Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Geophysical Surveys Related to Oil and Gas Activities in the Gulf of Mexico, 42849-42852 [2024-10736]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 96 (Thursday, May 16, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42849-42852]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-10736]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XD842]


Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals 
Incidental to Geophysical Surveys Related to Oil and Gas Activities in 
the Gulf of Mexico

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of issuance of Letter of Authorization.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as 
amended, its implementing regulations, and NMFS' MMPA Regulations for 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Geophysical Surveys Related to Oil 
and Gas Activities in the Gulf of Mexico, notification is hereby given 
that a Letter of Authorization (LOA) has been issued to CCG for the 
take of marine mammals incidental to geophysical survey activity in the 
Gulf of Mexico (GOM).

DATES: The LOA is effective from May 10, 2024 through December 31, 
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: 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

[[Page 42850]]

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

    CGG plans to conduct a three-dimensional (3D) ocean bottom node 
(OBN) survey over the Garden Banks and Keathley Canyon areas, with 
approximate water depths ranging from approximately 190 to 2,650 meters 
(m). See section F of the LOA application for a map of the area.
    CGG anticipates using two source vessels, towing conventional 
airgun array sources consisting of 42 elements with a total volume of 
5,220 cubic inches (in\3\), or the low-frequency tuned pulse source 
(TPS). Please see CGG's application for additional detail.
    The TPS was not included in the acoustic exposure modeling 
developed in support of the rule. However, the TPS was previously 
described and evaluated in the notice of issuance of a previous LOA to 
Shell (86 FR 37309, 37310; July 15, 2021; see also 87 FR 55790, 55791 
(September 12, 2022 (notice of issuance of LOA to Shell)). For 
additional detail regarding sources, see Section C of the LOA 
application. Based on this information we have determined there will be 
no effects of a magnitude or intensity different from those evaluated 
in support of the rule. NMFS therefore expects that use of modeling 
results supporting the final rule relating to use of the 72 element, 
8,000 in\3\ airgun array are expected to be significantly conservative 
as a proxy for use in evaluating potential impacts of use of the TPS.
    Consistent with the preamble to the final rule, the survey effort 
proposed by CGG 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 5398, January 19, 2021). In order to 
generate the appropriate take number for authorization, the following 
information was considered: (1) survey type; (2) location (by modeling 
zone \1\); (3) number of days; and (4) season.\2\ The acoustic exposure 
modeling performed in support of the rule provides 24-hour exposure 
estimates for each species, specific to each modeled survey type in 
each zone and season.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For purposes of acoustic exposure modeling, the GOM was 
divided into seven zones. Zone 1 is not included in the geographic 
scope of the rule.
    \2\ For purposes of acoustic exposure modeling, seasons include 
Winter (December-March) and Summer (April-November).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No 3D OBN 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 3D OBN survey effort, largely due 
to the greater area covered by the modeled proxies. Summary 
descriptions of these modeled survey geometries are available in the 
preamble to the proposed rule (83 FR 29212, 29220, June 22, 2018). Coil 
was selected as the best available proxy survey type in this case 
because the spatial coverage of the planned survey is most similar to 
the coil survey pattern.
    The planned 3D OBN survey will involve two source vessels sailing 
with a minimum of 2,500 m separation. The coil survey pattern was 
assumed to cover the smallest kilometers squared (km\2\) per day 
(compared with 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. Although CGG is not proposing to perform a survey 
using the coil geometry, the coil proxy is most representative of the 
effort planned by CGG in terms of predicted Level B harassment 
exposures.
    All available acoustic exposure modeling results for the 2021 final 
rule assume use of a 72-element, 8,000 in\3\ array. Thus, take numbers 
authorized through the LOA are considered conservative due to 
differences in the airgun array (42 elements, 5,220 in\3\ or the TPS 
source), as compared to the source modeled for the rule.
    The survey will take place over approximately 115 days with 65 days 
of sound source operation. The survey plan would include all 65 days in 
Zone 5. The seasonal distribution of survey days is not known in 
advance. Therefore, the take estimates for each species are based on 
the season that produces the greater value.
    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. Thus, although the modeling conducted for 
the rule is a natural starting point for estimating take, the rule 
acknowledged that other information could be considered (see, e.g., 86 
FR 5442, January 19, 2021, discussing the need to provide flexibility 
and make efficient use of

[[Page 42851]]

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 two 
marine mammal species produces results inconsistent with what is known 
regarding their occurrence in the GOM. Accordingly, we have adjusted 
the calculated take estimates for 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, habitat-based density 
modeling has identified similar habitat (i.e., approximately 100 to 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. CGG's 
planned activities will slightly overlap this depth range, with 
approximately 0.8 percent of the area expected to be ensonified by the 
survey above root-mean-squared pressure received levels (RMS SPL) of 
160 dB (referenced to 1 micropascal (re 1 [mu]Pa)) overlapping the 100-
400 m isobaths. Therefore, while we expect take of Rice's whale to be 
unlikely, there is some reasonable potential for take of Rice's whale 
to occur in association with this survey. However, NMFS' determination 
in reflection of the data discussed above, which informed the final 
rule, is that use of the generic acoustic exposure modeling results for 
Rice's whales would result in estimated take numbers that are 
inconsistent with the assumptions made in the rule regarding expected 
Rice's whale take (86 FR 5322, January 19, 2021; 86 FR 5403, January 
19, 2021).
    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 1992-2009 reported only 16 sightings 
of killer whales, with an additional 3 encounters during more recent 
survey effort from 2017-18 (Waring et al., 2013; 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 
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 encounters 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.
    In summary, killer whales are the most rarely encountered species 
in the GOM and typically occur only in particularly deep water (>700 
m). 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. NMFS' determination in reflection of the data 
discussed above, which informed the final rule, is that use of the 
generic acoustic exposure modeling results for killer whales will 
generally result in estimated take numbers that are inconsistent with 
the assumptions made in the rule regarding expected killer whale take 
(86 FR 5403, January 19, 2021).
    In past authorizations, NMFS has often addressed situations 
involving the low likelihood of encountering a rare species such as 
Rice's or killer whales in the GOM through authorization of take of a 
single group of average size (i.e., representing a single potential 
encounter). See 83 FR 63268, December 7, 2018; 86 FR 29090, May 28, 
2021; 85 FR 55645, September 9, 2020. For the reasons expressed above, 
NMFS determined that a single encounter of Rice's whales or killer 
whales is more likely than the model-generated

[[Page 42852]]

estimates and has authorized take associated with a single group 
encounter (i.e., up to two animals for Rice's whale and up to seven 
animals for killer whales).
    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. 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 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 1 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; 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      Scaled take                       Percent
                     Species                           take             \1\        Abundance \2\     abundance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rice's whale \3\................................               2             n/a              51             3.9
Sperm whale.....................................           1,710             723           2,207            32.8
Kogia spp.......................................         646 \3\             196           4,373             5.3
Beaked whales...................................           7,546             762           3,768            20.2
Rough-toothed dolphin...........................           1,297             372           4,853             7.7
Bottlenose dolphin..............................           6,148           1,764         176,108             1.0
Clymene dolphin.................................           3,651           1,048          11,895             8.8
Atlantic spotted dolphin........................           2,456             705          74,785             0.9
Pantropical spotted dolphin.....................          16,568           4,755         102,361             4.6
Spinner dolphin.................................           4,439           1,274          25,114             5.1
Striped dolphin.................................           1,426             409           5,229             7.8
Fraser's dolphin................................             410             118           1,665             7.1
Risso's dolphin.................................           1,073             316           3,764             8.4
Melon-headed whale..............................           2,399             708           7,003            10.1
Pygmy killer whale..............................             565             167           2,126             7.8
False killer whale..............................             898             265           3,204             8.3
Killer whale....................................               7             n/a             267             2.6
Short-finned pilot whale........................             694             205           1,981            10.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Scalar ratios were applied to ``Authorized Take'' values as described at 86 FR 5322, 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\ Includes 34 takes by Level A harassment and 612 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 CGG'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 CGG authorizing the take of marine mammals 
incidental to its geophysical survey activity, as described above.

    Dated: May 10, 2024.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-10736 Filed 5-15-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P