Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Geophysical Surveys Related to Oil and Gas Activities in the Gulf of Mexico, 41077-41080 [2023-13376]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 120 / Friday, June 23, 2023 / Notices information will be available at www.mafmc.org/council-events. Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 N. State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; telephone: (302) 674–2331; www.mafmc.org. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, telephone: (302) 526–5255. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MidAtlantic Fishery Management Council’s Highly Migratory Species (HMS) Committee will meet to review and provide comments on the NOAA Atlantic HMS recent and ongoing management initiative. The primary management initiatives include: (1) the proposed rule for Amendment 15 (spatial management and electronic monitoring), (2) an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for electronic HMS reporting requirements, and (3) scoping for Amendment 16 (shark management issues). Special Accommodations The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Shelley Spedden at the Council Office, (302) 526–5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Dated: June 20, 2023. Rey Israel Marquez, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2023–13413 Filed 6–22–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [RTID 0648–XD064] 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. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1 AGENCY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as amended, its implementing regulations, and NMFS’ MMPA SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 22, 2023 Jkt 259001 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 Murphy Exploration and Production Company (Murphy) for the take of marine mammals incidental to geophysical survey activity in the Gulf of Mexico. DATES: The LOA is effective from July 14, 2023, through September 13, 2023. 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: Jenna Harlacher, 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 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 41077 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 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 Murphy plans to conduct a zero offset vertical seismic profile (VSP) survey within Walker Ridge Block 425 in approximately 2,700 m water depth. Murphy plans to use a 6-element, 1,350 in3 airgun array. Please see Murphy’s application for additional detail. Consistent with the preamble to the final rule, the survey effort proposed by Murphy 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, January 19, 2021). In order to generate the appropriate take number for authorization, the following information was considered: (1) survey type; (2) E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM 23JNN1 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1 41078 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 120 / Friday, June 23, 2023 / Notices 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 VSP survey effort. Summary descriptions of these modeled survey geometries are available in the preamble to the proposed rule (83 FR 29212, June 22, 2018). Coil was selected as the best available proxy survey type because the spatial coverage of the planned survey is most similar to that associated with the coil survey pattern. For the planned survey, the seismic source array will be deployed from a stationary drilling rig at or near the borehole, with the seismic receivers (i.e., geophones) deployed in the borehole on wireline at specified depth intervals. 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 Murphy’s planned survey would not cover any additional area beyond that ensonified by the stationary source, the coil proxy is most representative of the effort planned by Murphy 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 the airgun array (6 elements; 1,350 in3), and in daily survey area planned by Murphy (as mentioned above), as compared to those modeled for the rule. The survey is planned to occur for 2 days during summer in Zone 7. Therefore, the take estimates for each species are based on the summer values for the species. 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 18:01 Jun 22, 2023 Jkt 259001 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. The approach used in the acoustic exposure modeling, in which seven modeling zones were defined over the U.S. GOM, necessarily averages finescale information about marine mammal distribution over the large area of each modeling zone. This can result in unrealistic projections regarding the likelihood of encountering particularly rare species and/or species not expected to occur outside particular habitats. 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, (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 killer whales 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). 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 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 3 encounters during more recent survey effort from 2017–18 (Waring et al., 2013; www.boem.gov/gommapps). Two other species were also observed on fewer than 20 occasions during the 1992–2009 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 1–30 m in depth than to deeper waters, with an average depth during those most common dives of approximately 3 m. 3 However, note that these species have been observed over a greater range of water depths in the GOM than have killer whales. E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM 23JNN1 41079 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 120 / Friday, June 23, 2023 / Notices In summary, killer whales are the most rarely encountered species in the GOM and typically occur only in particularly deep water. This survey would take place in deep waters that would overlap with depths in which killer whales typically occur. 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. In addition, as noted above in relation to the general take estimation methodology, the assumed proxy source (72-element, 8,000-in3 array) results in a significant overestimate of the actual potential for take to occur. NMFS’ determination in reflection of the information discussed above, which informed the final rule, is that use of the generic acoustic exposure modeling results for killer whales will generally result in 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 this case, use of the acoustic exposure modeling produces an estimate of one killer whale exposure. Given the foregoing, it is unlikely that any killer whales would be encountered during this 2-day survey, and accordingly no take of killer whales is authorized through this LOA. In addition, in this case, use of the exposure modeling produces results that are smaller than average GOM group sizes for multiple species (Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006). NMFS’ typical practice in such a situation is to increase exposure estimates to the assumed average group size for a species in order to ensure that, if the species is encountered, exposures will not exceed the authorized take number. However, other relevant considerations here lead to a determination that increasing the estimated exposures to average group sizes would likely lead to an overestimate of actual potential take. In this circumstance, the very short survey duration (maximum of 2 days) and relatively small Level B harassment isopleths likely to actually be produced through use of the 6-element, 1,350-in3 airgun array (compared with the modeled 72-element, 8,000 in3 array) mean that it is unlikely that certain species would be encountered at all, much less that the encounter would result in exposure of a greater number of individuals than is estimated through use of the exposure modeling results. As a result, in this case NMFS has not increased the estimated exposure values to assumed average group sizes in authorizing take. Based on the results of our analysis, NMFS has determined that the level of taking expected for this survey and authorized through the LOA is consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under the regulations for the affected species or stocks of marine mammals. 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 ................................................................................................................................. Sperm whale ................................................................................................................................ Kogia spp ..................................................................................................................................... Beaked whales ............................................................................................................................ Rough-toothed dolphin ................................................................................................................ Bottlenose dolphin ....................................................................................................................... Clymene dolphin .......................................................................................................................... Atlantic spotted dolphin ............................................................................................................... Pantropical spotted dolphin ......................................................................................................... Spinner dolphin ............................................................................................................................ Striped dolphin ............................................................................................................................. Fraser’s dolphin ........................................................................................................................... Risso’s dolphin ............................................................................................................................. Melon-headed whale ................................................................................................................... Pygmy killer whale ....................................................................................................................... False killer whale ......................................................................................................................... Killer whale .................................................................................................................................. Short-finned pilot whale ............................................................................................................... 1 Scalar 0 10 5 87 15 0 3 38 0 381 39 3 20 37 36 3 26 3 12 3 14 0 32 ratios were not applied in this case due to brief survey duration. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 22, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM 23JNN1 Abundance 2 51 2,207 4,373 3,768 4,853 176,108 11,895 74,785 102,361 25,114 5,229 1,665 3,764 7,003 2,126 3,204 267 1,981 Percent abundance n/a 0.4 0.1 2.3 0.3 n/a 0.3 n/a 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.4 n/a 0.1 41080 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 120 / Friday, June 23, 2023 / Notices 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 Rice’s whale and killer whale, the larger estimated SAR abundance estimate is used. 3 Modeled exposure estimate less than assumed average group size (Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006). Based on the analysis contained herein of Murphy’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 (i.e., less than one-third of the best available abundance estimate) and therefore the taking 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 Murphy authorizing the take of marine mammals incidental to its geophysical survey activity, as described above. Dated: June 20, 2023. Kimberly Damon-Randall, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2023–13376 Filed 6–22–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1 Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for Review and Approval; Comment Request; Type-Approval Requirements for Vessel Monitoring Systems The Department of Commerce will submit the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, on or after the date of publication of this notice. We invite the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on proposed, and continuing information collections, which helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public’s reporting burden. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register on February 13, 2023 (88 FR 9255) during a 60-day comment period. This notice allows for VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 22, 2023 Jkt 259001 an additional 30 days for public comments. Agency: National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. Title: Type-Approval Requirements for Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS) OMB Control Number: 0648–0789. Form Number(s): None. Type of Request: Regular submission (extension of currently approved collection). Number of Respondents: 9. Average Hours per Response: Initial application: 80 hours; Changes to existing type-approval: 24 hours; Response to a type-approval revocation: 24 hours; Diagnostic and troubleshooting support: 1,066 hours. Total Annual Burden Hours: 8,680 hours. Needs and Uses: This request is for extension of a currently approved information collection. The current Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at title 50, part 600, subpart Q, sets forth the requirements for Enhanced Mobile Transceiver Units (EMTUs) to be typeapproved by NMFS for use in federal fisheries programs. These EMTUs can either be satellite-linked systems or cellular-based hardware and software. Respondents for type-approval of vessel monitoring system (VMS) satellite- or cellular-based systems must submit a written type-approval request and electronic copies of supporting materials that include certain required information. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) uses the information submitted to assess whether an EMTU or EMTU–C meets minimum technical specifications and can be approved for use in the NMFS VMS program. The information currently required to accompany an application for typeapproval of VMS satellite-based systems is set forth at 50 CFR 600.1502 through 600.1507. The information required for type-approval of VMS cellular-based systems will be substantially similar and identical except where specifically indicated (e.g., EMTU–Cs will not be required to report the at-sea loss of communications signals, as proposed in 50 CFR 600.1503(e)(5)). Information requested in the typeapproval application for EMTU–Cs and EMTUs includes the information identified in 50 CFR 600, subpart Q, more specifically, 50 CFR 600.1501 through 600.1509. This identified PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 information is also embodied in the Type-Approval Matrix form (available from NMFS OLE) that can be used by a respondent to more easily organize and submit the required information in their type-approval request to NMFS. The information will include information regarding: Characteristics of the EMTU– C or EMTU, Associated entities including manufacturer and sellers, Communication functionalities, Data formats, Data transmission details, Latency requirements, Messaging formats and transmission details, Electronic forms, Data security, Customer service, Durability, and Applicant’s data handling requirements. Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations. Frequency: Variable. Estimated at once every 5 years. Respondent’s Obligation: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Legal Authority: The MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and regional fishery management councils prevent overfishing and requires the collection of reliable data essential to the effective conservation, management, and scientific understanding of the nation’s fishery resources, including vessel monitoring systems. This information collection request may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view the Department of Commerce collections currently under review by OMB. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this notice on the following website www.reginfo.gov/ public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or by using the search function and entering either the title of the collection or the OMB Control Number 0648–0789. Sheleen Dumas, Department PRA Clearance Officer, Office of the Under Secretary for Economic Affairs, Commerce Department. [FR Doc. 2023–13371 Filed 6–22–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P E:\FR\FM\23JNN1.SGM 23JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 120 (Friday, June 23, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41077-41080]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13376]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XD064]


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 Murphy 
Exploration and Production Company (Murphy) for the take of marine 
mammals incidental to geophysical survey activity in the Gulf of 
Mexico.

DATES: The LOA is effective from July 14, 2023, through September 13, 
2023.

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: Jenna Harlacher, 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 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

    Murphy plans to conduct a zero offset vertical seismic profile 
(VSP) survey within Walker Ridge Block 425 in approximately 2,700 m 
water depth. Murphy plans to use a 6-element, 1,350 in\3\ airgun array. 
Please see Murphy's application for additional detail.
    Consistent with the preamble to the final rule, the survey effort 
proposed by Murphy 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, January 19, 2021). In order to 
generate the appropriate take number for authorization, the following 
information was considered: (1) survey type; (2)

[[Page 41078]]

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 VSP survey effort. Summary 
descriptions of these modeled survey geometries are available in the 
preamble to the proposed rule (83 FR 29212, June 22, 2018). Coil was 
selected as the best available proxy survey type because the spatial 
coverage of the planned survey is most similar to that associated with 
the coil survey pattern.
    For the planned survey, the seismic source array will be deployed 
from a stationary drilling rig at or near the borehole, with the 
seismic receivers (i.e., geophones) deployed in the borehole on 
wireline at specified depth intervals. 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 Murphy's planned survey would not cover 
any additional area beyond that ensonified by the stationary source, 
the coil proxy is most representative of the effort planned by Murphy 
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 the airgun array (6 elements; 1,350 in\3\), and in daily survey area 
planned by Murphy (as mentioned above), as compared to those modeled 
for the rule.
    The survey is planned to occur for 2 days during summer in Zone 7. 
Therefore, the take estimates for each species are based on the summer 
values for the species.
    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. 
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. This can result in unrealistic projections 
regarding the likelihood of encountering particularly rare species and/
or species not expected to occur outside particular habitats. 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, (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 
killer whales 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). 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 3 encounters during more recent 
survey effort from 2017-18 (Waring et al., 2013; www.boem.gov/gommapps). Two other species were also observed on fewer than 20 
occasions during the 1992-2009 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 1-30 m in depth than to deeper 
waters, with an average depth during those most common dives of 
approximately 3 m.

[[Page 41079]]

    In summary, killer whales are the most rarely encountered species 
in the GOM and typically occur only in particularly deep water. This 
survey would take place in deep waters that would overlap with depths 
in which killer whales typically occur. 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. In addition, as noted above in relation to the general 
take estimation methodology, the assumed proxy source (72-element, 
8,000-in\3\ array) results in a significant overestimate of the actual 
potential for take to occur. NMFS' determination in reflection of the 
information discussed above, which informed the final rule, is that use 
of the generic acoustic exposure modeling results for killer whales 
will generally result in 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 this case, use of the 
acoustic exposure modeling produces an estimate of one killer whale 
exposure. Given the foregoing, it is unlikely that any killer whales 
would be encountered during this 2-day survey, and accordingly no take 
of killer whales is authorized through this LOA.
    In addition, in this case, use of the exposure modeling produces 
results that are smaller than average GOM group sizes for multiple 
species (Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006). NMFS' typical practice in such a 
situation is to increase exposure estimates to the assumed average 
group size for a species in order to ensure that, if the species is 
encountered, exposures will not exceed the authorized take number. 
However, other relevant considerations here lead to a determination 
that increasing the estimated exposures to average group sizes would 
likely lead to an overestimate of actual potential take. In this 
circumstance, the very short survey duration (maximum of 2 days) and 
relatively small Level B harassment isopleths likely to actually be 
produced through use of the 6-element, 1,350-in\3\ airgun array 
(compared with the modeled 72-element, 8,000 in\3\ array) mean that it 
is unlikely that certain species would be encountered at all, much less 
that the encounter would result in exposure of a greater number of 
individuals than is estimated through use of the exposure modeling 
results. As a result, in this case NMFS has not increased the estimated 
exposure values to assumed average group sizes in authorizing take.
    Based on the results of our analysis, NMFS has determined that the 
level of taking expected for this survey and authorized through the LOA 
is consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable 
under the regulations for the affected species or stocks of marine 
mammals. 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....................................................               0              51             n/a
Sperm whale.....................................................              10           2,207             0.4
Kogia spp.......................................................               5           4,373             0.1
Beaked whales...................................................              87           3,768             2.3
Rough-toothed dolphin...........................................              15           4,853             0.3
Bottlenose dolphin..............................................               0         176,108             n/a
Clymene dolphin.................................................          \3\ 38          11,895             0.3
Atlantic spotted dolphin........................................               0          74,785             n/a
Pantropical spotted dolphin.....................................             381         102,361             0.4
Spinner dolphin.................................................           \3\ 9          25,114             0.0
Striped dolphin.................................................          \3\ 20           5,229             0.4
Fraser's dolphin................................................           \3\ 7           1,665             0.4
Risso's dolphin.................................................           \3\ 6           3,764             0.2
Melon-headed whale..............................................          \3\ 26           7,003             0.4
Pygmy killer whale..............................................          \3\ 12           2,126             0.6
False killer whale..............................................          \3\ 14           3,204             0.4
Killer whale....................................................               0             267             n/a
Short-finned pilot whale........................................           \3\ 2           1,981             0.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Scalar ratios were not applied in this case due to brief survey duration.

[[Page 41080]]

 
\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
  Rice's whale and killer whale, the larger estimated SAR abundance estimate is used.
\3\ Modeled exposure estimate less than assumed average group size (Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006).

    Based on the analysis contained herein of Murphy'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 (i.e., less than 
one-third of the best available abundance estimate) and therefore the 
taking 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 Murphy authorizing the take of marine mammals 
incidental to its geophysical survey activity, as described above.

    Dated: June 20, 2023.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-13376 Filed 6-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.