Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Geophysical Surveys Related to Oil and Gas Activities in the Gulf of Mexico, 66409-66413 [2023-20947]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 27, 2023 / Notices expected to result in significant or longterm consequences for individuals, or to accrue to adverse impacts on their populations; • The ensonified areas are very small relative to the overall habitat ranges of all species and stocks; • The lack of anticipated significant or long-term negative effects to marine mammal habitat; and • USCG would implement mitigation measures including soft starts and shutdown zones to minimize the numbers of marine mammals exposed to injurious levels of sound, and to ensure that take by Level A harassment is, at most, a small degree of PTS. Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine mammal take from the proposed activities will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks. ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 Small Numbers As noted previously, only take of small numbers of marine mammals may be authorized under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals. When the predicted number of individuals to be taken is fewer than one-third of the species or stock abundance, the take is considered to be of small numbers. Additionally, other qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of the activities. For all species, the proposed take is below one third of the population for all marine mammal stocks (Table 10). Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity (including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small numbers of marine mammals would be taken relative to the population size of the affected species or stocks. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:44 Sep 26, 2023 Jkt 259001 Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes. Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults internally whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species. No incidental take of ESA-listed species is proposed for authorization or expected to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this action. Proposed Authorization As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to the USCG for conducting impact pile driving associated with the ETP project in Astoria, Oregon, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. A draft of the proposed IHA can be found at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ national/marine-mammal-protection/ incidental-take-authorizationsconstruction-activities. Request for Public Comments We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and any other aspect of this notice of proposed IHA for the proposed construction project. We also request comment on the potential renewal of this proposed IHA as described in the paragraph below. Please include with your comments any supporting data or literature citations to help inform decisions on the request for this IHA or a subsequent renewal IHA. On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a one-time, 1 year renewal IHA following notice to the public providing an additional 15 days for public comments when (1) up to another year of identical or nearly identical activities as described in the Description of Proposed Activity section of this notice PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 66409 is planned or (2) the activities as described in the Description of Proposed Activity section of this notice would not be completed by the time the IHA expires and a renewal would allow for completion of the activities beyond that described in the Dates and Duration section of this notice, provided all of the following conditions are met: • A request for renewal is received no later than 60 days prior to the needed renewal IHA effective date (recognizing that the renewal IHA expiration date cannot extend beyond 1 year from expiration of the initial IHA). • The request for renewal must include the following: (1) An explanation that the activities to be conducted under the requested renewal IHA are identical to the activities analyzed under the initial IHA, are a subset of the activities, or include changes so minor (e.g., reduction in pile size) that the changes do not affect the previous analyses, mitigation and monitoring requirements, or take estimates (with the exception of reducing the type or amount of take). (2) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not previously analyzed or authorized. Upon review of the request for renewal, the status of the affected species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS determines that there are no more than minor changes in the activities, the mitigation and monitoring measures will remain the same and appropriate, and the findings in the initial IHA remain valid. Dated: September 18, 2023. Catherine Marzin, Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2023–20534 Filed 9–26–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [RTID 0648–XD193] 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. AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 66410 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 27, 2023 / Notices Notice of issuance of Letter of Authorization. ACTION: 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 (GOM), notification is hereby given that a Letter of Authorization (LOA) has been issued to LLOG Exploration Company (LLOG) for the take of marine mammals incidental to geophysical survey activity in the GOM. DATES: The LOA is effective from September 21, 2023, through December 31, 2025. ADDRESSES: The LOA, LOA request, and supporting documentation are available online at: https://www.fisheries. noaa.gov/action/incidental-takeauthorization-oil-and-gas-industrygeophysical-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: ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 SUMMARY: 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. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:44 Sep 26, 2023 Jkt 259001 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 U.S. waters of the 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 5year 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 LLOG plans to conduct one of the following vertical seismic profile (VSP) survey types: Zero Offset, Offset, Walkaway VSP, and/or Checkshots within Keathley Canyon Block 686. The survey area has water depths of 1,888 to 1,966 meters (m). LLOG plans to use either a 12-element, 2,400 cubic inch (in3) airgun array, or a 6-element, 1,500 in3 airgun array. The survey is planned to occur for up to 5 days during the period from issuance of the LOA to PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 December 31, 2025. 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, 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 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 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 Checkshots—similar to Zero Offset VSP, typically hung from a platform and a sensor placed at a few depths in the well, where only the first energy arrival is recorded. 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 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). E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 27, 2023 / Notices Level B harassment criteria. Because LLOG’s planned survey is expected to cover no additional area as a stationary source, 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 (maximum 12 elements and 2,400 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 in Zone 5. The survey could take place in any 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. 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 Rice’s whales and killer whales produces results inconsistent with what is known regarding their occurrence in the GOM. Accordingly, we have adjusted the calculated take estimates for those species as described below. NMFS’ final rule described a ‘‘core habitat area’’ for Rice’s whales (formerly VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:44 Sep 26, 2023 Jkt 259001 known as GOM Bryde’s whales) 3 located in the northeastern GOM in waters between 100–400 m depth along the continental shelf break (Rosel et al., 2016). However, whaling records suggest that Rice’s whales historically had a broader distribution within similar habitat parameters throughout the GOM (Reeves et al., 2011; Rosel and Wilcox, 2014). In addition, habitatbased density modeling identified similar habitat (i.e., approximately 100– 400 m water depths along the continental shelf break) as being potential Rice’s whale habitat (Roberts et al., 2016), although the core habitat area contained approximately 92 percent of the predicted abundance of Rice’s whales. See discussion provided at, e.g., 83 FR 29228, 83 FR 29280 (June 22, 2018); 86 FR 5418 (January 19, 2021). Although Rice’s whales may occur outside of the core habitat area, we expect that any such occurrence would be limited to the narrow band of suitable habitat described above (i.e., 100–400 m) and that, based on the few available records, these occurrences would be rare. LLOG’s planned activities will occur in water depths of approximately 1,888 to 1,966 m in the central GOM. Thus, NMFS does not expect there to be the reasonable potential for take of Rice’s whale in association with this survey and, accordingly, does not authorize take of Rice’s whale through the LOA. 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 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). PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 66411 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 2017–2018 (Waring et al., 2013; https://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 4). 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, 86 FR 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 4 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. 4 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\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 66412 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 27, 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, 86 FR 5403, January 19, 2021). In this case, use of the acoustic exposure modeling produces an estimate of two killer whale exposures. Given the foregoing, it is unlikely that any killer whales would be encountered during this at most 5-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 one 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 the average group size would likely lead to an overestimate of actual potential take. In this circumstance, the very short survey duration (maximum of 5 days) and relatively small Level B harassment isopleths produced through use of the (at most) 12-element, 2,400-in3 airgun array (compared with the modeled 72element, 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, 86 FR 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, 86 FR 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; https:// 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 ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD 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 0 132 3 50 580 100 473 281 189 1,274 341 110 4 32 83 185 43 69 0 53 ratios were not applied in this case due to brief survey duration. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:44 Sep 26, 2023 Jkt 259001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 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 6.0 1.1 15.4 2.1 0.3 2.4 0.3 1.2 1.4 2.1 1.9 2.2 2.6 2.0 2.2 n/a 2.7 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 27, 2023 / Notices 66413 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 Includes 3 takes by Level A harassment and 47 takes by Level B harassment. 4 Modeled exposure estimate less than assumed average group size (Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006) 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 (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 LLOG authorizing the take of marine mammals incidental to its geophysical survey activity, as described above. Dated: September 21, 2023. Catherine Marzin, Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2023–20947 Filed 9–26–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [RTID 0648–XD397] South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a meeting of its Executive Committee via webinar to discuss the Council budget and workplan. DATES: The meeting will be held from 1 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, October 24, 2023. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held via webinar. Webinar registration is required. Details are included in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Iverson, Public Information Officer, ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:44 Sep 26, 2023 Jkt 259001 Meeting information, including the webinar registration link, online public comment form, agenda, and briefing book materials will be posted on the Council’s website at: https://safmc.net/ council-meetings/. Comments become part of the Administrative Record of the meeting and will automatically be posted to the website and available for Council consideration. At this meeting, the Council’s Executive Committee will review the 2023 Council budget status, planned activities for 2023, and the draft 2024 operating budget including priorities for potential additional funds available through the Inflation Reduction Act. The meeting will include a closed session to discuss personnel topics. Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council’s intent to take final action to address the emergency. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Special Accommodations National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. AGENCY: SUMMARY: SAFMC; phone: (843) 302–8440 or toll free: (866) SAFMC–10; fax: (843) 769– 4520; email: kim.iverson@safmc.net. The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES) 5 days prior to the meeting. Note: The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Dated: September 22, 2023. Rey Israel Marquez, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2023–21059 Filed 9–26–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [RTID 0648–XD401] Fisheries of the South Atlantic; Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR); Public Meeting National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of SEDAR 82 South Atlantic Gray Triggerfish Assessment Webinar 7. AGENCY: The SEDAR 82 assessment of the South Atlantic stock of gray triggerfish will consist of a data workshop, a series of assessment webinars, and a review workshop. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. DATES: The SEDAR 82 South Atlantic Gray Triggerfish Assessment Webinar 7 is scheduled for October 18, 2023, from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m., Eastern. The established times may be adjusted as necessary to accommodate the timely completion of discussion relevant to the assessment process. Such adjustments may result in the meeting being extended from or completed prior to the time established by this notice. ADDRESSES: Meeting address: The meeting will be held via webinar. The webinar is open to members of the public. Registration for the webinar is available by contacting the SEDAR coordinator via email at Meisha.Key@safmc.net. SEDAR address: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N. Charleston, SC 29405; www.sedarweb.org. SUMMARY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meisha Key, SEDAR Coordinator, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405; phone (843) 571– 4366; email: Meisha.Key@safmc.net. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions, have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66409-66413]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20947]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XD193]

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.

[[Page 66410]]

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 (GOM), notification is hereby
given that a Letter of Authorization (LOA) has been issued to LLOG
Exploration Company (LLOG) for the take of marine mammals incidental to
geophysical survey activity in the GOM.

DATES: The LOA is effective from September 21, 2023, through December
31, 2025.

ADDRESSES: The LOA, LOA request, and supporting documentation are
available online at: https://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 U.S. waters of the 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

LLOG plans to conduct one of the following vertical seismic profile
(VSP) survey types: Zero Offset, Offset, Walkaway VSP, and/or
Checkshots within Keathley Canyon Block 686. The survey area has water
depths of 1,888 to 1,966 meters (m). 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. The survey is planned to occur for up to 5 days
during the period from issuance of the LOA to December 31, 2025. 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, 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 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
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 Checkshots--similar to
Zero Offset VSP, typically hung from a platform and a sensor placed at
a few depths in the well, where only the first energy arrival is
recorded. 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

[[Page 66411]]

Level B harassment criteria. Because LLOG's planned survey is expected
to cover no additional area as a stationary source, 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 (maximum 12 elements and 2,400 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 in Zone 5. The survey could take
place in any 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.
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
Rice's whales and killer whales produces results inconsistent with what
is known regarding their occurrence in the GOM. Accordingly, we have
adjusted the calculated take estimates for those species as described
below.
NMFS' final rule described a ``core habitat area'' for Rice's
whales (formerly known as GOM Bryde's whales) \3\ located in the
northeastern GOM in waters between 100-400 m depth along the
continental shelf break (Rosel et al., 2016). However, whaling records
suggest that Rice's whales historically had a broader distribution
within similar habitat parameters throughout the GOM (Reeves et al.,
2011; Rosel and Wilcox, 2014). In addition, habitat-based density
modeling identified similar habitat (i.e., approximately 100-400 m
water depths along the continental shelf break) as being potential
Rice's whale habitat (Roberts et al., 2016), although the core habitat
area contained approximately 92 percent of the predicted abundance of
Rice's whales. See discussion provided at, e.g., 83 FR 29228, 83 FR
29280 (June 22, 2018); 86 FR 5418 (January 19, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Although Rice's whales may occur outside of the core habitat area,
we expect that any such occurrence would be limited to the narrow band
of suitable habitat described above (i.e., 100-400 m) and that, based
on the few available records, these occurrences would be rare. LLOG's
planned activities will occur in water depths of approximately 1,888 to
1,966 m in the central GOM. Thus, NMFS does not expect there to be the
reasonable potential for take of Rice's whale in association with this
survey and, accordingly, does not authorize take of Rice's whale
through the LOA.
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 2017-2018 (Waring et al., 2013; https://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 \4\). 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, 86 FR 5334 (January 19, 2021), and similarly informs our
analysis here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ 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 4 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 66412]]

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, 86 FR 5403, January 19, 2021). In this case, use of
the acoustic exposure modeling produces an estimate of two killer whale
exposures. Given the foregoing, it is unlikely that any killer whales
would be encountered during this at most 5-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 one 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 the average group size would
likely lead to an overestimate of actual potential take. In this
circumstance, the very short survey duration (maximum of 5 days) and
relatively small Level B harassment isopleths produced through use of
the (at most) 12-element, 2,400-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, 86 FR 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, 86 FR 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; https://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..................................................... 132 2,207 6.0
Kogia spp....................................................... \3\ 50 4,373 1.1
Beaked whales................................................... 580 3,768 15.4
Rough-toothed dolphin........................................... 100 4,853 2.1
Bottlenose dolphin.............................................. 473 176,108 0.3
Clymene dolphin................................................. 281 11,895 2.4
Atlantic spotted dolphin........................................ 189 74,785 0.3
Pantropical spotted dolphin..................................... 1,274 102,361 1.2
Spinner dolphin................................................. 341 25,114 1.4
Striped dolphin................................................. 110 5,229 2.1
Fraser's dolphin................................................ \4\ 32 1,665 1.9
Risso's dolphin................................................. 83 3,764 2.2
Melon-headed whale.............................................. 185 7,003 2.6
Pygmy killer whale.............................................. 43 2,126 2.0
False killer whale.............................................. 69 3,204 2.2
Killer whale.................................................... 0 267 n/a
Short-finned pilot whale........................................ 53 1,981 2.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Scalar ratios were not applied in this case due to brief survey duration.

[[Page 66413]]

\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\ Includes 3 takes by Level A harassment and 47 takes by Level B harassment.
\4\ Modeled exposure estimate less than assumed average group size (Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006)

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 (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 LLOG authorizing the take of marine mammals
incidental to its geophysical survey activity, as described above.

Dated: September 21, 2023.
Catherine Marzin,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-20947 Filed 9-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.