Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Marine Corps Training Exercises at Cherry Point Range Complex, North Carolina, 14886-14901 [2020-05233]
Download as PDF
14886
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
they also will become a matter of public
record.
Sheleen Dumas,
Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of
the Chief Information Officer, Commerce
Department.
Special Accommodations
Introduction to scenario planning and
plan for potential East Coast/MidAtlantic scenario planning exercise
These meetings are physically
accessible to people with disabilities.
Requests for sign language
interpretation or other auxiliary aid
should be directed to M. Jan Saunders,
(302) 526–5251, at least 5 days prior to
the meeting date.
Wednesday, April 8, 2020
South Atlantic Electronic Reporting
[FR Doc. 2020–05222 Filed 3–13–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
Update on South Atlantic for-hire
reporting requirements
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Blueline Tilefish 2021 Specifications
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Review SSC, Advisory Panel,
Monitoring Committee, and staff
recommendations for 2021
specifications and recommend
changes to 2021 specifications if
necessary
[RTID 0648–XA077]
Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management
Council (MAFMC); Public Meetings
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of public meetings.
AGENCY:
The Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (Council) will
hold public meetings of the Council.
DATES: The meetings will be held
Tuesday, April 7, 2020, from 2 p.m. to
5 p.m.; Wednesday, April 8, 2020, from
9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.; and Thursday, April
9, 2020, from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. For
agenda details, see SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
SUMMARY:
The meeting will be held at
Seaview, A Dolce Hotel, 401 S. New
York Rd., Galloway, NJ; telephone: (609)
652–1800.
Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council, 800 N. State St.,
Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; telephone:
(302) 674–2331.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D. Executive
Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council; telephone: (302)
526–5255. The Council’s website,
www.mafmc.org also has details on the
meeting location, proposed agenda,
webinar listen-in access, and briefing
materials.
ADDRESSES:
The
following items are on the agenda,
though agenda items may be addressed
out of order (changes will be noted on
the Council’s website when possible.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Tuesday, April 7, 2020
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Climate Change Scenario Planning
2020 Mid-Atlantic State of the
Ecosystem Report
EAFM Updates
2020 Risk Assessment, Summer
Flounder Management Strategy
Evaluation update, and other EAFM
related activities
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
Golden Tilefish 2021–22 Specifications
Review SSC, Advisory Panel,
Monitoring Committee, and staff
recommendations for 2021–22
specifications and adopt 2021–22
specifications
Ocean Data Portals Commercial
Fisheries Data Project
Offshore Wind Updates
Ocean Wind Project and Atlantic Shores
Wind Project
Black Sea Bass Commercial State
Allocation Amendment
Review scoping plan and document
Citizen Science
GARFO/NEFSC Joint Strategic Plan
Presentation on final NEFSC/GARFO
Regional Strategic Plan for 2020–23
and Annual Implementation Plan
Thursday, April 9, 2020
Business Session
Committee Reports: SSC; Executive
Director’s Report; Organization
Reports; and, Liaison Reports
Continuing and New Business
Although non-emergency issues not
contained in this agenda may come
before this group for discussion, in
accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those
issues may not be the subject of formal
action during these meetings. Actions
will be restricted to those issues
specifically identified in this notice and
any issues arising after publication of
this notice that require emergency
action under Section 305(c) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the
public has been notified of the Council’s
intent to take final action to address the
emergency.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: March 11, 2020.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–05303 Filed 3–13–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XR102]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to U.S. Marine
Corps Training Exercises at Cherry
Point Range Complex, North Carolina
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
harassment authorization; request for
comments on proposed authorization
and possible renewal.
AGENCY:
NMFS has received a request
from the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) for
authorization to take marine mammals
incidental to training exercises at
Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS)
Cherry Point Range Complex, North
Carolina. Pursuant to the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS
is requesting comments on its proposal
to issue an incidental harassment
authorization (IHA) to incidentally take
marine mammals during the specified
activities. NMFS is also requesting
comments on a possible one-year
renewal that could be issued under
certain circumstances and if all
requirements are met, as described in
Request for Public Comments at the end
of this notice. NMFS will consider
public comments prior to making any
final decision on the issuance of the
requested MMPA authorizations and
agency responses will be summarized in
the final notice of our decision. The
USMC’s activities are considered
military readiness activities pursuant to
the MMPA, as amended by the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2004 (NDAA).
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
Comments and information must
be received no later than April 15, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be
addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service. Physical
comments should be sent to 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910
and electronic comments should be sent
to ITP.Laws@noaa.gov.
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible
for comments sent by any other method,
to any other address or individual, or
received after the end of the comment
period. Comments received
electronically, including all
attachments, must not exceed a 25megabyte file size. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted online at
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-military-readinessactivities without change. All personal
identifying information (e.g., name,
address) voluntarily submitted by the
commenter may be publicly accessible.
Do not submit confidential business
information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Laws, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, (301) 427–8401. Electronic
copies of the application and supporting
documents, as well as a list of the
references cited in this document, may
be obtained online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-military-readinessactivities. In case of problems accessing
these documents, please call the contact
listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
DATES:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of
marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and
(D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et
seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce
(as delegated to NMFS) 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
incidental take authorization may be
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) and will not have
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
taking for subsistence uses (where
relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe
the permissible methods of taking and
other ‘‘means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact’’ on the
affected species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance, and on the
availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses
(referred to in shorthand as
‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of the takings are set forth.
The NDAA (Pub. L. 108–136)
removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and
‘‘specified geographical region’’
limitations indicated above and
amended the definition of ‘‘harassment’’
as it applies to a ‘‘military readiness
activity.’’ The activity for which
incidental take of marine mammals is
being requested addressed here qualifies
as a military readiness activity. The
definitions of all applicable MMPA
statutory terms cited above are included
in the relevant sections below.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
NOAA Administrative Order (NAO)
216–6A, we must review our proposed
action (i.e., the issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization) with respect
to potential impacts on the human
environment. In 2015, NMFS developed
an Environmental Assessment (EA)
evaluating the impacts of authorizing
take of marine mammals incidental to
the USMC’s training activities at MCAS
Cherry Point. Following review of this
analysis, NMFS determined that the
activity would not have a significant
effect on the quality of the human
environment and issued a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI).
NMFS has preliminarily determined
that there are no substantive changes to
the evaluated action or new
environmental impacts and, therefore,
the previous NEPA analysis remains
valid. The 2015 EA and FONSI are
posted online at
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-military-readinessactivities. We will review all comments
submitted in response to this notice
prior to concluding our NEPA process
or making a final decision on the IHA
request.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14887
Summary of Request
On September 28, 2019, NMFS
received a request from the USMC for an
IHA to take marine mammals incidental
to training exercises conducted at
MCAS Cherry Point Range Complex in
North Carolina. Following NMFS’
review of the request, USMC submitted
a revised application that was deemed
adequate and complete on January 22,
2020. The USMC’s request is for take of
bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)
by Level A and Level B harassment.
Neither the USMC nor NMFS expect
serious injury or mortality to result from
this activity. Therefore, an IHA is
appropriate. The proposed IHA would
be effective for a period of one year from
the date of issuance.
NMFS previously issued incidental
take authorizations to the USMC for the
same activities, including three IHAs
associated with training activities from
2010–2014 (75 FR 72807, November 26,
2010; 77 FR 87, January 3, 2012; and 78
FR 42042, July 15, 2013) and incidental
take regulations and a subsequent Letter
of Authorization issued in association
with training activities conducted from
2015–2020 (80 FR 13264, March 13,
2015). The USMC complied with all the
requirements (e.g., mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting) of the
previous incidental take authorizations
and information regarding their
monitoring results may be found in the
Estimated Take section.
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
The USMC conducts training to meet
its statutory responsibility to organize,
train, equip, and maintain combat-ready
forces. The training activities include
air-to-surface and surface-to-surface
weapons delivery, weapons firing, and
water-based training occurring at the
Brant Island Bombing Target (BT–9) and
Piney Island Bombing Range (BT–11)
located within the MCAS Cherry Point
Range Complex in Pamlico Sound,
North Carolina. The USMC training
activities are military readiness
activities under the MMPA as defined
by the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (NDAA; Public
Law 108–136).
Dates and Duration
The proposed activities could occur at
any time during the one year period of
effectiveness of the proposed IHA.
Activities are typically conducted
during daylight hours but may occur at
night.
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
14888
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
Specific Geographic Region
The USMC’s BT–9 and BT–11
bombing targets (See Figures 1–1 and 2–
1 in the USMC application) are located
in inshore waters of Pamlico Sound,
North Carolina in the vicinity of the
convergence of the Neuse River and
Pamlico River, North Carolina.
The BT–9 area is a water-based
bombing target and mining exercise area
located approximately 52 kilometers
(km) (32.3 miles (mi)) northeast of
MCAS Cherry Point. The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
has defined a danger zone (prohibited
area) by a 6 statute-mile (sm) diameter
boundary around BT–9 (33 CFR
334.420). This restriction prohibits nonmilitary vessels within the designated
area. The BT–9 target area ranges in
depth from 1.2 to 6.1 meters (m) (3.9 to
20 feet (ft)), with the shallow areas
concentrated along the Brant Island
Shoal. The target itself consists of three
ship hulls grounded on Brant Island
Shoals, located approximately 4.8 km
(3.0 mi) southeast of Goose Creek Island.
The BT–9 target and associated danger
zone is entirely in/over water.
The BT–11 area encompasses a total
of 50.6 square kilometers (km2) (19.5
square miles (mi2)) on Piney Island
located in Carteret County, NC. The
target prohibited area, at a radius of 1.8
sm, is roughly centered on Rattan Bay
and includes approximately 9.3 km2
(3.6 mi2) of water and water depths
range from 0.3 m (1.0 ft) along the
shoreline to 3.1 m (10.1 ft) in the center
of Rattan Bay. Water depths in the
center of Rattan Bay range from
approximately 2.4 to 3 m (8 to 10 ft)
with bottom depths ranging from 0.3 to
1.5 m (1 to 5 ft) adjacent to the shoreline
of Piney Island. The in-water stationary
targets of BT–11 consist of a barge and
patrol boat located in roughly the center
of Rattan Bay. The USMC also use a
second danger zone, also roughly
centered on Rattan Bay, on an
intermittent basis for strafing at waterand land-based targets, with an inner
radius of 1.8 sm and outer radius of 2.5
sm. Note that at BT–11, only a portion
of the associated composite danger zone
is over water (36 percent). Therefore, the
USMC assumes that only 36 percent of
expended ordnance would potentially
strike water.
The USMC conducts all inert and
live-fire exercises at BT–9 and BT–11 so
that all ammunition and other
ordnances strike and/or fall on the land
or water-based targets or within the
existing danger zones or water restricted
areas. Military forces close danger zones
to the public on an intermittent or fulltime basis for hazardous operations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
such as target practice and ordnance
firing. They also prohibit or limit public
access to water restricted areas to
provide security for government
property and/or to protect the public
from the risks of injury or damage that
could occur from the government’s use
of that area (33 CFR 334.2). Surface
danger zones are designated areas of
rocket firing, target practice, or other
hazardous operations (33 CFR 334.420).
The surface danger zone (prohibited
area) for BT–9 is a 4.8 km (3.0 mi)
radius centered on the south side of
Brant Island Shoal. The surface danger
zone for BT–11 is a 2.9 km (1.8 mi)
radius centered on a barge target in
Rattan Bay.
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
The following sections describe the
training activities that have the potential
to affect marine mammals present
within the BT–9 and BT–11 bombing
targets. These activities fall into two
categories based on the ordnance
delivery method: (1) Surface-to-surface
gunnery exercises; and (2) air-to-surface
bombing exercises. Note that
deployment of live ordnance is only
permitted at BT–9; all munitions fired at
BT–11 are inert.
Surface-to-Surface Exercises
Gunnery exercises are the only
category of surface-to-surface activity
currently conducted within BT–9 or
BT–11. BT–9 is the most common target
used for gunnery exercises. Surface-tosurface gunnery firing exercises
typically involve Special Boat Team
personnel firing munitions from a
machine gun and 40 mm grenade
launchers at a water-based target or
throwing concussion grenades into the
water (e.g., not at a specific target) from
a small boat. The number and type of
boats used depend on the unit using the
boat and the particular training mission.
These include: Small unit river craft,
combat rubber raiding craft, rigid hull
inflatable boats, and patrol craft. These
boats may use inboard or outboard,
diesel or gasoline engines with either
propeller or water jet propulsion
systems. Each boat would travel
between 0 to 20 knots (kts) (0 to 23
miles per hour (mph)) with an average
of two vessels to approach and engage
the intended targets. The boats typically
travel in linear paths and do not operate
erratically.
Boat sorties occur in all seasons and
the number of sorties conducted at each
range may vary from year to year based
on training needs and worldwide
operational tempo. The majority of boat
sorties at BT–9 originate from MCAS
Cherry Point’s Navy boat docks, but
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
they may also originate from the State
Port in Morehead City, NC; Marine
Corps Base Camp Lejeune; and U.S.
Coast Guard Station Hobucken in
Pamlico Sound. The majority of boat
sorties at BT–11 originate from launch
sites within the range complex.
There is no specific schedule
associated with the use of BT–9 or BT–
11 by the small boat teams. However,
the USMC schedules the exercises for 5day blocks with exercises at various
times throughout the year. Variables
such as deployment status, range
availability, and completion of crewspecific training requirements influence
the exercise schedules.
The direct-fire gunnery exercises (i.e.,
all targets are within the line of sight of
the military personnel) at BT–9 would
typically use 7.62 millimeter (mm) or
.50 caliber (cal) machine guns; 40 mm
grenade machine guns; or G911
concussion hand grenades. The
proposed exercises at BT–9 are usually
live-fire exercises. At times USMC
personnel would use blanks (inert
ordnance) so that the boat crews could
practice ship-handling skills during
training without being concerned with
the safety requirements involved with
live weapons.
Air-to-Surface Exercises
Air-to-surface training exercises
involve fixed-, rotary-, or tilt-wing
aircraft firing munitions at targets on the
water’s surface or on land (in the case
of BT–11). There are four types of airto-surface activities conducted within
BT–9 and BT–11. They include: Mine
laying, bombing, gunnery, or rocket
exercises. The following sections
provide more detail on each exercise
type that would be conducted.
Mine Laying Exercises
Mine laying exercises are simulations
only, meaning that mine detonations
would not occur during training. These
exercises, regularly conducted at the
BT–9 bombing target, involve the use of
fixed-wing aircraft flying to the target
area using either a low- or high-altitude
tactical flight pattern. When the aircraft
reaches the target area, the pilot deploys
a series of inert mine shapes in an
offensive or defensive pattern into the
water. The aircraft would make multiple
passes along a pre-determined flight
azimuth dropping one or more of the
inert shapes each time.
The mine-laying exercises at BT–9
would include the use of MK–62, MK–
63, MK–76, BDU–45, and BDU–48 inert
training shapes. Each inert shape weighs
500, 1,000, 25, 500, and 10 pounds (lbs)
(227, 454, 11, 227, and 5 kg),
respectively.
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
Bombing Exercises
Pilots train to destroy or disable
enemy ships or boats during bombing
exercises. These exercises, conducted at
BT–9 or BT–11, normally involve the
use of two to four fixed-wing aircraft
approaching the target area from an
altitude of approximately 152 m (500 ft)
up to 4,572 m (15,000 ft). When the
aircraft reach the target area, they
establish a predetermined racetrack
pattern relative to the target and deliver
the bombs. Participating aircraft follow
the same flight path during subsequent
target ingress, ordnance delivery, target
egress, and downwind pattern. This
type of pattern is used to ensure that
only one aircraft releases ordnance at
any given time.
The pilots deliver the bombs against
targets at BT–9 or BT–11, day or night;
the average time to complete this type
of exercise is approximately one hour.
There is no set level or pattern of
amount of sorties conducted. There are
no cluster munitions authorized for use
during bombing exercises.
The bombing exercises would
typically use unguided MK–76 and
BDU–45 inert training bombs or
precision-guided munitions consisting
of laser-guided bombs (inert) and laserguided training rounds.
Gunnery Exercises
During air-to-surface gunnery
exercises with cannons, pilots train to
destroy or disable enemy ships, boats, or
floating/near-surface mines from aircraft
with mounted cannons equal to or larger
than 20 mm. The USMC would use
either fixed-wing or rotary-wing, tiltrotor, and other aircraft to conduct
gunnery exercises at BT–9 or BT–11.
During the exercise (i.e., strafing run),
two aircraft would approach the target
area from an altitude of approximately
914 m (3,000 ft) and within a distance
of 1,219 m (4,000 ft) from the target,
begin to fire a burst of approximately 30
rounds of munitions before reaching an
altitude of 305 m (1,000 ft) to break off
the attack. Each aircraft would
reposition for another strafing run until
each aircraft expends its exercise
ordnance of approximately 250 rounds
(approximately 8–12 passes per aircraft
per exercise). This type of gunnery
exercise would typically use a 20 mm or
25 mm cannon. The USMC uses inert
munitions for these exercises. The
aircraft deliver the ordnance against
targets at BT–9 or BT–11, day or night.
The average time to complete this type
of exercise is approximately 1 hour.
During air-to-surface gunnery
exercises with machine guns, pilots
train to destroy or disable enemy ships,
boats, or floating/near-surface mines
with aircraft using mounted machine
guns. The USMC typically uses rotarywing aircraft to conduct gunnery
exercises at BT–9 or BT–11. During the
exercise an aircraft would fly around the
target area at an altitude between 15 and
30 m (50 and 100 ft) in a 91 m (300 ft)
racetrack pattern around the waterbased target. Each gunner would expend
approximately 800 rounds of 7.62 mm
ammunition or 200 rounds of .50 cal
ammunition in each exercise. The
aircraft deliver the ordnance against the
bombing targets at BT–9 or BT–11, day
or night. The average time to complete
this type of exercise is approximately 1
hour.
Rocket Exercises
Rocket exercises are similar to the
bombing exercises. Fixed- and rotarywing aircraft crews launch rockets at
surface maritime targets, day and night,
to train for destroying or disabling
enemy ships or boats. These operations
employ 2.75-inch and 5-inch (70- and
127-mm) rockets (4.8 and 15.0 lbs net
explosive weight, respectively).
14889
Generally, personnel would deliver an
average of approximately 14 rockets per
sortie. As with the bombing exercises,
there is no set level or pattern of amount
of sorties conducted.
Munitions and Estimated Expenditures
There are several varieties of
ordnance and net explosive weights (for
live munition used at BT–9) can vary
according to type. All practice bombs
are inert but simulate the same ballistic
properties of service type bombs. They
are either solid cast metal bodies or thin
sheet metal containers. Since practice
bombs contain no explosive filler, a
practice bomb signal cartridge (smoke)
serves as a visual observation of weapon
target impact. Please refer to Table 1–1
in USMC’s application for a full list of
all munitions authorized for use at BT–
9 and BT–11.
The estimated amount of ordnance to
be annually expended at BT–9 and BT–
11 under the activity is 1,238,614 and
1,254,684, respectively (Tables 1 and 2).
The amounts of ordnance expended at
the BTs account for all uses of the
targets, including use by other services.
All ordnance expended at BT–11 would
be inert. There are five types of
explosive sources used at BT–9: 2.75-in
Rocket High Explosives (HE), 5-in
Rocket HE, 30 mm HE, 40 mm HE, and
G911 grenades. The estimated ordnance
expenditure at BT–9 includes less than
2 percent high explosive rounds and
less than 0.1 percent each of live rockets
and grenades. The approximate
quantities of ordnance listed in Tables
1 and 2 represent conservative figures,
meaning that the volume of each type of
inert and explosive ordnance proposed
is the largest number that personnel
could expend but is not necessarily
expected. As noted previously, only 36
percent of expended ordnance at BT–11
is assumed to potentially strike water.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
TABLE 1—TYPE OF ORDNANCE, NET EXPLOSIVE WEIGHT, AND PROPOSED LEVELS OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES AT BT–9
Proposed ordnance
Net explosive weight in pounds
(lbs)
Small arms excluding .50 cal (7.62 mm) .....................................................................
.50 cal ...........................................................................................................................
Large arms—live (30 mm) ...........................................................................................
Large arms—live (40 mm) ...........................................................................................
Large arms—inert .........................................................................................................
Rockets—live (2.75-inch) .............................................................................................
Rockets—live (5-inch) ..................................................................................................
Rockets—inert ..............................................................................................................
Grenades—live (G911) ................................................................................................
Bombs—inert ................................................................................................................
Pyrotechnics—inert ......................................................................................................
N/A, inert ...................................................
N/A, inert ...................................................
0.1019 .......................................................
0.1199 .......................................................
N/A ............................................................
4.8 .............................................................
15.0 ...........................................................
N/A ............................................................
0.5 .............................................................
N/A ............................................................
N/A ............................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
Proposed
number
of rounds
525,610
568,515
3,432
10,420
120,405
220
68
844
144
4,460
2,500
14890
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
TABLE 2—TYPE OF ORDNANCE, NET EXPLOSIVE WEIGHT, AND PROPOSED LEVELS OF ANNUAL EXPENDITURES AT BT–11
Proposed ordnance
Net explosive weight in pounds
(lbs)
Small arms excluding .50 cal (7.62 mm) .....................................................................
.50 cal ...........................................................................................................................
Large arms—inert .........................................................................................................
Rockets—inert ..............................................................................................................
Bombs and grenades—inert ........................................................................................
Pyrotechnics—inert ......................................................................................................
N/A, inert ...................................................
N/A, inert ...................................................
N/A ............................................................
N/A ............................................................
N/A ............................................................
N/A ............................................................
Take of marine mammals is not
anticipated to result from direct strike
by inert ordnance or as a result of vessel
strike during small boat maneuvers. The
USMC has estimated that the probability
of direct strike of a dolphin by inert
ordnance during any given ordnance
deployment is 2.61 × 10¥7 or 9.4 × 10¥8
at BT–9 and BT–11, respectively. These
estimated probabilities result in
estimated numbers of ordnance strikes
of <0.5 at both target areas and,
therefore, in context of the required
mitigation requirements, the USMC’s
conclusion is that no take is reasonably
anticipated to occur as a result of direct
strike from inert ordnance. Please see
the USMC application for further detail
on the analysis. The USMC has also
determined that vessel strike is not a
reasonably anticipated outcome of the
specified activity, due to the limited
number of small boat maneuvers and
low concentrations of dolphins
expected to be present. No incidents of
direct strike from inert ordnance or of
vessel strike have been recorded during
prior years of activity monitoring.
NMFS concurs with these
determinations, and vessel maneuvers
and inert ordnance are not discussed
further in this document.
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures are described in
detail later in this document (please see
Proposed Mitigation and Proposed
Monitoring and Reporting).
Summary of Previous Monitoring
During monitoring conducted over the
period 2015–2019, USMC expended an
annual average amount of ordnance of
818,512 and 1,535,404 at BT–9 and BT–
11, respectively. During this period, no
high explosive munitions were used. On
50 occasions, dolphins were observed
by contracted range sweep aircraft along
the pre-defined flight path of the range
sweep. No marine mammals were
observed during air-to-surface training
activities (rotary-wing or fixed-wing
aircraft), or by maintenance vessels. For
additional detail, please see section 7 of
the USMC’s application.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application
summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution
and habitat preferences, and behavior
and life history, of the potentially
affected stocks of bottlenose dolphin.
Additional information regarding
population trends and threats may be
found in NMFS’s Stock Assessment
Reports (SARs; www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
national/marine-mammal-protection/
marine-mammal-stock-assessments)
and more general information about
these species (e.g., physical and
Proposed
number
of rounds
1,250,000
425,000
240,334
6,250
22,114
8,912
behavioral descriptions) may be found
on NMFS’s website
(www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 3 lists all species with expected
potential for occurrence in the project
area and summarizes information
related to the population or stock,
including regulatory status under the
MMPA and ESA and potential
biological removal (PBR), where known.
PBR is defined by the MMPA as the
maximum number of animals, not
including natural mortalities, that may
be removed from a marine mammal
stock while allowing that stock to reach
or maintain its optimum sustainable
population (as described in NMFS’s
SARs). While no mortality or serious
injury is anticipated or authorized here,
PBR and annual serious injury and
mortality from anthropogenic sources
are included here as gross indicators of
the status of the species and other
threats. All managed stocks in this
region are assessed in NMFS’ U.S.
Atlantic SARs (e.g., Hayes et al., 2018).
All values presented in Table 3 are the
most recent available at the time of
publication and are available in the
draft 2019 Atlantic SARs, which are
available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/draftmarine-mammal-stock-assessmentreports.
TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE PROJECT AREA
Common name
Scientific name
ESA/
MMPA
status;
strategic
(Y/N) 1
Stock
I
Stock abundance (CV,
Nmin, most recent
abundance survey) 2
PBR 3
Annual
M/SI 4
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Family Delphinidae
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Bottlenose dolphin ................
Tursiops truncatus truncatus
Northern Migratory Coastal
-/D; Y
-/-; Y
6,639 (0.41, 4,759,
2016).
3,751 (0.06, 2,353,
2016).
823 (0.06, 782, 2013)
Southern Migratory Coastal
-/D; Y
Northern North Carolina Estuarine.
Southern North Carolina Estuarine.
-/-; Y
Unknown ....................
48 ...............................
6.1–13.2
23 ...............................
0–14.3
7.8 ..............................
0.8–18.2
Unknown ....................
0.4–0.6
1 ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR (see footnote 3) or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future.
2 CV is coefficient of variation; N
min is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. The most recent abundance survey that is reflected in the abundance estimate is
presented; there may be more recent surveys that have not yet been incorporated into the estimate.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
14891
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
3 Potential biological removal, defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine
mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population size (OSP).
4 These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, subsistence hunting, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a range.
Bottlenose dolphins range widely in
temperate and tropical waters and are
found from deep, offshore to coastal
areas, including bays, estuaries and
river mouths. In the western North
Atlantic, there are two morphologically
and genetically distinct bottlenose
dolphin morphotypes described as the
coastal and offshore forms (Duffield et
al., 1983; Hersh and Duffield, 1990;
Mead and Potter, 1995; Curry and
Smith, 1997; Rosel et al., 2009). These
forms are genetically distinct based
upon both mitochondrial and nuclear
markers (Hoelzel et al., 1998; Rosel et
al., 2009). The offshore morphotype
does not occur in waters of Pamlico
Sound and is not discussed here. The
coastal morphotype is continuously
distributed in nearshore coastal and
estuarine waters along the U.S. Atlantic
coast south of Long Island, New York,
around the Florida peninsula and into
the Gulf of Mexico. Primary habitat for
coastal dolphins generally includes
waters less than 20 m deep (e.g.,
Garrison et al., 2003).
Initially, a single stock of coastal
bottlenose dolphins was thought to
migrate seasonally between New Jersey
(summer months) and central Florida
based on seasonal patterns in strandings
during a large scale mortality event
occurring during 1987–1988 (Scott et
al., 1988). However, re-analysis of
stranding data and extensive analysis of
genetic, photo-identification, and
satellite telemetry data demonstrate a
complex mosaic of coastal bottlenose
dolphin stocks (Zolman, 2002; McLellan
et al., 2002; Rosel et al., 2009; Hayes et
al., 2018). Integrated analysis of these
multiple lines of evidence suggests that
there are five coastal stocks of
bottlenose dolphins, including the
migratory stocks that may be present in
the action area.
The coastal morphotype inhabits
inshore estuarine waters in addition to
coastal nearshore and continental shelf
waters, with multiple lines of evidence
supporting demographic separation
between bottlenose dolphins residing
within different estuaries along the
Atlantic coast (Wells et al., 1987; Scott
et al., 1990; Wells et al., 1996; Zolman,
2002; Speakman et al., 2006; Stolen et
al., 2007; Balmer et al., 2008; Mazzoil et
al., 2008). In some cases, studies have
identified communities of resident
dolphins that are seen within relatively
restricted home ranges year-round, as
well as year-round resident dolphins
repeatedly observed across multiple
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
years (Zolman, 2002; Speakman et al.,
2006; Stolen et al., 2007; Mazzoil et al.,
2008). A few published studies
demonstrate that these resident animals
are genetically distinct from animals in
nearby coastal waters and/or from
animals residing in nearby estuarine
areas (Caldwell, 2001; Rosel et al., 2009;
Litz et al., 2012). However, the degree of
spatial overlap between estuarine and
coastal populations remains unclear,
and the degree of movement of resident
estuarine animals into coastal waters on
seasonal or shorter time scales is poorly
understood (Hayes et al., 2018).
Bottlenose dolphins inhabiting
primarily estuarine habitats are
considered distinct stocks from those
inhabiting coastal habitats.
The spatial extent of the coastal
stocks, their potential seasonal
movements, and their relationships with
estuarine stocks are poorly understood
(Hayes et al., 2018). The coastal stocks
include migratory stocks that move
south seasonally from mid-Atlantic
coastal waters. The northern migratory
stock is best defined by its distribution
during warm water months (best
described by July and August) when it
overlaps with the fewest stocks (Hayes
et al., 2018). During warm water
months, this stock occupies coastal
waters from the shoreline to
approximately the 20-m isobath
between Assateague, Virginia, and Long
Island, New York (Garrison et al.,
2017b). The stock migrates in late
summer and fall and, during cold water
months (best described by January and
February), occupies coastal waters from
approximately Cape Lookout, North
Carolina, to the North Carolina/Virginia
border (Garrison et al., 2017b).
The spatial distribution and migratory
movements of the southern migratory
stock are poorly understood and have
been defined based on movement data
from telemetry and photo-ID studies,
and stable isotope studies. The stock is
best delimited in warm water months,
when it overlaps least with other stocks,
as bottlenose dolphins that occupy
coastal waters from Cape Lookout to
Assateague, Virginia. Telemetry data
provide evidence for a stock of dolphins
migrating seasonally along the coast
between North Carolina and northern
Florida (Garrison et al., 2017b), and
suggest that during October–December
the stock occupies waters of southern
North Carolina (south of Cape Lookout).
During January–March, the stock
appears to move as far south as northern
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Florida and, during April–June, the
stock moves back north to North
Carolina to Cape Hatteras. During the
warm water months of July–August, the
stock is presumed to occupy coastal
waters north of Cape Lookout, North
Carolina, to Assateague, Virginia.
The northern North Carolina estuarine
system (NNCES) stock is best defined as
animals that occupy primarily waters of
the Pamlico Sound estuarine system
(which also includes Core, Roanoke,
and Albemarle sounds, and the Neuse
River) during warm water months (July–
August). Members of this stock also use
coastal waters (≤1 km from shore) of
North Carolina from Beaufort north to
Virginia Beach, Virginia (Garrison et al.
2017a). Many of these animals move out
of the estuaries during colder water
months and occupy coastal waters (≤3
km from shore) between the New River
and Oregon Inlet, North Carolina
(Garrison et al. 2017a). However, others
continue to be present in the Pamlico
Sound estuarine system during cold
water months (Goodman Hall et al.
2013). The timing of the seasonal
movements into and out of Pamlico
Sound and north along the coast likely
occurs with some inter-annual
variability related to seasonal changes in
water temperatures and/or prey
availability.
The southern North Carolina
estuarine system (SNCES) stock is best
defined as animals occupying estuarine
and nearshore coastal waters (≤3 km
from shore) between the Little River
Inlet estuary (33.9° N), inclusive of the
estuary (near the North Carolina/South
Carolina border), and the New River
(34.5° N) during cold water months (best
defined as January and February).
Members of this stock do not undertake
large-scale migratory movements.
Instead, they expand their range only
slightly northward during warmer
months into estuarine waters and
nearshore waters (≤3 km from shore) of
southern North Carolina as far as central
Core Sound and southern Pamlico
Sound (Garrison et al. 2017b). SNCES
stock animals have not been observed to
move north of Cape Lookout in coastal
waters nor into the main portion of
Pamlico Sound during warm water
months (Garrison et al. 2017b).
The four potentially affected stocks
likely exhibit seasonal spatial overlap to
varying degrees. The northern and
southern migratory stocks may overlap
in coastal waters of northern North
Carolina and Virginia during spring and
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
14892
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
fall migratory periods, but the degree of
overlap is unknown and it may vary
depending on annual water temperature
(Garrison et al. 2016). When the
northern migratory stock has migrated
in cold water months to coastal waters
from just north of Cape Hatteras, North
Carolina, to just south of Cape Lookout,
North Carolina, it overlaps spatially
with the NNCES stock (Garrison et al.
2017b). Depending on the timing of the
northward migration in the spring, it
may overlap with the NNCES stock in
coastal waters (<1 km from shore) as far
north as Virginia Beach, Virginia, and
the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay. The
northern migratory stock may also
overlap with the SNCES stock (Garrison
et al. 2017b) in nearshore coastal waters
south of Cape Hatteras in winter,
although the degree of overlap with is
not well defined. The southern
migratory stock may overlap with the
SNCES stock in coastal waters ≤3 km
from shore during October–December
(Garrison et al. 2017b). During April–
June, the southern migratory stock
overlaps in coastal waters with both the
SNCES and NNCES stocks and, during
July–August, likely overlaps in coastal
waters with the NNCES stock. During
warm water months (best defined as
July and August), the NNCES and
SNCES stocks overlap in estuarine
waters near Beaufort, North Carolina,
and in southern Pamlico Sound
(Garrison et al. 2017b). However,
SNCES stock animals were not observed
to move north of Cape Lookout in
coastal waters nor into the main portion
of Pamlico Sound during warm water
months (Garrison et al. 2017b) thereby
limiting the amount of overlap between
the two stocks. Overall, most overlap
between the coastal migratory stocks
and the estuarine stocks is likely to
occur within nearshore coastal waters
outside of Pamlico Sound. Based on the
information related to seasonal
distribution discussed above, we
assume that animals from the various
stocks could occur in the vicinity of the
training areas as follows: Northern
migratory dolphins from August–June,
southern migratory dolphins from
April–December, NNCES stock animals
year-round, and SNCES stock animals
from June–October.
The current population size of the
SNCES stock is considered unknown
due to the age of existing survey data.
An initial abundance estimate for
common bottlenose dolphins occurring
within the boundaries of the SNCES
stock was based on a photo-ID markrecapture survey of North Carolina
waters inshore of the barrier islands,
conducted during July 2000 (Read et al.,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
2003). This study estimated the number
of animals in the inshore waters of
North Carolina occupied by the SNCES
stock at 141 (CV=0.15, 95 percent CI:
112–200), but the estimate did not
account for the portion of the stock that
may have occurred in coastal waters.
Summer aerial survey data from 2002
(Garrison et al., 2016) were therefore
used to account for the portion of the
stock in coastal waters. The abundance
estimate for a 3-km strip from Cape
Lookout to the North Carolina-South
Carolina border was 2,454 (CV=0.53),
yielding a total of 2,595 (CV=0.50). This
estimate is likely positively biased as
some animals in coastal waters may
have belonged to a coastal stock.
A photo-ID mark-recapture study was
conducted by Urian et al. (2013) in July
2006 using similar methods to those in
Read et al. (2003) and included
estuarine waters of North Carolina from,
and including, the Little River Inlet
estuary (near the North Carolina/South
Carolina border) to, and including,
Pamlico Sound. The 2006 survey also
included coastal waters up to Cape
Hatteras extending up to 1 km from
shore. In order to estimate abundance
for the SNCES stock alone, only
sightings south of 34°46’ N in central
Core Sound were used. The resulting
abundance estimate included a
correction for the proportion of
dolphins with non-distinct fins in the
population. The abundance estimate for
the SNCES stock based upon photo-ID
mark-recapture surveys in 2006 was 188
animals (CV=0.19, 95 percent CI: 118–
257; Urian et al. 2013). This estimate is
probably negatively biased as the survey
covered waters only to 1 km from shore
and did not include habitat in southern
Pamlico Sound.
Bottlenose Dolphin Occurrence within
Pamlico Sound
In Pamlico Sound, bottlenose
dolphins concentrate in shallow water
habitats along shorelines, and few, if
any, individuals are present in the
central portions of the sound (Gannon,
2003; Read et al., 2003a, 2003b). The
dolphins utilize shallow habitats, such
as tributary creeks and the edges of the
Neuse River, where the bottom depth is
less than 3.5 m (11.5 ft) (Gannon, 2003).
Fine-scale distribution of dolphins
seems to relate to the presence of
topography or vertical structure, such as
the steeply-sloping bottom near the
shore and oyster reefs. Bottlenose
dolphins may use these features to
facilitate prey capture (Gannon, 2003).
In 2000, Duke University Marine Lab
(Duke) conducted a boat-based markrecapture survey throughout the
estuaries, bays and sounds of North
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Carolina (discussed above in context of
the SNCES stock population abundance;
Read et al., 2003). The 2000 boat-based
survey produced an estimate of 919
dolphins for the northern inshore waters
divided by an estimated 5,015 km2
(1,936 mi2) survey area (equating to a
density estimate of 0.183 dolphins per
km2). In a follow-on aerial study (July,
2002 to June, 2003) specifically in and
around BT–9 and BT–11, Duke reported
one sighting in the restricted area
surrounding BT–9, two sightings in
proximity to BT–11, and seven sightings
in waters adjacent to the bombing
targets (Maher, 2003). In total, the study
observed 276 bottlenose dolphins
ranging in group size from 2 to 70
animals.
Aerial surveys were flown in Pamlico
and Core sounds from July 2004 to April
2006 (Goodman et al. 2007). These
surveys yielded density estimates for
bottlenose dolphins in the western
portion of Pamlico Sound (including the
MCAS Cherry Point Range Complex)
ranging from 0.0272/km2 in winter to
0.2158/km2 in autumn. Correction
factors were incorporated for both
animals residing at the surface but not
sighted during the aerial survey and
animals below the surface that were not
sighted.
Results of a passive acoustic
monitoring effort conducted from 2006–
2007 by Duke University researchers
detected that dolphin vocalizations in
the BT–11 vicinity were higher in
August and September than vocalization
detection at BT–9 (Read et al., 2007).
Additionally, detected vocalizations of
dolphins were more frequent at night for
the BT–9 area and during early morning
hours at BT–11 (Read et al., 2007).
Biologically Important Areas—
LaBrecque et al. (2015) recognize
multiple biologically important areas
(BIA) for small and resident populations
of bottlenose dolphins in the mid- and
south Atlantic. Small and resident
population BIAs are areas and times
within which small and resident
populations occupy a limited
geographic extent, and are therefore
necessarily important areas for those
populations. Here, these include areas
defined for the SNCES and NNCES
populations and correspond with the
stock boundaries described above.
Unusual Mortality Events (UME)—A
UME is defined under the MMPA as ‘‘a
stranding that is unexpected; involves a
significant die-off of any marine
mammal population; and demands
immediate response.’’ Beginning in July
2013, elevated strandings of bottlenose
dolphins were observed along the
Atlantic coast from New York to
Florida. The investigation was closed in
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
2015, with the UME ultimately being
attributed to cetacean morbillivirus
(though additional contributory factors
are under investigation;
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-life-distress/2013-2015bottlenose-dolphin-unusual-mortalityevent-mid-atlantic; accessed February
24, 2020). Dolphin strandings during
2013–15 were greater than six times
higher than the annual average from
2007–12, with the most strandings
reported from Virginia, North Carolina,
and Florida. A total of approximately
1,650 bottlenose dolphins stranded from
June 2013 to March 2015. Only one
offshore ecotype dolphin has been
identified, meaning that over 99 percent
of affected dolphins were of the coastal
ecotype. Research, to include analyses
of stranding samples and post-UME
monitoring and modeling of surviving
populations, will continue in order to
better understand the impacts of the
UME on the affected stocks. Notably, an
earlier major UME in 1987–88 was also
caused by morbillivirus, and led to the
current designation of all coastal stocks
of Atlantic bottlenose dolphin as
depleted under the MMPA. Over 740
stranded dolphins were recovered
during that event.
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory
modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to
anthropogenic sound can have
deleterious effects. To appropriately
assess the potential effects of exposure
to sound, it is necessary to understand
the frequency ranges marine mammals
are able to hear. Current data indicate
that not all marine mammal species
have equal hearing capabilities (e.g.,
Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and
Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008).
To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007)
recommended that marine mammals be
divided into functional hearing groups
14893
based on directly measured or estimated
hearing ranges on the basis of available
behavioral response data, audiograms
derived using auditory evoked potential
techniques, anatomical modeling, and
other data. Note that no direct
measurements of hearing ability have
been successfully completed for
mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency
cetaceans).
Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described
generalized hearing ranges for these
marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen
based on the approximately 65 decibel
(dB) threshold from the normalized
composite audiograms, with the
exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower
bound was deemed to be biologically
implausible and the lower bound from
Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine
mammal hearing groups and their
associated hearing ranges are provided
in Table 4.
TABLE 4—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS
[NMFS, 2018]
Hearing group
Generalized hearing range *
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) ................................................................................................
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales) .....................
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) .............................................................................................
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) .........................................................................
7 Hz to 35 kHz.
150 Hz to 160 kHz.
275 Hz to 160 kHz.
50 Hz to 86 kHz.
60 Hz to 39 kHz.
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual species’
hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ∼65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram,
with the exception for lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
For more detail concerning these
groups and associated frequency ranges,
please see NMFS (2018) for a review of
available information. Bottlenose
dolphins are categorized as midfrequency cetaceans.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Potential Effects of Specified Activities
on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
Sections 6, 7, and 9 of the USMC’s
application includes a summary of the
ways that components of the specified
activity may impact marine mammals
and their habitat, including specific
discussion of potential effects to marine
mammals from noise and other stressors
produced through the use of munitions
in training exercises, and a summary of
the results of monitoring during
previous years’ training exercises. We
have reviewed the USMC’s discussion
of potential effects for accuracy and
completeness in its application and
refer to that information rather than
repeating it here. Here, we provide a
brief technical background on sound, on
the characteristics of certain sound
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
types, and on metrics used in this
proposal, as well as a brief overview of
the potential effects to marine mammals
associated with use of explosive
munitions and the associated criteria for
evaluation of these potential effects.
Alternatively, NMFS has included a
lengthy discussion of the potential
effects of similar activities on marine
mammals, including specifically from
training exercises using munitions, in
other Federal Register notices,
including prior notices for the same
specified activity. For full detail, we
refer the reader to these notices. For
previous discussion provided in context
of the same specified activity, please see
79 FR 41374 (July 15, 2014). This
previous discussion of potential effects
remains relevant. For more recent
discussion of similar effects
incorporating the most current
literature, please see, e.g., 85 FR 5782
(January 31, 2020); 83 FR 29872 (June
26, 2018); 82 FR 61372 (December 27,
2017), or view documents available
online at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
national/marine-mammal-protection/
incidental-take-authorizations-militaryreadiness-activities.
The planned training exercises have
the potential to cause take of 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
non-lethal injury (Level A harassment)
or disturbance (Level B harassment).
Under the previous incidental take
authorization issued to USMC, serious
injury and/or mortality was authorized
as a precaution. However, no such
incidents have ever been recorded in
association with USMC training
activities and none are expected. As
such, they are not proposed for
authorization herein. In addition, NMFS
also considered the potential for
harassment from vessel and aircraft
operations. The potential effects of
impulsive sound sources (underwater
detonations) from the proposed training
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
14894
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
activities may include one or more of
the following: tolerance, masking,
disturbance, hearing threshold shift, and
stress responses.
The Estimated Take section later in
this document includes a quantitative
analysis of the number of individuals
that are expected to be taken by the
specified activity. The Negligible Impact
Analysis and Determination section
includes an analysis of how these
activities will impact marine mammals
and considers the content of this
section, the Estimated Take section, and
the Proposed Mitigation section, to draw
conclusions regarding the likely impacts
of these activities on the reproductive
success or survivorship of individuals
and from that on the affected marine
mammal populations.
Description of Sound Sources
This section contains a brief technical
background on sound, on the
characteristics of certain sound types,
and on metrics used in this proposal
inasmuch as the information is relevant
to the specified activity and to a
discussion of the potential effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
found later in this document. For
general information on sound and its
interaction with the marine
environment, please see, e.g., Au and
Hastings (2008); Richardson et al.
(1995); Urick (1983).
Sound travels in waves, the basic
components of which are frequency,
wavelength, velocity, and amplitude.
Frequency is the number of pressure
waves that pass by a reference point per
unit of time and is measured in hertz or
cycles per second. Wavelength is the
distance between two peaks or
corresponding points of a sound wave
(length of one cycle). Higher frequency
sounds have shorter wavelengths than
lower frequency sounds, and typically
attenuate (decrease) more rapidly,
except in certain cases in shallower
water. Amplitude is the height of the
sound pressure wave or the ‘‘loudness’’
of a sound and is typically described
using the relative unit of the decibel
(dB). A sound pressure level (SPL) in dB
is described as the ratio between a
measured pressure and a reference
pressure (for underwater sound, this is
1 microPascal (mPa)), and is a
logarithmic unit that accounts for large
variations in amplitude. Therefore, a
relatively small change in dB
corresponds to large changes in sound
pressure. The source level (SL)
represents the SPL referenced at a
distance of 1 m from the source
(referenced to 1 mPa), while the received
level is the SPL at the listener’s position
(referenced to 1 mPa).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
Root mean square (rms) is the
quadratic mean sound pressure over the
duration of an impulse. Root mean
square is calculated by squaring all of
the sound amplitudes, averaging the
squares, and then taking the square root
of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean
square accounts for both positive and
negative values; squaring the pressures
makes all values positive so that they
may be accounted for in the summation
of pressure levels (Hastings and Popper,
2005). This measurement is often used
in the context of discussing behavioral
effects, in part because behavioral
effects, which often result from auditory
cues, may be better expressed through
averaged units than by peak pressures.
Sound exposure level (SEL;
represented as dB re 1 mPa2-s) represents
the total energy in a stated frequency
band over a stated time interval or event
and considers both intensity and
duration of exposure. The per-pulse SEL
is calculated over the time window
containing the entire pulse (i.e., 100
percent of the acoustic energy). SEL is
a cumulative metric; it can be
accumulated over a single pulse, or
calculated over periods containing
multiple pulses. Cumulative SEL
represents the total energy accumulated
by a receiver over a defined time
window or during an event. Peak sound
pressure (also referred to as zero-to-peak
sound pressure or 0-pk) is the maximum
instantaneous sound pressure
measurable in the water at a specified
distance from the source and is
represented in the same units as the rms
sound pressure.
When underwater objects vibrate or
activity occurs, sound-pressure waves
are created. These waves alternately
compress and decompress the water as
the sound wave travels. Underwater
sound waves radiate in a manner similar
to ripples on the surface of a pond and
may be either directed in a beam or
beams or may radiate in all directions
(omnidirectional sources), as is the case
for sound produced by the pile driving
activity considered here. The
compressions and decompressions
associated with sound waves are
detected as changes in pressure by
aquatic life and man-made sound
receptors such as hydrophones.
Even in the absence of sound from the
specified activity, the underwater
environment is typically loud due to
ambient sound, which is defined as
environmental background sound levels
lacking a single source or point
(Richardson et al., 1995). The sound
level of a region is defined by the total
acoustical energy being generated by
known and unknown sources. These
sources may include physical (e.g.,
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
wind and waves, earthquakes, ice,
atmospheric sound), biological (e.g.,
sounds produced by marine mammals,
fish, and invertebrates), and
anthropogenic (e.g., vessels, dredging,
construction) sound. A number of
sources contribute to ambient sound,
including wind and waves, which are a
main source of naturally occurring
ambient sound for frequencies between
200 Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). In
general, ambient sound levels tend to
increase with increasing wind speed
and wave height. Precipitation can
become an important component of total
sound at frequencies above 500 Hz, and
possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet
times. Marine mammals can contribute
significantly to ambient sound levels, as
can some fish and snapping shrimp. The
frequency band for biological
contributions is from approximately 12
Hz to over 100 kHz. Sources of ambient
sound related to human activity include
transportation (surface vessels),
dredging and construction, oil and gas
drilling and production, geophysical
surveys, sonar, and explosions. Vessel
noise typically dominates the total
ambient sound for frequencies between
20 and 300 Hz. In general, the
frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are
below 1 kHz and, if higher frequency
sound levels are created, they attenuate
rapidly.
The sum of the various natural and
anthropogenic sound sources that
comprise ambient sound at any given
location and time depends not only on
the source levels (as determined by
current weather conditions and levels of
biological and human activity) but also
on the ability of sound to propagate
through the environment. In turn, sound
propagation is dependent on the
spatially and temporally varying
properties of the water column and sea
floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a
result of the dependence on a large
number of varying factors, ambient
sound levels can be expected to vary
widely over both coarse and fine spatial
and temporal scales. Sound levels at a
given frequency and location can vary
by 10–20 decibels (dB) from day to day
(Richardson et al., 1995). The result is
that, depending on the source type and
its intensity, sound from the specified
activity may be a negligible addition to
the local environment or could form a
distinctive signal that may affect marine
mammals. Details of source types are
described in the following text.
Sounds are often considered to fall
into one of two general types: Pulsed
and non-pulsed (defined in the
following). The distinction between
these two sound types is important
because they have differing potential to
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
cause physical effects, particularly with
regard to hearing (e.g., Ward, 1997 in
Southall et al., 2007). Please see
Southall et al. (2007) for an in-depth
discussion of these concepts. The
distinction between these two sound
types is not always obvious, as certain
signals share properties of both pulsed
and non-pulsed sounds. A signal near a
source could be categorized as a pulse,
but due to propagation effects as it
moves farther from the source, the
signal duration becomes longer (e.g.,
Greene and Richardson, 1988).
Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns,
explosions, gunshots, sonic booms,
impact pile driving) produce signals
that are brief (typically considered to be
less than one second), broadband, atonal
transients (ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris,
1998; NIOSH, 1998; ISO, 2003) and
occur either as isolated events or
repeated in some succession. Pulsed
sounds are all characterized by a
relatively rapid rise from ambient
pressure to a maximal pressure value
followed by a rapid decay period that
may include a period of diminishing,
oscillating maximal and minimal
pressures, and generally have an
increased capacity to induce physical
injury as compared with sounds that
lack these features.
Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal,
narrowband, or broadband, brief or
prolonged, and may be either
continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995;
NIOSH, 1998). Some of these nonpulsed sounds can be transient signals
of short duration but without the
essential properties of pulses (e.g., rapid
rise time). Examples of non-pulsed
sounds include those produced by
vessels, aircraft, machinery operations
such as drilling or dredging, vibratory
pile driving, and active sonar systems.
The duration of such sounds, as
received at a distance, can be greatly
extended in a highly reverberant
environment.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Mortality
Mortality risk assessment may be
considered in terms of direct injury,
which includes primary blast injury and
barotrauma. The potential for direct
injury of marine mammals has been
inferred from terrestrial mammal
experiments and from post-mortem
examination of marine mammals
believed to have been exposed to
underwater explosions (Finneran and
Jenkins, 2012; Ketten et al., 1993;
Richmond et al., 1973). Actual effects
on marine mammals may differ from
terrestrial animals due to anatomical
and physiological differences, such as a
reinforced trachea and flexible thoracic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
cavity, which may decrease the risk of
injury (Ridgway and Dailey, 1972).
Primary blast injuries result from the
initial compression of a body exposed to
a blast wave, and are usually limited to
gas-containing structures (e.g., lung and
gut) and the auditory system (U.S.
Department of the Navy, 2001b).
Barotrauma refers to injuries caused
when large pressure changes occur
across tissue interfaces, normally at the
boundaries of air-filled tissues such as
the lungs. Primary blast injury to the
respiratory system may be fatal
depending upon the severity of the
trauma. Rupture of the lung may
introduce air into the vascular system,
producing air emboli that can restrict
oxygen delivery to the brain or heart.
Thresholds for evaluation of potential
for mortality are based on the level of
impact that would cause extensive lung
injury to one percent of exposed
animals (i.e., an impact level from
which one percent of exposed animals
would not recover) (Finneran and
Jenkins, 2012). The threshold represents
the expected onset of mortality, where
99 percent of exposed animals would be
expected to survive. Most survivors
would have moderate blast injuries. The
lethal exposure level of blast noise,
associated with the positive impulse
pressure of the blast, is expressed as
Pa·s and is determined using the
Goertner (1982) modified positive
impulse equation. This equation
incorporates source/animal depths and
the mass of a newborn calf for the
affected species. The threshold is
conservative because animals of greater
mass can withstand greater pressure
waves, and newborn calves typically
make up a very small percentage of any
cetacean group.
Injury (Level A Harassment)
Potential injuries that may occur to
marine mammals include blast related
injury: Gastrointestinal (GI) tract injury
and slight lung injury, and irrecoverable
auditory damage. These injury
categories are all types of Level A
harassment as defined in the MMPA.
Slight Lung Injury—This threshold is
based on a level of lung injury from
which all exposed animals are expected
to survive (zero percent mortality)
(Finneran and Jenkins, 2012). Similar to
the mortality determination, the metric
is positive impulse and the equation for
determination is that of the Goertner
injury model (1982), corrected for
atmospheric and hydrostatic pressures
and based on the cube root scaling of
body mass (Richmond et al., 1973; U.S.
Department of the Navy, 2001b).
Gastrointestinal Tract Injuries—GI
tract injuries are correlated with the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14895
peak pressure of an underwater
detonation. GI tract injury thresholds
are based on the results of experiments
in which terrestrial mammals were
exposed to small charges. The peak
pressure of the shock wave was found
to be the causal agent in recoverable
contusions (bruises) in the GI tract
(Richmond et al., 1973, in Finneran and
Jenkins, 2012).
Auditory Damage—Auditory injury,
or permanent threshold shift (PTS), is
not fully recoverable and therefore
results in a permanent decrease in
hearing sensitivity. As there have been
no studies to determine the onset of PTS
in marine mammals, this threshold is
estimated from available information
associated with temporary threshold
shift (TTS), i.e., recoverable auditory
damage.
Non-Injurious Impacts (Level B
Harassment)
Two categories of Level B harassment
are currently recognized: TTS and
behavioral impacts. Although TTS is a
physiological impact, it is not
considered injury because auditory
structures are temporarily fatigued
instead of being permanently damaged.
Behavioral Impacts
Behavioral impacts refer to
disturbances that may occur at sound
levels below those considered to cause
TTS in marine mammals, particularly in
cases of multiple detonations. During an
activity with a series of explosions (not
concurrent multiple explosions shown
in a burst), an animal is expected to
exhibit a startle reaction to the first
detonation followed by a behavioral
response after multiple detonations. At
close ranges and high sound levels,
avoidance of the area around the
explosions is the assumed behavioral
response in most cases. Other
behavioral impacts may include
decreased ability to feed, communicate,
migrate, or reproduce, among others.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of
the number of incidental takes proposed
for authorization through this IHA,
which will inform NMFS’ negligible
impact determination.
Harassment is the only type of take
expected to result from these activities.
For this military readiness activity, the
MMPA defines harassment as (i) Any
act that injures or has the significant
potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild (Level
A harassment); or (ii) Any act that
disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild by causing disruption of natural
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
14896
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing,
breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a
point where the behavioral patterns are
abandoned or significantly altered
(Level B harassment).
Authorized takes would primarily be
by Level B harassment, in the form of
disruption of behavioral patterns and
temporary threshold shift, for individual
marine mammals resulting from
exposure to acoustic stressors. A small
amount of Level A harassment, in the
form of permanent threshold shift, is
anticipated and proposed for
authorization. No Level A harassment is
anticipated to occur in the form of
gastrointestinal (GI) tract or lung injury.
No serious injury or mortality is
anticipated or proposed to be authorized
for this activity. Below we describe how
the take is estimated.
Generally speaking, we estimate take
from exposure to sound by considering:
(1) Acoustic thresholds above which
NMFS believes the best available
science indicates marine mammals will
be behaviorally harassed or incur some
degree of permanent hearing
impairment; (2) the area or volume of
water that will be ensonified above
these levels in a day; (3) the density or
occurrence of marine mammals within
these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the
number of days of activities. For this
proposed IHA, the U.S. Navy employed
a sophisticated model known as the
Navy Acoustic Effects Model (NAEMO)
for assessing the impacts of underwater
sound. The USMC then incorporated
these results into their application.
Acoustic Thresholds
Using the best available science,
NMFS applies acoustic thresholds that
identify the received level of
underwater sound above which exposed
marine mammals would be reasonably
expected to be behaviorally harassed
(equated to Level B harassment) or to
incur PTS of some degree (equated to
Level A harassment). Thresholds have
also been developed to identify the
pressure levels above which animals
may incur different types of tissue
damage from exposure to pressure
waves from explosive detonation.
The criteria and thresholds used to
estimate potential pressure and energy
impacts to marine mammals resulting
from detonations are as presented in the
U.S. Navy’s Phase III criteria
documentation (DoN, 2017). These
criteria represent the best available
science. Criteria used to analyze impacts
to marine mammals include mortality,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
harassment that causes or is likely to
cause injury (Level A harassment) and
harassment that disrupts or is likely to
disrupt natural behavior patterns (Level
B harassment).
Harassment (Auditory and
Behavioral)—In order to evaluate the
potential for harassment resulting from
auditory damage, NMFS’s ‘‘Technical
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of
Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing’’ (NMFS, 2018)
identifies dual criteria to assess the
potential for permanent (Level A
harassment) and temporary (Level B
harassment) threshold shift to occur for
different marine mammal groups (based
on hearing sensitivity) as a result of
exposure to noise. The technical
guidance identifies the received levels,
or thresholds, above which individual
marine mammals are predicted to
experience changes in their hearing
sensitivity for all underwater
anthropogenic sound sources, and
reflects the best available science on the
potential for noise to affect auditory
sensitivity by:
• Dividing sound sources into two
groups (i.e., impulsive and nonimpulsive) based on their potential to
affect hearing sensitivity;
• Choosing metrics that best address
the impacts of noise on hearing
sensitivity, i.e., peak sound pressure
level (peak SPL) (reflects the physical
properties of impulsive sound sources
to affect hearing sensitivity) and
cumulative sound exposure level (cSEL)
(accounts for not only level of exposure
but also duration of exposure); and
• Dividing marine mammals into
hearing groups and developing auditory
weighting functions based on the
science supporting that not all marine
mammals hear and use sound in the
same manner.
The premise of the dual criteria
approach is that, while there is no
definitive answer to the question of
which acoustic metric is most
appropriate for assessing the potential
for injury, both the received level and
duration of received signals are
important to an understanding of the
potential for auditory injury. Therefore,
peak SPL is used to define a pressure
criterion above which auditory injury is
predicted to occur, regardless of
exposure duration (i.e., any single
exposure at or above this level is
considered to cause auditory injury),
and cSEL is used to account for the total
energy received over the duration of
sound exposure (i.e., both received level
and duration of exposure) (South all et
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
al., 2007, 2019; NMFS, 2018). As a
general principle, whichever criterion is
exceeded first (i.e., results in the largest
insolent) would be used as the effective
injury criterion (i.e., the more
precautionary of the criteria). Note that
cSEL acoustic threshold levels
incorporate marine mammal auditory
weighting functions, while peak
pressure thresholds do not (i.e., flat or
un weighted). Weighting functions for
each hearing group (e.g., low-, mid-, and
high-frequency cetaceans) are described
in NMFS (2018).
NMFS (2018) recommends 24 hours
as a maximum accumulation period
relative to cSEL thresholds. These
thresholds were developed by
compiling and synthesizing the best
available science, and are provided in
Table 5 below. The references, analysis,
and methodology used in the
development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS (2018), which is
available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
In order to evaluate the potential for
Level B (behavioral) harassment
resulting from multiple, successive
explosive detonations (i.e., detonations
happening at the same location within
a 24-hour period), the threshold is set 5
dB below the SEL-based TTS threshold.
Non-Auditory Impacts—As described
previously, explosive detonations have
the potential to cause non-serious injury
(Level A harassment) or mortality/
serious injury. These potential effects
are assumed to occur due to the effects
of pressure waves on gas-filled
structures (i.e., lungs, GI tract).
Mortality and slight lung injury
thresholds are calculated using
equations incorporating the assumed
mass and depth of the mammal:
Mortality threshold (50 percent risk of
extensive lung injury) = 144M1/3(1 +
D/10.1)1⁄6 Pas
Injury threshold (50 percent risk of
slight lung injury) = 65.8M1/3(1 + D/
10.1)1⁄6 Pas
Adult and calf mass for bottlenose
dolphin are defined based on data from
‘‘Criteria and Thresholds for U.S. Navy
Acoustic and Explosive Impacts to
Marine Mammals and Sea Turtles.’’ A
peak SPL threshold determined through
experiments on terrestrial mammals is
assumed to represent the potential for
GI tract injury. Relevant thresholds for
bottlenose dolphins (i.e., mid-frequency
cetaceans) are provided in Table 5.
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
14897
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
TABLE 5—EXPLOSIVE CRITERIA AND THRESHOLDS USED FOR IMPACT ANALYSES
Level A harassment
Level B harassment
GI tract injury
PTS 1
TTS 1
243 dB SPL (Pak) 2 ........................
185 dB SE L .................................
230 dB SPL
170 dB SE L .................................
224 dB SPL
Behavior
165 dB SEL.3
1 Dual metric criteria. SEL thresholds are cumulative, referenced to 1 μPa2-s, and weighted according to appropriate auditory weighting function. SPL thresholds are peak pressure referenced to 1 μPa and un weighted within generalized hearing range.
2 Threshold for 50 percent risk of GI tract injury, used in modeling to assess potential for injuries due to underwater explosions. Threshold for 1
percent risk of GI tract injury (237 dB SPL Pak) is used in modeling range to effect.
3 Applicable to events with multiple explosive detonations within any given 24-hr period. For single explosions at received sound levels below
hearing loss thresholds, the most likely behavioral response is a brief alerting or orienting response. Since no further sounds follow the initial
brief impulses, significant behavioral reactions would not be expected to occur.
Marine Mammal Occurrence
Please see Description of Marine
Mammals in the Area of Specified
Activities for details regarding past
marine mammal survey effort conducted
in the Alnico Sound region. A density
of 0.183 dolphins per square kilometer
was used year-round (Read et al., 2003).
The USMC and NMFS believe that this
value, which is consistent with the
information used to support prior
USMC requests for authorization, is
most appropriate. Although the aerial
survey study (Goodman et al., 2007)
provides seasonal density values, and
reports a higher density value for some
seasons, the USMC believes the Read et
al. (2003) survey data to represent the
better density estimate.
In order to apportion any predicted
exposures to the potentially affected
stocks, USMC calculated monthly stockspecific proportions of each stock
expected to be present in the vicinity of
the training exercises, based on relative
stock-specific abundance and available
information about stock movements and
seasonal occurrence in the area. Please
see Table 3–2 in the USMC application.
Exposure Modeling
NAEMO is the standard model used
by the Navy to estimate the potential
acoustic effects of proposed Navy
training and testing activities on marine
mammals and was employed by the
Navy in this case to evaluate the
potential effects of the proposed USMC
training activities. NAEMO is comprised
of multiple modules that, in a stepwise
process (1) define the activity, including
sound source characteristics, location,
and duration; (2) incorporate sitespecific oceanographic and
environmental data required for a
scenario simulation; (3) generate
acoustic propagation data; (4) distribute
marine species within the modeling
environment; (5) execute the simulation
and record the sound received by each
virtual marine mammal in the area for
every time step that sound is emitted;
incorporating the scenario definition,
sound propagation data, and marine
species distribution data, ultimately
providing raw data output for each
simulation; (6) provide the computation
of estimated effects that exceed defined
threshold criteria; and (7) generate a
report of simulation results over
multiple scenario runs.
In summary, source characteristics are
integrated with environmental data
(bathymetry, sound speed, bottom
characterization, and wind speed) to
calculate the three-dimensional sound
field for each source. Marine species
density information is then processed to
develop a series of distribution files for
each species present in the study area.
Each distribution file varies the
abundance and placement of the
animals based on uncertainty defined in
the density and published group size.
The scenario details, three-dimensional
sound field data, and marine species
distributions are then combined in
NAEMO to build virtual threedimensional representations of each
event and environment. This
information is then processed by
NAEMO to determine the number of
marine species exposed in each
scenario.
The NAEMO simulation process is
run multiple times for each season to
provide an average of potential effects
on marine species. Each iteration reads
in the species dive data and introduces
variations to the marine species
distributions in addition to the initial
position and direction of each platform
and ordnance within the designated
area. Effects criteria and thresholds are
then applied to quantify the predicted
number of marine mammal effects.
Results from each iteration are averaged
to provide the number of marine species
effects for a given period. A complete
description of the NAEMO model and
modeling approach used for this
analysis can be found in the Navy’s
Phase III Quantitative Analysis
Technical Report (Blackstock et al.,
2017).
As noted previously, all ordnance
expenditure at BT–11 is inert and,
therefore, only ordnance use at BT–9 is
considered in the effects analysis
described here. The following types of
ordnance were modeled: Bomb (GBU,
BDU, MK), 2.75-in Rocket HE, 5-in
Rocket HE, G911 Grenades, 30 mm HE,
and 40 mm HE. Note that live bombs are
not planned for use. Therefore, we do
not provide information related to the
modeling. All explosives are modeled as
detonating at a 0.1-meter depth.
Relevant parameters are provided in
Table 6. For further detail regarding the
modeling, including details concerning
environmental data sources, please the
USMC application. Table 7 shows the
quantitative exposure modeling results.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
TABLE 6—SOURCE CHARACTERISTICS
Net explosive
weight
(lbs)
Source
5-in rocket ....................................................................................................................................
2.75-in rocket ...............................................................................................................................
Grenade .......................................................................................................................................
40 mm ..........................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Peak one-third
octave (OTO)
source level
(dB)
15
4.8
0.5
0.1199
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
229
224
214
208
Center
frequency
of peak OTO
(Hz)
1008
1270
2540
4032
14898
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
TABLE 6—SOURCE CHARACTERISTICS—Continued
Net explosive
weight
(lbs)
Source
30 mm ..........................................................................................................................................
Peak one-third
octave (OTO)
source level
(dB)
0.1019
207
Center
frequency
of peak OTO
(Hz)
4032
TABLE 7—QUANTITATIVE MODELING RESULTS
Level B harassment
Level A harassment
Species
Mortality
Behavioral
Bottlenose dolphin ...................................
72.09
The exposure modeling results shown
in Table 7 support proposed bottlenose
dolphin take authorization numbers of
102 incidents of Level B harassment and
2 incidents of Level A harassment (PTS
only). No incidents of GI tract injury or
lung injury are anticipated.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible
methods of taking pursuant to the
activity, and other means of effecting
the least practicable impact on the
species or stock and its habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating
grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of
the species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses. NMFS regulations
require applicants for incidental take
authorizations to include information
about the availability and feasibility
(economic and technological) of
equipment, methods, and manner of
conducting the activity or other means
of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or
stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)). The NDAA for FY 2004
amended the MMPA as it relates to
military readiness activities and the
incidental take authorization process
such that ‘‘least practicable impact’’
shall include consideration of personnel
safety, practicality of implementation,
and impact on the effectiveness of the
military readiness activity.
In evaluating how mitigation may or
may not be appropriate to ensure the
least practicable adverse impact on
species or stocks and their habitat, as
well as subsistence uses where
applicable, we carefully consider two
primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the
degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is
expected to reduce impacts to marine
mammals, marine mammal species or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:57 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
TTS
PTS
29.99
GI tract injury
1.81
stocks, and their habitat, as well as
subsistence uses. This considers the
nature of the potential adverse impact
being mitigated (likelihood, scope,
range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be
effective if implemented (probability of
accomplishing the mitigating result if
implemented as planned), the
likelihood of effective implementation
(probability implemented as planned);
and
(2) The practicability of the measures
for applicant implementation, which
may consider such things as cost,
impact on operations, and, in the case
of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of
implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness
activity.
Mitigation for Marine Mammals and
Their Habitat
NMFS and the USMC have worked to
identify potential practicable and
effective mitigation measures. These
measures include the following:
Visual Monitoring—Range operators
conduct or direct visual surveys to
monitor the target areas for protected
species before and after each exercise.
Range operation and control personnel
would monitor the target area through
two tower-mounted safety and
surveillance cameras. In addition, when
small boats are part of planned exercises
and already on range, visual checks by
boat crew would be performed.
The remotely operated range cameras
are high-resolution cameras that allow
viewers to see animals at the surface
and breaking the surface (though not
underwater). The camera system has
night vision (IR) capabilities. Lenses on
the camera system have a focal length of
40 mm to 2200 mm (56x), with view
angles of 18 degrees 10′ and 13 degrees
41′ respectively. The field of view when
zoomed in on the Rattan Bay targets will
be 23′ wide by 17′ high, and on the
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
0.13
Lung injury
0.01
<0.01
mouth of Rattan Bay itself 87′ wide by
66′ high. Observers using the cameras
are able to clearly identify ducks
floating on waters near the target.
In the event that a marine mammal is
sighted within 914 m (3,000 ft) of the
BT–9 target area, personnel would
declare the area as fouled and cease
training exercises. Personnel would
commence operations in BT–9 only after
the animal has moved 914 m (3,000 ft)
away from the target area.
For BT–11, in the event that a marine
mammal is sighted anywhere within the
confines of Rattan Bay, personnel would
declare the water-based targets within
Rattan Bay as fouled and cease training
exercises. Personnel would commence
operations in BT–11 only after the
animal has moved out of Rattan Bay.
Range Sweeps—MCAS Cherry Point
contracts range sweeps with commercial
support aircraft each weekday morning
prior to the commencement of the day’s
range operations. The pilot and aircrew
are trained in spotting objects in the
water. The primary goal of the preexercise sweep is to ensure that the
target area is clear of unauthorized
vessels or persons and protected
species. Range sweeps would not occur
on weekend mornings.
The sweeps are flown at at 100 to 300
ft (30–90 m) above the water surface, at
airspeeds between 60 to 100 knots (69
to 115 mph). The crew communicates
directly with range personnel and can
provide immediate notification to range
operators of a fouled target area due to
the presence of protected species.
Aircraft Cold Pass—Standard
operating procedures for waterborne
targets require the pilot to perform a
visual check prior to ordnance delivery
to ensure the target area is clear of
unauthorized civilian boats and
personnel, and protected species. This
is referred to as a ‘‘cold’’ or clearing
pass. Pilots requesting entry onto the
BT–9 and BT–11 airspace must perform
a low-altitude, cold first pass (a pass
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
without any release of ordnance)
immediately prior to ordnance delivery
at the bombing targets both day and
night.
Pilots would conduct the cold pass
with the aircraft (helicopter or fixedwinged) flying straight and level at
altitudes of 61 to 914 m (200 to 3,000
ft) over the target area. The viewing
angle is approximately 15 degrees. A
blind spot exists to the immediate rear
of the aircraft. Based upon prevailing
visibility, a pilot can see more than one
mile forward upon approach. If marine
mammals are not present in the target
area, the Range Controller may grant
ordnance delivery as conditions
warrant.
Delay of Exercises—The USMC would
consider an active range as fouled and
not available for use if a marine
mammal is present within 914 m (3,000
ft) of the target area at BT–9 or
anywhere within Rattan Bay (BT–11).
Therefore, if USMC personnel observe a
marine mammal within 914 m (3,000 ft)
of the target at BT–9 or anywhere within
Rattan Bay at BT–11 during the cold
pass or from range camera detection,
they would delay training until the
marine mammal moves beyond and on
a path away from 914 m (3,000 ft) from
the BT–9 target or moved out of Rattan
Bay at BT–11. This mitigation applies to
air-to-surface and surface-to-surface
exercises day or night.
Approximately 15 percent of training
activities take place during nighttime
hours. During these training events,
monitoring procedures mirror day time
operations as range operators first
visually search the target area with the
high-resolution camera. Pilots will then
conduct a low-altitude first cold pass
and utilize night vision capabilities to
visually check the target area for any
surfacing mammals.
Vessel Operation—All vessels used
during training operations would abide
by NMFS’ Southeast Regional Viewing
Guidelines designed to prevent
harassment to marine mammals.
Stranding Network Coordination—
The USMC would coordinate with the
local NMFS Stranding Coordinator to
discuss any unusual marine mammal
behavior and any stranding, beached
live/dead, or floating marine mammals
that may occur at any time during
training activities or within 24 hours
after completion of training.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s proposed measures, as well
as other measures considered by NMFS,
NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the proposed mitigation measures
provide the means effecting the least
practicable impact on the affected
species or stocks and their habitat,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of
such species or stock for subsistence
uses.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth
requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking.
The MMPA implementing regulations at
50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that
requests for authorizations must include
the suggested means of accomplishing
the necessary monitoring and reporting
that will result in increased knowledge
of the species and of the level of taking
or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be
present in the proposed action area.
Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the
most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting
requirements prescribed by NMFS
should contribute to improved
understanding of one or more of the
following:
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species or stocks in the area in which
take is anticipated (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 marine mammal
responses (behavioral or physiological)
to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or
cumulative), other stressors, or
cumulative impacts from multiple
stressors.
• How anticipated responses to
stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
fitness and survival of individual
marine mammals; or (2) populations,
species, or stocks.
• Effects on marine mammal habitat
(e.g., marine mammal prey species,
acoustic habitat, or other important
physical components of marine
mammal habitat).
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
The USMC proposes to conduct the
following monitoring activities:
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14899
Protected Species Observer Training—
Operators of small boats, and other
personnel monitoring for marine
mammals from watercraft shall be
required to take the U.S. Navy’s Marine
Species Awareness Training. Pilots
conducting range sweeps shall be
instructed on marine mammal
observation techniques during routine
Range Management Department
briefings. This training would make
personnel knowledgeable of marine
mammals, protected species, and visual
cues related to the presence of marine
mammals and protected species.
Pre- and Post-Exercise Monitoring—
The USMC would conduct pre-exercise
monitoring the morning of an exercise
and post-exercise monitoring the
morning following an exercise, unless
an exercise occurs on a Friday, in which
case the post-exercise sweep would take
place the following Monday. If the crew
sights marine mammals during a range
sweep, they would collect sighting data
and immediately provide the
information to range personnel who
would take appropriate management
action. Range staff would relay the
sighting information to training
Commanders scheduled on the range
after the observation. Range personnel
would enter the data into the USMC
sighting database. Sighting data
includes the following (collected to the
best of the observer’s ability): (1)
Location (either an approximate
location or latitude and longitude); (2)
the platform that sighted the animal; (3)
date and time; (4) species; (5) number of
animals; (6) the animals’ direction of
travel and/or behavior; and (7) weather.
Long-term Monitoring—MCAS Cherry
Point has contracted Duke University to
develop and test a real-time passive
acoustic monitoring system that will
allow automated detection of bottlenose
dolphin whistles. The work has been
performed in two phases. Phase I was
the development of an automated signal
detector (a software program) to
recognize the whistles of dolphins at
BT–9 and BT–11. Phase II included the
assembly and deployment of a real-time
monitoring unit on one of the towers on
the BT–9 range. The knowledge base
gain from this effort helped direct
current monitoring initiatives and
activities within the MCAS Cherry Point
Range Complex. The current system
layout includes a pair of autonomous
monitoring units at BT–9 and a single
unit in Rattan Bay, BT–11. The system
is not currently functional due to storm
related damage and communication link
issues. It may be on-line during the
course of the IHA period. In that case,
the Passive Acoustic Monitoring system
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
14900
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
will serve as an additional mitigation
measure to reduce impacts.
Reporting—The USMC will submit a
report to NMFS no later than 90 days
following expiration of this IHA. This
report must summarize the type and
amount of training exercises conducted,
all marine mammal observations made
during monitoring, and if mitigation
measures were implemented. The report
will also address the effectiveness of the
monitoring plan in detecting marine
mammals.
Reporting Injured or Dead Marine
Mammals
In the event that personnel involved
in the training activities discover an
injured or dead marine mammal, the
USMC shall report the incident to the
Office of Protected Resources (OPR),
NMFS and to the regional stranding
coordinator as soon as feasible. The
report must include the following
information:
• Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the first discovery (and
updated location information if known
and applicable);
• Species identification (if known) or
description of the animal(s) involved;
• Condition of the animal(s)
(including carcass condition if the
animal is dead);
• Observed behaviors of the
animal(s), if alive;
• If available, photographs or video
footage of the animal(s); and
• General circumstances under which
the animal was discovered.
Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact
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
(50 CFR 216.103). 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 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 harassment, NMFS considers
other factors, such as the likely nature
of any responses (e.g., intensity,
duration), the context of any responses
(e.g., critical reproductive time or
location, migration), as well as effects
on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the
number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this
information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989
preamble for NMFS’s implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29,
1989), the impacts from other past and
ongoing anthropogenic activities are
incorporated into this analysis via their
impacts on the environmental baseline
(e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status
of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing
sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
In order to evaluate the number of
takes that might be expected to accrue
to the different potentially affected
stocks, the USMC estimated the
proportion of dolphins present (based
on density information from Read et al.,
2003) that would belong to each of the
potentially affected stocks. Please see
Table 3–2 of the USMC’s application.
Based on these assumptions, we assume
that the total take proposed for
authorization of 102 incidents of Level
B harassment and 2 incidents of Level
A harassment would proportionally
impact the various stocks as shown in
Table 8.
TABLE 8—PROPORTIONAL EFFECTS TO STOCKS
Level B harassment
Stock
Behavioral
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Northern migratory .......................................................................................................................
Southern migratory ......................................................................................................................
NNCES ........................................................................................................................................
SNCES .........................................................................................................................................
NMFS expects short-term effects such
as stress during underwater detonations.
However, the time scale of individual
explosions is very limited, and the
USMC disperses its training exercises in
space and time. Consequently, repeated
exposure of individual bottlenose
dolphins to sounds from underwater
explosions is not likely and most
acoustic effects are expected to be shortterm and localized. NMFS does not
expect long-term consequences for
populations because the BT–9 and BT–
11 areas continue to support bottlenose
dolphins in spite of ongoing missions.
The best available data do not suggest
that there is a decline in the Pamlico
Sound population due to these
exercises.
The probability that detonation events
will overlap in time and space with
marine mammals is low, particularly
given the densities of marine mammals
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
in the vicinity of BT–9 and BT–11 and
the implementation of monitoring and
mitigation measures. Moreover, NMFS
does not expect animals to experience
repeat exposures to the same sound
source, as bottlenose dolphins would
likely move away from the source after
being exposed. In addition, NMFS
expects that these isolated exposures,
when received at distances associated
with Level B harassment (behavioral),
would cause brief startle reactions or
short-term behavioral modification by
the animals. These brief reactions and
behavioral changes would likely cease
when the exposures cease. The Level B
harassment takes would likely result in
dolphins being temporarily affected by
bombing or gunnery exercises.
Individual bottlenose dolphins may
sustain some level of temporary
threshold shift (TTS) from underwater
detonations. TTS can last from a few
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38.68
25.86
6.74
0.82
TTS
15.19
10.39
3.70
0.70
Level A
harassment
(PTS)
1.23
0.45
0.06
0.06
minutes to days, be of varying degree,
and occur across various frequency
bandwidths. Although the degree of
TTS depends on the received noise
levels and exposure time, studies show
that TTS is reversible. NMFS expects
the animals’ sensitivity to recover fully
in minutes to hours based on the fact
that the proposed underwater
detonations are small in scale and
isolated. In summary, we do not expect
that these levels of received impulse
noise from detonations would affect
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
The potential for permanent hearing
impairment and injury is low due to the
incorporation of the proposed
mitigation measures specified in the
proposed rulemaking.
NMFS considers if the specified
activities occur during and within
habitat important to vital life functions
to better inform the preliminary
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 51 / Monday, March 16, 2020 / Notices
negligible impact determination. Read et
al. (2003) concluded that dolphins
rarely occur in open waters in the
middle of North Carolina sounds and
large estuaries, but instead are
concentrated in shallow water habitats
along shorelines. However, no specific
areas have been identified as vital
reproduction or foraging habitat.
In summary and as described above,
the following factors primarily support
our preliminary determination that the
impacts resulting from this activity are
not expected to adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival:
• No serious injury or mortality is
anticipated or authorized;
• Impacts will be limited to Level B
harassment, primarily in the form of
behavioral disturbance, and only two
incidents of Level A harassment in the
form of PTS;
• Of the number of total takes
proposed to be authorized, the expected
proportions that may accrue to
individual affected stocks are low
relative to the estimated abundances of
the affected stocks;
• There will be no loss or
modification of habitat and minimal,
temporary impacts on prey; and
• Mitigation requirements would
minimize impacts.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
proposed monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS preliminarily finds
that the total marine mammal take from
the proposed activity will have a
negligible impact on all affected marine
mammal species or stocks.
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with NOTICES
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by these
actions. Therefore, we have 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)
No marine mammal species listed
under the ESA are expected to be
affected by these activities. Therefore,
we have determined that section 7
consultation under the ESA is not
required.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary
determinations, NMFS proposes to issue
an IHA to the USMC for conducting
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:29 Mar 13, 2020
Jkt 250001
training activities in Pamlico Sound for
a period of one year, provided the
previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements
are incorporated. A draft of the
proposed IHA can be found at
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-military-readinessactivities.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses,
the proposed authorization, and any
other aspect of this Notice of Proposed
IHA. We also request comment on the
potential renewal of this proposed IHA
as described in the paragraph below.
Please include with your comments any
supporting data or literature citations to
help inform decisions on the request for
this IHA or a subsequent renewal.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may
issue a one-year IHA renewal with an
additional 15 days for public comments
when (1) another year of identical or
nearly identical activities as described
in the Description of Proposed Activity
section of this notice is planned or (2)
the activities as described in the
Description of Proposed Activity section
of this notice would not be completed
by the time the IHA expires and a
renewal would allow for completion of
the activities beyond that described in
the Dates and Duration section of this
notice, provided all of the following
conditions are met:
• A request for renewal is received no
later than 60 days prior to expiration of
the current IHA.
• The request for renewal must
include the following:
(1) An explanation that the activities
to be conducted under the requested
renewal are identical to the activities
analyzed under the initial IHA, are a
subset of the activities, or include
changes so minor (e.g., reduction in pile
size) that the changes do not affect the
previous analyses, mitigation and
monitoring requirements, or take
estimates (with the exception of
reducing the type or amount of take
because only a subset of the initially
analyzed activities remain to be
completed under the Renewal); and
(2) A preliminary monitoring report
showing the results of the required
monitoring to date and an explanation
showing that the monitoring results do
not indicate impacts of a scale or nature
not previously analyzed or authorized.
• Upon review of the request for
renewal, the status of the affected
species or stocks, and any other
pertinent information, NMFS
determines that there are no more than
minor changes in the activities, the
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14901
mitigation and monitoring measures
will remain the same and appropriate,
and the findings in the initial IHA
remain valid.
Dated: March 10, 2020.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–05233 Filed 3–13–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XR075]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Offshore Wind
Construction Activities off of Virginia
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
harassment authorization; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
NMFS has received a request
from Virginia Electric and Power
Company, d/b/a Dominion Energy
Virginia (Dominion), for authorization
to take marine mammals incidental to
conducting construction activities off
the coast of Virginia in the area of
Research Lease of Submerged Lands for
Renewable Energy Activities on the
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Offshore
Virginia (Lease No. OCS–A–0497), in
support of the Coastal Virginia Offshore
Wind (CVOW) Project. Pursuant to the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments
on its proposal to issue an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to
incidentally take marine mammals
during the specified activities. NMFS is
also requesting comments on a possible
one-year renewal that could be issued
under certain circumstances and if all
requirements are met, as described in
Request for Public Comments at the end
of this notice. NMFS will consider
public comments prior to making any
final decision on the issuance of the
requested MMPA authorizations and
agency responses will be summarized in
the final notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than April 15, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be
addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service. Physical
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM
16MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 51 (Monday, March 16, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14886-14901]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05233]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XR102]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Marine Corps Training
Exercises at Cherry Point Range Complex, North Carolina
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request
for comments on proposed authorization and possible renewal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC)
for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to training
exercises at Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Cherry Point Range
Complex, North Carolina. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an
incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to incidentally take marine
mammals during the specified activities. NMFS is also requesting
comments on a possible one-year renewal that could be issued under
certain circumstances and if all requirements are met, as described in
Request for Public Comments at the end of this notice. NMFS will
consider public comments prior to making any final decision on the
issuance of the requested MMPA authorizations and agency responses will
be summarized in the final notice of our decision. The USMC's
activities are considered military readiness activities pursuant to the
MMPA, as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2004 (NDAA).
[[Page 14887]]
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than April
15, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service. Physical comments should be sent to
1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and electronic comments
should be sent to [email protected].
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the
end of the comment period. Comments received electronically, including
all attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. All comments
received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted
online at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities without
change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do
not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in
this document, may be obtained online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities. In case of problems accessing these
documents, please call the contact listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) 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 incidental take authorization may be 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) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth.
The NDAA (Pub. L. 108-136) removed the ``small numbers'' and
``specified geographical region'' limitations indicated above and
amended the definition of ``harassment'' as it applies to a ``military
readiness activity.'' The activity for which incidental take of marine
mammals is being requested addressed here qualifies as a military
readiness activity. The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory
terms cited above are included in the relevant sections below.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, we
must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization) with respect to potential impacts on the
human environment. In 2015, NMFS developed an Environmental Assessment
(EA) evaluating the impacts of authorizing take of marine mammals
incidental to the USMC's training activities at MCAS Cherry Point.
Following review of this analysis, NMFS determined that the activity
would not have a significant effect on the quality of the human
environment and issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
NMFS has preliminarily determined that there are no substantive
changes to the evaluated action or new environmental impacts and,
therefore, the previous NEPA analysis remains valid. The 2015 EA and
FONSI are posted online at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities. We will review all comments submitted in response to this
notice prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final decision
on the IHA request.
Summary of Request
On September 28, 2019, NMFS received a request from the USMC for an
IHA to take marine mammals incidental to training exercises conducted
at MCAS Cherry Point Range Complex in North Carolina. Following NMFS'
review of the request, USMC submitted a revised application that was
deemed adequate and complete on January 22, 2020. The USMC's request is
for take of bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) by Level A and
Level B harassment. Neither the USMC nor NMFS expect serious injury or
mortality to result from this activity. Therefore, an IHA is
appropriate. The proposed IHA would be effective for a period of one
year from the date of issuance.
NMFS previously issued incidental take authorizations to the USMC
for the same activities, including three IHAs associated with training
activities from 2010-2014 (75 FR 72807, November 26, 2010; 77 FR 87,
January 3, 2012; and 78 FR 42042, July 15, 2013) and incidental take
regulations and a subsequent Letter of Authorization issued in
association with training activities conducted from 2015-2020 (80 FR
13264, March 13, 2015). The USMC complied with all the requirements
(e.g., mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of the previous
incidental take authorizations and information regarding their
monitoring results may be found in the Estimated Take section.
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
The USMC conducts training to meet its statutory responsibility to
organize, train, equip, and maintain combat-ready forces. The training
activities include air-to-surface and surface-to-surface weapons
delivery, weapons firing, and water-based training occurring at the
Brant Island Bombing Target (BT-9) and Piney Island Bombing Range (BT-
11) located within the MCAS Cherry Point Range Complex in Pamlico
Sound, North Carolina. The USMC training activities are military
readiness activities under the MMPA as defined by the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (NDAA; Public Law 108-136).
Dates and Duration
The proposed activities could occur at any time during the one year
period of effectiveness of the proposed IHA. Activities are typically
conducted during daylight hours but may occur at night.
[[Page 14888]]
Specific Geographic Region
The USMC's BT-9 and BT-11 bombing targets (See Figures 1-1 and 2-1
in the USMC application) are located in inshore waters of Pamlico
Sound, North Carolina in the vicinity of the convergence of the Neuse
River and Pamlico River, North Carolina.
The BT-9 area is a water-based bombing target and mining exercise
area located approximately 52 kilometers (km) (32.3 miles (mi))
northeast of MCAS Cherry Point. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District has defined a danger zone (prohibited area) by a 6
statute-mile (sm) diameter boundary around BT-9 (33 CFR 334.420). This
restriction prohibits non-military vessels within the designated area.
The BT-9 target area ranges in depth from 1.2 to 6.1 meters (m) (3.9 to
20 feet (ft)), with the shallow areas concentrated along the Brant
Island Shoal. The target itself consists of three ship hulls grounded
on Brant Island Shoals, located approximately 4.8 km (3.0 mi) southeast
of Goose Creek Island. The BT-9 target and associated danger zone is
entirely in/over water.
The BT-11 area encompasses a total of 50.6 square kilometers
(km\2\) (19.5 square miles (mi\2\)) on Piney Island located in Carteret
County, NC. The target prohibited area, at a radius of 1.8 sm, is
roughly centered on Rattan Bay and includes approximately 9.3 km\2\
(3.6 mi\2\) of water and water depths range from 0.3 m (1.0 ft) along
the shoreline to 3.1 m (10.1 ft) in the center of Rattan Bay. Water
depths in the center of Rattan Bay range from approximately 2.4 to 3 m
(8 to 10 ft) with bottom depths ranging from 0.3 to 1.5 m (1 to 5 ft)
adjacent to the shoreline of Piney Island. The in-water stationary
targets of BT-11 consist of a barge and patrol boat located in roughly
the center of Rattan Bay. The USMC also use a second danger zone, also
roughly centered on Rattan Bay, on an intermittent basis for strafing
at water- and land-based targets, with an inner radius of 1.8 sm and
outer radius of 2.5 sm. Note that at BT-11, only a portion of the
associated composite danger zone is over water (36 percent). Therefore,
the USMC assumes that only 36 percent of expended ordnance would
potentially strike water.
The USMC conducts all inert and live-fire exercises at BT-9 and BT-
11 so that all ammunition and other ordnances strike and/or fall on the
land or water-based targets or within the existing danger zones or
water restricted areas. Military forces close danger zones to the
public on an intermittent or full-time basis for hazardous operations
such as target practice and ordnance firing. They also prohibit or
limit public access to water restricted areas to provide security for
government property and/or to protect the public from the risks of
injury or damage that could occur from the government's use of that
area (33 CFR 334.2). Surface danger zones are designated areas of
rocket firing, target practice, or other hazardous operations (33 CFR
334.420). The surface danger zone (prohibited area) for BT-9 is a 4.8
km (3.0 mi) radius centered on the south side of Brant Island Shoal.
The surface danger zone for BT-11 is a 2.9 km (1.8 mi) radius centered
on a barge target in Rattan Bay.
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
The following sections describe the training activities that have
the potential to affect marine mammals present within the BT-9 and BT-
11 bombing targets. These activities fall into two categories based on
the ordnance delivery method: (1) Surface-to-surface gunnery exercises;
and (2) air-to-surface bombing exercises. Note that deployment of live
ordnance is only permitted at BT-9; all munitions fired at BT-11 are
inert.
Surface-to-Surface Exercises
Gunnery exercises are the only category of surface-to-surface
activity currently conducted within BT-9 or BT-11. BT-9 is the most
common target used for gunnery exercises. Surface-to-surface gunnery
firing exercises typically involve Special Boat Team personnel firing
munitions from a machine gun and 40 mm grenade launchers at a water-
based target or throwing concussion grenades into the water (e.g., not
at a specific target) from a small boat. The number and type of boats
used depend on the unit using the boat and the particular training
mission. These include: Small unit river craft, combat rubber raiding
craft, rigid hull inflatable boats, and patrol craft. These boats may
use inboard or outboard, diesel or gasoline engines with either
propeller or water jet propulsion systems. Each boat would travel
between 0 to 20 knots (kts) (0 to 23 miles per hour (mph)) with an
average of two vessels to approach and engage the intended targets. The
boats typically travel in linear paths and do not operate erratically.
Boat sorties occur in all seasons and the number of sorties
conducted at each range may vary from year to year based on training
needs and worldwide operational tempo. The majority of boat sorties at
BT-9 originate from MCAS Cherry Point's Navy boat docks, but they may
also originate from the State Port in Morehead City, NC; Marine Corps
Base Camp Lejeune; and U.S. Coast Guard Station Hobucken in Pamlico
Sound. The majority of boat sorties at BT-11 originate from launch
sites within the range complex.
There is no specific schedule associated with the use of BT-9 or
BT-11 by the small boat teams. However, the USMC schedules the
exercises for 5-day blocks with exercises at various times throughout
the year. Variables such as deployment status, range availability, and
completion of crew-specific training requirements influence the
exercise schedules.
The direct-fire gunnery exercises (i.e., all targets are within the
line of sight of the military personnel) at BT-9 would typically use
7.62 millimeter (mm) or .50 caliber (cal) machine guns; 40 mm grenade
machine guns; or G911 concussion hand grenades. The proposed exercises
at BT-9 are usually live-fire exercises. At times USMC personnel would
use blanks (inert ordnance) so that the boat crews could practice ship-
handling skills during training without being concerned with the safety
requirements involved with live weapons.
Air-to-Surface Exercises
Air-to-surface training exercises involve fixed-, rotary-, or tilt-
wing aircraft firing munitions at targets on the water's surface or on
land (in the case of BT-11). There are four types of air-to-surface
activities conducted within BT-9 and BT-11. They include: Mine laying,
bombing, gunnery, or rocket exercises. The following sections provide
more detail on each exercise type that would be conducted.
Mine Laying Exercises
Mine laying exercises are simulations only, meaning that mine
detonations would not occur during training. These exercises, regularly
conducted at the BT-9 bombing target, involve the use of fixed-wing
aircraft flying to the target area using either a low- or high-altitude
tactical flight pattern. When the aircraft reaches the target area, the
pilot deploys a series of inert mine shapes in an offensive or
defensive pattern into the water. The aircraft would make multiple
passes along a pre-determined flight azimuth dropping one or more of
the inert shapes each time.
The mine-laying exercises at BT-9 would include the use of MK-62,
MK-63, MK-76, BDU-45, and BDU-48 inert training shapes. Each inert
shape weighs 500, 1,000, 25, 500, and 10 pounds (lbs) (227, 454, 11,
227, and 5 kg), respectively.
[[Page 14889]]
Bombing Exercises
Pilots train to destroy or disable enemy ships or boats during
bombing exercises. These exercises, conducted at BT-9 or BT-11,
normally involve the use of two to four fixed-wing aircraft approaching
the target area from an altitude of approximately 152 m (500 ft) up to
4,572 m (15,000 ft). When the aircraft reach the target area, they
establish a predetermined racetrack pattern relative to the target and
deliver the bombs. Participating aircraft follow the same flight path
during subsequent target ingress, ordnance delivery, target egress, and
downwind pattern. This type of pattern is used to ensure that only one
aircraft releases ordnance at any given time.
The pilots deliver the bombs against targets at BT-9 or BT-11, day
or night; the average time to complete this type of exercise is
approximately one hour. There is no set level or pattern of amount of
sorties conducted. There are no cluster munitions authorized for use
during bombing exercises.
The bombing exercises would typically use unguided MK-76 and BDU-45
inert training bombs or precision-guided munitions consisting of laser-
guided bombs (inert) and laser-guided training rounds.
Gunnery Exercises
During air-to-surface gunnery exercises with cannons, pilots train
to destroy or disable enemy ships, boats, or floating/near-surface
mines from aircraft with mounted cannons equal to or larger than 20 mm.
The USMC would use either fixed-wing or rotary-wing, tilt-rotor, and
other aircraft to conduct gunnery exercises at BT-9 or BT-11. During
the exercise (i.e., strafing run), two aircraft would approach the
target area from an altitude of approximately 914 m (3,000 ft) and
within a distance of 1,219 m (4,000 ft) from the target, begin to fire
a burst of approximately 30 rounds of munitions before reaching an
altitude of 305 m (1,000 ft) to break off the attack. Each aircraft
would reposition for another strafing run until each aircraft expends
its exercise ordnance of approximately 250 rounds (approximately 8-12
passes per aircraft per exercise). This type of gunnery exercise would
typically use a 20 mm or 25 mm cannon. The USMC uses inert munitions
for these exercises. The aircraft deliver the ordnance against targets
at BT-9 or BT-11, day or night. The average time to complete this type
of exercise is approximately 1 hour.
During air-to-surface gunnery exercises with machine guns, pilots
train to destroy or disable enemy ships, boats, or floating/near-
surface mines with aircraft using mounted machine guns. The USMC
typically uses rotary-wing aircraft to conduct gunnery exercises at BT-
9 or BT-11. During the exercise an aircraft would fly around the target
area at an altitude between 15 and 30 m (50 and 100 ft) in a 91 m (300
ft) racetrack pattern around the water-based target. Each gunner would
expend approximately 800 rounds of 7.62 mm ammunition or 200 rounds of
.50 cal ammunition in each exercise. The aircraft deliver the ordnance
against the bombing targets at BT-9 or BT-11, day or night. The average
time to complete this type of exercise is approximately 1 hour.
Rocket Exercises
Rocket exercises are similar to the bombing exercises. Fixed- and
rotary-wing aircraft crews launch rockets at surface maritime targets,
day and night, to train for destroying or disabling enemy ships or
boats. These operations employ 2.75-inch and 5-inch (70- and 127-mm)
rockets (4.8 and 15.0 lbs net explosive weight, respectively).
Generally, personnel would deliver an average of approximately 14
rockets per sortie. As with the bombing exercises, there is no set
level or pattern of amount of sorties conducted.
Munitions and Estimated Expenditures
There are several varieties of ordnance and net explosive weights
(for live munition used at BT-9) can vary according to type. All
practice bombs are inert but simulate the same ballistic properties of
service type bombs. They are either solid cast metal bodies or thin
sheet metal containers. Since practice bombs contain no explosive
filler, a practice bomb signal cartridge (smoke) serves as a visual
observation of weapon target impact. Please refer to Table 1-1 in
USMC's application for a full list of all munitions authorized for use
at BT-9 and BT-11.
The estimated amount of ordnance to be annually expended at BT-9
and BT-11 under the activity is 1,238,614 and 1,254,684, respectively
(Tables 1 and 2). The amounts of ordnance expended at the BTs account
for all uses of the targets, including use by other services. All
ordnance expended at BT-11 would be inert. There are five types of
explosive sources used at BT-9: 2.75-in Rocket High Explosives (HE), 5-
in Rocket HE, 30 mm HE, 40 mm HE, and G911 grenades. The estimated
ordnance expenditure at BT-9 includes less than 2 percent high
explosive rounds and less than 0.1 percent each of live rockets and
grenades. The approximate quantities of ordnance listed in Tables 1 and
2 represent conservative figures, meaning that the volume of each type
of inert and explosive ordnance proposed is the largest number that
personnel could expend but is not necessarily expected. As noted
previously, only 36 percent of expended ordnance at BT-11 is assumed to
potentially strike water.
Table 1--Type of Ordnance, Net Explosive Weight, and Proposed Levels of
Annual Expenditures at BT-9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed
Proposed ordnance Net explosive weight number of
in pounds (lbs) rounds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small arms excluding .50 cal (7.62 N/A, inert.......... 525,610
mm).
.50 cal........................... N/A, inert.......... 568,515
Large arms--live (30 mm).......... 0.1019.............. 3,432
Large arms--live (40 mm).......... 0.1199.............. 10,420
Large arms--inert................. N/A................. 120,405
Rockets--live (2.75-inch)......... 4.8................. 220
Rockets--live (5-inch)............ 15.0................ 68
Rockets--inert.................... N/A................. 844
Grenades--live (G911)............. 0.5................. 144
Bombs--inert...................... N/A................. 4,460
Pyrotechnics--inert............... N/A................. 2,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 14890]]
Table 2--Type of Ordnance, Net Explosive Weight, and Proposed Levels of
Annual Expenditures at BT-11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed
Proposed ordnance Net explosive weight number of
in pounds (lbs) rounds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small arms excluding .50 cal (7.62 N/A, inert.......... 1,250,000
mm).
.50 cal........................... N/A, inert.......... 425,000
Large arms--inert................. N/A................. 240,334
Rockets--inert.................... N/A................. 6,250
Bombs and grenades--inert......... N/A................. 22,114
Pyrotechnics--inert............... N/A................. 8,912
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take of marine mammals is not anticipated to result from direct
strike by inert ordnance or as a result of vessel strike during small
boat maneuvers. The USMC has estimated that the probability of direct
strike of a dolphin by inert ordnance during any given ordnance
deployment is 2.61 x 10-7 or 9.4 x 10-8 at BT-9
and BT-11, respectively. These estimated probabilities result in
estimated numbers of ordnance strikes of <0.5 at both target areas and,
therefore, in context of the required mitigation requirements, the
USMC's conclusion is that no take is reasonably anticipated to occur as
a result of direct strike from inert ordnance. Please see the USMC
application for further detail on the analysis. The USMC has also
determined that vessel strike is not a reasonably anticipated outcome
of the specified activity, due to the limited number of small boat
maneuvers and low concentrations of dolphins expected to be present. No
incidents of direct strike from inert ordnance or of vessel strike have
been recorded during prior years of activity monitoring. NMFS concurs
with these determinations, and vessel maneuvers and inert ordnance are
not discussed further in this document.
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are
described in detail later in this document (please see Proposed
Mitigation and Proposed Monitoring and Reporting).
Summary of Previous Monitoring
During monitoring conducted over the period 2015-2019, USMC
expended an annual average amount of ordnance of 818,512 and 1,535,404
at BT-9 and BT-11, respectively. During this period, no high explosive
munitions were used. On 50 occasions, dolphins were observed by
contracted range sweep aircraft along the pre-defined flight path of
the range sweep. No marine mammals were observed during air-to-surface
training activities (rotary-wing or fixed-wing aircraft), or by
maintenance vessels. For additional detail, please see section 7 of the
USMC's application.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and
behavior and life history, of the potentially affected stocks of
bottlenose dolphin. Additional information regarding population trends
and threats may be found in NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SARs;
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and more general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's
website (www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 3 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in
the project area and summarizes information related to the population
or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and ESA and
potential biological removal (PBR), where known. PBR is defined by the
MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural
mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while
allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable
population (as described in NMFS's SARs). While no mortality or serious
injury is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury
and mortality from anthropogenic sources are included here as gross
indicators of the status of the species and other threats. All managed
stocks in this region are assessed in NMFS' U.S. Atlantic SARs (e.g.,
Hayes et al., 2018). All values presented in Table 3 are the most
recent available at the time of publication and are available in the
draft 2019 Atlantic SARs, which are available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports.
Table 3--Marine Mammal Species Potentially Present in the Project Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/MMPA Stock abundance (CV,
status; Nmin, most recent Annual M/
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) abundance survey) PBR \3\ SI \4\
\1\ \2\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Family Delphinidae
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin................ Tursiops truncatus Northern Migratory -/D; Y 6,639 (0.41, 4,759, 48.................. 6.1-13.2
truncatus. Coastal. 2016).
Southern Migratory -/D; Y 3,751 (0.06, 2,353, 23.................. 0-14.3
Coastal. 2016).
Northern North -/-; Y 823 (0.06, 782, 7.8................. 0.8-18.2
Carolina Estuarine. 2013).
Southern North -/-; Y Unknown............. Unknown............. 0.4-0.6
Carolina Estuarine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or
designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR (see
footnote 3) or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future.
\2\ CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. The most recent abundance survey that is reflected in the abundance
estimate is presented; there may be more recent surveys that have not yet been incorporated into the estimate.
[[Page 14891]]
\3\ Potential biological removal, defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a
marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population size (OSP).
\4\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g.,
commercial fisheries, subsistence hunting, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a range.
Bottlenose dolphins range widely in temperate and tropical waters
and are found from deep, offshore to coastal areas, including bays,
estuaries and river mouths. In the western North Atlantic, there are
two morphologically and genetically distinct bottlenose dolphin
morphotypes described as the coastal and offshore forms (Duffield et
al., 1983; Hersh and Duffield, 1990; Mead and Potter, 1995; Curry and
Smith, 1997; Rosel et al., 2009). These forms are genetically distinct
based upon both mitochondrial and nuclear markers (Hoelzel et al.,
1998; Rosel et al., 2009). The offshore morphotype does not occur in
waters of Pamlico Sound and is not discussed here. The coastal
morphotype is continuously distributed in nearshore coastal and
estuarine waters along the U.S. Atlantic coast south of Long Island,
New York, around the Florida peninsula and into the Gulf of Mexico.
Primary habitat for coastal dolphins generally includes waters less
than 20 m deep (e.g., Garrison et al., 2003).
Initially, a single stock of coastal bottlenose dolphins was
thought to migrate seasonally between New Jersey (summer months) and
central Florida based on seasonal patterns in strandings during a large
scale mortality event occurring during 1987-1988 (Scott et al., 1988).
However, re-analysis of stranding data and extensive analysis of
genetic, photo-identification, and satellite telemetry data demonstrate
a complex mosaic of coastal bottlenose dolphin stocks (Zolman, 2002;
McLellan et al., 2002; Rosel et al., 2009; Hayes et al., 2018).
Integrated analysis of these multiple lines of evidence suggests that
there are five coastal stocks of bottlenose dolphins, including the
migratory stocks that may be present in the action area.
The coastal morphotype inhabits inshore estuarine waters in
addition to coastal nearshore and continental shelf waters, with
multiple lines of evidence supporting demographic separation between
bottlenose dolphins residing within different estuaries along the
Atlantic coast (Wells et al., 1987; Scott et al., 1990; Wells et al.,
1996; Zolman, 2002; Speakman et al., 2006; Stolen et al., 2007; Balmer
et al., 2008; Mazzoil et al., 2008). In some cases, studies have
identified communities of resident dolphins that are seen within
relatively restricted home ranges year-round, as well as year-round
resident dolphins repeatedly observed across multiple years (Zolman,
2002; Speakman et al., 2006; Stolen et al., 2007; Mazzoil et al.,
2008). A few published studies demonstrate that these resident animals
are genetically distinct from animals in nearby coastal waters and/or
from animals residing in nearby estuarine areas (Caldwell, 2001; Rosel
et al., 2009; Litz et al., 2012). However, the degree of spatial
overlap between estuarine and coastal populations remains unclear, and
the degree of movement of resident estuarine animals into coastal
waters on seasonal or shorter time scales is poorly understood (Hayes
et al., 2018). Bottlenose dolphins inhabiting primarily estuarine
habitats are considered distinct stocks from those inhabiting coastal
habitats.
The spatial extent of the coastal stocks, their potential seasonal
movements, and their relationships with estuarine stocks are poorly
understood (Hayes et al., 2018). The coastal stocks include migratory
stocks that move south seasonally from mid-Atlantic coastal waters. The
northern migratory stock is best defined by its distribution during
warm water months (best described by July and August) when it overlaps
with the fewest stocks (Hayes et al., 2018). During warm water months,
this stock occupies coastal waters from the shoreline to approximately
the 20-m isobath between Assateague, Virginia, and Long Island, New
York (Garrison et al., 2017b). The stock migrates in late summer and
fall and, during cold water months (best described by January and
February), occupies coastal waters from approximately Cape Lookout,
North Carolina, to the North Carolina/Virginia border (Garrison et al.,
2017b).
The spatial distribution and migratory movements of the southern
migratory stock are poorly understood and have been defined based on
movement data from telemetry and photo-ID studies, and stable isotope
studies. The stock is best delimited in warm water months, when it
overlaps least with other stocks, as bottlenose dolphins that occupy
coastal waters from Cape Lookout to Assateague, Virginia. Telemetry
data provide evidence for a stock of dolphins migrating seasonally
along the coast between North Carolina and northern Florida (Garrison
et al., 2017b), and suggest that during October-December the stock
occupies waters of southern North Carolina (south of Cape Lookout).
During January-March, the stock appears to move as far south as
northern Florida and, during April-June, the stock moves back north to
North Carolina to Cape Hatteras. During the warm water months of July-
August, the stock is presumed to occupy coastal waters north of Cape
Lookout, North Carolina, to Assateague, Virginia.
The northern North Carolina estuarine system (NNCES) stock is best
defined as animals that occupy primarily waters of the Pamlico Sound
estuarine system (which also includes Core, Roanoke, and Albemarle
sounds, and the Neuse River) during warm water months (July-August).
Members of this stock also use coastal waters (<=1 km from shore) of
North Carolina from Beaufort north to Virginia Beach, Virginia
(Garrison et al. 2017a). Many of these animals move out of the
estuaries during colder water months and occupy coastal waters (<=3 km
from shore) between the New River and Oregon Inlet, North Carolina
(Garrison et al. 2017a). However, others continue to be present in the
Pamlico Sound estuarine system during cold water months (Goodman Hall
et al. 2013). The timing of the seasonal movements into and out of
Pamlico Sound and north along the coast likely occurs with some inter-
annual variability related to seasonal changes in water temperatures
and/or prey availability.
The southern North Carolina estuarine system (SNCES) stock is best
defined as animals occupying estuarine and nearshore coastal waters
(<=3 km from shore) between the Little River Inlet estuary (33.9[deg]
N), inclusive of the estuary (near the North Carolina/South Carolina
border), and the New River (34.5[deg] N) during cold water months (best
defined as January and February). Members of this stock do not
undertake large-scale migratory movements. Instead, they expand their
range only slightly northward during warmer months into estuarine
waters and nearshore waters (<=3 km from shore) of southern North
Carolina as far as central Core Sound and southern Pamlico Sound
(Garrison et al. 2017b). SNCES stock animals have not been observed to
move north of Cape Lookout in coastal waters nor into the main portion
of Pamlico Sound during warm water months (Garrison et al. 2017b).
The four potentially affected stocks likely exhibit seasonal
spatial overlap to varying degrees. The northern and southern migratory
stocks may overlap in coastal waters of northern North Carolina and
Virginia during spring and
[[Page 14892]]
fall migratory periods, but the degree of overlap is unknown and it may
vary depending on annual water temperature (Garrison et al. 2016). When
the northern migratory stock has migrated in cold water months to
coastal waters from just north of Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, to
just south of Cape Lookout, North Carolina, it overlaps spatially with
the NNCES stock (Garrison et al. 2017b). Depending on the timing of the
northward migration in the spring, it may overlap with the NNCES stock
in coastal waters (<1 km from shore) as far north as Virginia Beach,
Virginia, and the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay. The northern migratory
stock may also overlap with the SNCES stock (Garrison et al. 2017b) in
nearshore coastal waters south of Cape Hatteras in winter, although the
degree of overlap with is not well defined. The southern migratory
stock may overlap with the SNCES stock in coastal waters <=3 km from
shore during October-December (Garrison et al. 2017b). During April-
June, the southern migratory stock overlaps in coastal waters with both
the SNCES and NNCES stocks and, during July-August, likely overlaps in
coastal waters with the NNCES stock. During warm water months (best
defined as July and August), the NNCES and SNCES stocks overlap in
estuarine waters near Beaufort, North Carolina, and in southern Pamlico
Sound (Garrison et al. 2017b). However, SNCES stock animals were not
observed to move north of Cape Lookout in coastal waters nor into the
main portion of Pamlico Sound during warm water months (Garrison et al.
2017b) thereby limiting the amount of overlap between the two stocks.
Overall, most overlap between the coastal migratory stocks and the
estuarine stocks is likely to occur within nearshore coastal waters
outside of Pamlico Sound. Based on the information related to seasonal
distribution discussed above, we assume that animals from the various
stocks could occur in the vicinity of the training areas as follows:
Northern migratory dolphins from August-June, southern migratory
dolphins from April-December, NNCES stock animals year-round, and SNCES
stock animals from June-October.
The current population size of the SNCES stock is considered
unknown due to the age of existing survey data. An initial abundance
estimate for common bottlenose dolphins occurring within the boundaries
of the SNCES stock was based on a photo-ID mark-recapture survey of
North Carolina waters inshore of the barrier islands, conducted during
July 2000 (Read et al., 2003). This study estimated the number of
animals in the inshore waters of North Carolina occupied by the SNCES
stock at 141 (CV=0.15, 95 percent CI: 112-200), but the estimate did
not account for the portion of the stock that may have occurred in
coastal waters. Summer aerial survey data from 2002 (Garrison et al.,
2016) were therefore used to account for the portion of the stock in
coastal waters. The abundance estimate for a 3-km strip from Cape
Lookout to the North Carolina-South Carolina border was 2,454
(CV=0.53), yielding a total of 2,595 (CV=0.50). This estimate is likely
positively biased as some animals in coastal waters may have belonged
to a coastal stock.
A photo-ID mark-recapture study was conducted by Urian et al.
(2013) in July 2006 using similar methods to those in Read et al.
(2003) and included estuarine waters of North Carolina from, and
including, the Little River Inlet estuary (near the North Carolina/
South Carolina border) to, and including, Pamlico Sound. The 2006
survey also included coastal waters up to Cape Hatteras extending up to
1 km from shore. In order to estimate abundance for the SNCES stock
alone, only sightings south of 34[deg]46' N in central Core Sound were
used. The resulting abundance estimate included a correction for the
proportion of dolphins with non-distinct fins in the population. The
abundance estimate for the SNCES stock based upon photo-ID mark-
recapture surveys in 2006 was 188 animals (CV=0.19, 95 percent CI: 118-
257; Urian et al. 2013). This estimate is probably negatively biased as
the survey covered waters only to 1 km from shore and did not include
habitat in southern Pamlico Sound.
Bottlenose Dolphin Occurrence within Pamlico Sound
In Pamlico Sound, bottlenose dolphins concentrate in shallow water
habitats along shorelines, and few, if any, individuals are present in
the central portions of the sound (Gannon, 2003; Read et al., 2003a,
2003b). The dolphins utilize shallow habitats, such as tributary creeks
and the edges of the Neuse River, where the bottom depth is less than
3.5 m (11.5 ft) (Gannon, 2003). Fine-scale distribution of dolphins
seems to relate to the presence of topography or vertical structure,
such as the steeply-sloping bottom near the shore and oyster reefs.
Bottlenose dolphins may use these features to facilitate prey capture
(Gannon, 2003).
In 2000, Duke University Marine Lab (Duke) conducted a boat-based
mark-recapture survey throughout the estuaries, bays and sounds of
North Carolina (discussed above in context of the SNCES stock
population abundance; Read et al., 2003). The 2000 boat-based survey
produced an estimate of 919 dolphins for the northern inshore waters
divided by an estimated 5,015 km\2\ (1,936 mi\2\) survey area (equating
to a density estimate of 0.183 dolphins per km\2\). In a follow-on
aerial study (July, 2002 to June, 2003) specifically in and around BT-9
and BT-11, Duke reported one sighting in the restricted area
surrounding BT-9, two sightings in proximity to BT-11, and seven
sightings in waters adjacent to the bombing targets (Maher, 2003). In
total, the study observed 276 bottlenose dolphins ranging in group size
from 2 to 70 animals.
Aerial surveys were flown in Pamlico and Core sounds from July 2004
to April 2006 (Goodman et al. 2007). These surveys yielded density
estimates for bottlenose dolphins in the western portion of Pamlico
Sound (including the MCAS Cherry Point Range Complex) ranging from
0.0272/km\2\ in winter to 0.2158/km\2\ in autumn. Correction factors
were incorporated for both animals residing at the surface but not
sighted during the aerial survey and animals below the surface that
were not sighted.
Results of a passive acoustic monitoring effort conducted from
2006-2007 by Duke University researchers detected that dolphin
vocalizations in the BT-11 vicinity were higher in August and September
than vocalization detection at BT-9 (Read et al., 2007). Additionally,
detected vocalizations of dolphins were more frequent at night for the
BT-9 area and during early morning hours at BT-11 (Read et al., 2007).
Biologically Important Areas--LaBrecque et al. (2015) recognize
multiple biologically important areas (BIA) for small and resident
populations of bottlenose dolphins in the mid- and south Atlantic.
Small and resident population BIAs are areas and times within which
small and resident populations occupy a limited geographic extent, and
are therefore necessarily important areas for those populations. Here,
these include areas defined for the SNCES and NNCES populations and
correspond with the stock boundaries described above.
Unusual Mortality Events (UME)--A UME is defined under the MMPA as
``a stranding that is unexpected; involves a significant die-off of any
marine mammal population; and demands immediate response.'' Beginning
in July 2013, elevated strandings of bottlenose dolphins were observed
along the Atlantic coast from New York to Florida. The investigation
was closed in
[[Page 14893]]
2015, with the UME ultimately being attributed to cetacean
morbillivirus (though additional contributory factors are under
investigation; www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2013-2015-bottlenose-dolphin-unusual-mortality-event-mid-atlantic;
accessed February 24, 2020). Dolphin strandings during 2013-15 were
greater than six times higher than the annual average from 2007-12,
with the most strandings reported from Virginia, North Carolina, and
Florida. A total of approximately 1,650 bottlenose dolphins stranded
from June 2013 to March 2015. Only one offshore ecotype dolphin has
been identified, meaning that over 99 percent of affected dolphins were
of the coastal ecotype. Research, to include analyses of stranding
samples and post-UME monitoring and modeling of surviving populations,
will continue in order to better understand the impacts of the UME on
the affected stocks. Notably, an earlier major UME in 1987-88 was also
caused by morbillivirus, and led to the current designation of all
coastal stocks of Atlantic bottlenose dolphin as depleted under the
MMPA. Over 740 stranded dolphins were recovered during that event.
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine
mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine
mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et
al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect
this, Southall et al. (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided
into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or estimated
hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response data,
audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques,
anatomical modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements
of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes
(i.e., low-frequency cetaceans).
Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described generalized hearing ranges for
these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized hearing ranges were
chosen based on the approximately 65 decibel (dB) threshold from the
normalized composite audiograms, with the exception for lower limits
for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was deemed to be
biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall et al.
(2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing groups and their associated
hearing ranges are provided in Table 4.
Table 4--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose
whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger &
L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
Bottlenose dolphins are categorized as mid-frequency cetaceans.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
Sections 6, 7, and 9 of the USMC's application includes a summary
of the ways that components of the specified activity may impact marine
mammals and their habitat, including specific discussion of potential
effects to marine mammals from noise and other stressors produced
through the use of munitions in training exercises, and a summary of
the results of monitoring during previous years' training exercises. We
have reviewed the USMC's discussion of potential effects for accuracy
and completeness in its application and refer to that information
rather than repeating it here. Here, we provide a brief technical
background on sound, on the characteristics of certain sound types, and
on metrics used in this proposal, as well as a brief overview of the
potential effects to marine mammals associated with use of explosive
munitions and the associated criteria for evaluation of these potential
effects.
Alternatively, NMFS has included a lengthy discussion of the
potential effects of similar activities on marine mammals, including
specifically from training exercises using munitions, in other Federal
Register notices, including prior notices for the same specified
activity. For full detail, we refer the reader to these notices. For
previous discussion provided in context of the same specified activity,
please see 79 FR 41374 (July 15, 2014). This previous discussion of
potential effects remains relevant. For more recent discussion of
similar effects incorporating the most current literature, please see,
e.g., 85 FR 5782 (January 31, 2020); 83 FR 29872 (June 26, 2018); 82 FR
61372 (December 27, 2017), or view documents available online at
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities.
The planned training exercises have the potential to cause take of
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 non-lethal injury (Level A harassment) or disturbance
(Level B harassment). Under the previous incidental take authorization
issued to USMC, serious injury and/or mortality was authorized as a
precaution. However, no such incidents have ever been recorded in
association with USMC training activities and none are expected. As
such, they are not proposed for authorization herein. In addition, NMFS
also considered the potential for harassment from vessel and aircraft
operations. The potential effects of impulsive sound sources
(underwater detonations) from the proposed training
[[Page 14894]]
activities may include one or more of the following: tolerance,
masking, disturbance, hearing threshold shift, and stress responses.
The Estimated Take section later in this document includes a
quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to
be taken by the specified activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination section includes an analysis of how these activities will
impact marine mammals and considers the content of this section, the
Estimated Take section, and the Proposed Mitigation section, to draw
conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the
reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and from that on
the affected marine mammal populations.
Description of Sound Sources
This section contains a brief technical background on sound, on the
characteristics of certain sound types, and on metrics used in this
proposal inasmuch as the information is relevant to the specified
activity and to a discussion of the potential effects of the specified
activity on marine mammals found later in this document. For general
information on sound and its interaction with the marine environment,
please see, e.g., Au and Hastings (2008); Richardson et al. (1995);
Urick (1983).
Sound travels in waves, the basic components of which are
frequency, wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. Frequency is the number
of pressure waves that pass by a reference point per unit of time and
is measured in hertz or cycles per second. Wavelength is the distance
between two peaks or corresponding points of a sound wave (length of
one cycle). Higher frequency sounds have shorter wavelengths than lower
frequency sounds, and typically attenuate (decrease) more rapidly,
except in certain cases in shallower water. Amplitude is the height of
the sound pressure wave or the ``loudness'' of a sound and is typically
described using the relative unit of the decibel (dB). A sound pressure
level (SPL) in dB is described as the ratio between a measured pressure
and a reference pressure (for underwater sound, this is 1 microPascal
([mu]Pa)), and is a logarithmic unit that accounts for large variations
in amplitude. Therefore, a relatively small change in dB corresponds to
large changes in sound pressure. The source level (SL) represents the
SPL referenced at a distance of 1 m from the source (referenced to 1
[mu]Pa), while the received level is the SPL at the listener's position
(referenced to 1 [mu]Pa).
Root mean square (rms) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over
the duration of an impulse. Root mean square is calculated by squaring
all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the
square root of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean square accounts for
both positive and negative values; squaring the pressures makes all
values positive so that they may be accounted for in the summation of
pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 2005). This measurement is often
used in the context of discussing behavioral effects, in part because
behavioral effects, which often result from auditory cues, may be
better expressed through averaged units than by peak pressures.
Sound exposure level (SEL; represented as dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s)
represents the total energy in a stated frequency band over a stated
time interval or event and considers both intensity and duration of
exposure. The per-pulse SEL is calculated over the time window
containing the entire pulse (i.e., 100 percent of the acoustic energy).
SEL is a cumulative metric; it can be accumulated over a single pulse,
or calculated over periods containing multiple pulses. Cumulative SEL
represents the total energy accumulated by a receiver over a defined
time window or during an event. Peak sound pressure (also referred to
as zero-to-peak sound pressure or 0-pk) is the maximum instantaneous
sound pressure measurable in the water at a specified distance from the
source and is represented in the same units as the rms sound pressure.
When underwater objects vibrate or activity occurs, sound-pressure
waves are created. These waves alternately compress and decompress the
water as the sound wave travels. Underwater sound waves radiate in a
manner similar to ripples on the surface of a pond and may be either
directed in a beam or beams or may radiate in all directions
(omnidirectional sources), as is the case for sound produced by the
pile driving activity considered here. The compressions and
decompressions associated with sound waves are detected as changes in
pressure by aquatic life and man-made sound receptors such as
hydrophones.
Even in the absence of sound from the specified activity, the
underwater environment is typically loud due to ambient sound, which is
defined as environmental background sound levels lacking a single
source or point (Richardson et al., 1995). The sound level of a region
is defined by the total acoustical energy being generated by known and
unknown sources. These sources may include physical (e.g., wind and
waves, earthquakes, ice, atmospheric sound), biological (e.g., sounds
produced by marine mammals, fish, and invertebrates), and anthropogenic
(e.g., vessels, dredging, construction) sound. A number of sources
contribute to ambient sound, including wind and waves, which are a main
source of naturally occurring ambient sound for frequencies between 200
Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). In general, ambient sound levels tend to
increase with increasing wind speed and wave height. Precipitation can
become an important component of total sound at frequencies above 500
Hz, and possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet times. Marine mammals can
contribute significantly to ambient sound levels, as can some fish and
snapping shrimp. The frequency band for biological contributions is
from approximately 12 Hz to over 100 kHz. Sources of ambient sound
related to human activity include transportation (surface vessels),
dredging and construction, oil and gas drilling and production,
geophysical surveys, sonar, and explosions. Vessel noise typically
dominates the total ambient sound for frequencies between 20 and 300
Hz. In general, the frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are below 1 kHz
and, if higher frequency sound levels are created, they attenuate
rapidly.
The sum of the various natural and anthropogenic sound sources that
comprise ambient sound at any given location and time depends not only
on the source levels (as determined by current weather conditions and
levels of biological and human activity) but also on the ability of
sound to propagate through the environment. In turn, sound propagation
is dependent on the spatially and temporally varying properties of the
water column and sea floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a result of
the dependence on a large number of varying factors, ambient sound
levels can be expected to vary widely over both coarse and fine spatial
and temporal scales. Sound levels at a given frequency and location can
vary by 10-20 decibels (dB) from day to day (Richardson et al., 1995).
The result is that, depending on the source type and its intensity,
sound from the specified activity may be a negligible addition to the
local environment or could form a distinctive signal that may affect
marine mammals. Details of source types are described in the following
text.
Sounds are often considered to fall into one of two general types:
Pulsed and non-pulsed (defined in the following). The distinction
between these two sound types is important because they have differing
potential to
[[Page 14895]]
cause physical effects, particularly with regard to hearing (e.g.,
Ward, 1997 in Southall et al., 2007). Please see Southall et al. (2007)
for an in-depth discussion of these concepts. The distinction between
these two sound types is not always obvious, as certain signals share
properties of both pulsed and non-pulsed sounds. A signal near a source
could be categorized as a pulse, but due to propagation effects as it
moves farther from the source, the signal duration becomes longer
(e.g., Greene and Richardson, 1988).
Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns, explosions, gunshots, sonic
booms, impact pile driving) produce signals that are brief (typically
considered to be less than one second), broadband, atonal transients
(ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 1998; ISO, 2003) and occur
either as isolated events or repeated in some succession. Pulsed sounds
are all characterized by a relatively rapid rise from ambient pressure
to a maximal pressure value followed by a rapid decay period that may
include a period of diminishing, oscillating maximal and minimal
pressures, and generally have an increased capacity to induce physical
injury as compared with sounds that lack these features.
Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, narrowband, or broadband, brief or
prolonged, and may be either continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995;
NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-pulsed sounds can be transient signals
of short duration but without the essential properties of pulses (e.g.,
rapid rise time). Examples of non-pulsed sounds include those produced
by vessels, aircraft, machinery operations such as drilling or
dredging, vibratory pile driving, and active sonar systems. The
duration of such sounds, as received at a distance, can be greatly
extended in a highly reverberant environment.
Mortality
Mortality risk assessment may be considered in terms of direct
injury, which includes primary blast injury and barotrauma. The
potential for direct injury of marine mammals has been inferred from
terrestrial mammal experiments and from post-mortem examination of
marine mammals believed to have been exposed to underwater explosions
(Finneran and Jenkins, 2012; Ketten et al., 1993; Richmond et al.,
1973). Actual effects on marine mammals may differ from terrestrial
animals due to anatomical and physiological differences, such as a
reinforced trachea and flexible thoracic cavity, which may decrease the
risk of injury (Ridgway and Dailey, 1972).
Primary blast injuries result from the initial compression of a
body exposed to a blast wave, and are usually limited to gas-containing
structures (e.g., lung and gut) and the auditory system (U.S.
Department of the Navy, 2001b). Barotrauma refers to injuries caused
when large pressure changes occur across tissue interfaces, normally at
the boundaries of air-filled tissues such as the lungs. Primary blast
injury to the respiratory system may be fatal depending upon the
severity of the trauma. Rupture of the lung may introduce air into the
vascular system, producing air emboli that can restrict oxygen delivery
to the brain or heart.
Thresholds for evaluation of potential for mortality are based on
the level of impact that would cause extensive lung injury to one
percent of exposed animals (i.e., an impact level from which one
percent of exposed animals would not recover) (Finneran and Jenkins,
2012). The threshold represents the expected onset of mortality, where
99 percent of exposed animals would be expected to survive. Most
survivors would have moderate blast injuries. The lethal exposure level
of blast noise, associated with the positive impulse pressure of the
blast, is expressed as Pa[middot]s and is determined using the Goertner
(1982) modified positive impulse equation. This equation incorporates
source/animal depths and the mass of a newborn calf for the affected
species. The threshold is conservative because animals of greater mass
can withstand greater pressure waves, and newborn calves typically make
up a very small percentage of any cetacean group.
Injury (Level A Harassment)
Potential injuries that may occur to marine mammals include blast
related injury: Gastrointestinal (GI) tract injury and slight lung
injury, and irrecoverable auditory damage. These injury categories are
all types of Level A harassment as defined in the MMPA.
Slight Lung Injury--This threshold is based on a level of lung
injury from which all exposed animals are expected to survive (zero
percent mortality) (Finneran and Jenkins, 2012). Similar to the
mortality determination, the metric is positive impulse and the
equation for determination is that of the Goertner injury model (1982),
corrected for atmospheric and hydrostatic pressures and based on the
cube root scaling of body mass (Richmond et al., 1973; U.S. Department
of the Navy, 2001b).
Gastrointestinal Tract Injuries--GI tract injuries are correlated
with the peak pressure of an underwater detonation. GI tract injury
thresholds are based on the results of experiments in which terrestrial
mammals were exposed to small charges. The peak pressure of the shock
wave was found to be the causal agent in recoverable contusions
(bruises) in the GI tract (Richmond et al., 1973, in Finneran and
Jenkins, 2012).
Auditory Damage--Auditory injury, or permanent threshold shift
(PTS), is not fully recoverable and therefore results in a permanent
decrease in hearing sensitivity. As there have been no studies to
determine the onset of PTS in marine mammals, this threshold is
estimated from available information associated with temporary
threshold shift (TTS), i.e., recoverable auditory damage.
Non-Injurious Impacts (Level B Harassment)
Two categories of Level B harassment are currently recognized: TTS
and behavioral impacts. Although TTS is a physiological impact, it is
not considered injury because auditory structures are temporarily
fatigued instead of being permanently damaged.
Behavioral Impacts
Behavioral impacts refer to disturbances that may occur at sound
levels below those considered to cause TTS in marine mammals,
particularly in cases of multiple detonations. During an activity with
a series of explosions (not concurrent multiple explosions shown in a
burst), an animal is expected to exhibit a startle reaction to the
first detonation followed by a behavioral response after multiple
detonations. At close ranges and high sound levels, avoidance of the
area around the explosions is the assumed behavioral response in most
cases. Other behavioral impacts may include decreased ability to feed,
communicate, migrate, or reproduce, among others.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
proposed for authorization through this IHA, which will inform NMFS'
negligible impact determination.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. For this military readiness activity, the MMPA defines
harassment as (i) Any act that injures or has the significant potential
to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A
harassment); or (ii) Any act that disturbs or is likely to disturb a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption
of natural
[[Page 14896]]
behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration,
surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a point where
the behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly altered (Level B
harassment).
Authorized takes would primarily be by Level B harassment, in the
form of disruption of behavioral patterns and temporary threshold
shift, for individual marine mammals resulting from exposure to
acoustic stressors. A small amount of Level A harassment, in the form
of permanent threshold shift, is anticipated and proposed for
authorization. No Level A harassment is anticipated to occur in the
form of gastrointestinal (GI) tract or lung injury. No serious injury
or mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized for this
activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.
Generally speaking, we estimate take from exposure to sound by
considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best
available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally
harassed or incur some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the
area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a
day; (3) the density or occurrence of marine mammals within these
ensonified areas; and, (4) and the number of days of activities. For
this proposed IHA, the U.S. Navy employed a sophisticated model known
as the Navy Acoustic Effects Model (NAEMO) for assessing the impacts of
underwater sound. The USMC then incorporated these results into their
application.
Acoustic Thresholds
Using the best available science, NMFS applies acoustic thresholds
that identify the received level of underwater sound above which
exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally
harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of some degree
(equated to Level A harassment). Thresholds have also been developed to
identify the pressure levels above which animals may incur different
types of tissue damage from exposure to pressure waves from explosive
detonation.
The criteria and thresholds used to estimate potential pressure and
energy impacts to marine mammals resulting from detonations are as
presented in the U.S. Navy's Phase III criteria documentation (DoN,
2017). These criteria represent the best available science. Criteria
used to analyze impacts to marine mammals include mortality, harassment
that causes or is likely to cause injury (Level A harassment) and
harassment that disrupts or is likely to disrupt natural behavior
patterns (Level B harassment).
Harassment (Auditory and Behavioral)--In order to evaluate the
potential for harassment resulting from auditory damage, NMFS's
``Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound
on Marine Mammal Hearing'' (NMFS, 2018) identifies dual criteria to
assess the potential for permanent (Level A harassment) and temporary
(Level B harassment) threshold shift to occur for different marine
mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to
noise. The technical guidance identifies the received levels, or
thresholds, above which individual marine mammals are predicted to
experience changes in their hearing sensitivity for all underwater
anthropogenic sound sources, and reflects the best available science on
the potential for noise to affect auditory sensitivity by:
Dividing sound sources into two groups (i.e., impulsive
and non-impulsive) based on their potential to affect hearing
sensitivity;
Choosing metrics that best address the impacts of noise on
hearing sensitivity, i.e., peak sound pressure level (peak SPL)
(reflects the physical properties of impulsive sound sources to affect
hearing sensitivity) and cumulative sound exposure level (cSEL)
(accounts for not only level of exposure but also duration of
exposure); and
Dividing marine mammals into hearing groups and developing
auditory weighting functions based on the science supporting that not
all marine mammals hear and use sound in the same manner.
The premise of the dual criteria approach is that, while there is
no definitive answer to the question of which acoustic metric is most
appropriate for assessing the potential for injury, both the received
level and duration of received signals are important to an
understanding of the potential for auditory injury. Therefore, peak SPL
is used to define a pressure criterion above which auditory injury is
predicted to occur, regardless of exposure duration (i.e., any single
exposure at or above this level is considered to cause auditory
injury), and cSEL is used to account for the total energy received over
the duration of sound exposure (i.e., both received level and duration
of exposure) (South all et al., 2007, 2019; NMFS, 2018). As a general
principle, whichever criterion is exceeded first (i.e., results in the
largest insolent) would be used as the effective injury criterion
(i.e., the more precautionary of the criteria). Note that cSEL acoustic
threshold levels incorporate marine mammal auditory weighting
functions, while peak pressure thresholds do not (i.e., flat or un
weighted). Weighting functions for each hearing group (e.g., low-, mid-
, and high-frequency cetaceans) are described in NMFS (2018).
NMFS (2018) recommends 24 hours as a maximum accumulation period
relative to cSEL thresholds. These thresholds were developed by
compiling and synthesizing the best available science, and are provided
in Table 5 below. The references, analysis, and methodology used in the
development of the thresholds are described in NMFS (2018), which is
available online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
In order to evaluate the potential for Level B (behavioral)
harassment resulting from multiple, successive explosive detonations
(i.e., detonations happening at the same location within a 24-hour
period), the threshold is set 5 dB below the SEL-based TTS threshold.
Non-Auditory Impacts--As described previously, explosive
detonations have the potential to cause non-serious injury (Level A
harassment) or mortality/serious injury. These potential effects are
assumed to occur due to the effects of pressure waves on gas-filled
structures (i.e., lungs, GI tract). Mortality and slight lung injury
thresholds are calculated using equations incorporating the assumed
mass and depth of the mammal:
Mortality threshold (50 percent risk of extensive lung injury) =
144M1/3(1 + D/10.1)\1/6\ Pas
Injury threshold (50 percent risk of slight lung injury) =
65.8M1/3(1 + D/10.1)\1/6\ Pas
Adult and calf mass for bottlenose dolphin are defined based on
data from ``Criteria and Thresholds for U.S. Navy Acoustic and
Explosive Impacts to Marine Mammals and Sea Turtles.'' A peak SPL
threshold determined through experiments on terrestrial mammals is
assumed to represent the potential for GI tract injury. Relevant
thresholds for bottlenose dolphins (i.e., mid-frequency cetaceans) are
provided in Table 5.
[[Page 14897]]
Table 5--Explosive Criteria and Thresholds Used for Impact Analyses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A harassment Level B harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GI tract injury PTS \1\ TTS \1\ Behavior
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
243 dB SPL (Pak) \2\................. 185 dB SE L............ 170 dB SE L............ 165 dB SEL.\3\
230 dB SPL............. 224 dB SPL.............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Dual metric criteria. SEL thresholds are cumulative, referenced to 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s, and weighted according to
appropriate auditory weighting function. SPL thresholds are peak pressure referenced to 1 [mu]Pa and un
weighted within generalized hearing range.
\2\ Threshold for 50 percent risk of GI tract injury, used in modeling to assess potential for injuries due to
underwater explosions. Threshold for 1 percent risk of GI tract injury (237 dB SPL Pak) is used in modeling
range to effect.
\3\ Applicable to events with multiple explosive detonations within any given 24-hr period. For single
explosions at received sound levels below hearing loss thresholds, the most likely behavioral response is a
brief alerting or orienting response. Since no further sounds follow the initial brief impulses, significant
behavioral reactions would not be expected to occur.
Marine Mammal Occurrence
Please see Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified
Activities for details regarding past marine mammal survey effort
conducted in the Alnico Sound region. A density of 0.183 dolphins per
square kilometer was used year-round (Read et al., 2003). The USMC and
NMFS believe that this value, which is consistent with the information
used to support prior USMC requests for authorization, is most
appropriate. Although the aerial survey study (Goodman et al., 2007)
provides seasonal density values, and reports a higher density value
for some seasons, the USMC believes the Read et al. (2003) survey data
to represent the better density estimate.
In order to apportion any predicted exposures to the potentially
affected stocks, USMC calculated monthly stock-specific proportions of
each stock expected to be present in the vicinity of the training
exercises, based on relative stock-specific abundance and available
information about stock movements and seasonal occurrence in the area.
Please see Table 3-2 in the USMC application.
Exposure Modeling
NAEMO is the standard model used by the Navy to estimate the
potential acoustic effects of proposed Navy training and testing
activities on marine mammals and was employed by the Navy in this case
to evaluate the potential effects of the proposed USMC training
activities. NAEMO is comprised of multiple modules that, in a stepwise
process (1) define the activity, including sound source
characteristics, location, and duration; (2) incorporate site-specific
oceanographic and environmental data required for a scenario
simulation; (3) generate acoustic propagation data; (4) distribute
marine species within the modeling environment; (5) execute the
simulation and record the sound received by each virtual marine mammal
in the area for every time step that sound is emitted; incorporating
the scenario definition, sound propagation data, and marine species
distribution data, ultimately providing raw data output for each
simulation; (6) provide the computation of estimated effects that
exceed defined threshold criteria; and (7) generate a report of
simulation results over multiple scenario runs.
In summary, source characteristics are integrated with
environmental data (bathymetry, sound speed, bottom characterization,
and wind speed) to calculate the three-dimensional sound field for each
source. Marine species density information is then processed to develop
a series of distribution files for each species present in the study
area. Each distribution file varies the abundance and placement of the
animals based on uncertainty defined in the density and published group
size. The scenario details, three-dimensional sound field data, and
marine species distributions are then combined in NAEMO to build
virtual three-dimensional representations of each event and
environment. This information is then processed by NAEMO to determine
the number of marine species exposed in each scenario.
The NAEMO simulation process is run multiple times for each season
to provide an average of potential effects on marine species. Each
iteration reads in the species dive data and introduces variations to
the marine species distributions in addition to the initial position
and direction of each platform and ordnance within the designated area.
Effects criteria and thresholds are then applied to quantify the
predicted number of marine mammal effects. Results from each iteration
are averaged to provide the number of marine species effects for a
given period. A complete description of the NAEMO model and modeling
approach used for this analysis can be found in the Navy's Phase III
Quantitative Analysis Technical Report (Blackstock et al., 2017).
As noted previously, all ordnance expenditure at BT-11 is inert
and, therefore, only ordnance use at BT-9 is considered in the effects
analysis described here. The following types of ordnance were modeled:
Bomb (GBU, BDU, MK), 2.75-in Rocket HE, 5-in Rocket HE, G911 Grenades,
30 mm HE, and 40 mm HE. Note that live bombs are not planned for use.
Therefore, we do not provide information related to the modeling. All
explosives are modeled as detonating at a 0.1-meter depth. Relevant
parameters are provided in Table 6. For further detail regarding the
modeling, including details concerning environmental data sources,
please the USMC application. Table 7 shows the quantitative exposure
modeling results.
Table 6--Source Characteristics
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peak one-third
Net explosive octave (OTO) Center
Source weight (lbs) source level frequency of
(dB) peak OTO (Hz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5-in rocket..................................................... 15 229 1008
2.75-in rocket.................................................. 4.8 224 1270
Grenade......................................................... 0.5 214 2540
40 mm........................................................... 0.1199 208 4032
[[Page 14898]]
30 mm........................................................... 0.1019 207 4032
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 7--Quantitative Modeling Results
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B harassment Level A harassment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species GI tract Mortality
Behavioral TTS PTS injury Lung injury
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin...................................... 72.09 29.99 1.81 0.13 0.01 <0.01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The exposure modeling results shown in Table 7 support proposed
bottlenose dolphin take authorization numbers of 102 incidents of Level
B harassment and 2 incidents of Level A harassment (PTS only). No
incidents of GI tract injury or lung injury are anticipated.
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to the
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of the species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses. NMFS regulations require applicants for incidental
take authorizations to include information about the availability and
feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and
manner of conducting the activity or other means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks and
their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)). The NDAA for FY 2004 amended the
MMPA as it relates to military readiness activities and the incidental
take authorization process such that ``least practicable impact'' shall
include consideration of personnel safety, practicality of
implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the military
readiness activity.
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we
carefully consider two primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat, as
well as subsistence uses. This considers the nature of the potential
adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further
considers the likelihood that the measure will be effective if
implemented (probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if
implemented as planned), the likelihood of effective implementation
(probability implemented as planned); and
(2) The practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
NMFS and the USMC have worked to identify potential practicable and
effective mitigation measures. These measures include the following:
Visual Monitoring--Range operators conduct or direct visual surveys
to monitor the target areas for protected species before and after each
exercise. Range operation and control personnel would monitor the
target area through two tower-mounted safety and surveillance cameras.
In addition, when small boats are part of planned exercises and already
on range, visual checks by boat crew would be performed.
The remotely operated range cameras are high-resolution cameras
that allow viewers to see animals at the surface and breaking the
surface (though not underwater). The camera system has night vision
(IR) capabilities. Lenses on the camera system have a focal length of
40 mm to 2200 mm (56x), with view angles of 18 degrees 10' and 13
degrees 41' respectively. The field of view when zoomed in on the
Rattan Bay targets will be 23' wide by 17' high, and on the mouth of
Rattan Bay itself 87' wide by 66' high. Observers using the cameras are
able to clearly identify ducks floating on waters near the target.
In the event that a marine mammal is sighted within 914 m (3,000
ft) of the BT-9 target area, personnel would declare the area as fouled
and cease training exercises. Personnel would commence operations in
BT-9 only after the animal has moved 914 m (3,000 ft) away from the
target area.
For BT-11, in the event that a marine mammal is sighted anywhere
within the confines of Rattan Bay, personnel would declare the water-
based targets within Rattan Bay as fouled and cease training exercises.
Personnel would commence operations in BT-11 only after the animal has
moved out of Rattan Bay.
Range Sweeps--MCAS Cherry Point contracts range sweeps with
commercial support aircraft each weekday morning prior to the
commencement of the day's range operations. The pilot and aircrew are
trained in spotting objects in the water. The primary goal of the pre-
exercise sweep is to ensure that the target area is clear of
unauthorized vessels or persons and protected species. Range sweeps
would not occur on weekend mornings.
The sweeps are flown at at 100 to 300 ft (30-90 m) above the water
surface, at airspeeds between 60 to 100 knots (69 to 115 mph). The crew
communicates directly with range personnel and can provide immediate
notification to range operators of a fouled target area due to the
presence of protected species.
Aircraft Cold Pass--Standard operating procedures for waterborne
targets require the pilot to perform a visual check prior to ordnance
delivery to ensure the target area is clear of unauthorized civilian
boats and personnel, and protected species. This is referred to as a
``cold'' or clearing pass. Pilots requesting entry onto the BT-9 and
BT-11 airspace must perform a low-altitude, cold first pass (a pass
[[Page 14899]]
without any release of ordnance) immediately prior to ordnance delivery
at the bombing targets both day and night.
Pilots would conduct the cold pass with the aircraft (helicopter or
fixed-winged) flying straight and level at altitudes of 61 to 914 m
(200 to 3,000 ft) over the target area. The viewing angle is
approximately 15 degrees. A blind spot exists to the immediate rear of
the aircraft. Based upon prevailing visibility, a pilot can see more
than one mile forward upon approach. If marine mammals are not present
in the target area, the Range Controller may grant ordnance delivery as
conditions warrant.
Delay of Exercises--The USMC would consider an active range as
fouled and not available for use if a marine mammal is present within
914 m (3,000 ft) of the target area at BT-9 or anywhere within Rattan
Bay (BT-11). Therefore, if USMC personnel observe a marine mammal
within 914 m (3,000 ft) of the target at BT-9 or anywhere within Rattan
Bay at BT-11 during the cold pass or from range camera detection, they
would delay training until the marine mammal moves beyond and on a path
away from 914 m (3,000 ft) from the BT-9 target or moved out of Rattan
Bay at BT-11. This mitigation applies to air-to-surface and surface-to-
surface exercises day or night.
Approximately 15 percent of training activities take place during
nighttime hours. During these training events, monitoring procedures
mirror day time operations as range operators first visually search the
target area with the high-resolution camera. Pilots will then conduct a
low-altitude first cold pass and utilize night vision capabilities to
visually check the target area for any surfacing mammals.
Vessel Operation--All vessels used during training operations would
abide by NMFS' Southeast Regional Viewing Guidelines designed to
prevent harassment to marine mammals.
Stranding Network Coordination--The USMC would coordinate with the
local NMFS Stranding Coordinator to discuss any unusual marine mammal
behavior and any stranding, beached live/dead, or floating marine
mammals that may occur at any time during training activities or within
24 hours after completion of training.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means
effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the
availability of such species or stock for subsistence uses.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (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 marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks.
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat).
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
The USMC proposes to conduct the following monitoring activities:
Protected Species Observer Training--Operators of small boats, and
other personnel monitoring for marine mammals from watercraft shall be
required to take the U.S. Navy's Marine Species Awareness Training.
Pilots conducting range sweeps shall be instructed on marine mammal
observation techniques during routine Range Management Department
briefings. This training would make personnel knowledgeable of marine
mammals, protected species, and visual cues related to the presence of
marine mammals and protected species.
Pre- and Post-Exercise Monitoring--The USMC would conduct pre-
exercise monitoring the morning of an exercise and post-exercise
monitoring the morning following an exercise, unless an exercise occurs
on a Friday, in which case the post-exercise sweep would take place the
following Monday. If the crew sights marine mammals during a range
sweep, they would collect sighting data and immediately provide the
information to range personnel who would take appropriate management
action. Range staff would relay the sighting information to training
Commanders scheduled on the range after the observation. Range
personnel would enter the data into the USMC sighting database.
Sighting data includes the following (collected to the best of the
observer's ability): (1) Location (either an approximate location or
latitude and longitude); (2) the platform that sighted the animal; (3)
date and time; (4) species; (5) number of animals; (6) the animals'
direction of travel and/or behavior; and (7) weather.
Long-term Monitoring--MCAS Cherry Point has contracted Duke
University to develop and test a real-time passive acoustic monitoring
system that will allow automated detection of bottlenose dolphin
whistles. The work has been performed in two phases. Phase I was the
development of an automated signal detector (a software program) to
recognize the whistles of dolphins at BT-9 and BT-11. Phase II included
the assembly and deployment of a real-time monitoring unit on one of
the towers on the BT-9 range. The knowledge base gain from this effort
helped direct current monitoring initiatives and activities within the
MCAS Cherry Point Range Complex. The current system layout includes a
pair of autonomous monitoring units at BT-9 and a single unit in Rattan
Bay, BT-11. The system is not currently functional due to storm related
damage and communication link issues. It may be on-line during the
course of the IHA period. In that case, the Passive Acoustic Monitoring
system
[[Page 14900]]
will serve as an additional mitigation measure to reduce impacts.
Reporting--The USMC will submit a report to NMFS no later than 90
days following expiration of this IHA. This report must summarize the
type and amount of training exercises conducted, all marine mammal
observations made during monitoring, and if mitigation measures were
implemented. The report will also address the effectiveness of the
monitoring plan in detecting marine mammals.
Reporting Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
In the event that personnel involved in the training activities
discover an injured or dead marine mammal, the USMC shall report the
incident to the Office of Protected Resources (OPR), NMFS and to the
regional stranding coordinator as soon as feasible. The report must
include the following information:
Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if
the animal is dead);
Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
If available, photographs or video footage of the
animal(s); and
General circumstances under which the animal was
discovered.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact 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 (50 CFR 216.103). 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 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 harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
In order to evaluate the number of takes that might be expected to
accrue to the different potentially affected stocks, the USMC estimated
the proportion of dolphins present (based on density information from
Read et al., 2003) that would belong to each of the potentially
affected stocks. Please see Table 3-2 of the USMC's application. Based
on these assumptions, we assume that the total take proposed for
authorization of 102 incidents of Level B harassment and 2 incidents of
Level A harassment would proportionally impact the various stocks as
shown in Table 8.
Table 8--Proportional Effects to Stocks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B harassment Level A
Stock -------------------------------- harassment
Behavioral TTS (PTS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern migratory.............................................. 38.68 15.19 1.23
Southern migratory.............................................. 25.86 10.39 0.45
NNCES........................................................... 6.74 3.70 0.06
SNCES........................................................... 0.82 0.70 0.06
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMFS expects short-term effects such as stress during underwater
detonations. However, the time scale of individual explosions is very
limited, and the USMC disperses its training exercises in space and
time. Consequently, repeated exposure of individual bottlenose dolphins
to sounds from underwater explosions is not likely and most acoustic
effects are expected to be short-term and localized. NMFS does not
expect long-term consequences for populations because the BT-9 and BT-
11 areas continue to support bottlenose dolphins in spite of ongoing
missions. The best available data do not suggest that there is a
decline in the Pamlico Sound population due to these exercises.
The probability that detonation events will overlap in time and
space with marine mammals is low, particularly given the densities of
marine mammals in the vicinity of BT-9 and BT-11 and the implementation
of monitoring and mitigation measures. Moreover, NMFS does not expect
animals to experience repeat exposures to the same sound source, as
bottlenose dolphins would likely move away from the source after being
exposed. In addition, NMFS expects that these isolated exposures, when
received at distances associated with Level B harassment (behavioral),
would cause brief startle reactions or short-term behavioral
modification by the animals. These brief reactions and behavioral
changes would likely cease when the exposures cease. The Level B
harassment takes would likely result in dolphins being temporarily
affected by bombing or gunnery exercises.
Individual bottlenose dolphins may sustain some level of temporary
threshold shift (TTS) from underwater detonations. TTS can last from a
few minutes to days, be of varying degree, and occur across various
frequency bandwidths. Although the degree of TTS depends on the
received noise levels and exposure time, studies show that TTS is
reversible. NMFS expects the animals' sensitivity to recover fully in
minutes to hours based on the fact that the proposed underwater
detonations are small in scale and isolated. In summary, we do not
expect that these levels of received impulse noise from detonations
would affect annual rates of recruitment or survival. The potential for
permanent hearing impairment and injury is low due to the incorporation
of the proposed mitigation measures specified in the proposed
rulemaking.
NMFS considers if the specified activities occur during and within
habitat important to vital life functions to better inform the
preliminary
[[Page 14901]]
negligible impact determination. Read et al. (2003) concluded that
dolphins rarely occur in open waters in the middle of North Carolina
sounds and large estuaries, but instead are concentrated in shallow
water habitats along shorelines. However, no specific areas have been
identified as vital reproduction or foraging habitat.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our preliminary determination that the impacts resulting from
this activity are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock
through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No serious injury or mortality is anticipated or
authorized;
Impacts will be limited to Level B harassment, primarily
in the form of behavioral disturbance, and only two incidents of Level
A harassment in the form of PTS;
Of the number of total takes proposed to be authorized,
the expected proportions that may accrue to individual affected stocks
are low relative to the estimated abundances of the affected stocks;
There will be no loss or modification of habitat and
minimal, temporary impacts on prey; and
Mitigation requirements would minimize impacts.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine
mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on
all affected marine mammal species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence
Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by these actions. Therefore, we have 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)
No marine mammal species listed under the ESA are expected to be
affected by these activities. Therefore, we have determined that
section 7 consultation under the ESA is not required.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to the USMC for conducting training activities in Pamlico
Sound for a period of one year, provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. A
draft of the proposed IHA can be found at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and
any other aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA. We also request
comment on the potential renewal of this proposed IHA as described in
the paragraph below. Please include with your comments any supporting
data or literature citations to help inform decisions on the request
for this IHA or a subsequent renewal.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a one-year IHA renewal with
an additional 15 days for public comments when (1) another year of
identical or nearly identical activities as described in the
Description of Proposed Activity section of this notice is planned or
(2) the activities as described in the Description of Proposed Activity
section of this notice would not be completed by the time the IHA
expires and a renewal would allow for completion of the activities
beyond that described in the Dates and Duration section of this notice,
provided all of the following conditions are met:
A request for renewal is received no later than 60 days
prior to expiration of the current IHA.
The request for renewal must include the following:
(1) An explanation that the activities to be conducted under the
requested renewal are identical to the activities analyzed under the
initial IHA, are a subset of the activities, or include changes so
minor (e.g., reduction in pile size) that the changes do not affect the
previous analyses, mitigation and monitoring requirements, or take
estimates (with the exception of reducing the type or amount of take
because only a subset of the initially analyzed activities remain to be
completed under the Renewal); and
(2) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the
required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the
monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not
previously analyzed or authorized.
Upon review of the request for renewal, the status of the
affected species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS
determines that there are no more than minor changes in the activities,
the mitigation and monitoring measures will remain the same and
appropriate, and the findings in the initial IHA remain valid.
Dated: March 10, 2020.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-05233 Filed 3-13-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P