Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Geophysical Surveys Related to Oil and Gas Activities in the Gulf of Mexico, 3084-3087 [2022-00985]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
3084
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2022 / Notices
and tag recovery program is part of the
fishery resource assessment and data
collection that the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) conducts
under the Magnuson-Stevens Act
authority as codified in 16 U.S.C. 1801
(a)(8).
II. Method of Collection
This is a volunteer program requiring
the actual tag from the fish to be
returned, along with recovery
information. Reporting forms with preaddressed and postage-free envelopes
are distributed to processors and catcher
vessels.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 0648–0276.
Form Number: None.
Type of Review: Regular submission
(extension of a currently approved
collection).
Affected Public: Not-for-profit
institutions; State, local, or tribal
government; business or other for-profit
organizations.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
440.
Estimated Time per Response: 5
minutes for returning a regular tag, and
20 minutes for returning an internal
archival tag.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 89.
Estimated Total Annual Cost to
Public: $30 in recordkeeping/reporting
costs.
Legal Authority: Magnuson-Stevens
Act.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
IV. Request for Comments
We are soliciting public comments to
permit the Department/Bureau to: (a)
Evaluate whether the proposed
information collection is necessary for
the proper functions of the Department,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the
accuracy of our estimate of the time and
cost burden for this proposed collection,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c)
Evaluate ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) Minimize the
reporting burden on those who are to
respond, including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
Comments that you submit in
response to this notice are a matter of
public record. We will include or
summarize each comment in our request
to OMB to approve this ICR. Before
including your address, phone number,
email address, or other personal
identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:16 Jan 19, 2022
Jkt 256001
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you may ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Sheleen Dumas,
Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of
the Chief Information Officer, Commerce
Department.
[FR Doc. 2022–01009 Filed 1–19–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XB645]
Taking and Importing Marine
Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals
Incidental to Geophysical Surveys
Related to Oil and Gas Activities in the
Gulf of Mexico
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of issuance of Letter of
Authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), as amended, its implementing
regulations, and NMFS’ MMPA
Regulations for Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Geophysical
Surveys Related to Oil and Gas
Activities in the Gulf of Mexico,
notification is hereby given that a Letter
of Authorization (LOA) has been issued
to LLOG Exploration Offshore, L.L.C.
(LLOG) for the take of marine mammals
incidental to geophysical survey activity
in the Gulf of Mexico.
DATES: The LOA is effective from March
1, 2022, through December 31, 2022.
ADDRESSES: The LOA, LOA request, and
supporting documentation are available
online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
action/incidental-take-authorization-oiland-gas-industry-geophysical-surveyactivity-gulf-mexico. In case of problems
accessing these documents, please call
the contact listed below (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben
Laws, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and either regulations are
issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, a notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public
for review.
An authorization for incidental
takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible
impact on the species or stock(s), will
not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of the species or
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible
methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of such takings are set
forth. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact
resulting from the specified activity that
cannot be reasonably expected to, and is
not reasonably likely to, adversely affect
the species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has
the potential to disturb a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild by causing disruption of behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B
harassment).
On January 19, 2021, we issued a final
rule with regulations to govern the
unintentional taking of marine
mammals incidental to geophysical
survey activities conducted by oil and
gas industry operators, and those
persons authorized to conduct activities
on their behalf (collectively ‘‘industry
operators’’), in Federal waters of the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico (GOM) over the
course of 5 years (86 FR 5322; January
19, 2021). The rule was based on our
findings that the total taking from the
specified activities over the 5-year
period will have a negligible impact on
the affected species or stock(s) of marine
mammals and will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of those species or stocks for
subsistence uses. The rule became
effective on April 19, 2021.
Our regulations at 50 CFR 217.180 et
seq. allow for the issuance of LOAs to
industry operators for the incidental
take of marine mammals during
E:\FR\FM\20JAN1.SGM
20JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2022 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
geophysical survey activities and
prescribe the permissible methods of
taking and other means of effecting the
least practicable adverse impact on
marine mammal species or stocks and
their habitat (often referred to as
mitigation), as well as requirements
pertaining to the monitoring and
reporting of such taking. Under 50 CFR
217.186(e), issuance of an LOA shall be
based on a determination that the level
of taking will be consistent with the
findings made for the total taking
allowable under these regulations and a
determination that the amount of take
authorized under the LOA is of no more
than small numbers.
Summary of Request and Analysis
LLOG plans to conduct one of the
following vertical seismic profile (VSP)
survey types: Zero Offset, Offset, Walk
Away, Salt Proximity and/or Check
Shots after reaching total depth of any
of the proposed wells operated by LLOG
within the Keathley Canyon Area. See
Section G of LLOG’s application for a
map. LLOG plans to use either a 12element, 2,400 cubic inch (in3) airgun
array, or a 6-element, 1,500 in3 airgun
array. Please see LLOG’s application for
additional detail.
Consistent with the preamble to the
final rule, the survey effort proposed by
LLOG in its LOA request was used to
develop LOA-specific take estimates
based on the acoustic exposure
modeling results described in the
preamble (86 FR 5322, 5398; January 19,
2021). In order to generate the
appropriate take number for
authorization, the following information
was considered: (1) Survey type; (2)
location (by modeling zone 1); (3)
number of days; and (4) season.2 The
acoustic exposure modeling performed
in support of the rule provides 24-hour
exposure estimates for each species,
specific to each modeled survey type in
each zone and season.
No VSP surveys were included in the
modeled survey types, and use of
existing proxies (i.e., 2D, 3D NAZ, 3D
WAZ, Coil) is generally conservative for
use in evaluation of these survey types.
Summary descriptions of these modeled
survey geometries are available in the
preamble to the proposed rule (83 FR
29212, 29220; June 22, 2018). Coil was
selected as the best available proxy
survey type for LLOG’s survey because
the spatial coverage of the planned
surveys is most similar to the coil
1 For purposes of acoustic exposure modeling, the
GOM was divided into seven zones. Zone 1 is not
included in the geographic scope of the rule.
2 For purposes of acoustic exposure modeling,
seasons include Winter (December–March) and
Summer (April–November).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:16 Jan 19, 2022
Jkt 256001
survey pattern. For the planned survey,
the seismic source array will be
deployed in one of the following forms:
Zero Offset VSP—deployed from a
drilling rig at or near the borehole, with
the seismic receivers (i.e., geophones)
deployed in the borehole on wireline at
specified depth intervals; Offset VSP—
in a fixed position deployed from a
supply vessel on an offset position;
Walkaway VSP—attached to a line, or a
series of lines, towed by a supply vessel;
or 3D VSP—moving along a spiral or
line swaths towed by a supply vessel or
using a marine shooting vessel. All
possible source assemblages except for
3D VSP will be stationary. If 3D VSP is
used as the survey design, the area that
would be covered would be up to three
times the total depth of the well
centered around the well head. The coil
survey pattern in the model was
assumed to cover approximately 144
kilometers squared (km2) per day
(compared with approximately 795 km2,
199 km2, and 845 km2 per day for the
2D, 3D NAZ, and 3D WAZ survey
patterns, respectively). Among the
different parameters of the modeled
survey patterns (e.g., area covered, line
spacing, number of sources, shot
interval, total simulated pulses), NMFS
considers area covered per day to be
most influential on daily modeled
exposures exceeding Level B
harassment criteria. Because LLOG’s
planned survey is expected to cover no
additional area as a stationary source, or
up to three times the total depth of the
well centered around the well head, the
coil proxy is most representative of the
effort planned by LLOG in terms of
predicted Level B harassment.
In addition, all available acoustic
exposure modeling results assume use
of a 72-element, 8,000 in3 array. Thus,
estimated take numbers for this LOA are
considered conservative due to the
differences in both the airgun array (12
or 6 elements, 2,400 or 1,500 in3), and
in daily survey area planned by LLOG
(as mentioned above), as compared to
those modeled for the rule.
The survey is planned to occur for 1–
5 days in Zone 7. The survey may occur
in either season. Therefore, the take
estimates for each species are based on
the season that has the greater value for
the species (i.e., winter or summer).
Additionally, for some species, take
estimates based solely on the modeling
yielded results that are not realistically
likely to occur when considered in light
of other relevant information available
during the rulemaking process regarding
marine mammal occurrence in the
GOM. Thus, although the modeling
conducted for the rule is a natural
starting point for estimating take, our
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3085
rule acknowledged that other
information could be considered (see,
e.g., 86 FR 5322, 5442 (January 19,
2021), discussing the need to provide
flexibility and make efficient use of
previous public and agency review of
other information and identifying that
additional public review is not
necessary unless the model or inputs
used differ substantively from those that
were previously reviewed by NMFS and
the public). For this survey, NMFS has
other relevant information reviewed
during the rulemaking that indicates use
of the acoustic exposure modeling to
generate a take estimate for certain
marine mammal species produces
results inconsistent with what is known
regarding their occurrence in the GOM.
Accordingly, we have adjusted the
calculated take estimates for that species
as described below.
Killer whales are the most rarely
encountered species in the GOM,
typically in deep waters of the central
GOM (Roberts et al., 2015; Maze-Foley
and Mullin, 2006). The approach used
in the acoustic exposure modeling, in
which seven modeling zones were
defined over the U.S. GOM, necessarily
averages fine-scale information about
marine mammal distribution over the
large area of each modeling zone. NMFS
has determined that the approach can
result in unrealistic projections
regarding the likelihood of encountering
killer whales.
As discussed in the final rule, the
density models produced by Roberts et
al. (2016) provide the best available
scientific information regarding
predicted density patterns of cetaceans
in the U.S. GOM. The predictions
represent the output of models derived
from multi-year observations and
associated environmental parameters
that incorporate corrections for
detection bias. However, in the case of
killer whales, the model is informed by
few data, as indicated by the coefficient
of variation associated with the
abundance predicted by the model
(0.41, the second-highest of any GOM
species model; Roberts et al., 2016). The
model’s authors noted the expected
non-uniform distribution of this rarelyencountered species (as discussed
above) and expressed that, due to the
limited data available to inform the
model, it ‘‘should be viewed cautiously’’
(Roberts et al., 2015).
NOAA surveys in the GOM from
1992–2009 reported only 16 sightings of
killer whales, with an additional three
encounters during more recent survey
effort from 2017–18 (Waring et al., 2013;
www.boem.gov/gommapps). Two other
species were also observed on less than
20 occasions during the 1992–2009
E:\FR\FM\20JAN1.SGM
20JAN1
3086
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2022 / Notices
NOAA surveys (Fraser’s dolphin and
false killer whale 3). However,
observational data collected by
protected species observers (PSOs) on
industry geophysical survey vessels
from 2002–2015 distinguish the killer
whale in terms of rarity. During this
period, killer whales were encountered
on only 10 occasions, whereas the next
most rarely encountered species
(Fraser’s dolphin) was recorded on 69
occasions (Barkaszi and Kelly, 2019).
The false killer whale and pygmy killer
whale were the next most rarely
encountered species, with 110 records
each. The killer whale was the species
with the lowest detection frequency
during each period over which PSO data
were synthesized (2002–2008 and 2009–
2015). This information qualitatively
informed our rulemaking process, as
discussed at 86 FR 5322, 5334 (January
19, 2021), and similarly informs our
analysis here.
The rarity of encounter during seismic
surveys is not likely to be the product
of high bias on the probability of
detection. Unlike certain cryptic species
with high detection bias, such as Kogia
spp. or beaked whales, or deep-diving
species with high availability bias, such
as beaked whales or sperm whales,
killer whales are typically available for
detection when present and are easily
observed. Roberts et al. (2015) stated
that availability is not a major factor
affecting detectability of killer whales
from shipboard surveys, as they are not
a particularly long-diving species. Baird
et al. (2005) reported that mean dive
durations for 41 fish-eating killer whales
for dives greater than or equal to 1
minute in duration was 2.3–2.4 minutes,
and Hooker et al. (2012) reported that
killer whales spent 78 percent of their
time at depths between 0–10 m.
Similarly, Kvadsheim et al. (2012)
reported data from a study of four killer
whales, noting that the whales
performed 20 times as many dives to 1–
30 m depth than to deeper waters, with
an average depth during those most
common dives of approximately 3 m.
In summary, killer whales are the
most rarely encountered species in the
GOM and typically occur only in
particularly deep water. While this
information is reflected through the
density model informing the acoustic
exposure modeling results, there is
relatively high uncertainty associated
with the model for this species, and the
acoustic exposure modeling applies
mean distribution data over areas where
the species is in fact less likely to occur.
NMFS’ determination in reflection of
the data discussed above, which
informed the final rule, is that use of the
generic acoustic exposure modeling
results for killer whales would result in
high estimated take numbers that are
inconsistent with the assumptions made
in the rule regarding expected killer
whale take (86 FR 5322, 5403; January
19, 2021).
In past authorizations, NMFS has
often addressed situations involving the
low likelihood of encountering a rare
species such as killer whales in the
GOM through authorization of take of a
single group of average size (i.e.,
representing a single potential
encounter). See 83 FR 63268, December
7, 2018. See also 86 FR 29090, May 28,
2021; 85 FR 55645, September 9, 2020.
For LLOG’s survey, use of the exposure
modeling produces an estimate of 4
killer whale exposures. Given the
foregoing discussion, it is unlikely that
even one killer whale would be
encountered during this 1–5 day survey,
and accordingly, no take of killer whales
is authorized through the LLOG LOA.
Based on the results of our analysis,
NMFS has determined that the level of
taking authorized through the LOA is
consistent with the findings made for
the total taking allowable under the
regulations. See Table 1 in this notice
and Table 9 of the rule (86 FR 5322;
January 19, 2021).
Small Numbers Determination
Under the GOM rule, NMFS may not
authorize incidental take of marine
mammals in an LOA if it will exceed
‘‘small numbers.’’ In short, when an
acceptable estimate of the individual
marine mammals taken is available, if
the estimated number of individual
animals taken is up to, but not greater
than, one-third of the best available
abundance estimate, NMFS will
determine that the numbers of marine
mammals taken of a species or stock are
small. For more information please see
NMFS’ discussion of the MMPA’s small
numbers requirement provided in the
final rule (86 FR 5322, 5438; January 19,
2021).
The take numbers for authorization,
which are determined as described
above, are used by NMFS in making the
necessary small numbers
determinations, through comparison
with the best available abundance
estimates (see discussion at 86 FR 5322,
5391; January 19, 2021). For this
comparison, NMFS’ approach is to use
the maximum theoretical population,
determined through review of current
stock assessment reports (SAR;
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments) and modelpredicted abundance information
(https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/
Duke/GOM/). For the latter, for taxa
where a density surface model could be
produced, we use the maximum mean
seasonal (i.e., 3-month) abundance
prediction for purposes of comparison
as a precautionary smoothing of monthto-month fluctuations and in
consideration of a corresponding lack of
data in the literature regarding seasonal
distribution of marine mammals in the
GOM. Information supporting the small
numbers determinations is provided in
Table 1.
TABLE 1—TAKE ANALYSIS
Authorized
take 1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Species
Rice’s whale 3 ..............................................................................................................................
Sperm whale ................................................................................................................................
Kogia spp .....................................................................................................................................
Beaked whales ............................................................................................................................
Rough-toothed dolphin ................................................................................................................
Bottlenose dolphin .......................................................................................................................
Clymene dolphin ..........................................................................................................................
Atlantic spotted dolphin ...............................................................................................................
Pantropical spotted dolphin .........................................................................................................
Spinner dolphin ............................................................................................................................
0
26
4 15
234
43
1
115
0
1,139
27
3 However, note that these species have been
observed over a greater range of water depths in the
GOM than have killer whales.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:16 Jan 19, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\20JAN1.SGM
20JAN1
Abundance 2
51
2,207
4,373
3,768
4,853
176,108
11,895
74,785
102,361
25,114
Percent
abundance
n/a
1.2
0.3
6.2
0.9
0.0
1.0
n/a
1.1
0.1
3087
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2022 / Notices
TABLE 1—TAKE ANALYSIS—Continued
Authorized
take 1
Species
Striped dolphin .............................................................................................................................
Fraser’s dolphin ...........................................................................................................................
Risso’s dolphin .............................................................................................................................
Melon-headed whale ...................................................................................................................
Pygmy killer whale .......................................................................................................................
False killer whale .........................................................................................................................
Killer whale ..................................................................................................................................
Short-finned pilot whale ...............................................................................................................
60
19
18
74
36
41
0
6
Abundance 2
5,229
1,665
3,764
7,003
2,126
3,204
267
1,981
Percent
abundance
1.1
3.9
0.5
1.1
1.7
1.3
n/a
0.3
1 Scalar
ratios were not applied in this case due to brief survey duration.
abundance estimate. For most taxa, the best abundance estimate for purposes of comparison with take estimates is considered here to
be the model-predicted abundance (Roberts et al., 2016). For those taxa where a density surface model predicting abundance by month was
produced, the maximum mean seasonal abundance was used. For those taxa where abundance is not predicted by month, only mean annual
abundance is available. For the killer whale, the larger estimated SAR abundance estimate is used.
3 The final rule refers to the GOM Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni). These whales were subsequently described as a new species, Rice’s
whale (Balaenoptera ricei) (Rosel et al., 2021).
4 Includes 1 take by Level A harassment and 14 takes by Level B harassment.
2 Best
Based on the analysis contained
herein of LLOG’s proposed survey
activity described in its LOA
application and the anticipated take of
marine mammals, NMFS finds that
small numbers of marine mammals will
be taken relative to the affected species
or stock sizes and therefore is of no
more than small numbers.
Authorization
NMFS has determined that the level
of taking for this LOA request is
consistent with the findings made for
the total taking allowable under the
incidental take regulations and that the
amount of take authorized under the
LOA is of no more than small numbers.
Accordingly, we have issued an LOA to
LLOG authorizing the take of marine
mammals incidental to its geophysical
survey activity, as described above.
Dated: January 11, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2022–00985 Filed 1–19–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
Monday, January 24, 2022; 8 a.m.–5:30
p.m., CST
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XB680]
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Council; Public Meeting; Correction
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
AGENCY:
The Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council (Council) will
hold a four-day meeting to consider
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:16 Jan 19, 2022
Jkt 256001
actions affecting the Gulf of Mexico
fisheries in the exclusive economic zone
(EEZ). UPDATE: Notice of change to
meeting will now be VIRTUAL only for
all participants.
DATES: The meeting has changed to
VIRTUAL only. The meeting will
convene Monday, January 24 through
Wednesday, January 26, 2022 from 8
a.m. to 5:30 p.m., CST and on Thursday
January 27, 2022 from 8 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., CST.
ADDRESSES: You may access the log-on
information by visiting our website at
www.gulfcouncil.org.
Council address: Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council, 4107 W
Spruce Street, Suite 200, Tampa, FL
33607; telephone: (813) 348–1630.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Carrie Simmons, Executive Director,
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Council; telephone: (813) 348–1630.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
original notice published in the Federal
Register on December 27, 2021 (86 FR
73259). The meeting was a hybrid
meeting, but is being changed to an all
virtual meeting.
The meeting will begin open to the
public in a Full Council Session to hold
an Election of Council Vice-Chair, and
review and adoption of the revised
Council Committee Assignments for
October 2021 through August 2022.
Committee sessions will begin
approximately 8:15 a.m. with the
Habitat Protection and Restoration
Committee receiving a presentation
from the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM) on Wind Energy
Development in the Gulf of Mexico,
review of Essential Fish Habitat Generic
Amendment and Draft Response Letter
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to NOAA Request for Comments on the
Area-Based Management Goals Related
to Executive Order 14008.
The Outreach and Education
Committee will receive a presentation
on 2021 Communications Analytics and
Updated 2021 Communications
Improvement Plan, draft Social Media
Guidelines, draft Public Comment
Guidelines, draft Press Release
Guidelines, and the 2022
Communications Improvement Plan.
The Committee will discuss remaining
items form the Outreach and Education
Technical Committee and receive a
presentation on Summary of Discard
and Barotrauma Reduction Efforts
Across the Region.
The Shrimp Committee will review
National Marine Fisheries Service’s
(NMFS) Evaluation of Draft Approval
Specifications for Reinstituting
Historical cELB Program, Updated Draft
Framework Action: Modification of the
Vessel Position Data Collection Program
for the Gulf of Mexico Shrimp Fishery,
and summary of the Shrimp Advisory
Panel Meeting.
The Mackerel Committee will review
and discuss Coastal Migratory Pelagics
Landings, Draft Amendment 33:
Modifications to the Gulf of Mexico
Migratory Group King Mackerel Catch
Limits and Sector Allocations, and Draft
Amendment 34: Atlantic Migratory
Group King Mackerel Catch Levels and
Atlantic King and Spanish Mackerel
Management Measures.
Tuesday, January 25, 2022; 8 a.m.–5:30
p.m., CST
The Reef Fish Committee will
convene to review Reef Fish Landings
and Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ)
Landings and Final Action: Framework
Action: Modification of Vermillion
Snapper Catch Limits. Following, the
Committee will receive presentations on
E:\FR\FM\20JAN1.SGM
20JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 13 (Thursday, January 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3084-3087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00985]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XB645]
Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals
Incidental to Geophysical Surveys Related to Oil and Gas Activities in
the Gulf of Mexico
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of issuance of Letter of Authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as
amended, its implementing regulations, and NMFS' MMPA Regulations for
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Geophysical Surveys Related to Oil
and Gas Activities in the Gulf of Mexico, notification is hereby given
that a Letter of Authorization (LOA) has been issued to LLOG
Exploration Offshore, L.L.C. (LLOG) for the take of marine mammals
incidental to geophysical survey activity in the Gulf of Mexico.
DATES: The LOA is effective from March 1, 2022, through December 31,
2022.
ADDRESSES: The LOA, LOA request, and supporting documentation are
available online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-oil-and-gas-industry-geophysical-survey-activity-gulf-mexico. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the
contact listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking
is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is
provided to the public for review.
An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings
are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103
as an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering (Level B harassment).
On January 19, 2021, we issued a final rule with regulations to
govern the unintentional taking of marine mammals incidental to
geophysical survey activities conducted by oil and gas industry
operators, and those persons authorized to conduct activities on their
behalf (collectively ``industry operators''), in Federal waters of the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico (GOM) over the course of 5 years (86 FR 5322;
January 19, 2021). The rule was based on our findings that the total
taking from the specified activities over the 5-year period will have a
negligible impact on the affected species or stock(s) of marine mammals
and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of
those species or stocks for subsistence uses. The rule became effective
on April 19, 2021.
Our regulations at 50 CFR 217.180 et seq. allow for the issuance of
LOAs to industry operators for the incidental take of marine mammals
during
[[Page 3085]]
geophysical survey activities and prescribe the permissible methods of
taking and other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat (often
referred to as mitigation), as well as requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. Under 50 CFR 217.186(e),
issuance of an LOA shall be based on a determination that the level of
taking will be consistent with the findings made for the total taking
allowable under these regulations and a determination that the amount
of take authorized under the LOA is of no more than small numbers.
Summary of Request and Analysis
LLOG plans to conduct one of the following vertical seismic profile
(VSP) survey types: Zero Offset, Offset, Walk Away, Salt Proximity and/
or Check Shots after reaching total depth of any of the proposed wells
operated by LLOG within the Keathley Canyon Area. See Section G of
LLOG's application for a map. LLOG plans to use either a 12-element,
2,400 cubic inch (in\3\) airgun array, or a 6-element, 1,500 in\3\
airgun array. Please see LLOG's application for additional detail.
Consistent with the preamble to the final rule, the survey effort
proposed by LLOG in its LOA request was used to develop LOA-specific
take estimates based on the acoustic exposure modeling results
described in the preamble (86 FR 5322, 5398; January 19, 2021). In
order to generate the appropriate take number for authorization, the
following information was considered: (1) Survey type; (2) location (by
modeling zone \1\); (3) number of days; and (4) season.\2\ The acoustic
exposure modeling performed in support of the rule provides 24-hour
exposure estimates for each species, specific to each modeled survey
type in each zone and season.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For purposes of acoustic exposure modeling, the GOM was
divided into seven zones. Zone 1 is not included in the geographic
scope of the rule.
\2\ For purposes of acoustic exposure modeling, seasons include
Winter (December-March) and Summer (April-November).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
No VSP surveys were included in the modeled survey types, and use
of existing proxies (i.e., 2D, 3D NAZ, 3D WAZ, Coil) is generally
conservative for use in evaluation of these survey types. Summary
descriptions of these modeled survey geometries are available in the
preamble to the proposed rule (83 FR 29212, 29220; June 22, 2018). Coil
was selected as the best available proxy survey type for LLOG's survey
because the spatial coverage of the planned surveys is most similar to
the coil survey pattern. For the planned survey, the seismic source
array will be deployed in one of the following forms: Zero Offset VSP--
deployed from a drilling rig at or near the borehole, with the seismic
receivers (i.e., geophones) deployed in the borehole on wireline at
specified depth intervals; Offset VSP--in a fixed position deployed
from a supply vessel on an offset position; Walkaway VSP--attached to a
line, or a series of lines, towed by a supply vessel; or 3D VSP--moving
along a spiral or line swaths towed by a supply vessel or using a
marine shooting vessel. All possible source assemblages except for 3D
VSP will be stationary. If 3D VSP is used as the survey design, the
area that would be covered would be up to three times the total depth
of the well centered around the well head. The coil survey pattern in
the model was assumed to cover approximately 144 kilometers squared
(km\2\) per day (compared with approximately 795 km\2\, 199 km\2\, and
845 km\2\ per day for the 2D, 3D NAZ, and 3D WAZ survey patterns,
respectively). Among the different parameters of the modeled survey
patterns (e.g., area covered, line spacing, number of sources, shot
interval, total simulated pulses), NMFS considers area covered per day
to be most influential on daily modeled exposures exceeding Level B
harassment criteria. Because LLOG's planned survey is expected to cover
no additional area as a stationary source, or up to three times the
total depth of the well centered around the well head, the coil proxy
is most representative of the effort planned by LLOG in terms of
predicted Level B harassment.
In addition, all available acoustic exposure modeling results
assume use of a 72-element, 8,000 in\3\ array. Thus, estimated take
numbers for this LOA are considered conservative due to the differences
in both the airgun array (12 or 6 elements, 2,400 or 1,500 in\3\), and
in daily survey area planned by LLOG (as mentioned above), as compared
to those modeled for the rule.
The survey is planned to occur for 1-5 days in Zone 7. The survey
may occur in either season. Therefore, the take estimates for each
species are based on the season that has the greater value for the
species (i.e., winter or summer).
Additionally, for some species, take estimates based solely on the
modeling yielded results that are not realistically likely to occur
when considered in light of other relevant information available during
the rulemaking process regarding marine mammal occurrence in the GOM.
Thus, although the modeling conducted for the rule is a natural
starting point for estimating take, our rule acknowledged that other
information could be considered (see, e.g., 86 FR 5322, 5442 (January
19, 2021), discussing the need to provide flexibility and make
efficient use of previous public and agency review of other information
and identifying that additional public review is not necessary unless
the model or inputs used differ substantively from those that were
previously reviewed by NMFS and the public). For this survey, NMFS has
other relevant information reviewed during the rulemaking that
indicates use of the acoustic exposure modeling to generate a take
estimate for certain marine mammal species produces results
inconsistent with what is known regarding their occurrence in the GOM.
Accordingly, we have adjusted the calculated take estimates for that
species as described below.
Killer whales are the most rarely encountered species in the GOM,
typically in deep waters of the central GOM (Roberts et al., 2015;
Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006). The approach used in the acoustic
exposure modeling, in which seven modeling zones were defined over the
U.S. GOM, necessarily averages fine-scale information about marine
mammal distribution over the large area of each modeling zone. NMFS has
determined that the approach can result in unrealistic projections
regarding the likelihood of encountering killer whales.
As discussed in the final rule, the density models produced by
Roberts et al. (2016) provide the best available scientific information
regarding predicted density patterns of cetaceans in the U.S. GOM. The
predictions represent the output of models derived from multi-year
observations and associated environmental parameters that incorporate
corrections for detection bias. However, in the case of killer whales,
the model is informed by few data, as indicated by the coefficient of
variation associated with the abundance predicted by the model (0.41,
the second-highest of any GOM species model; Roberts et al., 2016). The
model's authors noted the expected non-uniform distribution of this
rarely-encountered species (as discussed above) and expressed that, due
to the limited data available to inform the model, it ``should be
viewed cautiously'' (Roberts et al., 2015).
NOAA surveys in the GOM from 1992-2009 reported only 16 sightings
of killer whales, with an additional three encounters during more
recent survey effort from 2017-18 (Waring et al., 2013; www.boem.gov/gommapps). Two other species were also observed on less than 20
occasions during the 1992-2009
[[Page 3086]]
NOAA surveys (Fraser's dolphin and false killer whale \3\). However,
observational data collected by protected species observers (PSOs) on
industry geophysical survey vessels from 2002-2015 distinguish the
killer whale in terms of rarity. During this period, killer whales were
encountered on only 10 occasions, whereas the next most rarely
encountered species (Fraser's dolphin) was recorded on 69 occasions
(Barkaszi and Kelly, 2019). The false killer whale and pygmy killer
whale were the next most rarely encountered species, with 110 records
each. The killer whale was the species with the lowest detection
frequency during each period over which PSO data were synthesized
(2002-2008 and 2009-2015). This information qualitatively informed our
rulemaking process, as discussed at 86 FR 5322, 5334 (January 19,
2021), and similarly informs our analysis here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ However, note that these species have been observed over a
greater range of water depths in the GOM than have killer whales.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rarity of encounter during seismic surveys is not likely to be
the product of high bias on the probability of detection. Unlike
certain cryptic species with high detection bias, such as Kogia spp. or
beaked whales, or deep-diving species with high availability bias, such
as beaked whales or sperm whales, killer whales are typically available
for detection when present and are easily observed. Roberts et al.
(2015) stated that availability is not a major factor affecting
detectability of killer whales from shipboard surveys, as they are not
a particularly long-diving species. Baird et al. (2005) reported that
mean dive durations for 41 fish-eating killer whales for dives greater
than or equal to 1 minute in duration was 2.3-2.4 minutes, and Hooker
et al. (2012) reported that killer whales spent 78 percent of their
time at depths between 0-10 m. Similarly, Kvadsheim et al. (2012)
reported data from a study of four killer whales, noting that the
whales performed 20 times as many dives to 1-30 m depth than to deeper
waters, with an average depth during those most common dives of
approximately 3 m.
In summary, killer whales are the most rarely encountered species
in the GOM and typically occur only in particularly deep water. While
this information is reflected through the density model informing the
acoustic exposure modeling results, there is relatively high
uncertainty associated with the model for this species, and the
acoustic exposure modeling applies mean distribution data over areas
where the species is in fact less likely to occur. NMFS' determination
in reflection of the data discussed above, which informed the final
rule, is that use of the generic acoustic exposure modeling results for
killer whales would result in high estimated take numbers that are
inconsistent with the assumptions made in the rule regarding expected
killer whale take (86 FR 5322, 5403; January 19, 2021).
In past authorizations, NMFS has often addressed situations
involving the low likelihood of encountering a rare species such as
killer whales in the GOM through authorization of take of a single
group of average size (i.e., representing a single potential
encounter). See 83 FR 63268, December 7, 2018. See also 86 FR 29090,
May 28, 2021; 85 FR 55645, September 9, 2020. For LLOG's survey, use of
the exposure modeling produces an estimate of 4 killer whale exposures.
Given the foregoing discussion, it is unlikely that even one killer
whale would be encountered during this 1-5 day survey, and accordingly,
no take of killer whales is authorized through the LLOG LOA.
Based on the results of our analysis, NMFS has determined that the
level of taking authorized through the LOA is consistent with the
findings made for the total taking allowable under the regulations. See
Table 1 in this notice and Table 9 of the rule (86 FR 5322; January 19,
2021).
Small Numbers Determination
Under the GOM rule, NMFS may not authorize incidental take of
marine mammals in an LOA if it will exceed ``small numbers.'' In short,
when an acceptable estimate of the individual marine mammals taken is
available, if the estimated number of individual animals taken is up
to, but not greater than, one-third of the best available abundance
estimate, NMFS will determine that the numbers of marine mammals taken
of a species or stock are small. For more information please see NMFS'
discussion of the MMPA's small numbers requirement provided in the
final rule (86 FR 5322, 5438; January 19, 2021).
The take numbers for authorization, which are determined as
described above, are used by NMFS in making the necessary small numbers
determinations, through comparison with the best available abundance
estimates (see discussion at 86 FR 5322, 5391; January 19, 2021). For
this comparison, NMFS' approach is to use the maximum theoretical
population, determined through review of current stock assessment
reports (SAR; www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and model-predicted abundance
information (https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/Duke/GOM/). For the
latter, for taxa where a density surface model could be produced, we
use the maximum mean seasonal (i.e., 3-month) abundance prediction for
purposes of comparison as a precautionary smoothing of month-to-month
fluctuations and in consideration of a corresponding lack of data in
the literature regarding seasonal distribution of marine mammals in the
GOM. Information supporting the small numbers determinations is
provided in Table 1.
Table 1--Take Analysis
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorized Percent
Species take \1\ Abundance \2\ abundance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rice's whale \3\................................................ 0 51 n/a
Sperm whale..................................................... 26 2,207 1.2
Kogia spp....................................................... \4\ 15 4,373 0.3
Beaked whales................................................... 234 3,768 6.2
Rough-toothed dolphin........................................... 43 4,853 0.9
Bottlenose dolphin.............................................. 1 176,108 0.0
Clymene dolphin................................................. 115 11,895 1.0
Atlantic spotted dolphin........................................ 0 74,785 n/a
Pantropical spotted dolphin..................................... 1,139 102,361 1.1
Spinner dolphin................................................. 27 25,114 0.1
[[Page 3087]]
Striped dolphin................................................. 60 5,229 1.1
Fraser's dolphin................................................ 19 1,665 3.9
Risso's dolphin................................................. 18 3,764 0.5
Melon-headed whale.............................................. 74 7,003 1.1
Pygmy killer whale.............................................. 36 2,126 1.7
False killer whale.............................................. 41 3,204 1.3
Killer whale.................................................... 0 267 n/a
Short-finned pilot whale........................................ 6 1,981 0.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Scalar ratios were not applied in this case due to brief survey duration.
\2\ Best abundance estimate. For most taxa, the best abundance estimate for purposes of comparison with take
estimates is considered here to be the model-predicted abundance (Roberts et al., 2016). For those taxa where
a density surface model predicting abundance by month was produced, the maximum mean seasonal abundance was
used. For those taxa where abundance is not predicted by month, only mean annual abundance is available. For
the killer whale, the larger estimated SAR abundance estimate is used.
\3\ The final rule refers to the GOM Bryde's whale (Balaenoptera edeni). These whales were subsequently
described as a new species, Rice's whale (Balaenoptera ricei) (Rosel et al., 2021).
\4\ Includes 1 take by Level A harassment and 14 takes by Level B harassment.
Based on the analysis contained herein of LLOG's proposed survey
activity described in its LOA application and the anticipated take of
marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be
taken relative to the affected species or stock sizes and therefore is
of no more than small numbers.
Authorization
NMFS has determined that the level of taking for this LOA request
is consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable
under the incidental take regulations and that the amount of take
authorized under the LOA is of no more than small numbers. Accordingly,
we have issued an LOA to LLOG authorizing the take of marine mammals
incidental to its geophysical survey activity, as described above.
Dated: January 11, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-00985 Filed 1-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
