Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Geophysical Surveys Related to Oil and Gas Activities in the Gulf of Mexico, 41387-41391 [2024-10417]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
41387
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 93 / Monday, May 13, 2024 / Notices
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 5438, January 19,
2021).
The take numbers for authorization
are determined as described above in
the Summary of Request and Analysis
section. Subsequently, the total
incidents of harassment for each species
are multiplied by scalar ratios to
produce a derived product that better
reflects the number of individuals likely
to be taken within a survey (as
compared to the total number of
instances of take), accounting for the
likelihood that some individual marine
mammals may be taken on more than
one day (see 86 FR 5404, January 19,
2021). The output of this scaling, where
appropriate, is incorporated into
adjusted total take estimates that are the
basis for NMFS’ small numbers
determinations, as depicted in table 1.
This product is used by NMFS in
making the necessary small numbers
determinations through comparison
with the best available abundance
estimates (see discussion at 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;
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
Species
Rice’s whale 3 ...................................................................................................
Sperm whale ....................................................................................................
Kogia spp .........................................................................................................
Beaked whales ................................................................................................
Rough-toothed dolphin ....................................................................................
Bottlenose dolphin ...........................................................................................
Clymene dolphin ..............................................................................................
Atlantic spotted dolphin ...................................................................................
Pantropical spotted dolphin .............................................................................
Spinner dolphin ................................................................................................
Striped dolphin .................................................................................................
Fraser’s dolphin ...............................................................................................
Risso’s dolphin .................................................................................................
Melon-headed whale .......................................................................................
Pygmy killer whale ...........................................................................................
False killer whale .............................................................................................
Killer whale ......................................................................................................
Short-finned pilot whale ...................................................................................
Scaled take 1
0
733
4 320
4,263
762
1,807
2,077
718
14,864
1,533
941
285
476
1,352
482
621
7
254
Abundance 2
n/a
310
96
431
219
519
596
206
4,266
440
270
82
141
399
142
183
n/a
75
Percent
abundance
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
n/a
14.0
2.7
11.4
4.5
0.3
5.0
0.3
4.2
1.8
5.2
4.9
3.7
5.7
6.7
5.7
2.6
3.8
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
1 Scalar ratios were applied to ‘‘Authorized Take’’ values as described at 86 FR 5322 at 5404 (January 19, 2021) to derive scaled take numbers shown here.
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 The final rule refers to the GOM Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni). These whales were subsequently described as a new species, Rice’s
whale (Balaenoptera ricei) (Rosel et al., 2021).
4 Includes 21 takes by Level A harassment and 299 takes by Level B harassment. Scalar ratio is applied to takes by Level B harassment only;
small numbers determination made on basis of scaled Level B harassment take plus authorized Level A harassment take.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of Shell’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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:33 May 10, 2024
Jkt 262001
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
Shell authorizing the take of marine
mammals incidental to its geophysical
survey activity, as described above.
Dated: May 7, 2024.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–10303 Filed 5–10–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XD876]
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\13MYN1.SGM
13MYN1
41388
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 93 / Monday, May 13, 2024 / 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 Anadarko Petroleum Corporation
(Anadarko) for the take of marine
mammals incidental to geophysical
survey activity in the GOM.
DATES: The LOA is effective from May
15, 2024, through November 15, 2024.
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:
Rachel Wachtendonk, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–
8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD 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
21:33 May 10, 2024
Jkt 262001
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
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
Anadarko plans to conduct a zero
offset vertical seismic profile (VSP)
within Mississippi Canyon Block MC–
216. The survey area has water depths
of approximately 1,875 meters (m).
Anadarko plans to use either a 12element, 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 3 days in May 2024. Please see
Anadarko’s application for additional
detail.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Consistent with the preamble to the
final rule, the survey effort proposed by
Anadarko 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., two-dimensional
(2D), three-dimensional narrow azimuth
(3D NAZ), 3D wide-azimuth (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
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 Anadarko’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 Anadarko 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
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\13MYN1.SGM
13MYN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 93 / Monday, May 13, 2024 / Notices
considered conservative due to the
differences in both the airgun array
(maximum of 12 elements and 2,400
in3), and in daily survey area planned
by Anadarko (as mentioned above), as
compared to those modeled for the rule.
The survey is planned to occur in
zone 5 during summer.
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
known as GOM Bryde’s whales) 3
located in the northeastern GOM in
waters between 100 and 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 has identified
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).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:33 May 10, 2024
Jkt 262001
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; Garrison et al., 2023), and
Rice’s whales have been detected within
this depth band throughout the GOM
(Soldevilla et al., 2022, 2024). See
discussion provided at, e.g., 83 FR
29228, June 22, 2018; 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. Anadarko’s planned
activities will occur in water depths of
approximately 1,875 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) represent the
output of models derived from multiyear observations and associated
environmental parameters that
incorporate corrections for detection
bias. However, in the case of killer
whales, the model is informed by few
data, as indicated by the coefficient of
variation associated with the abundance
predicted by the model (0.41, the
second-highest of any GOM species
model; Roberts et al., 2016). The
model’s authors noted the expected
non-uniform distribution of this rarelyencountered species (as discussed
above) and expressed that, due to the
limited data available to inform the
model, it ‘‘should be viewed cautiously’’
(Roberts et al., 2015).
NOAA surveys in the GOM from 1992
to 2009 reported only 16 sightings of
killer whales, with an additional 3
encounters during more recent survey
effort from 2017 to 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
4 However, note that these species have been
observed over a greater range of water depths in the
GOM than have killer whales.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
41389
geophysical survey vessels from 2002 to
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 and 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 and 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.
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
E:\FR\FM\13MYN1.SGM
13MYN1
41390
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 93 / Monday, May 13, 2024 / Notices
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, January
19, 2021; 86 FR 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 at most 3-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 3 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 size 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, January 19, 2021;
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,
January 19, 2021 and 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 a
Species
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
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 ...............................................................................................................
0
79
c 29
338
58
267
160
110
726
195
62
d 19
47
109
25
40
0
32
a
Abundance b
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
3.6
0.7
9.0
1.2
0.2
1.3
0.1
0.7
0.8
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.6
1.2
1.3
n/a
1.6
Scalar ratios were not applied in this case due to brief survey duration.
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.
c Includes 2 takes by Level A harassment and 27 takes by Level B harassment.
d Modeled exposure estimate less than assumed average group size (Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006).
b
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:31 May 10, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\13MYN1.SGM
13MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 93 / Monday, May 13, 2024 / Notices
Based on the analysis contained
herein of Anadarko’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
Anadarko authorizing the take of marine
mammals incidental to its geophysical
survey activity, as described above.
Dated: May 6, 2024
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–10417 Filed 5–10–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XD954]
Western Pacific Fishery Management
Council; Public Meetings
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of public meetings.
AGENCY:
The Western Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council) will
hold its Education Committee (EC) and
Social Science Planning Committee
(SSPC) meetings to discuss and make
recommendations on fishery
management issues in the Western
Pacific Region.
DATES: The EC meeting will be held on
May 29, 2024, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.,
Hawaii Standard Time (HST). The SSPC
meeting will be held on May 30, 2024,
from 12 p.m. to 4 p.m., HST. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for the
agenda.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
The EC meeting will be held
by web conference via Webex.
The SSPC meeting will be held as a
hybrid meeting for SSPC members and
the public, with a remote participation
option available via Webex. In-person
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:33 May 10, 2024
Jkt 262001
attendance will be hosted at the Council
office, 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400,
Honolulu, HI 96813.
Instructions for connecting to the web
conference and providing oral public
comments will be posted on the Council
website at www.wpcouncil.org. For
assistance with the web conference
connection, contact the Council office at
(808) 522–8220.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director,
Western Pacific Fishery Management
Council; telephone: (808) 522–8220.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A public
comment period will be provided in the
agendas. The order in which agenda
items are addressed may change. The
meetings will run as late as necessary to
complete scheduled business.
41391
9. Discussion and Recommendations
Special Accommodations
These meetings are physically
accessible to people with disabilities.
Requests for sign language
interpretation or other auxiliary aids
should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds,
(808) 522–8220 (voice) or (808) 522–
8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the
meeting date.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: May 8, 2024.
Rey Israel Marquez,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2024–10391 Filed 5–10–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Agenda for the EC Meeting
Wednesday, May 29, 2024, 1 p.m. to 4
p.m., HST
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
1. Welcome and Introductions
2. Review of the Last Education
Committee Recommendations and
Meeting
A. Council Education Committee
Memorandum of Understanding
Update
B. Working Group Reports
i. Input on Education Initiatives in
Council 2025–2028 Program Plan
ii. Incorporate Fisheries Science into
K–12 and Higher Education
Classrooms
iii. Review Course Articulation
Agreements Between 2-year and 4year Higher Education Programs
C. Marine Resource Education
Program in Pacific Islands Update
3. Council 2025–2028 Program Plan
Update
4. Other Business
5. Public Comment
6. Discussion and Recommendations
[RTID 0648–XD900]
Agenda for the SSPC Meeting
Thursday, May 30, 2024, 12 p.m. to 4
p.m., HST
1. Welcome and Introductions
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Annual Stock Assessment and
Fishery Evaluation Reports
A. Socioeconomic Modules 2023
Report Updates
B. Fisher Observations
4. Review of Draft 2025–2029
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
Research Priorities
5. Social, Economic, Ecological, and
Management Process Review
6. Project Updates
7. Other Business
8. Public Comment
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to the Revolution
Wind Offshore Wind Energy Project
Offshore of Rhode Island
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; modification of letter of
authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), as amended, its implementing
regulations, and NMFS’ MMPA
Regulations for Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Construction of
the Revolution Wind Project Offshore of
Rhode Island, notification is hereby
given that upon request from Revolution
Wind, LLC (Revolution Wind), NMFS
has modified a Letter of Authorization
(LOA) issued to Revolution Wind for the
take of marine mammals incidental to
activities associated with construction
of the Revolution Wind Offshore Wind
Energy Project (hereafter known as the
‘‘Project’’) in Federal and State waters
offshore Rhode Island. Specifically,
NMFS has removed the requirement
that each real-time passive acoustic
monitoring (PAM) data stream must be
monitored by separate PAM operators.
NMFS has determined that this
modification to the aforementioned
monitoring requirement does not change
the findings made for the regulations
and does not result in any change in the
total estimated number of takes of
marine mammals.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13MYN1.SGM
13MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 93 (Monday, May 13, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41387-41391]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-10417]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XD876]
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 41388]]
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 Anadarko
Petroleum Corporation (Anadarko) for the take of marine mammals
incidental to geophysical survey activity in the GOM.
DATES: The LOA is effective from May 15, 2024, through November 15,
2024.
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: Rachel Wachtendonk, 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 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
Anadarko plans to conduct a zero offset vertical seismic profile
(VSP) within Mississippi Canyon Block MC-216. The survey area has water
depths of approximately 1,875 meters (m). Anadarko 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 3
days in May 2024. Please see Anadarko's application for additional
detail.
Consistent with the preamble to the final rule, the survey effort
proposed by Anadarko 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., two-dimensional (2D), three-dimensional
narrow azimuth (3D NAZ), 3D wide-azimuth (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 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 Anadarko'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 Anadarko 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
[[Page 41389]]
considered conservative due to the differences in both the airgun array
(maximum of 12 elements and 2,400 in\3\), and in daily survey area
planned by Anadarko (as mentioned above), as compared to those modeled
for the rule.
The survey is planned to occur in zone 5 during summer.
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 and 400[thinsp]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 has 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; Garrison et al., 2023), and
Rice's whales have been detected within this depth band throughout the
GOM (Soldevilla et al., 2022, 2024). See discussion provided at, e.g.,
83 FR 29228, June 22, 2018; 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.
Anadarko's planned activities will occur in water depths of
approximately 1,875 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) 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 to 2009 reported only 16
sightings of killer whales, with an additional 3 encounters during more
recent survey effort from 2017 to 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 to 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 and 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 and 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.
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
[[Page 41390]]
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, January 19, 2021; 86 FR 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 at most 3-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 3 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 size 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, January 19, 2021; 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, January 19, 2021 and 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 \a\ Abundance \b\ abundance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rice's whale.................................................... 0 51 n/a
Sperm whale..................................................... 79 2,207 3.6
Kogia spp....................................................... \c\ 29 4,373 0.7
Beaked whales................................................... 338 3,768 9.0
Rough-toothed dolphin........................................... 58 4,853 1.2
Bottlenose dolphin.............................................. 267 176,108 0.2
Clymene dolphin................................................. 160 11,895 1.3
Atlantic spotted dolphin........................................ 110 74,785 0.1
Pantropical spotted dolphin..................................... 726 102,361 0.7
Spinner dolphin................................................. 195 25,114 0.8
Striped dolphin................................................. 62 5,229 1.2
Fraser's dolphin................................................ \d\ 19 1,665 1.1
Risso's dolphin................................................. 47 3,764 1.2
Melon-headed whale.............................................. 109 7,003 1.6
Pygmy killer whale.............................................. 25 2,126 1.2
False killer whale.............................................. 40 3,204 1.3
Killer whale.................................................... 0 267 n/a
Short-finned pilot whale........................................ 32 1,981 1.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Scalar ratios were not applied in this case due to brief survey duration.
\b\ 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.
\c\ Includes 2 takes by Level A harassment and 27 takes by Level B harassment.
\d\ Modeled exposure estimate less than assumed average group size (Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006).
[[Page 41391]]
Based on the analysis contained herein of Anadarko'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 Anadarko authorizing the take of marine
mammals incidental to its geophysical survey activity, as described
above.
Dated: May 6, 2024
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-10417 Filed 5-10-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
