outside the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]) due
to the animal swimming out of the range;
Any large schools of fish or large flocks of birds feeding
at the surface are within the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]). Postponement would
continue until Eglin AFB personnel confirm that these potential
indicators are outside the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]):
Any technical or mechanical issues related to the aircraft
or target boats; or
Any non-participating vessel enters the human safety zone
prior to weapon release.
In the event of a postponement, protected species monitoring would
continue from the Central Control Facility through the live video feed.
[[Page 7314]]
Post-Mission Monitoring
Post-mission monitoring determines the effectiveness of pre-mission
mitigation by reporting sightings of any marine mammals. Post-
detonation monitoring surveys will commence once the mission has ended
or, if required, as soon as personnel declare the mission area safe.
Vessels will move into the survey area from outside the safety zone and
monitor for at least 30 minutes, concentrating on the area down-current
of the test site. This area is easily identifiable because of the
floating debris in the water from impacted targets. Up to 10 Eglin AFB
support vessels will be cleaning debris and collecting damaged targets
from this area thus spending several hours in the area once Eglin AFB
completes the mission. Observers will document and report any marine
mammal species, number, location, and behavior of any animals observed
to Eglin Natural Resources.
Mission Delays Due to Weather
Eglin AFB would delay or reschedule Maritime WSEP missions if the
Beaufort sea state is greater than number 4 at the time of the testing
activities. The Lead Biologist aboard one of the survey vessels will
make the final determination of whether conditions are conducive for
sighting protected species or not.
We have carefully evaluated Eglin AFB'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 stimuli
expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1,
above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment only).
3. A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at
biologically important time or location) individuals would be exposed
to stimuli 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 training
exercises that we expect to result in the take of marine mammals (this
goal may contribute to 1, 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 our evaluation of Eglin AFB's proposed measures, as well
as other measures that may be relevant to the specified activity, we
have 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. while also
considering personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and the
impact of effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an Authorization for an activity, section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that we must set forth ``requirements
pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking.'' The MMPA
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that
requests for an authorization must include the suggested means of
accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result
in increased knowledge of the species and our expectations of the level
of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals present in the
proposed action area.
Eglin AFB submitted a marine mammal monitoring plan in their
Authorization application. We have not modified or supplemented the
plan based on comments or new information received from the public
during the public comment period. Any monitoring requirement we
prescribe should improve our understanding of one or more of the
following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species in action area (e.g.,
presence, abundance, distribution, density).
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
Affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) Co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) Biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas).
Individual responses to acute stressors, or impacts of
chronic exposures (behavioral or physiological).
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of an individual; or (2) Population,
species, or stock.
Effects on marine mammal habitat and resultant impacts to
marine mammals.
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
The Authorization for Maritime WSEP operations will require the
following measures. They are:
(1) Eglin AFB will track the use of the EGTTR for test firing
missions and protected species observations, through the use of mission
reporting forms.
(2) Eglin AFB will submit a summary report of marine mammal
observations and Maritime WSEP activities to the NMFS Southeast
Regional Office (SERO) and the Office of Protected Resources 90 days
after expiration of the current Authorization. This report must include
the following information: (i) Date and time of each Maritime WSEP
exercise; (ii) a complete description of the pre-exercise and post-
exercise activities related to mitigating and monitoring the effects of
Maritime WSEP exercises on marine mammal populations; and (iii) results
of the Maritime WSEP exercise monitoring, including number of marine
mammals (by species) that may have been harassed due to presence within
the activity zone.
(3) Eglin AFB will monitor for marine mammals in the proposed
action area. If Eglin AFB personnel observe or detect
[[Page 7315]]
any dead or injured marine mammals prior to testing, or detects any
injured or dead marine mammal during live fire exercises, Eglin AFB
must cease operations and submit a report to NMFS within 24 hours.
(4) Eglin AFB must immediately report any unauthorized takes of
marine mammals (i.e., serious injury or mortality) to NMFS and to the
respective Southeast Region stranding network representative. Eglin AFB
must cease operations and submit a report to NMFS within 24 hours.
Monitoring Results From Previously Authorized Activities
Eglin AFB complied with the mitigation and monitoring required
under the previous Authorization for 2015 WSEP activities. Marine
mammal monitoring occurred before, during, and after each Maritime WSEP
mission. During the course of these activities, Eglin AFB's monitoring
did not suggest that they had exceeded the take levels authorized under
Authorization. In accordance with the 2015 Authorization, Eglin AFB
submitted a monitoring report (available at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/military.htm).
Under the 2015 Authorization, Eglin AFB anticipated conducting
Maritime WSEP training missions over approximately two to three weeks,
but actually conducted a total of eight mission days: four days
(February 9, 10, 11, and 12, 2015) associated with inert ordnance
delivery and four days (March 16, 17, 18, and 19, 2015) associated with
live ordnance delivery.
During the February 2015 missions, Eglin AFB released two inert
CBU-105s in air which resulted in no acoustic impacts to marine
mammals. The CBU-105 is a cluster bomb unit that detonates in air
(airburst), contains 10 submunition cylinders with each cylinder
containing four sub-submunitions (skeets) which fire inert projectiles.
During the March 2015 live fire missions, Eglin AFB expended four
AGM-65 Mavericks and six AGM-114 Hellfire missiles against remotely-
controlled boats approximately 27 km (17 mi) offshore Santa Rosa
Island, FL. Net explosive weights of the munitions that detonated at
the water surface or up to 3 m (10 ft) below the surface are 86 lbs for
the AGM-65 Maverick missiles and 13 pounds for the AGM-114 Hellfire
missiles. Eglin AFB conducted the required monitoring for marine
mammals or indicators of marine mammals (e.g., flocks of birds,
baitfish schools, or large fish schools) before, during, and after each
mission and observed only two species of marine mammals: the common
bottlenose dolphin and Atlantic spotted dolphin. Total protected
species observed during pre-mission surveys ranged between 149 and 156
individuals and Eglin AFB confirmed that marine mammals were outside of
the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]) at the conclusion of each pre-mission survey.
For one mission day (March 17, 2015), Eglin AFB personnel extended
the duration of the pre-mission surveys to continue to monitoring a pod
of 10 bottlenose dolphins until the vessel captain could confirm that
the pod remained outside the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]) and did not change
travel direction. Eglin AFB delayed weapons delivery as required by the
Authorization. Eglin AFB continued with their mission activities after
all animals cleared the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]).
After each mission, Eglin AFB re-entered the ZOI (5 km [3.1 mi]) to
begin post-mission surveys for marine mammals and debris-clean-up
operations. Eglin AFB personnel did not observe reactions indicative of
disturbance during the pre-mission surveys and did not observe any
marine mammals during the post-mission surveys. In summary, Eglin AFB
reports that no observable instances of take of marine mammals occurred
incidental to the Maritime WSEP training activities under the 2015
Authorization.
Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Taken by Harassment
The NDAA 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].
NMFS' analysis identified the physiological responses, and
behavioral responses that could potentially result from exposure to
underwater explosive detonations. In this section, we will relate the
potential effects to marine mammals from underwater detonation of
explosives to the MMPA regulatory definitions of Level A and Level B
harassment. This section will also quantify the effects that might
occur from the proposed military readiness activities in W-151.
At NMFS' recommendation, Eglin AFB updated the thresholds used for
onset of temporary threshold shift (TTS; Level B Harassment) and onset
of permanent threshold shift (PTS; Level A Harassment) to be consistent
with the thresholds outlined in the Navy's report titled, ``Criteria
and Thresholds for U.S. Navy Acoustic and Explosive Effects Analysis
Technical Report,'' which the Navy coordinated with NMFS. NMFS believes
that the thresholds outlined in the Navy's report represent the best
available science. The report is available on the Internet at: https://aftteis.com/Portals/4/aftteis/Supporting%20Technical%20Documents/Criteria_and_Thresholds_for_US_Navy_Acoustic_and_Explosive_Effects_Analysis-Apr_2012.pdf.
Level B Harassment
Of the potential effects described earlier in this document, the
following are the types of effects that fall into the Level B
harassment category:
Behavioral Harassment--Behavioral disturbance that rises to the
level described in the above definition, when resulting from exposures
to non-impulsive or impulsive sound, is Level B harassment. Some of the
lower level physiological stress responses discussed earlier would also
likely co-occur with the predicted harassments, although these
responses are more difficult to detect and fewer data exist relating
these responses to specific received levels of sound. When predicting
Level B harassment based on estimated behavioral responses, those takes
may have a stress-related physiological component.
Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS)--As discussed previously, TTS can
affect how an animal behaves in response to the environment, including
conspecifics, predators, and prey. NMFS classifies TTS (when resulting
from exposure to explosives and other impulsive sources) as Level B
harassment, not Level A harassment (injury).
Level A Harassment
Of the potential effects that were described earlier, the following
are the types of effects that fall into the Level A Harassment
category:
Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS)--PTS (resulting either from
exposure to explosive detonations) is irreversible and NMFS considers
this to be an injury.
Table 5 in this document outlines the acoustic thresholds used by
NMFS for this Authorization when addressing noise impacts from
explosives.
[[Page 7316]]
Table 5--Impulsive Sound Explosive Thresholds Used by Eglin AFB in its Current Acoustics Impacts Modeling
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Behavior Slight injury
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group Gastro- Mortality
Behavioral TTS PTS Intestinal Tract Lung
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid-frequency Cetaceans....... 167 dB SEL....... 172 dB SEL or 23 187 dB SEL or 104 psi.......... 39.1 M1/3 (1+[DRm/ 91.4 M1/3 (1+DRm/
psi. 45.86 psi. 10.081])1/2 Pa-sec 10.081])1/2 Pa-sec
Where: M = mass of Where: M = mass of
the animals in kg the animals in kg
DRm = depth of the DRm = depth of the
receiver (animal) in receiver (animal) in
meters. meters
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eglin AFB modeled that all explosives would detonate at a 1.2 m
(3.9 ft) water depth despite the training goal of hitting the target,
resulting in an above water or on land explosion. For sources detonated
at shallow depths, it is frequently the case that the explosion may
breech the surface with some of the acoustic energy escaping the water
column. Table 6 provides the estimated maximum range or radius, from
the detonation point to the various thresholds described in Table 5.
Table 6--Distances (m) to Harassment Thresholds From Eglin AFB's Explosive Ordnance
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mortality Level A harassment Level B harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slight GI Track PTS TTS Behavioral
Lung Injury --------------------------------------------------------
Munition NEW Total # Detonation scenario Modified Injury ----------
(lbs) Goertner -----------
Model 1 Modified 237 dB 187 dB 230 dB 172 dB 224 dB 167 dB SEL
Goertner SPL SEL peak SPL SEL peak SPL
Model 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose Dolphin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GBU-10 or GBU-24.............................. 945 2 Surface............................ 199 350 340 965 698 1,582 1,280 2,549
GBU-12 or GBU-54.............................. 192 6 Surface............................ 111 233 198 726 409 2,027 752 2,023
AGM-65 (Maverick)............................. 86 6 Surface............................ 82 177 150 610 312 1,414 575 1,874
GBU-39 (LSDB)................................. 37 4 Surface............................ 59 128 112 479 234 1,212 433 1,543
AGM-114 (Hellfire)............................ 20 15 (10 ft depth)...................... 110 229 95 378 193 2,070 354 3,096
AGM-175 (Griffin)............................. 13 10 Surface............................ 38 83 79 307 165 1,020 305 1,343
2.75 Rockets.................................. 12 100 Surface............................ 36 81 77 281 161 1,010 296 1,339
PGU-13 HEI 30 mm.............................. 0.1 1,000 Surface............................ 0 7 16 24 33 247 60 492
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic Spotted Dolphin and Unidentified Dolphin \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GBU-10 or GBU-24.............................. 945 2 Surface............................ 237 400 340 965 698 1,582 1,280 2,549
GBU-12 or GBU-54.............................. 192 6 Surface............................ 138 274 198 726 409 2,027 752 2,023
AGM-65 (Maverick)............................. 86 6 Surface............................ 101 216 150 610 312 1,414 575 1,874
GBU-39 (LSDB)................................. 37 4 Surface............................ 73 158 112 479 234 1,212 433 1,543
AGM-114 (Hellfire)............................ 20 15 (10 ft depth)...................... 135 277 95 378 193 2,070 354 3,096
AGM-175 (Griffin)............................. 13 10 Surface............................ 47 104 79 307 165 1,020 305 1,343
2.75 Rockets.................................. 12 100 Surface............................ 45 100 77 281 161 1,010 296 1,339
PGU-13 HEI 30 mm.............................. 0.1 1,000 Surface............................ 0 9 16 24 33 247 60 492
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AGM = air-to-ground missile; cal = caliber; CBU = Cluster Bomb Unit; ft = feet; GBU = Guided Bomb Unit; HEI = high explosive incendiary; lbs = pounds; mm = millimeters; N/A = not applicable;
NEW = net explosive weight; PGU = Projectile Gun Unit; SDB = small diameter bomb; PTS = permanent threshold shift; TTS = temporary threshold shift; WCMD = wind corrected munition dispenser.
\1\ Unidentified dolphin can be either bottlenose or Atlantic spotted dolphin. Eglin AFB based the mortality and slight lung injury criteria on the mass of a newborn Atlantic spotted dolphin.
Eglin AFB uses the distance information shown in Table 6 to
calculate the radius of impact for a given threshold from a single
detonation of each munition/detonation scenario, then combine the
calculated impact radii with density estimates (adjusted for depth
distribution) and the number of live munitions to provide an estimate
of the number of marine mammals potentially exposed to the various
impact thresholds. The ranges presented in Table 6 represent a radius
of impact for a given threshold from a single detonation of each
munition/detonation scenario. They do not consider accumulated energies
from multiple detonation occurring within the same 24-hour time period.
Density Estimation
Density estimates for bottlenose dolphin and spotted dolphin were
derived from two sources (see Table 7). NMFS provided detailed
information on Eglin AFB's derivation of density estimates for the
common bottlenose and Atlantic spotted dolphins in a previous Federal
Register notice for a proposed Authorization to Eglin AFB for the same
activities (79 FR 72631, December 8, 2014). The information presented
in that notice has not changed and NMFS refers the reader to Section 3
of Eglin AFB's application for detailed information on all equations
used to calculate densities presented in Table 7.
Table 7--Marine Mammal Density Estimates Within Eglin AFB's EGTTR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Density
Species (animals/
km\2\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin \1\.................................. 1.194
Atlantic spotted dolphin \2\............................ 0.265
[[Page 7317]]
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).
Take Estimation
NMFS recalculated the takes proposed in previous notice for the
proposed Authorization (80 FR 7984, December 23, 2015) based upon the
Commission's recommendations to eliminate the double counting of the
estimated take for each species and appropriately rounding take
estimates before summing the total take. Table 8 indicates the modeled
potential for lethality, injury, and non-injurious harassment
(including behavioral harassment) to marine mammals in the absence of
mitigation measures. Eglin AFB and NMFS estimate that approximately 14
marine mammals could be exposed to injurious Level A harassment noise
levels (187 dB SEL) and approximately 671 animals could be exposed to
Level B harassment (TTS and Behavioral) noise levels in the absence of
mitigation measures.
Table 8--Modeled Number of Marine Mammals Potentially Affected by Maritime WSEP Operations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A Level B Level B
Species Mortality Harassment Harassment Harassment
(PTS only) (TTS) (Behavioral)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin.............................. 0 14 255 353
Atlantic spotted dolphin........................ 0 0 23 40
Unidentified bottlenose dolphin/Atlantic spotted 0 0 0 0
dolphin........................................
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 0 14 278 393
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the mortality exposure estimates calculated by the
acoustic model, zero marine mammals are expected to be affected by
pressure levels associated with mortality or serious injury. Zero
marine mammals are expected to be exposed to pressure levels associated
with slight lung injury or gastrointestinal tract injury.
NMFS generally considers PTS to fall under the injury category
(Level A Harassment). An animal would need to stay very close to the
sound source for an extended amount of time to incur a serious degree
of PTS, which could increase the probability of mortality. In this
case, it would be highly unlikely for this scenario to unfold given the
nature of any anticipated acoustic exposures that could potentially
result from a mobile marine mammal that NMFS generally expects to
exhibit avoidance behavior to loud sounds within the EGTTR.
NMFS has relied on the best available scientific information to
support the issuance of Eglin AFB's authorization. In the case of
authorizing Level A harassment, NMFS has estimated that no more than 14
bottlenose dolphins and no Atlantic spotted dolphins could, although
unlikely, experience minor permanent threshold shifts of hearing
sensitivity (PTS). The available data and analyses, as described more
fully in a previous notice for a proposed Authorization (80 FR 7984,
December 23, 2015) and this notice include extrapolation results of
many studies on marine mammal noise-induced temporary threshold shifts
of hearing sensitivities. An extensive review of TTS studies and
experiments prompted NMFS to conclude that possibility of minor PTS in
the form of slight upward shift of hearing threshold at certain
frequency bands by a few individuals of marine mammals is extremely
low, but not unlikely.
Negligible Impact Analysis 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.'' A negligible impact finding is based on the
lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of
Level B harassment takes alone is not enough information on which to
base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of
the number of marine mammals that might be ``taken'' through behavioral
harassment, we consider 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.
To avoid repetition, the discussion below applies to all the
species listed in Table 8 for which we propose to authorize incidental
take for Eglin AFB's activities.
In making a negligible impact determination, we consider:
The number of anticipated injuries, serious injuries, or
mortalities;
The number, nature, and intensity, and duration of Level B
harassment;
The context in which the takes occur (e.g., impacts to
areas of significance, impacts to local populations, and cumulative
impacts when taking into account successive/contemporaneous actions
when added to baseline data);
The status of stock or species of marine mammals (i.e.,
depleted, not depleted, decreasing, increasing, stable, impact relative
to the size of the population);
Impacts on habitat affecting rates of recruitment/
survival; and
The effectiveness of monitoring and mitigation measures to
reduce the number or severity of incidental take.
For reasons stated previously in this document and based on the
following factors, Eglin AFB's specified activities are not likely to
cause long-term behavioral disturbance, serious injury, or death.
The takes from Level B harassment would be due to potential
behavioral disturbance and TTS. The takes from Level A harassment would
be due to some form of PTS. Activities would only occur over a
timeframe of two to three weeks in beginning in February 2016, 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.
[[Page 7318]]
Noise-induced threshold shifts (TS, which includes PTS) are defined
as increases in the threshold of audibility (i.e., the sound has to be
louder to be detected) of the ear at a certain frequency or range of
frequencies (ANSI 1995; Yost 2000). Several important factors relate to
the magnitude of TS, such as level, duration, spectral content
(frequency range), and temporal pattern (continuous, intermittent) of
exposure (Yost 2000; Henderson et al. 2008). TS occurs in terms of
frequency range (Hz or kHz), hearing threshold level (dB), or both
frequency and hearing threshold level (CDC, 2004).
In addition, there are different degrees of PTS: ranging from
slight/mild to moderate and from severe to profound (Clark, 1981).
Profound PTS or the complete loss of the ability to hear in one or both
ears is commonly referred to as deafness (CDC, 2004; WHO, 2006). High-
frequency PTS, presumably as a normal process of aging that occurs in
humans and other terrestrial mammals, has also been demonstrated in
captive cetaceans (Ridgway and Carder, 1997; Yuen et al. 2005; Finneran
et al., 2005; Houser and Finneran, 2006; Finneran et al. 2007; Schlundt
et al., 2011) and in stranded individuals (Mann et al., 2010).
In terms of what is analyzed for the potential PTS (Level A
harassment) in marine mammals as a result of Eglin AFB's Maritime WSEP
operations, if it occurs, NMFS has determined that the levels would be
slight/mild because research shows that most cetaceans show relatively
high levels of avoidance. Further, it is uncommon to sight marine
mammals within the target area, especially for prolonged durations.
Results from monitoring programs associated other Eglin AFB activities
and for Eglin AFB's 2015 Maritime WSEP activities have shown the
absence of marine mammals within the EGTTR during and after maritime
operations. Avoidance varies among individuals and depends on their
activities or reasons for being in the area.
NMFS' predicted estimates for Level A harassment take are likely
overestimates of the likely injury that will occur. NMFS expects that
successful implementation of the required vessel-based and video-based
mitigation measures would avoid Level A take in some instances. Also,
NMFS expects that some individuals would avoid the source at levels
expected to result in injury. Nonetheless, although NMFS expects that
Level A harassment is unlikely to occur at the numbers proposed to be
authorized, because it is difficult to quantify the degree to which the
mitigation and avoidance will reduce the number of animals that might
incur PTS, we are proposing to authorize (and analyze) the modeled
number of Level A takes (14), which does not take the mitigation or
avoidance into consideration. However, we anticipate that any PTS
incurred because of mitigation and the likely short duration of
exposures, would be in the form of only a small degree of permanent
threshold shift and not total deafness.
While animals may be impacted in the immediate vicinity of the
activity, because of the short duration of the actual individual
explosions themselves (versus continual sound source operation)
combined with the short duration of the Maritime WSEP operations, NMFS
has determined that there will not be a substantial impact on marine
mammals or on the normal functioning of the nearshore or offshore Gulf
of Mexico ecosystems. We do not expect that the proposed activity would
impact rates of recruitment or survival of marine mammals since we do
not expect mortality (which would remove individuals from the
population) or serious injury to occur. In addition, the proposed
activity would 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 would only occur in a small part of their overall range, so
the impact of any potential temporary displacement would be negligible
and animals would be expected to return to the area after the
cessations of activities. Although the proposed activity could result
in Level A (PTS only, not slight lung injury or gastrointestinal tract
injury) 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 (i.e.,
four hours a day or less) and site-specific nature of the activity. We
do not anticipate that the effects would be detrimental to rates of
recruitment and survival because we do not expect serious of extended
behavioral responses that would result in energetic effects at the
level to impact fitness.
Moreover, the mitigation and monitoring measures proposed for the
Authorization (described earlier in this document) are expected to
further minimize the potential for harassment. The protected species
surveys would require Eglin AFB to search the area for marine mammals,
and if any are found in the live fire area, then the exercise would be
suspended until the animal(s) has left the area or relocated. Moreover,
marine species observers located in the Eglin control tower would
monitor the high-definition video feed from cameras located on the
instrument barge anchored on-site for the presence of protected
species. Furthermore, Maritime WSEP missions would 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, Maritime WSEP missions would
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 WSEP operations will
result in the incidental take of marine mammals, by Level A and Level B
harassment only, and that the taking from the Maritime WSEP 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)
Due to the location of the activity, no ESA-listed marine mammal
species are likely to be affected; therefore, NMFS has determined that
this proposed Authorization would have no effect on ESA-listed species.
Therefore, NMFS has determined that a section 7 consultation under the
ESA is not required for the issuance of an MMPA Authorization to Eglin
AFB.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
In 2015, Eglin AFB provided NMFS with an EA titled, Maritime Weapon
Systems Evaluation Program (WSEP) Operational Testing in the Eglin Gulf
Testing and Training Range (EGTTR), Florida. The EA analyzed the
direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts of the specified
activities on marine mammals. NMFS, after review and evaluation of the
Eglin AFB EA for consistency with the regulations published by the
Council of
[[Page 7319]]
Environmental Quality (CEQ) and NOAA Administrative Order 216-6,
Environmental Review Procedures for Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, adopted the EA. After considering the EA, the
information in the 2014 IHA application, and the Federal Register
notice, as well as public comments, NMFS has determined that the
issuance of the 2015 Authorization was not likely to result in
significant impacts on the human environment; adopted Eglin AFB's EA
under 40 CFR 1506.3; and issued a FONSI statement on issuance of an
Authorization under section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA.
In accordance with NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 (Environmental
Review Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act, May 20, 1999), NMFS will again review the information contained in
Eglin AFB's EA and determine whether the EA accurately and completely
describes the preferred action alternative and the potential impacts on
marine mammals. Based on this review and analysis, NMFS has reaffirmed
the 2015 FONSI statement on issuance of an annual authorization under
section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA or supplement the EA if necessary.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an Incidental
Harassment Authorization to Eglin AFB for conducting Maritime WSEP
activities, for a period of one year from the date of issuance,
provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated.
Dated: February 8, 2016.
Perry F. Gayaldo,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-02801 Filed 2-10-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
