Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55645

Scallop Advisory Panel via webinar to U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is request, the incidental, but not consider actions affecting New England available upon request. intentional, taking of small numbers of fisheries in the exclusive economic zone Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. marine mammals by U.S. citizens who (EEZ). Recommendations from this engage in a specified activity (other than group will be brought to the full Council Dated: September 3, 2020. commercial fishing) within a specified for formal consideration and action, if Tracey L. Thompson, geographical region if certain findings appropriate. Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable are made and either regulations are Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. DATES: This meeting will be held on issued or, if the taking is limited to [FR Doc. 2020–19910 Filed 9–8–20; 8:45 am] Wednesday, September 23, 2020 at 8:30 harassment, a notice of a proposed a.m. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P incidental take authorization may be provided to the public for review. ADDRESSES: All meeting participants Authorization for incidental takings and interested parties can register to DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE shall be granted if NMFS finds that the join the webinar at https:// taking will have a negligible impact on attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/ National Oceanic and Atmospheric the species or stock(s) and will not have 9134937625686223119. Administration Council address: New England an unmitigable adverse impact on the Fishery Management Council, 50 Water [RTID 0648–XA439] availability of the species or stock(s) for Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. taking for subsistence uses (where Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Specified Activities; Taking Marine the permissible methods of taking and Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, Mammals Incidental to a Marine other ‘‘means of effecting the least New England Fishery Management Geophysical Survey in the Aleutian practicable adverse impact’’ on the Council; telephone: (978) 465–0492. Islands affected species or stocks and their SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries habitat, paying particular attention to Agenda Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the The Scallop Advisory Panel will Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), availability of the species or stocks for discuss Amendment 21, specifically, Commerce. taking for certain subsistence uses review of public comments and select ACTION: Notice; issuance of incidental (referred to in shorthand as final preferred alternatives. Amendment harassment authorization. ‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements 21 includes measures related to: (1) pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring Management of the Northern Gulf of SUMMARY: In accordance with the and reporting of the takings are set forth. Maine (NGOM) Management Area, (2) regulations implementing the Marine The definitions of all applicable MMPA Limited Access General Category Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as statutory terms cited above are included (LAGC) individual fishing quota (IFQ) amended, notification is hereby given in the relevant sections below. possession limits, and (3) ability of that NMFS has issued an incidental Limited Access vessels with LAGC IFQ harassment authorization (IHA) to the Summary of Request Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of to transfer quota to LAGC IFQ only On March 27, 2020, NMFS received a vessels. The panel will also discuss Columbia University (L–DEO) to incidentally harass marine mammals request from L–DEO for an IHA to take 2021/22 Specifications: Discuss the marine mammals incidental to a marine timing and outlook for 2020 surveys and during a marine geophysical survey in the Aleutian Islands, Alaska. geophysical survey along and across the 2021/22 specifications process. They Aleutian Andreanof Arc in Alaska. L– DATES: The authorization is effective for also plan to review 2021 Priorities: DEO submitted a revised version of the Discuss and rank potential 2021 scallop a period of one year, from September 1, 2020, through August 31, 2021. application, which was deemed work priorities. Other business may be adequate and complete, on June 25, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: discussed, as necessary. Ben 2020. NMFS published a proposed IHA Although non-emergency issues not Laws, Office of Protected Resources, for public review and comment on July contained in this agenda may come NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 28, 2020 (85 FR 45389). NMFS has before this group for discussion, those SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: authorized take of 24 species of marine issues may not be the subject of formal mammals by harassment. For seven of action during these meetings. Action Availability these species, taking by Level A and will be restricted to those issues Electronic copies of the application Level B harassment is authorized, with specifically listed in this notice and any and supporting documents, as well as a only Level B harassment authorized for issues arising after publication of this list of the references cited in this the remaining 17 species. notice that require emergency action document, may be obtained online at: under section 305(c) of the Magnuson- www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/ Description of Proposed Activity Stevens Act, provided the public has incidental-take-authorization-lamont- Overview been notified of the Council’s intent to doherty-earth-observatory-marine- take final action to address the geophysical-survey-2. In case of Researchers from L–DEO and Woods emergency. problems accessing these documents, Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), please call the contact listed above. with funding from the National Science Special Accommodations Foundation (NSF), proposed to conduct This meeting is physically accessible Background a high-energy seismic survey from the to people with disabilities. Requests for The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of Research Vessel (R/V) Marcus G. sign language interpretation or other marine mammals, with certain Langseth (Langseth) along and across auxiliary aids should be directed to exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and the Aleutian Andreanof Arc in Alaska Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et during September-October 2020. The (978) 465–0492, at least 5 days prior to seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce two-dimensional (2–D) seismic survey the meeting date. Consistent with 16 (as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon will occur within the Exclusive

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55646 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

Economic Zone (EEZ) of the United necessary for reasons such as science acquired, the strike and dip lines will be States. The survey will use a 36-airgun drivers, poor data quality, inclement acquired a second time using MCS. The towed array with a total discharge weather, or mechanical issues with the MCS transect lines and Amlia Fracture volume of ∼6,600 cubic inches (in3) research vessel and/or equipment. The Zone transect lines will be acquired (108,155 cm3) as an acoustic source, survey will occur within the EEZ of the only once using MCS. Thus, the line km acquiring return signals using both a United States, including Alaskan state to be acquired during the entire survey towed streamer as well as ocean bottom waters, ranging in depth from 35–7,100 is expected to be approximately 3,255 seismometers (OBSs). meters (m). Approximately 3,224 km of km. There could be additional seismic The study will use 2–D seismic transect lines will be surveyed. Most of operations associated with turns, airgun surveying to seismically image the the survey (73 percent) would occur in testing, and repeat coverage of any areas structure of the crust along and across deep water (≤1,000 m), 26 percent where initial data quality is sub- the Andreanof segment of the Aleutian would occur in intermediate water standard, and 25 percent has been Arc, an intact arc segment with a simple (100–1,000 m deep), and approximately added to the assumed survey line- and well known history. Existing 1 percent would take place in shallow kilometers to account for this potential. geochemical analyses of igneous rocks water <100 m deep. For the majority of the survey (90 from this segment suggest an along- percent), R/V Langseth will tow the full segment trend in crustal-scale Detailed Description of Specific Activity array, consisting of four strings with 36 fractionation processes. Seismic velocity The procedures to be used for the airguns (plus 4 spares) with a total provides strong constraints on bulk survey would be similar to those used discharge volume of 6,600 in3. In certain composition, and so seismic images will during previous seismic surveys by L– locations (see Figure 1) closest to reveal the constructional architecture, DEO and involve conventional seismic islands, only half the array (18 airguns) vertical fractionation patterns, and methodology. The survey will involve would be operated, with a total volume along-arc trends in both of those things. one source vessel, R/V Langseth, which of approximately 3,300 in3 (54,077 cm3). Together with existing observations is owned by NSF and operated on its The airguns would fire at a shot interval from surface rocks (e.g., bulk behalf by L–DEO. R/V Langseth will of 22 seconds (s) during MCS shooting composition, volatile content) and deploy an array of 36 airguns as an with the hydrophone streamer and at a forcing parameters (e.g., slab geometry, energy source with a total volume of 120-s interval during refraction sediment input, deformation-inferred 6,600 in3. The array consists of 36 surveying to OBSs. stress regime), hypotheses related to elements, including 20 Bolt 1500LL The seismometers consist of short- controls on oceanic-arc crustal airguns with volumes of 180 to 360 in3 period multi-component OBSs from construction and fractionation can be (2,950–5,800 cm3) and 16 Bolt 1900LLX Scripps Institution of Oceanography tested and refined. airguns with volumes of 40 to 120 in3 (SIO). Fifty OBSs will be deployed and (655–1,966 cm3). The airgun array subsequently retrieved by R/V Langseth Dates and Duration configuration is illustrated in Figure 2– prior to MCS surveying. When an OBS The survey is expected to last for 11 of NSF and USGS’s Programmatic is ready to be retrieved, an acoustic approximately 48 days, including Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS; release transponder (pinger) interrogates approximately 16 days of seismic NSF–USGS, 2011). (The PEIS is the instrument at a frequency of 12 operations, 19 days of equipment available online at: www.nsf.gov/geo/ kiloHertz (kHz); a response is received deployment/retrieval, and 8 days of oce/envcomp/usgs-nsf-marine-seismic- at the same frequency. The burn-wire transits, and 5 contingency days research/nsf-usgs-final-eis-oeis-with- release assembly is then activated, and (accounting for potential delays due to, appendices.pdf). The vessel speed the instrument is released from its 36- e.g., weather). R/V Langseth will likely during seismic operations will be kilogram iron grate anchor to float to the leave out of and return to port in Dutch approximately 4.5 knots (∼8.3 km/hour) surface. Take of marine mammals is not Harbor, Alaska, during September- during the survey and the airgun array expected to occur incidental to L–DEO’s October 2020. will be towed at a depth of 9 m. The use of OBSs. receiving system consists of OBSs and a In addition to the operations of the Specific Geographic Region towed hydrophone streamer with a airgun array, a multibeam echosounder The survey will occur within the area nominal length of 8 km. As the airguns (MBES), a sub-bottom profiler (SBP), of approximately 49–53.5° N and are towed along the survey lines, the and an Acoustic Doppler Current approximately 172.5–179° W. hydrophone streamer transfers the data Profiler (ADCP) will be operated from R/ Representative survey tracklines are to the on-board processing system, and V Langseth continuously during the shown in Figure 1, available online at: the OBSs receive and store the returning seismic surveys, but not during transit www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/ acoustic signals internally for later to and from the survey area. Take of incidental-take-authorization-lamont- analysis. marine mammals is not expected to doherty-earth-observatory-marine- The study consists of one east-west occur incidental to use of the MBES, geophysical-survey-2. Tracklines in the strike-line transect (∼540 km), two SBP, or ADCP because they will be vicinity of specific Steller sea lion haul- north-south dip-line transects (∼420 km operated only during seismic outs and rookeries are designed to and ∼285 km), connecting multi-channel acquisition, and it is assumed that, ensure that the area assumed to be seismic (MCS) transects (∼480 km), and during simultaneous operations of the ensonified above the Level B an MCS survey of the Amlia Fracture airgun array and the other sources, any harassment threshold (see Estimated Zone (∼285 km). (See Figure 1, available marine mammals close enough to be Take section) does not extend beyond a online.) The representative tracklines affected by the MBES, SBP, and ADCP 3,000 ft (0.9 kilometers (km)) buffer have a total length of 2,010 km. The would already be affected by the around those areas. In addition, the strike- and dip-line transects will first airguns. However, whether or not the survey vessel will not physically travel be acquired using OBSs, which will be airguns are operating simultaneously within 3 nautical miles (nmi) (5.5 km) deployed along one line at a time, the with the other sources, given their of listed Steller sea lion rookeries. Some line will be surveyed, and the OBSs will characteristics (e.g., narrow downward- deviation in actual track lines, including then be recovered, before moving onto directed beam), marine mammals would the order of survey operations, could be the next line. After all refraction data is experience no more than one or two

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55647

brief ping exposures, if any exposure appear instead to be a misunderstanding relative to the mean a true outcome will were to occur. Mitigation, monitoring, about what these values represent. The lie. The Commission does not explain and reporting measures are described in values referenced by the Commission why use of the mean densities would detail later in this document (please see from revised Table C–1 are not result in an underestimate of takes Mitigation and Monitoring and percentages of survey trackline, but versus an overestimate of takes and, in Reporting). rather percentages of ensonified area in fact, both outcomes should be each depth stratum. Due to the large size considered equally likely. Therefore, the Comments and Responses of the estimated Level B harassment Commission’s suggested approach of A notice of proposed IHA was ensonified areas relative to the increasing the density estimate through, published in the Federal Register on estimated Level A harassment e.g., use of the mean plus the CV, would July 28, 2020 (85 FR 45389). During the ensonified areas, the percentages of be unnecessarily precautionary. NMFS’ 30-day public comment period, NMFS ensonified area within each depth implementing regulations state that received a letter from the Marine stratum will be different. Because the NMFS should rely on the best scientific Mammal Commission (Commission). Level A harassment ensonified areas are evidence available in making findings of Please see the Commission’s letter for all generally small, the percentages of negligible impact and no unmitigable full details regarding their ensonified area per depth stratum are adverse impact. There is no requirement recommendations and rationale. The essentially the same as the percentages in the MMPA or NMFS’ implementing letter is available online at: of trackline per depth stratum. regulations to introduce unwarranted www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/ Comment—Describing what it precaution into the analyses. While incidental-take-authorization-lamont- believes to be the best available NMFS acknowledges that there is doherty-earth-observatory-marine- information regarding Steller sea lion uncertainty associated with any density geophysical-survey-2. A summary of the occurrence in the survey area, the estimate, the take estimate methodology Commission’s recommendations as well Commission recommends that NMFS used here produces the most as NMFS’ responses is below. ensure that the number of Level B appropriate estimate of potential takes. Comment—Noting certain harassment takes of Steller sea lions are NMFS indicated in its previous inconsistencies and errors in correct based on a revised density of response to this comment that it is open information provided in L–DEO’s 0.0392 sea lions/km2 in shallow- and to consideration of specific correction application and NMFS’ Federal Register intermediate-water depths and the same factors for use for specific circumstances notice, the Commission recommends revised percentages of survey tracklines or species in future IHAs and to further that NMFS (1) determine what the for Level A and B harassment in each discussion with the Commission. percentages of the survey tracklines in of the three depth strata. However, it appears that the the three depth strata should be, (2) Response—NMFS concurs with the Commission misunderstood this ensure that the same percentages of Commission’s recommendation and has comment as a commitment to take survey tracklines are used for Level A adopted it. Estimated takes of Steller sea action. The Commission states in its and B harassment in each of the three lion have been revised in part through letter that ‘‘[i]t has been more than a depth strata, (3) re-estimate the numbers incorporation of the recommended year and NMFS has not contacted the of Level A and B harassment takes density values. Commission regarding this matter’’ and accordingly, and (4) ensure that the total Comment—The Commission that ‘‘NMFS has yet to advance the takes of low-frequency and high- recommends that NMFS adjust the issue.’’ NMFS does not believe that it frequency cetaceans and Level B marine mammal density estimates used needs to develop a policy regarding this harassment takes of mid-frequency in estimating potential takes using issue and, therefore, NMFS does not cetaceans, otariids, and phocids are either coefficients of variation (CVs) or intend to contact the Commission or based on the Level A and B harassment standard deviations for L–DEO’s take steps to advance an issue that it takes added together. proposed survey, and reiterates a does not believe requires action. Response—As noted in the previous recommendation that NMFS However, NMFS reiterates its Commission’s letter, L–DEO provided develop a policy and consistent willingness to discuss the issue with the revised tables C–1 and D–1, which approach for how L–DEO and other Commission in greater detail. corrected various minor errors described NSF-affiliated entities should Comment—Noting its disagreement in the Commission’s letter. Of greater incorporate uncertainty in density with L–DEO’s approach to estimating substance, L–DEO also revised the estimates that have been extrapolated the size of various ensonified areas, the estimated take numbers to reflect the from other areas or during other times Commission recommends that NMFS movement of certain tracklines to of the years or when the data themselves require L–DEO to either (1) re-estimate minimize impacts on areas of include high uncertainty. the proposed Level A and B harassment importance to Steller sea lions and sea Response—NMFS does not concur zones and associated takes of marine otters, as described above (see Changes with the Commission’s recommendation mammals using (a) both operational and from the Proposed IHA below for and does not adopt it. As noted by the site-specific environmental parameters, additional discussion). Correct values Commission, it has previously provided (b) what the Commission believes to be representing the proportion of trackline this same recommendation. NMFS has a comprehensive source model and (c) in each depth stratum and associated previously expressed its disagreement what the Commission believes to be an size of ensonified area were used in with the recommendation, which we appropriate sound propagation model calculating the estimated takes, and the reiterate here. for the proposed IHA or (2) collect or total takes authorized represent the sum The Commission states that ‘‘[u]sing provide the relevant acoustic data to of estimated instances of Level A only the mean densities would likely substantiate that its modeling approach harassment and Level B harassment, as result in an underestimation of takes is conservative for both deep- and recommended by the Commission. due to the CVs being so much greater intermediate-water depths beyond the NMFS does note that the supposed than the mean estimates.’’ A CV simply Gulf of Mexico. In addition, the ‘‘discrepancies’’ referenced by the shows the extent of variability in Commission recommends that NMFS (1) Commission regarding percentages of relation to the mean of the population, explain why sound channels with survey trackline in each depth stratum but does not indicate in which direction downward refraction, as well as seafloor

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55648 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

reflections, are not likely to occur intermediate and shallow water, and (3) define the Level B harassment zones. L– during the geophysical survey, (2) if the justification is inconsistent with DEO uses the radius at a 2,000 m depth, specify the degree to which both of the approach taken for intermediate and as this is approximately the maximum those parameters would affect the shallow water, revise the Level B relevant water depth for marine estimation (or underestimation) of Level harassment zones in deep water based mammals. The maximum radii were B harassment zones in deep- and on the maximum radii and re-estimate used for both intermediate and shallow intermediate-water depths, (3) explain the numbers of takes accordingly. water as the water depth for these depth why L–DEO’s model and other Response—Regarding the strata is less than 2,000 m. modeling approaches provide more Commission’s recommendation to In light of this justification, NMFS accurate, realistic, and appropriate conduct analysis of OBS data, L–DEO determined that revising the Level B Level A and B harassment zones than has not previously undertaken the type harassment zones in deep water based BELLHOP (a different propagation of analysis suggested by the on the maximum radii is not model favored by the Commission), Commission, and indicated to NMFS appropriate, and therefore, re-estimating particularly for deep- and intermediate- that it does not have the expertise or the numbers of takes is not warranted. water depths, and (4) explain why, if L– capability to do so at this time. In Comment—The Commission DEO’s model and other modeling addition, we note that the Commission’s recommends that NMFS include in the approaches are considered best recommendation is vague; detailed final authorization a requirement to use available science, other action direction would be needed from the a method believed by the Commission proponents that conduct seismic Commission on how to accomplish the to be appropriate for estimating the surveys are not implementing similar recommended effort. This would need numbers of marine mammals taken, e.g., methods, particularly given their to include agreement on the analytical by applying relevant corrections to simplicity. approach in order to meet expectations account for animals that are not Response—As noted by the and to ensure acceptance of results. The detected. Commission, these comments reflect a Commission’s recommendation does not Response—NMFS appreciates the longstanding disagreement between acknowledge the time it would take to Commission’s development of a NMFS and the Commission regarding perform the analysis or the level of recommended approach to better L–DEO’s approach to modeling the effort and cost that would be involved, estimate the numbers of marine output of their airgun array and its e.g., experts needed to obtain and mammals that may have been taken propagation through the water column. review data, perform detailed during geophysical survey activities, NMFS has previously responded to comparative analysis, preparation of a including marine mammals that were similar Commission comments on L– report. Based on these concerns, NMFS not detected. The ‘‘Commission’s DEO’s modeling approach. We refer the believes that the recommendation is not method’’ (see the Commission’s letter reader to previous Federal Register practicable. for additional discussion and citation to notices providing responses rather than Also, implementation of this repeat them here (e.g., 84 FR 60059, recommendation would not provide any a full description provided in an November 07, 2019; 84 FR 54849, additional conservation value (e.g., addendum to a 2019 Commission October 11, 2019; 84 FR 35073, July 22, improvement in mitigation comment letter) involves correction of 2019). Regardless of the addition of effectiveness) for the proposed survey. marine mammal sightings data through slightly different points or modifications The analysis would be retrospective and use of proxies for marine mammal to the language with which the could be used to help inform analysis of detectability (f(0)) and platform/ Commission expresses these points, the future surveys in the same area. observer bias on marine mammal gist of the Commission’s disagreement However, there are no NSF-proposed detection (g(0)), and extrapolation of with L–DEO’s modeling approach seismic surveys on the R/V Langseth for corrected marine mammal sightings data remains the same. NMFS believes that this region in the foreseeable future. based on the assumed extent of the its prior responses have adequately The Commission also recommended Level B harassment zones. explained the rationale for not following that NMFS require L–DEO to justify However, NMFS does not concur with the Commission’s recommendations why it did not use the maximum radii the recommendation to require L–DEO and, importantly, why L–DEO’s as its Level B harassment zones in deep to implement this approach because we modeling approach is adequate. NMFS water. L–DEO used the maximum deep- do not have confidence in the reliability will, however, provide an additional water radii to estimate the scaling of estimates of potential marine detailed explanation of the reasons why factors discussed by the Commission, as mammal take that would result from use the Commission’s recommendations the isopleths are not spherical. The of the approach. The Commission does regarding this matter are not followed highest scaling factor (2.08) is obtained not address the multiple assumptions within 120 days, as suggested by the for the maximum radii and when that must be made in order to have Commission and required by section scaling to account for differences in confidence in the estimates that would 202 of the MMPA. towed depths and/or volumes between be produced through application of the Comment—The Commission sources, L–DEO uses the highest scaling method. For example, the assumption recommends that NMFS require L–DEO factor to be conservative. However, the that the application of proxy values for to (1) analyze the data recorded on the maximum deep-water radii are not used g(0) and f(0) is appropriate is not OBSs to determine the extents of the for defining the Level B harassment justified (including application of f(0) Level B harassment zones in shallow-, zones in deep water, but rather the radii values to species for which no value is intermediate-, and deep-water depths at 2,000 m depth. available and assuming that application and specify how the in-situ zones The maximum radii for the 6,600 and of f(0) to species in a wholly different compare to the Level B harassment 3,300 in3 arrays are at depths of 10,129 region is appropriate). Notably, g(0) zones specified in the final m and 4,700 m, depths that are well values are typically derived on a authorization, (2) justify why it did not below where marine mammals would be platform-specific basis, and even for use the maximum radii as its Level B encountered. Given the sound specific observers—not generalized harassment zones in deep water for both propagation loss in water, the maximum across platforms, as the Commission’s the 36- and 18-airgun array as it did for radii would thus not be appropriate to method would require.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55649

Separately, the appropriate Response—NMFS concurs with the Therefore, we have not included this application of distance sampling recommendation and has included these requirement in the authorization. NMFS methods requires that certain requirements in the IHA. retains authority to modify the IHA and assumptions are valid, and the Comment—The Commission asserts cease all activities immediately based Commission does not explain why these that L–DEO and other NSF-affiliated on a vessel strike and will exercise that assumptions should be assumed to be entities have not complied with all of authority if warranted. valid during a seismic survey, as the requirements set forth in certain With respect to the Commission’s compared with typical line-transect final IHAs, and recommends that, recommendation that NMFS include surveys operating without an active should the alleged shortcomings occur these requirements in all proposed and acoustic source. For example, a key again, NMFS refrain from issuing any final IHAs, NMFS determines the underlying concept of distance further authorizations to L–DEO and requirements for mitigation measures in sampling methodology is that the other NSF-affiliated entities until such each authorization based on numerous probability of detecting an animal time that the monitoring reports include case-specific factors, including the decreases as its distance from the all of the required information. practicability of the measures for observer increases. This cannot be Response—NMFS appreciates the applicant implementation, which may assumed true during an active seismic Commission’s concern but will consider consider such things as cost, impact on survey. NMFS believes it unlikely that any future requests for incidental take operations, and, in the case of a military the numerous assumptions inherent to authorization from NSF-affiliated readiness activity, personnel safety, application of the Commission’s method entities according to the requirements of practicality of implementation, and would be accepted in a research context the MMPA. impact on the effectiveness of the (where distance sampling approaches Comment—The Commission asserts military readiness activity. As NMFS are typically applied). that ‘‘only one of the last six monitoring must make these determinations on a reports involving geophysical surveys Furthermore, the area over which case by case basis, we therefore do not conducted by L–DEO and other NSF- observations are to be extrapolated agree with this recommendation. affiliated entities has been posted on Comment—The Commission through the Commission’s method is a NMFS’ website,’’ and recommends that recommends that NMFS refrain from modeled ensonified area. We do not NMFS post all final monitoring reports issuing a renewal for any authorization believe it appropriate to assume a on its website as soon as they are unless it is consistent with the modeled ensonified area is always available. procedural requirements specified in accurate for purposes of estimating total Response—NMFS concurs with the section 101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of the MMPA. take. In purporting to estimate total Commission’s recommendation and it is Response—In prior responses to takes, the method ignores the fact that our practice to post all final monitoring comments about IHA Renewals (e.g., 84 marine mammals exposed to a level of reports on its website as soon as they are FR 52464; October 02, 2019 and 85 FR received sound assumed to cause take available. All available monitoring 53342; August 28, 2020), NMFS has for analytical purposes may not in fact reports involving geophysical surveys explained how the Renewal process, as respond behaviorally in a way that conducted by L–DEO and other NSF- implemented, is consistent with the equates to take, especially at great affiliated entities are currently available statutory requirements contained in distance from the source. on NMFS’ website. We note that reports section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA and, NMFS believes it is important to focus are not yet available for the three most therefore, we plan to continue to issue on collection and reporting of empirical recent IHAs issued for these activities. qualifying Renewals when the data that can directly inform an Comment—The Commission requirements outlined on our website assessment of the effects of a specified recommends that NMFS include in all are met. Thus, NMFS agrees with the activity on the affected species or stock. draft and final IHAs the explicit Commission’s recommendation that we While there may be value in an requirements to cease activities if a should not issue a Renewal for any assessment of potential unobserved marine mammal is injured or killed authorization unless it is consistent take, we need to proceed cautiously in during the specified activities, including with the procedural requirements the development of derived values given by vessel strike, until NMFS reviews the specified in section 101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of our low confidence in multiple inputs. circumstances involving any injury or the MMPA. NMFS has found that the NMFS is currently more broadly death that is likely attributable to the Renewal process is consistent with the evaluating monitoring requirements, activities and determines what statutory requirements of the MMPA including data collection, interpretation, additional measures are necessary to and, further, promotes NMFS’ goals of and reporting, as well as the specific minimize additional injuries or deaths. improving conservation of marine issue the Commission has raised, and is Response—NMFS does not expect mammals and increasing efficiency in committed to developing improved that the proposed activities have the the MMPA compliance process. approaches. potential to result in injury or mortality Therefore, we intend to continue Comment—The Commission to marine mammals and therefore does implementing the Renewal process. recommends that NMFS require L–DEO not agree that a blanket requirement for to specify in the final monitoring report project activities to cease would be Changes From the Proposed IHA (1) the number of days on which the warranted. NMFS does not agree that a The only substantive change from the airgun array was active and (2) the requirement for a vessel that is proposed IHA is the revision of take percentage of time and total time the operating on the open water to suddenly estimates. As noted in the notice of array was active during daylight versus stop operating is practicable, and it is proposed IHA, L–DEO agreed to modify nighttime hours (including dawn and unclear what mitigation benefit would its originally proposed tracklines in dusk), and further recommends that result from such a requirement in order to avoid takes of sea otters NMFS require L–DEO to include in its relation to vessel strike. The (through consultation with the U.S. Fish monitoring report all data to be Commission does not suggest what and Wildlife Service) and to minimize collected under section 5(d)(ii), (iii), and measures other than those prescribed in impacts on Steller sea lions (by moving (iv) through specific stipulations in this IHA would potentially prove more tracklines near specific, known sea lion section 6(a) of the final authorization. effective in reducing the risk of strike. rookeries such that the track is

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55650 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

sufficiently distant from shore that the Finally, NMFS has included reporting PBR is defined by the MMPA as the estimated Level B harassment zone does requirements recommended by the maximum number of animals, not not overlap with a 3,000 ft (0.9-km) Marine Mammal Commission including natural mortalities, that may buffer around these areas). Although L– (discussed above). be removed from a marine mammal DEO had committed to these changes at Description of Marine Mammals in the stock while allowing that stock to reach the time of publication of the notice of Area of Specified Activities or maintain its optimum sustainable proposed IHA, take estimates had not population (as described in NMFS’s yet been revised accordingly. In Sections 3 and 4 of the application SARs). While no mortality is anticipated addition, the take estimate for Steller summarize available information or authorized here, PBR and annual sea lions was revised through use of the regarding status and trends, distribution serious injury and mortality from adjusted density value recommended by and habitat preferences, and behavior anthropogenic sources are included here the Marine Mammal Commission (as and life history, of the potentially as gross indicators of the status of the discussed above). For species where the affected species. Additional information species and other threats. take number changed, all take numbers regarding population trends and threats decreased, except for the Steller sea may be found in NMFS’s Stock Marine mammal abundance estimates lion, where the increased density value Assessment Reports (SARs; presented in this document represent led to an increase in the take estimate. www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ the total number of individuals that During the public review period, marine-mammal-protection/marine- make up a given stock or the total NMFS-affiliated scientists noted that a mammal-stock-assessments) and more number estimated within a particular newly described species of beaked general information about these species study or survey area. NMFS’s stock whale (Berardius minimus; Yamada et (e.g., physical and behavioral abundance estimates for most species al., 2019) could be present in the survey descriptions) may be found on NMFS’s represent the total estimate of area. At least five specimens of Sato’s website (www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find- individuals within the geographic area, beaked whale have been reported from species). if known, that comprises that stock. For U.S. waters in the vicinity of the eastern Table 1 lists all species with expected some species, this geographic area may Aleutian Islands, St. George Island, and potential for occurrence in the survey extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed the southern Alaska Peninsula (Morin et area and summarizes information stocks in this region are assessed in al., 2017). No information is available related to the population or stock, NMFS’s U.S. Pacific and Alaska SARs. regarding the occurrence of this species. including regulatory status under the All MMPA stock information presented Therefore, NMFS has authorized take of MMPA and Endangered Species Act in Table 1 is the most recent available one group of the species, as represented (ESA) and potential biological removal at the time of publication and is by the average group size of Berardius (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we available in the 2019 SARs (Caretta et spp. from Barlow (2016). follow Committee on Taxonomy (2020). al., 2020; Muto et al., 2020). TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMALS THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE SURVEY AREA

ESA/ MMPA Stock abundance Common name Scientific name Stock status; (CV, N , most recent PBR Annual min M/SI 3 strategic abundance survey) 2 (Y/N) 1

Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)

Family Balaenidae: North Pacific right whale Eubalaena japonica ...... Eastern North Pacific (ENP) E/D; Y 31 (0.226; 26; 2015) ...... 0.05 0 Family Eschrichtiidae: Gray whale ...... Eschrichtius robustus ...... ENP ...... -; N 26,960 (0.05; 25,849; 2016) 801 139 Western North Pacific E/D; Y 290 (n/a; 271; 2016 ...... 0.12 Unk (WNP). Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals): Humpback whale ...... Megaptera novaeangliae Central North Pacific (CNP) * E/D; Y 10,103 (0.3; 7,891; 2006) .... 83 25 kuzira. Western North Pacific * ...... E/D; Y 1,107 (0.3; 865; 2006) ...... 3 2.6 Minke whale ...... Balaenoptera acutorostrata Alaska * ...... -; N Unknown ...... n/a 0 scammoni. Sei whale ...... B. borealis borealis ...... ENP ...... E/D; Y 519 (0.4; 374; 2014) ...... 0.75 ≥0.2 Fin whale ...... B. physalus physalus ...... Northeast Pacific * ...... E/D; Y Unknown ...... n/a 0.4 Blue whale ...... B. musculus musculus ...... ENP ...... E/D; Y 1,496 (0.44; 1,050; 2014) .... 6 1.2 ≥19.4

Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)

Family Physeteridae: Sperm whale ...... Physeter macrocephalus ...... North Pacific * ...... E/D; Y Unknown ...... n/a 4.7 Family Ziphiidae (beaked whales): Cuvier’s beaked whale ... Ziphius cavirostris ...... Alaska ...... -; N Unknown ...... n/a 0 Baird’s beaked whale ..... Berardius bairdii ...... Alaska ...... -; N Unknown ...... n/a 0 Sato’s beaked whale ...... B. minimus ...... n/a ...... -; N Unknown ...... n/a 0 Stejneger’s beaked Mesoplodon stejnegeri ...... Alaska ...... -; N Unknown ...... n/a 0 whale. Family Delphinidae: Pacific white-sided dol- Lagenorhynchus obliquidens North Pacific 5 ...... -; N 26,880 (n/a; 26,880; 1990) .. n/a 0 phin. Northern right whale dol- Lissodelphis borealis ...... CA/OR/WA * ...... -; N 26,556 (0.44; 18,608; 2014) 179 3.8 phin. Risso’s dolphin ...... Grampus griseus ...... CA/OR/WA * ...... -; N 6,336 (0.32; 4,817; 2014) .... 46 ≥3.7 Killer whale ...... Orcinus orca 4 ...... ENP Offshore ...... -; N 300 (0.1; 276; 2012) ...... 2.8 0

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55651

TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMALS THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE SURVEY AREA—Continued

ESA/ MMPA Stock abundance Annual Common name Scientific name Stock status; (CV, N , most recent PBR min M/SI 3 strategic abundance survey) 2 (Y/N) 1

ENP Gulf of Alaska, Aleutian ...... -; N 587 (n/a; 2012) ...... 5.9 1 Islands, and Bering Sea Transient. ENP Alaska Resident ...... -; N 2,347 (n/a; 2012) ...... 24 1 Family Phocoenidae (por- poises): Harbor porpoise ...... Phocoena phocoena Bering Sea 5 ...... -; Y 48,215 (0.22; 40,150; 1999) n/a 0.2 vomerina. Dall’s porpoise ...... Phocoenoides dalli dalli ...... Alaska 5 ...... -; N 83,400 (0.097; n/a; 1991) .... n/a 38

Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia

Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions): Northern fur seal ...... Callorhinus ursinus ...... Pribilof Islands/Eastern Pa- D; Y 620,660 (0.2; 525,333; 2016) 11,295 399 cific. Steller sea lion ...... Eumetopias jubatus jubatus Western U.S ...... E/D; Y 53,624 (n/a; 2018) ...... 322 247 Family Phocidae (earless seals): Harbor seal ...... Phoca vitulina richardii ...... Aleutian Islands ...... -; N 5,588 (n/a; 5,366; 2018) ...... 97 90 Spotted seal ...... P. largha ...... Alaska * ...... -; N 461,625 (n/a; 423,237; 2013) 12,697 329 Ribbon seal ...... Histriophoca fasciata ...... Alaska * ...... -; N 184,697 (n/a; 163,086; 2013) 9,785 3.9 Northern elephant seal ... Mirounga angustirostris ...... California Breeding ...... -; N 179,000 (n/a; 81,368; 2010) 4,882 8.8 * Stocks marked with an asterisk were addressed in further detail in the notice of proposed IHA. 1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments. CV is coeffi- cient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For most stocks of killer whales, the abundance values rep- resent direct counts of individually identifiable animals; therefore there is only a single abundance estimate with no associated CV. For certain stocks of pinnipeds, abundance estimates are based upon observations of animals (often pups) ashore multiplied by some correction factor derived from knowledge of the species’ (or similar species’) life history to arrive at a best abundance estimate; therefore, there is no associated CV. In these cases, the minimum abundance may represent ac- tual counts of all animals ashore. 3 These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fish- eries, subsistence hunting, ship strike). Annual mortality/serious injury (M/SI) often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value. All M/SI values are as presented in the 2019 SARs. 4 Transient and resident killer whales are considered unnamed subspecies (Committee on Taxonomy, 2020). 5 Abundance estimates for these stocks are not considered current. PBR is therefore considered undetermined for these stocks, as there is no current minimum abundance estimate for use in calculation. We nevertheless present the most recent abundance estimates, as these represent the best available information for use in this document. 6 This stock is known to spend a portion of time outside the U.S. EEZ. Therefore, the PBR presented here is the allocation for U.S. waters only and is a portion of the total. The total PBR for blue whales is 2.1 (7/12 allocation for U.S. waters). Annual M/SI presented for these species is for U.S. waters only.

Prior to 2016, humpback whales were encountered whales are most likely to the specific areas within the listed under the ESA as an endangered be from the Hawaii DPS (86.8 percent), geographical area occupied by the species worldwide. Following a 2015 but could be from the Mexico DPS (11 species, at the time it is listed, on which global status review (Bettridge et al., percent) or WNP DPS (2.1 percent). Note are found those physical or biological 2015), NMFS established 14 distinct that these probabilities reflect the upper features (a) essential to the conservation population segments (DPS) with limit of the 95 percent confidence of the species and (b) which may require different listing statuses (81 FR 62259; interval of the probability of occurrence; special management considerations or September 8, 2016) pursuant to the ESA. therefore, numbers may not sum to 100 protection; and (2) specific areas outside The DPSs that occur in U.S. waters do percent for a given area. the geographical area occupied by the not necessarily equate to the existing Additional detailed information species at the time it is listed, upon a stocks designated under the MMPA and regarding the potentially affected stocks determination by the Secretary that such shown in Table 1. of marine mammals was provided in the areas are essential for the conservation Within Alaska waters, four current notice of proposed IHA (85 FR 45389; of the species. humpback whale DPSs may occur: The July 28, 2020). No new information is Designated Steller sea lion critical Western North Pacific (WNP) DPS available, and we do not reprint that habitat includes terrestrial, aquatic, and (endangered), Hawaii DPS (not listed), discussion here. Please see the notice of air zones that extend 3,000 ft (0.9 km) Mexico DPS (threatened), and Central proposed IHA for additional landward, seaward, and above each America DPS (endangered). Two information. major rookery and major haulout in humpback whale stocks designated Biologically Important Areas (BIA) Alaska. For the Western DPS, the under the MMPA may occur within aquatic zone extends further, out 20 nmi Alaskan waters: The Western North Several biologically important areas (37 km) seaward of major rookeries and Pacific Stock and the Central North for marine mammals are recognized in haulouts west of 144ß W. In addition to Pacific Stock. Both these stocks are the Bering Sea, Aleutian Islands, and major rookeries and haulouts, critical designated as depleted under the Gulf of Alaska. Critical habitat is habitat foraging areas have been MMPA. According to Wade (2017), in designated for the Steller sea lion (58 FR designated in Seguam Pass, Bogoslof the Aleutian Islands and Bering, 45269; August 27, 1993). Critical habitat area, and Shelikof Strait. Of the foraging Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas, is defined by section 3 of the ESA as (1) areas, only Seguam Pass overlaps the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55652 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

proposed survey area. The Bogoslof Bering Sea shelf, and does not extend observed in the lagoons in winter have foraging area is located to the east of the past approximately Unimak Pass in the been reported as ‘‘skinny’’ compared to survey area, and Shelikof Strait is in the Aleutian Islands. A gray whale feeding the annual average of 10–12 percent western Gulf of Alaska. In addition, ‘‘no BIA is recognized along the north side ‘‘skinny’’ whales normally seen. The approach’’ buffer areas around rookery of the Alaska Peninsula. Marine cause of the UME is as yet sites of the Western DPS of Steller sea mammal behavior in these BIAs is undetermined. For more information, lions are identified. ‘‘No approach’’ similarly not expected to be affected by please visit: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ zones are restricted areas wherein no the proposed survey due to distance and national/marine-life-distress/2019-2020- vessel may approach within 3 nmi (5.6 timing. gray-whale-unusual-mortality-event- km) of listed rookeries; some of these Large aggregations of feeding along-west-coast-and. are adjacent to the survey area. In the humpback whales have historically Another recent, notable UME Aleutian Islands, critical habitat been observed along the northern side of involved large whales and occurred in includes 66 sites (26 rookeries and 40 the eastern Aleutian Islands and Alaska the western Gulf of Alaska and off of haulout sites) and foraging areas in Peninsula, and a feeding BIA is British Columbia, Canada. Beginning in Seguam Pass (within the proposed recognized. Highest densities are May 2015, elevated large whale survey area) and the Bogoslof area (east expected from June through September. mortalities (primarily fin and humpback of the survey area). Please see Figure 1 The eastern edge of the planned survey whales) occurred in the areas around of L–DEO’s application for additional area is approximately 100 km west of Kodiak Island, Afognak Island, Chirikof detail. the western edge of the recognized BIA, Island, the Semidi Islands, and the Critical habitat has also been but it is possible that the survey could southern shoreline of the Alaska designated for the North Pacific right affect feeding humpback whales. For Peninsula. Although most carcasses whale (73 FR 19000; April 8, 2008). The more information on BIAs, please see have been non-retrievable as they were designation includes areas in the Bering Ferguson et al. (2015a, 2015b). discovered floating and in a state of Sea and Gulf of Alaska. However, the moderate to severe decomposition, the Unusual Mortality Events (UME) closest critical habitat unit, in the UME is likely attributable to ecological Bering Sea, is more than 400 km away A UME is defined under the MMPA factors, i.e., the 2015 El Nin˜ o, ‘‘warm from the proposed survey area. There is as ‘‘a stranding that is unexpected; water blob,’’ and the Pacific Coast no critical habitat designated for any involves a significant die-off of any domoic acid bloom. The UME was other species within the region. In marine mammal population; and closed in 2016. More information is addition, a feeding BIA for right whales demands immediate response.’’ For available online at is recognized to the south of Kodiak more information on UMEs, please visit: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ Island, and the Bering Sea critical www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ marine-life-distress/2015-2016-large- habitat unit is also recognized as a BIA. marine-mammal-protection/marine- whale-unusual-mortality-event-western- For fin whales, a BIA for feeding is mammal-unusual-mortality-events. gulf-alaska. recognized in Shelikof Strait, between Currently recognized UMEs in Alaska Kodiak Island and the Alaska Peninsula, involving species under NMFS’ Marine Mammal Hearing and extending west to the Semidi jurisdiction include those affecting ice Hearing is the most important sensory Islands. For gray whales, a feeding BIA seals in the Bering and Chukchi Seas modality for marine mammals is recognized to the south of Kodiak and gray whales. Since June 1, 2018, underwater, and exposure to Island, and a migratory BIA is elevated strandings for bearded, ringed anthropogenic sound can have recognized as extending along the and spotted seals have occurred in the deleterious effects. To appropriately continental shelf throughout the Gulf of Bering and Chukchi seas in Alaska, with assess the potential effects of exposure Alaska, through Unimak Pass in the causes undetermined. For more to sound, it is necessary to understand eastern Aleutian Islands, and along the information, please visit: the frequency ranges marine mammals Bering Sea continental shelf. For www.fisheries.noaa.gov/alaska/marine- are able to hear. Current data indicate humpback whales, feeding BIAs are life-distress/2018-2020-ice-seal-unusual- that not all marine mammal species recognized around the Shumagin mortality-event-alaska. have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Islands and around Kodiak Island. Since January 1, 2019, elevated gray Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and These areas are sufficiently distant from whale strandings have occurred along Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). the proposed survey area that no effects the west coast of North America from To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) to important behaviors occurring in the Mexico through Alaska. As of June 5, recommended that marine mammals be BIAs should be expected. Moreover, the 2020, there have been a total of 340 divided into functional hearing groups timeframe of the planned survey does whales reported in the event, with based on directly measured or estimated not overlap with expected highest approximately 168 dead whales in hearing ranges on the basis of available abundance of whales on the feeding Mexico, 159 whales in the United States behavioral response data, audiograms BIAs or with gray whale migratory (53 in California; 9 in Oregon; 42 in derived using auditory evoked potential periods. Washington, 55 in Alaska), and 13 techniques, anatomical modeling, and A separate feeding BIA is recognized whales in British Columbia, Canada. For other data. Note that no direct in the Bering Sea for fin whales. the United States, the historical 18-year measurements of hearing ability have Because the distribution of presumed 5-month average (Jan–May) is 14.8 been successfully completed for feeding fin whales in the Bering Sea is whales for the four states for this same mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency widespread, a wide region from the time-period. Several dead whales have cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) Middle Shelf domain to the slope is been emaciated with moderate to heavy described generalized hearing ranges for considered to be a BIA. The highest whale lice (cyamid) loads. Necropsies these marine mammal hearing groups. densities of feeding fin whales in the have been conducted on a subset of Generalized hearing ranges were chosen Bering Sea likely occur from June whales with additional findings of based on the approximately 65 decibel through September. The BIA is vessel strike in three whales and (dB) threshold from the normalized considered as being in waters shallower entanglement in one whale. In Mexico, composite audiograms, with the than the 1,000-m isobath on the eastern 50–55 percent of the free-ranging whales exception for lower limits for low-

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55653

frequency cetaceans where the lower Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine associated hearing ranges are provided bound was deemed to be biologically mammal hearing groups and their in Table 2. implausible and the lower bound from

TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS (NMFS, 2018)

Hearing group Generalized hearing range *

Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) ...... 7 Hz to 35 kHz. Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales) ...... 150 Hz to 160 kHz. High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger & 275 Hz to 160 kHz. L. australis). Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) ...... 50 Hz to 86 kHz. Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) ...... 60 Hz to 39 kHz. * Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual species’ hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ∼65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).

The pinniped functional hearing includes a summary and discussion of ‘‘small numbers’’ and the negligible group was modified from Southall et al. the ways that the specified activity may impact determination. (2007) on the basis of data indicating impact marine mammals and their Harassment is the only type of take that phocid species have consistently habitat. Consistent with the analysis in expected to result from these activities. demonstrated an extended frequency our prior Federal Register notices for Except with respect to certain activities range of hearing compared to otariids, similar L–DEO surveys and after not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the especially in the higher frequency range independently evaluating the analysis MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act (Hemila¨ et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., in L–DEO’s application, we determine of pursuit, torment, or annoyance, 2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013). that the survey is likely to result in the which (i) has the potential to injure a For more detail concerning these takes described in the Estimated Take marine mammal or marine mammal groups and associated frequency ranges, section of this document and that other stock in the wild (Level A harassment); please see NMFS (2018) for a review of forms of take are not expected to occur. or (ii) has the potential to disturb a available information. Twenty-four The Estimated Take section includes marine mammal or marine mammal marine mammal species (18 cetacean a quantitative analysis of the number of stock in the wild by causing disruption and six pinniped (two otariid and four individuals that are expected to be taken of behavioral patterns, including, but phocid) species) are considered herein. by this activity. The Negligible Impact not limited to, migration, breathing, Of the cetacean species that may be Analysis and Determination section nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering present, seven are classified as low- considers the potential effects of the (Level B harassment). frequency cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete specified activity, the Estimated Take Authorized takes are primarily by species), nine are classified as mid- section, and the Mitigation section, to Level B harassment, as use of seismic frequency cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid draw conclusions regarding the likely airguns has the potential to result in and ziphiid species and the sperm impacts of these activities on the disruption of behavioral patterns for whale), and two are classified as high- reproductive success or survivorship of individual marine mammals. There is frequency cetaceans (i.e., porpoises). individuals and how those impacts on also some potential for auditory injury (Level A harassment) for mysticetes and Potential Effects of Specified Activities individuals are likely to impact marine mammal species or stocks. high-frequency cetaceans (i.e., on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat porpoises). The mitigation and Detailed descriptions of the potential Description of Active Acoustic Sound monitoring measures are expected to effects of similar specified activities Sources minimize the severity of such taking to have been provided in other recent The notice of proposed IHA provided the extent practicable. Federal Register notices, including for a brief technical background on sound, As described previously, no serious activities occurring within the same on the characteristics of certain sound injury or mortality is anticipated or specified geographical region (e.g., 83 types, and on metrics used in this authorized for this activity. Below we FR 29212, June 22, 2018; 84 FR 14200, proposal inasmuch as the information is describe how the take is estimated. April 9, 2019; 85 FR 19580, April 7, relevant to the specified activity and to Generally speaking, we estimate take 2020). Section 7 of L–DEO’s application a discussion of the potential effects of by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds provides a comprehensive discussion of the specified activity on marine above which NMFS believes the best the potential effects of the proposed mammals found later in this document. available science indicates marine survey. We have reviewed L–DEO’s Please see that document (85 FR 45389; mammals will be behaviorally harassed application and believe it is accurate July 28, 2020) for additional or incur some degree of permanent and complete. No significant new information. For general information on hearing impairment; (2) the area or information is available. The sound and its interaction with the volume of water that will be ensonified information in L–DEO’s application and marine environment, please see, e.g., Au above these levels in a day; (3) the in the referenced Federal Register and Hastings (2008); Richardson et al. density or occurrence of marine notices are sufficient to inform our (1995); Urick (1983). mammals within these ensonified areas; determinations regarding the potential and, (4) and the number of days of effects of L–DEO’s specified activity on Estimated Take activities. We note that while these marine mammals and their habitat. We This section provides an estimate of basic factors can contribute to a basic refer the reader to these documents the number of incidental takes calculation to provide an initial rather than repeating the information authorized through the IHA, which will prediction of takes, additional here. The referenced information inform both NMFS’ consideration of information that can qualitatively

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55654 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

inform take estimates is also sometimes degrees by other factors related to the Anthropogenic Sound on Marine available (e.g., previous monitoring source (e.g., frequency, predictability, Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) results or average group size). Below, we duty cycle), the environment (e.g., (Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies describe the factors considered here in bathymetry), and the receiving animals dual criteria to assess auditory injury more detail and present the take (hearing, motivation, experience, (Level A harassment) to five different numbers. demography, behavioral context) and marine mammal groups (based on can be difficult to predict (Southall et Acoustic Thresholds hearing sensitivity) as a result of al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2012). NMFS exposure to noise from two different NMFS uses acoustic thresholds that uses a generalized acoustic threshold types of sources (impulsive or non- identify the received level of based on received level to estimate the impulsive). L–DEO’s seismic survey underwater sound above which exposed onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS includes the use of impulsive (seismic marine mammals would be reasonably predicts that marine mammals may be airguns) sources. expected to be behaviorally harassed behaviorally harassed (i.e., Level B (equated to Level B harassment) or to harassment) when exposed to These thresholds are provided in the incur permanent threshold shift (PTS) of underwater anthropogenic noise above a table below. The references, analysis, some degree (equated to Level A received level of 160 dB re 1 and methodology used in the harassment). microPascal (mPa) root mean square development of the thresholds are Level B Harassment for non-explosive (rms) for the impulsive source (i.e., described in NMFS 2018 Technical sources—Though significantly driven by seismic airguns) evaluated here. Guidance, which may be accessed at received level, the onset of behavioral Level A harassment for non-explosive www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ disturbance from anthropogenic noise sources—NMFS’ Technical Guidance marine-mammal-protection/marine- exposure is also informed to varying for Assessing the Effects of mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.

TABLE 3—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT

PTS onset acoustic thresholds* Hearing group (received level) Impulsive Non-impulsive

Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ...... Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB; LE,LF,24h: 183 dB ...... Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB. Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ...... Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; LE,MF,24h: 185 dB ...... Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB. High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans ...... Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB; LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ...... Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB. Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) ...... Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB; LE,PW,24h: 185 dB ...... Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB. Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) ...... Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB; LE,OW,24h: 203 dB ...... Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB. * Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impul- sive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered. 2 Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.

Ensonified Area array), in a constant-velocity half-space Similarly, data collected by Crone et al. (infinite homogeneous ocean layer, (2017) during a survey off New Jersey in Here, we describe operational and unbounded by a seafloor). To validate 2014 and 2015 confirmed that in situ environmental parameters of the activity the model results, L–DEO measured measurements collected by R/V that feed into identifying the area propagation of pulses from the 36- Langseth hydrophone streamer were 2– ensonified above the acoustic airgun array at a tow depth of 6 m in 3 times smaller than the predicted radii. thresholds, which include source levels the Gulf of Mexico, for deep water L–DEO model results are used to and acoustic propagation modeling. (1,600 m), intermediate water depth on determine the assumed radial distance L–DEO’s modeling methodologies are the slope (600–1,100 m), and shallow to the 160-dB rms threshold for these described in greater detail in Appendix water (50 m) (Tolstoy et al., 2009; arrays in deep water (>1,000 m) (down A of L–DEO’s IHA application. The Diebold et al., 2010). to a maximum water depth of 2,000 m). survey would acquire data using the 36- L–DEO collected a MCS data set from Water depths in the project area may be airgun array with a total discharge R/V Langseth on an 8 km streamer in up to 7,100 m, but marine mammals in volume of 6,600 in3 at a maximum tow 2012 on the shelf of the Cascadia Margin the region are generally not anticipated depth of 9 m. During approximately 10 off of Washington in water up to 200 m to dive below 2,000 m (Costa and percent of the planned survey deep that allowed Crone et al. (2014) to Williams, 1999). For the 36-airgun array, tracklines, the array would be used at analyze the hydrophone streamer the estimated radial distance for half the total volume (i.e., an 18-airgun (>1,100 individual shots). These intermediate (100–1,000 m) and shallow array with total volume of 3,300 in3). L– empirical data were then analyzed to (<100 m) water depths is taken from DEO’s modeling approach uses ray determine in situ sound levels for Crone et al. (2014). L–DEO typically tracing for the direct wave traveling shallow and upper intermediate water derives estimated distances for from the array to the receiver and its depths. These data suggest that modeled intermediate water depths by applying a associated source ghost (reflection at the radii were 2–3 times larger than the correction factor of 1.5 to the model air-water interface in the vicinity of the measured radii in shallow water. results for deep water. The Crone et al.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55655

(2014) empirical data produce results and intermediate-water depths are taken The estimated distances to the Level consistent with L–DEO’s typical from Crone et al. (2014) and scaled to B harassment isopleths for the arrays are approach (8,233 m versus 8,444 m). For account for the difference in airgun shown in Table 4. the 18-airgun array, the radii for shallow volume.

TABLE 4—PREDICTED RADIAL DISTANCES TO ISOPLETHS CORRESPONDING TO LEVEL B HARASSMENT THRESHOLD

Level B Tow depth Water depth harassment Source and volume (m) (m) zone (m)

36 airgun array; 6,600 in 3 ...... 9 >1,000 1 5,629 100–1,000 3 8,233 <100 3 11,000 18 airgun array; 3,300 in 3 ...... 9 >1,000 1 3,562 100–1,000 2 3,939 <100 2 5,263 1 Distance based on L–DEO model results. 2 Based on empirical data from Crone et al. (2014) with scaling factor based on deep-water modeling applied to account for differences in array size. 3 Based on empirical data from Crone et al. (2014).

Predicted distances to Level A mathematically to a notional distance of In order to more realistically harassment isopleths, which vary based 1 m from the array’s geometrical center. incorporate the Technical Guidance’s on marine mammal hearing groups, However, when the source is an array of weighting functions over the seismic were calculated based on modeling multiple airguns separated in space, the array’s full acoustic band, unweighted performed by L–DEO using the source level from the theoretical farfield spectrum data for the Langseth’s airgun NUCLEUS source modeling software signature is not necessarily the best array (modeled in 1 Hz bands) were program and the NMFS User measurement of the source level that is used to make adjustments (dB) to the Spreadsheet, described below. The physically achieved at the source unweighted spectrum levels, by acoustic thresholds for impulsive (Tolstoy et al., 2009). Near the source (at frequency, according to the weighting sounds (e.g., airguns) contained in the short ranges, distances <1 km), the functions for each relevant marine Technical Guidance were presented as pulses of sound pressure from each mammal hearing group. These adjusted/ dual metric acoustic thresholds using individual airgun in the source array do weighted spectrum levels were then both cumulative sound exposure level not stack constructively, as they do for converted to pressures (mPa) in order to (SELcum) and peak sound pressure the theoretical farfield signature. The integrate them over the entire metrics (NMFS 2018). As dual metrics, pulses from the different airguns spread broadband spectrum, resulting in NMFS considers onset of PTS (Level A out in time such that the source levels broadband weighted source levels by harassment) to have occurred when observed or modeled are the result of hearing group that could be directly either one of the two metrics is the summation of pulses from a few incorporated within the User exceeded (i.e., metric resulting in the airguns, not the full array (Tolstoy et al., Spreadsheet (i.e., to override the largest isopleth). The SELcum metric 2009). At larger distances, away from Spreadsheet’s more simple weighting considers both level and duration of the source array center, sound pressure factor adjustment). Using the User exposure, as well as auditory weighting of all the airguns in the array stack Spreadsheet’s ‘‘safe distance’’ functions by marine mammal hearing coherently, but not within one time methodology for mobile sources group. In recognition of the fact that the sample, resulting in smaller source (described by Sivle et al., 2014) with the requirement to calculate Level A levels (a few dB) than the source level hearing group-specific weighted source harassment ensonified areas could be derived from the farfield signature. levels, and inputs assuming spherical more technically challenging to predict Because the farfield signature does not spreading propagation and source due to the duration component and the take into account the large array effect velocities and shot intervals specific to use of weighting functions in the new near the source and is calculated as a the planned survey, potential radial SELcum thresholds, NMFS developed an point source, the modified farfield distances to auditory injury zones were optional User Spreadsheet that includes signature is a more appropriate measure then calculated for SELcum thresholds. tools to help predict a simple isopleth of the sound source level for distributed Inputs to the User Spreadsheet in the that can be used in conjunction with sound sources, such as airgun arrays. L– form of estimated source levels are marine mammal density or occurrence DEO used the acoustic modeling shown in Appendix A of L–DEO’s to facilitate the estimation of take methodology as used for estimating application. User Spreadsheets used by numbers. Level B harassment distances with a L–DEO to estimate distances to Level A The values for SELcum and peak sound small grid step of 1 m in both the inline harassment isopleths for the airgun pressure level (SPL) for the Langseth and depth directions. The propagation arrays are also provided in Appendix A airgun arrays were derived from modeling takes into account all airgun of the application. Outputs from the calculating the modified far-field interactions at short distances from the User Spreadsheets in the form of signature. The farfield signature is often source, including interactions between estimated distances to Level A used as a theoretical representation of subarrays, which are modeled using the harassment isopleths for the survey are the source level. To compute the farfield NUCLEUS software to estimate the shown in Table 5. As described above, signature, the source level is estimated notional signature and MATLAB NMFS considers onset of PTS (Level A at a large distance below the array (e.g., software to calculate the pressure signal harassment) to have occurred when 9 km), and this level is back projected at each mesh point of a grid. either one of the dual metrics (SELcum

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55656 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

and Peak SPLflat) is exceeded (i.e., metric resulting in the largest isopleth).

TABLE 5—MODELED RADIAL DISTANCES (m) TO ISOPLETHS CORRESPONDING TO LEVEL A HARASSMENT THRESHOLDS

Level A harassment zone Source (m) (volume) Threshold LF cetaceans MF cetaceans HF cetaceans Phocids Otariids

3 36-airgun array (6,600 in ) ...... SELcum ...... 376 0 1 10 0 Peak ...... 39 14 229 42 11 3 18-airgun array (3,300 in ) ...... SELcum ...... 55 0 0 2 0 Peak ...... 23 11 119 25 10

Note that because of some of the in the near-field will be significantly have been made, other than those assumptions included in the methods lower than the output of the largest described in the Changes from the used (e.g., stationary receiver with no individual element. Here, the peak Proposed IHA section, provided vertical or horizontal movement in isopleth distances would in all cases be previously in this document. response to the acoustic source), expected to be within the near-field of The Marine Mammal Commission isopleths produced may be the array where the definition of source noted several concerns with the density overestimates to some degree, which level breaks down. Therefore, actual values used for Steller sea lions. As will ultimately result in some degree of locations within this distance of the noted by the Commission, L–DEO used overestimation of Level A harassment. array center where the sound level data from Department of the Navy However, these tools offer the best way exceeds peak SPL isopleth distances (2014), which relied on abundance to predict appropriate isopleths when would not necessarily exist. In general, estimates from the 2008 stock more sophisticated modeling methods Caldwell and Dragoset (2000) suggest assessment report divided by an area. are not available, and NMFS continues that the near-field for airgun arrays is The Commission raised the following to develop ways to quantitatively refine considered to extend out to issues: (1) Abundance estimates have these tools and will qualitatively approximately 250 m. We provided increased since the 2008 SAR and the address the output where appropriate. additional discussion and quantitative original estimates were based on For mobile sources, such as this seismic support for this theoretical argument in portions of the eastern stock of Steller survey, the User Spreadsheet predicts the notice of proposed IHA. Please see sea lions that would not occur in L– the closest distance at which a that notice (85 FR 45389; July 28, 2020) DEO’s survey area; (2) the density value stationary animal would not incur PTS for additional information. should be corrected on the basis of In consideration of the received sound if the sound source traveled by the telemetry data, as done in Department of levels in the near-field as described animal in a straight line at a constant the Navy (2019); and (3) true density above, we expect the potential for Level speed. estimates may be even greater in A harassment of mid-frequency shallow waters near critical habitat Auditory injury is unlikely to occur cetaceans, otariid pinnipeds, and areas. For these reasons, the for mid-frequency cetaceans, otariid phocid pinnipeds to be de minimis, Commission recommended use of a pinnipeds, and phocid pinnipeds given even before the likely moderating effects corrected, revised density value of very small modeled zones of injury for of aversion and/or other compensatory 0.0392 sea lions/km2 in shallow- and those species (all estimated zones less behaviors (e.g., Nachtigall et al., 2018) than 15 m for mid-frequency cetaceans are considered. We do not believe that intermediate-water depths, while and otariid pinnipeds, up to a maximum retaining the estimate of 0.0098 sea Level A harassment is a likely outcome 2 of 42 m for phocid pinnipeds), in for any mid-frequency cetacean, otariid lions/km in deep water. NMFS context of distributed source dynamics. pinniped, or phocid pinniped and do concurred with the recommendation The source level of the array is a not propose to authorize any Level A and the take calculations for shallow- theoretical definition assuming a point harassment for these species. Any and intermediate-water depths were source and measurement in the far-field estimated exposures above Level A revised accordingly. of the source (MacGillivray, 2006). As harassment criteria are assumed to be In addition, as described in Changes described by Caldwell and Dragoset takes by Level B harassment instead (see from the Proposed IHA, NMFS was (2000), an array is not a point source, Table 6). made aware of the potential occurrence but one that spans a small area. In the of Sato’s beaked whale (a newly far-field, individual elements in arrays Marine Mammal Occurrence described species previously considered will effectively work as one source Information about the presence, to be a conspecific form of Baird’s because individual pressure peaks will density, and group dynamics of marine beaked whale) in the survey area and have coalesced into one relatively broad mammals that informs the take added a nominal amount of take in the pulse. The array can then be considered calculations was provided in our notice form of one mean group size. This a ‘‘point source.’’ For distances within of proposed IHA (85 FR 45389; July 28, inclusion likely represents an the near-field, i.e., approximately 2–3 2020). That information is not re-printed overestimate of actual take, as times the array dimensions, pressure here. For additional detail, please see occurrence of Sato’s beaked whale peaks from individual elements do not the proposed IHA notice and Appendix would have been accounted for in the arrive simultaneously because the B of L–DEO’s application. Density existing density estimates for Baird’s observation point is not equidistant values are provided in Table B–1 of L– beaked whale. However, we determined from each element. The effect is DEO’s application. No new information it appropriate to acknowledge the destructive interference of the outputs is available since we published the presence and potential exposure of this of each element, so that peak pressures notice of proposed IHA, and no changes new species.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55657

Take Calculation and Estimation presented in Table 6. As noted take numbers, we assume that whales previously, L–DEO has added 25 encountered will follow Wade (2017), Here we describe how the information percent in the form of operational days, i.e., that 86.8 percent of takes would provided above is brought together to which is equivalent to adding 25 accrue to the Hawaii DPS, 11 percent to produce a quantitative take estimate. In percent to the proposed line-kms to be the Mexico DPS, and 2.1 percent to the order to estimate the number of marine surveyed. This accounts for the WNP DPS. Of the estimated take of gray mammals predicted to be exposed to possibility that additional operational whales, we assume that 1.1 percent of sound levels that would result in Level days are required, but likely results in encountered whales would be from the A or Level B harassment, radial an overestimate of actual exposures. WNP stock (Carretta et al., 2019) and distances from the airgun array to The estimated marine mammal authorize take accordingly. predicted isopleths corresponding to the exposures above harassment thresholds Level A harassment and Level B are generally assumed here to equate to Importantly, as described in the harassment thresholds are calculated, as take, and the estimates form the basis Changes from the Proposed IHA section, described above. Those radial distances for our take authorization numbers. For revised take numbers have been are then used to calculate the area(s) the species for which NMFS does not produced after accounting for around the airgun array predicted to be expect there to be a reasonable potential modification of planned tracklines to ensonified to sound levels that exceed for take by Level A harassment to occur, avoid take of sea otters and to maintain the Level A and Level B harassment i.e., mid-frequency cetaceans and all a larger buffer around specific Steller thresholds. The distance for the 160-dB pinnipeds, the estimated exposures sea lion haul-outs and rookeries. Aside threshold (based on L–DEO model above Level A harassment thresholds from the change to Steller sea lion results) was used to draw a buffer have been added to the estimated density in shallow- and intermediate- around every transect line in a exposures above the Level B harassment depth waters and the addition of take of geographic information system (GIS) to threshold to produce a total number of Sato’s beaked whale, all changes to take determine the total ensonified area in incidents of take by Level B harassment numbers from the notice of proposed each depth category. Estimated that is authorized. Estimated exposures IHA result from revised calculations incidents of exposure above Level A and and authorized take numbers are shown accounting for these shifts in planned Level B harassment criteria are in Table 6. Regarding humpback whale tracklines.

TABLE 6—ESTIMATED TAKING BY LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT, AND PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION

Estimated Estimated Authorized Authorized 1 Percent of Species Stock Level A Level B Level A Level B Total take 1 harassment harassment harassment harassment stock

North Pacific right whale 2 ...... 0 0 0 2 2 6.5 Humpback whale...... WNP ...... 106 1,842 106 1,842 1,948 176.0 CNP ...... 19.3 Blue whale ...... 2 23 2 23 25 1.7 Fin whale 5 ...... 104 1,650 104 1,650 1,754 n/a Sei whale ...... 0 5 0 5 5 1.0 Minke whale 5 ...... 2 27 2 27 29 n/a Gray whale ...... ENP ...... 1 61 1 61 62 0.2 WNP ...... 0 1 0 1 1 0.3 Sperm whale 5 ...... 0 43 0 43 43 n/a Baird’s beaked whale 5 ...... 0 24 0 24 24 n/a Sato’s beaked whale 5 ...... 0 9 9 n/a Stejneger’s beaked whale 35 ...... 0 47 0 47 47 n/a Cuvier’s beaked whale 5 ...... 0 106 0 106 106 n/a Pacific white-sided dolphin ...... 2 1,000 0 1,002 1,002 3.7 Northern right whale dolphin 3 ...... 0 58 58 0.2 Risso’s dolphin 3 ...... 0 0 0 22 22 0.3 Killer whale ...... Offshore ..... 0 141 0 141 141 47.0 Transient ...... 24.0 Resident ...... 6.0 Dall’s porpoise...... 157 4,312 157 4,312 4,469 5.4 Harbor porpoise...... 23 679 23 679 702 1.5 Northern fur seal ...... 1 788 0 789 789 0.1 Steller sea lion ...... 2 907 0 909 909 1.7 Northern elephant seal ...... 1 105 0 106 106 0.1 Harbor seal ...... 1 148 0 149 149 2.7 Spotted seal 4 ...... 0 5 5 0.0 Ribbon seal 4 ...... 0 5 5 0.0 1 In most cases, where multiple stocks are being affected, for the purposes of calculating the percentage of the stock impacted, the take is being analyzed as if all takes occurred within each stock. Where necessary, additional discussion is provided in the ‘‘Small Numbers Analysis’’ section. 2 In the notice of proposed IHA, estimated exposure of one whale was increased to group size of two (Shelden et al., 2005; Waite et al., 2003; Wade et al., 2011). Following revision of the take estimates, no exposures of North Pacific right whale are predicted. We retain the take number, reflecting potential exposure of one group of two whales. 3 L–DEO requested authorization of northern right whale dolphin take equivalent to exposure of one group. In the notice of proposed IHA, esti- mated exposure of one Risso’s dolphin was increased to group size of 22. Following revision of the take estimates, no exposures of Risso’s dol- phin are predicted. We retain the take number, reflecting potential exposure of one group of 22 dolphins. Take of Sato’s beaked whale reflects mean group size information for Baird’s beaked whale. Group sizes for these species follow Barlow (2016). 4 L–DEO requested authorization of five takes each of spotted seal and ribbon seal. 5 As noted in Table 1, there is no estimate of abundance available for these species.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55658 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

Mitigation a 3,000-ft (0.9-km) buffer around those protected species observation team. The haul-outs and rookeries. lead PSO shall serve as primary point of In order to issue an IHA under contact for the vessel operator and Vessel-Based Visual Mitigation Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, ensure all PSO requirements per the Monitoring NMFS must set forth the permissible IHA are met. To the maximum extent methods of taking pursuant to the Visual monitoring requires the use of practicable, the experienced PSOs activity, and other means of effecting trained observers (herein referred to as should be scheduled to be on duty with the least practicable impact on the visual protected species observers those PSOs with appropriate training species or stock and its habitat, paying (PSO)) to scan the ocean surface for the but who have not yet gained relevant particular attention to rookeries, mating presence of marine mammals. The area experience. grounds, and areas of similar to be scanned visually includes During survey operations (e.g., any significance, and on the availability of primarily the exclusion zone, within day on which use of the acoustic source the species or stock for taking for certain which observation of certain marine is planned to occur, and whenever the subsistence uses (latter not applicable mammals requires shutdown of the acoustic source is in the water, whether for this action). NMFS regulations acoustic source, but also a buffer zone. activated or not), a minimum of two require applicants for incidental take The buffer zone means an area beyond visual PSOs must be on duty and authorizations to include information the exclusion zone to be monitored for conducting visual observations at all about the availability and feasibility the presence of marine mammals that times during daylight hours (i.e., from (economic and technological) of may enter the exclusion zone. During 30 minutes prior to sunrise through 30 equipment, methods, and manner of pre-clearance monitoring (i.e., before minutes following sunset). Visual conducting the activity or other means ramp-up begins), the buffer zone also monitoring of the exclusion and buffer of effecting the least practicable adverse acts as an extension of the exclusion zones must begin no less than 30 impact upon the affected species or zone in that observations of marine minutes prior to ramp-up and must stocks and their habitat (50 CFR mammals within the buffer zone would continue until one hour after use of the 216.104(a)(11)). also prevent airgun operations from acoustic source ceases or until 30 In evaluating how mitigation may or beginning (i.e., ramp-up). The buffer minutes past sunset. Visual PSOs shall may not be appropriate to ensure the zone encompasses the area at and below coordinate to ensure 360° visual least practicable adverse impact on the sea surface from the edge of the 0– coverage around the vessel from the species or stocks and their habitat, as 500 m exclusion zone, out to a radius most appropriate observation posts, and well as subsistence uses where of 1,000 m from the edges of the airgun shall conduct visual observations using applicable, we carefully consider two array (500–1,000 m). Visual monitoring binoculars and the naked eye while free primary factors: of the exclusion zone and adjacent from distractions and in a consistent, (1) The manner in which, and the waters is intended to establish and, systematic, and diligent manner. degree to which, the successful when visual conditions allow, maintain PSOs shall establish and monitor the implementation of the measure(s) is zones around the sound source that are exclusion and buffer zones. These zones expected to reduce impacts to marine clear of marine mammals, thereby shall be based upon the radial distance mammals, marine mammal species or reducing or eliminating the potential for from the edges of the acoustic source stocks, and their habitat. This considers injury and minimizing the potential for (rather than being based on the center of the nature of the potential adverse more severe behavioral reactions for the array or around the vessel itself). impact being mitigated (likelihood, animals occurring closer to the vessel. During use of the acoustic source (i.e., Visual monitoring of the buffer zone is scope, range). It further considers the anytime airguns are active, including intended to (1) provide additional likelihood that the measure will be ramp-up), detections of marine protection to naı¨ve marine mammals effective if implemented (probability of mammals within the buffer zone (but that may be in the area during pre- outside the exclusion zone) shall be accomplishing the mitigating result if clearance, and (2) during airgun use, aid communicated to the operator to implemented as planned), the in establishing and maintaining the prepare for the potential shutdown of likelihood of effective implementation exclusion zone by alerting the visual the acoustic source. (probability implemented as planned); observer and crew of marine mammals During use of the airgun (i.e., anytime and that are outside of, but may approach the acoustic source is active, including (2) The practicability of the measures and enter, the exclusion zone. ramp-up), detections of marine for applicant implementation, which L–DEO must use dedicated, trained, mammals within the buffer zone (but may consider such things as cost, NMFS-approved PSOs. The PSOs must outside the exclusion zone) should be impact on operations, and, in the case have no tasks other than to conduct communicated to the operator to of a military readiness activity, observational effort, record prepare for the potential shutdown of personnel safety, practicality of observational data, and communicate the acoustic source. Visual PSOs will implementation, and impact on the with and instruct relevant vessel crew immediately communicate all effectiveness of the military readiness with regard to the presence of marine observations to the on duty acoustic activity. mammals and mitigation requirements. PSO(s), including any determination by As described previously, L–DEO PSO resumes shall be provided to the PSO regarding species agreed to modify certain tracklines in NMFS for approval. identification, distance, and bearing and order to reduce the number and At least one of the visual and two of the degree of confidence in the intensity of acoustic exposures of Steller the acoustic PSOs (discussed below) determination. Any observations of sea lions in waters around the specific aboard the vessel must have a minimum marine mammals by crew members haul-outs and rookeries of greatest of 90 days at-sea experience working in shall be relayed to the PSO team. During importance for the stock. Tracklines those roles, respectively, with no more good conditions (e.g., daylight hours; were modified to ensure that the vessel than 18 months elapsed since the Beaufort sea state (BSS) 3 or less), visual maintains a standoff distance sufficient conclusion of the at-sea experience. One PSOs shall conduct observations when to prevent the assumed Level B visual PSO with such experience shall the acoustic source is not operating for harassment zone from overlapping with be designated as the lead for the entire comparison of sighting rates and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55659

behavior with and without use of the and visual but not at same time) may An extended EZ of 1,500 m must be acoustic source and between acquisition not exceed 12 hours per 24-hour period enforced for all beaked whales. No periods, to the maximum extent for any individual PSO. buffer of this extended EZ is required. practicable. Survey activity may continue for 30 Pre-Clearance and Ramp-Up Visual PSOs may be on watch for a minutes when the PAM system maximum of four consecutive hours malfunctions or is damaged, while the Ramp-up (sometimes referred to as followed by a break of at least one hour PAM operator diagnoses the issue. If the ‘‘soft start’’) means the gradual and between watches and may conduct a diagnosis indicates that the PAM system systematic increase of emitted sound maximum of 12 hours of observation per must be repaired to solve the problem, levels from an airgun array. Ramp-up 24-hour period. Combined observational operations may continue for an begins by first activating a single airgun duties (visual and acoustic but not at additional five hours without acoustic of the smallest volume, followed by same time) may not exceed 12 hours per monitoring during daylight hours only doubling the number of active elements 24-hour period for any individual PSO. under the following conditions: in stages until the full complement of an array’s airguns are active. Each stage Passive Acoustic Monitoring • Sea state is less than or equal to Beaufort sea state (BSS) 4; should be approximately the same Acoustic monitoring means the use of duration, and the total duration should • No marine mammals (excluding trained personnel (sometimes referred to not be less than approximately 20 delphinids) detected solely by PAM in as passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) minutes. The intent of pre-clearance the applicable exclusion zone in the operators, herein referred to as acoustic observation (30 minutes) is to ensure no previous two hours; PSOs) to operate PAM equipment to protected species are observed within • NMFS is notified via email as soon acoustically detect the presence of the buffer zone prior to the beginning of marine mammals. Acoustic monitoring as practicable with the time and ramp-up. During pre-clearance is the involves acoustically detecting marine location in which operations began only time observations of protected mammals regardless of distance from occurring without an active PAM species in the buffer zone would the source, as localization of animals system; and • prevent operations (i.e., the beginning of may not always be possible. Acoustic Operations with an active acoustic ramp-up). The intent of ramp-up is to monitoring is intended to further source, but without an operating PAM warn protected species of pending support visual monitoring (during system, do not exceed a cumulative total seismic operations and to allow daylight hours) in maintaining an of five hours in any 24-hour period. sufficient time for those animals to leave exclusion zone around the sound source Establishment of Exclusion and Buffer the immediate vicinity. A ramp-up that is clear of marine mammals. In Zones procedure, involving a step-wise cases where visual monitoring is not increase in the number of airguns firing effective (e.g., due to weather, An exclusion zone (EZ) is a defined and total array volume until all nighttime), acoustic monitoring may be area within which occurrence of a operational airguns are activated and used to allow certain activities to occur, marine mammal triggers mitigation the full volume is achieved, is required as further detailed below. action intended to reduce the potential at all times as part of the activation of PAM would take place in addition to for certain outcomes, e.g., auditory the acoustic source. All operators must the visual monitoring program. Visual injury, disruption of critical behaviors. adhere to the following pre-clearance monitoring typically is not effective The PSOs will establish a minimum EZ and ramp-up requirements: during periods of poor visibility or at with a 500-m radius. The 500-m EZ is • The operator must notify a night, and even with good visibility, is based on radial distance from the edge designated PSO of the planned start of unable to detect marine mammals when of the airgun array (rather than being ramp-up as agreed upon with the lead they are below the surface or beyond based on the center of the array or PSO; the notification time should not be visual range. Acoustic monitoring can around the vessel itself). With certain less than 60 minutes prior to the be used in addition to visual exceptions (described below), if a planned ramp-up in order to allow the observations to improve detection, marine mammal appears within or PSOs time to monitor the exclusion and identification, and localization of enters this zone, the acoustic source will buffer zones for 30 minutes prior to the cetaceans. The acoustic monitoring be shut down. initiation of ramp-up (pre-clearance); would serve to alert visual PSOs (if on The 500-m EZ is intended to be • Ramp-ups shall be scheduled so as duty) when vocalizing cetaceans are precautionary in the sense that it would to minimize the time spent with the detected. It is only useful when marine be expected to contain sound exceeding source activated prior to reaching the mammals call, but it can be effective the injury criteria for all cetacean designated run-in; either by day or by night, and does not hearing groups, (based on the dual • One of the PSOs conducting pre- depend on good visibility. It would be criteria of SELcum and peak SPL), while clearance observations must be notified monitored in real time so that the visual also providing a consistent, reasonably again immediately prior to initiating observers can be advised when observable zone within which PSOs ramp-up procedures and the operator cetaceans are detected. would typically be able to conduct must receive confirmation from the PSO The R/V Langseth will use a towed effective observational effort. to proceed; PAM system, which must be monitored Additionally, a 500-m EZ is expected to • Ramp-up may not be initiated if any by at a minimum one on duty acoustic minimize the likelihood that marine marine mammal is within the applicable PSO beginning at least 30 minutes prior mammals will be exposed to levels exclusion or buffer zone. If a marine to ramp-up and at all times during use likely to result in more severe mammal is observed within the of the acoustic source. Acoustic PSOs behavioral responses. Although applicable exclusion zone or the buffer may be on watch for a maximum of four significantly greater distances may be zone during the 30 minute pre-clearance consecutive hours followed by a break observed from an elevated platform period, ramp-up may not begin until the of at least one hour between watches under good conditions, we believe that animal(s) has been observed exiting the and may conduct a maximum of 12 500 m is likely regularly attainable for zones or until an additional time period hours of observation per 24-hour period. PSOs using the naked eye during typical has elapsed with no further sightings Combined observational duties (acoustic conditions. (15 minutes for small odontocetes and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55660 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

pinnipeds, and 30 minutes for all operations or to call for shutdown of the practicability concerns without likely mysticetes and all other odontocetes, acoustic source if a marine mammal is commensurate benefits for the animals including sperm whales, beaked whales, detected within the applicable in question. Small dolphins are and large delphinids, such as killer exclusion zone. The operator must also generally the most commonly observed whales and Risso’s dolphins); establish and maintain clear lines of marine mammals in the specific • Ramp-up shall begin by activating a communication directly between PSOs geographic region and would typically single airgun of the smallest volume in on duty and crew controlling the be the only marine mammals likely to the array and shall continue in stages by acoustic source to ensure that shutdown intentionally approach the vessel. As doubling the number of active elements commands are conveyed swiftly while described above, auditory injury is at the commencement of each stage, allowing PSOs to maintain watch. When extremely unlikely to occur for mid- with each stage of approximately the both visual and acoustic PSOs are on frequency cetaceans (e.g., delphinids), same duration. Duration shall not be duty, all detections will be immediately as this group is relatively insensitive to less than 20 minutes. The operator must communicated to the remainder of the sound produced at the predominant provide information to the PSO on-duty PSO team for potential frequencies in an airgun pulse while documenting that appropriate verification of visual observations by the also having a relatively high threshold procedures were followed; acoustic PSO or of acoustic detections for the onset of auditory injury (i.e., • PSOs must monitor the exclusion by visual PSOs. When the airgun array PTS). and buffer zones during ramp-up, and is active (i.e., anytime one or more A large body of anecdotal evidence ramp-up must cease and the source airguns is active, including during indicates that small dolphins commonly must be shut down upon detection of a ramp-up) and (1) a marine mammal approach vessels and/or towed arrays marine mammal within the applicable appears within or enters the applicable during active sound production for exclusion zone. Once ramp-up has exclusion zone and/or (2) a marine purposes of bow riding, with no begun, detections of marine mammals mammal (other than delphinids, see apparent effect observed in those within the buffer zone do not require below) is detected acoustically and delphinoids (e.g., Barkaszi et al., 2012, shutdown, but such observation shall be localized within the applicable 2018). The potential for increased communicated to the operator to exclusion zone, the acoustic source will shutdowns resulting from such a prepare for the potential shutdown; be shut down. When shutdown is called measure would require the Langseth to • Ramp-up may occur at times of for by a PSO, the acoustic source will revisit the missed track line to reacquire poor visibility, including nighttime, if be immediately deactivated and any data, resulting in an overall increase in appropriate acoustic monitoring has dispute resolved only following the total sound energy input to the occurred with no detections in the 30 deactivation. Additionally, shutdown marine environment and an increase in minutes prior to beginning ramp-up. will occur whenever PAM alone the total duration over which the survey Acoustic source activation may only (without visual sighting), confirms is active in a given area. Although other occur at times of poor visibility where presence of marine mammal(s) in the mid-frequency hearing specialists (e.g., operational planning cannot reasonably EZ. If the acoustic PSO cannot confirm large delphinids) are no more likely to avoid such circumstances; presence within the EZ, visual PSOs incur auditory injury than are small • If the acoustic source is shut down will be notified but shutdown is not dolphins, they are much less likely to for brief periods (i.e., less than 30 required. approach vessels. Therefore, retaining a minutes) for reasons other than that Following a shutdown, airgun activity shutdown requirement for large described for shutdown (e.g., will not resume until the marine delphinids would not have similar mechanical difficulty), it may be mammal has cleared the 500-m EZ. The impacts in terms of either practicability activated again without ramp-up if PSOs animal would be considered to have for the applicant or corollary increase in have maintained constant visual and/or cleared the 500-m EZ if it is visually sound energy output and time on the acoustic observation and no visual or observed to have departed the 500-m water. We do anticipate some benefit for acoustic detections of marine mammals EZ, or it has not been seen within the a shutdown requirement for large have occurred within the applicable 500-m EZ for 15 min in the case of small delphinids in that it simplifies exclusion zone. For any longer odontocetes and pinnipeds, or 30 min in somewhat the total range of decision- shutdown, pre-clearance observation the case of mysticetes and large making for PSOs and may preclude any and ramp-up are required. For any odontocetes, including sperm whales, potential for physiological effects other shutdown at night or in periods of poor beaked whales, killer whales, and than to the auditory system as well as visibility (e.g., BSS 4 or greater), ramp- Risso’s dolphins. some more severe behavioral reactions up is required, but if the shutdown The shutdown requirement can be for any such animals in close proximity period was brief and constant waived for small dolphins if an to the source vessel. observation was maintained, pre- individual is visually detected within Visual PSOs shall use best clearance watch of 30 minutes is not the exclusion zone. As defined here, the professional judgment in making the required; and small dolphin group is intended to decision to call for a shutdown if there • Testing of the acoustic source encompass those members of the Family is uncertainty regarding identification involving all elements requires ramp- Delphinidae most likely to voluntarily (i.e., whether the observed marine up. Testing limited to individual source approach the source vessel for purposes mammal(s) belongs to one of the elements or strings does not require of interacting with the vessel and/or delphinid genera for which shutdown is ramp-up but does require pre-clearance airgun array (e.g., bow riding). This waived or one of the species with a of 30 min. exception to the shutdown requirement larger exclusion zone). applies solely to specific genera of small Upon implementation of shutdown, Shutdown dolphins (Lagenorhynchus and the source may be reactivated after the The shutdown of an airgun array Lissodelphis). marine mammal(s) has been observed requires the immediate de-activation of We include this small dolphin exiting the applicable exclusion zone all individual airgun elements of the exception because shutdown (i.e., animal is not required to fully exit array. Any PSO on duty will have the requirements for small dolphins under the buffer zone where applicable) or authority to delay the start of survey all circumstances represent following 15 minutes for small

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55661

odontocetes and pinnipeds, and 30 be possible (e.g., for animals that • Occurrence of marine mammal minutes for mysticetes and all other approach the vessel). species or stocks in the area in which odontocetes, including sperm whales, 6. When protected species are sighted take is anticipated (e.g., presence, beaked whales, killer whales, and while a vessel is underway, the vessel abundance, distribution, density); Risso’s dolphins, with no further shall take action as necessary to avoid • Nature, scope, or context of likely observation of the marine mammal(s). violating the relevant separation marine mammal exposure to potential L–DEO must implement shutdown if distance (e.g., attempt to remain parallel stressors/impacts (individual or a marine mammal species for which to the animal’s course, avoid excessive cumulative, acute or chronic), through take was not authorized, or a species for speed or abrupt changes in direction better understanding of: (1) Action or which authorization was granted but the until the animal has left the area). If environment (e.g., source takes have been met, approaches the protected species are sighted within the characterization, propagation, ambient Level A or Level B harassment zones. L– relevant separation distance, the vessel noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life DEO must also implement shutdown if must reduce speed and shift the engine history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence any of the following are observed at any to neutral, not engaging the engines of marine mammal species with the distance: until animals are clear of the area. This action; or (4) biological or behavioral • Any large whale (defined as a does not apply to any vessel towing gear context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or sperm whale or any mysticete species) or any vessel that is navigationally feeding areas); • with a calf (defined as an animal less constrained. Individual marine mammal than two-thirds the body size of an adult 7. These requirements do not apply in responses (behavioral or physiological) observed to be in close association with any case where compliance would to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or an adult); create an imminent and serious threat to cumulative), other stressors, or a person or vessel or to the extent that • An aggregation of six or more large cumulative impacts from multiple a vessel is restricted in its ability to whales; and/or stressors; maneuver and, because of the • • A North Pacific right whale. How anticipated responses to restriction, cannot comply. stressors impact either: (1) Long-term Vessel Strike Avoidance We have carefully evaluated the suite fitness and survival of individual of mitigation measures described here 1. Vessel operators and crews must marine mammals; or (2) populations, and considered a range of other species, or stocks; maintain a vigilant watch for all measures in the context of ensuring that • protected species and slow down, stop Effects on marine mammal habitat we prescribe the means of effecting the (e.g., marine mammal prey species, their vessel, or alter course, as least practicable adverse impact on the appropriate and regardless of vessel acoustic habitat, or other important affected marine mammal species and physical components of marine size, to avoid striking any protected stocks and their habitat. Based on our species. A visual observer aboard the mammal habitat); and evaluation of the proposed measures, as • Mitigation and monitoring vessel must monitor a vessel strike well as other measures considered by effectiveness. avoidance zone around the vessel NMFS described above, NMFS has (distances stated below). Visual determined that the mitigation measures Vessel-Based Visual Monitoring observers monitoring the vessel strike provide the means effecting the least As described above, PSO observations avoidance zone may be third-party practicable impact on the affected will take place during daytime airgun observers (i.e., PSOs) or crew members, species or stocks and their habitat, operations. During seismic operations, but crew members responsible for these paying particular attention to rookeries, at least five visual PSOs would be based duties must be provided sufficient mating grounds, and areas of similar aboard the Langseth. Two visual PSOs training to (1) distinguish protected significance. would be on duty at all time during species from other phenomena and (2) daytime hours. Monitoring shall be Monitoring and Reporting broadly to identify a marine mammal as conducted in accordance with the a right whale, other whale (defined in In order to issue an IHA for an following requirements: this context as sperm whales or baleen activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the • The operator shall provide PSOs whales other than right whales), or other MMPA states that NMFS must set forth with bigeye binoculars (e.g., 25 x 150; marine mammal. requirements pertaining to the 2.7 view angle; individual ocular focus; 2. Vessel speeds must also be reduced monitoring and reporting of such taking. height control) of appropriate quality to 10 knots or less when mother/calf The MMPA implementing regulations at (i.e., Fujinon or equivalent) solely for pairs, pods, or large assemblages of 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that PSO use. These shall be pedestal- cetaceans are observed near a vessel. requests for authorizations must include mounted on the deck at the most 3. All vessels must maintain a the suggested means of accomplishing appropriate vantage point that provides minimum separation distance of 500 m the necessary monitoring and reporting for optimal sea surface observation, PSO from right whales. If a whale is observed that will result in increased knowledge safety, and safe operation of the vessel; but cannot be confirmed as a species of the species and of the level of taking and other than a right whale, the vessel or impacts on populations of marine • The operator will work with the operator must assume that it is a right mammals that are expected to be selected third-party observer provider to whale and take appropriate action. present in the proposed action area. ensure PSOs have all equipment 4. All vessels must maintain a Effective reporting is critical both to (including backup equipment) needed minimum separation distance of 100 m compliance as well as ensuring that the to adequately perform necessary tasks, from sperm whales and all other baleen most value is obtained from the required including accurate determination of whales. monitoring. distance and bearing to observed marine 5. All vessels must, to the maximum Monitoring and reporting mammals. PSOs must have the extent practicable, attempt to maintain a requirements prescribed by NMFS following requirements and minimum separation distance of 50 m should contribute to improved qualifications: from all other protected species, with an understanding of one or more of the • PSOs shall be independent, understanding that at times this may not following: dedicated, trained visual and acoustic

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55662 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

PSOs and must be employed by a third- government-sponsored protected • Watch status (sighting made by PSO party observer provider; species surveys; or (3) previous work on/off effort, opportunistic, crew, • PSOs shall have no tasks other than experience as a PSO; the PSO should alternate vessel/platform); to conduct observational effort (visual or demonstrate good standing and • PSO who sighted the animal; acoustic), collect data, and consistently good performance of PSO • Time of sighting; communicate with and instruct relevant duties. • Vessel location at time of sighting; vessel crew with regard to the presence For data collection purposes, PSOs • Water depth; of protected species and mitigation shall use standardized data collection • Direction of vessel’s travel (compass requirements (including brief alerts forms, whether hard copy or electronic. direction); regarding maritime hazards); PSOs shall record detailed information • • PSOs shall have successfully Direction of animal’s travel relative about any implementation of mitigation to the vessel; completed an approved PSO training requirements, including the distance of • Pace of the animal; course appropriate for their designated animals to the acoustic source and • Estimated distance to the animal task (visual or acoustic). Acoustic PSOs description of specific actions that and its heading relative to vessel at are required to complete specialized ensued, the behavior of the animal(s), training for operating PAM systems and initial sighting; any observed changes in behavior before • are encouraged to have familiarity with and after implementation of mitigation, Identification of the animal (e.g., the vessel with which they will be and if shutdown was implemented, the genus/species, lowest possible working; length of time before any subsequent taxonomic level, or unidentified) and • PSOs can act as acoustic or visual ramp-up of the acoustic source. If the composition of the group if there is observers (but not at the same time) as a mix of species; required mitigation was not • long as they demonstrate that their implemented, PSOs should record a Estimated number of animals (high/ training and experience are sufficient to description of the circumstances. At a low/best); perform the task at hand; • Estimated number of animals by • minimum, the following information NMFS must review and approve must be recorded: cohort (adults, yearlings, juveniles, PSO resumes accompanied by a relevant • Vessel names (source vessel and calves, group composition, etc.); training course information packet that other vessels associated with survey) • Description (as many distinguishing includes the name and qualifications and call signs; features as possible of each individual (i.e., experience, training completed, or • PSO names and affiliations; seen, including length, shape, color, educational background) of the • Dates of departures and returns to pattern, scars or markings, shape and instructor(s), the course outline or port with port name; size of dorsal fin, shape of head, and syllabus, and course reference material • Date and participants of PSO blow characteristics); as well as a document stating successful briefings; • Detailed behavior observations (e.g., completion of the course; • Dates and times (Greenwich Mean • number of blows/breaths, number of NMFS shall have one week to Time) of survey effort and times surfaces, breaching, spyhopping, diving, approve PSOs from the time that the corresponding with PSO effort; feeding, traveling; as explicit and • necessary information is submitted, Vessel location (latitude/longitude) detailed as possible; note any observed after which PSOs meeting the minimum when survey effort began and ended and changes in behavior); requirements shall automatically be vessel location at beginning and end of • Animal’s closest point of approach considered approved; visual PSO duty shifts; and/or closest distance from any • PSOs must successfully complete • Vessel heading and speed at element of the acoustic source; relevant training, including completion beginning and end of visual PSO duty • Platform activity at time of sighting of all required coursework and passing shifts and upon any line change; (e.g., deploying, recovering, testing, (80 percent or greater) a written and/or • Environmental conditions while on shooting, data acquisition, other); and oral examination developed for the visual survey (at beginning and end of • training program; PSO shift and whenever conditions Description of any actions • PSOs must have successfully changed significantly), including BSS implemented in response to the sighting attained a bachelor’s degree from an and any other relevant weather (e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up) and accredited college or university with a conditions including cloud cover, fog, time and location of the action. major in one of the natural sciences, a sun glare, and overall visibility to the If a marine mammal is detected while minimum of 30 semester hours or horizon; using the PAM system, the following equivalent in the biological sciences, • Factors that may have contributed information should be recorded: • and at least one undergraduate course in to impaired observations during each An acoustic encounter math or statistics; and PSO shift change or as needed as identification number, and whether the • The educational requirements may environmental conditions changed (e.g., detection was linked with a visual be waived if the PSO has acquired the vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions); sighting; relevant skills through alternate and • Date and time when first and last experience. Requests for such a waiver • Survey activity information, such as heard; shall be submitted to NMFS and must acoustic source power output while in • Types and nature of sounds heard include written justification. Requests operation, number and volume of (e.g., clicks, whistles, creaks, burst shall be granted or denied (with airguns operating in the array, tow pulses, continuous, sporadic, strength of justification) by NMFS within one week depth of the array, and any other notes signal); and of receipt of submitted information. of significance (i.e., pre-clearance, ramp- • Any additional information Alternate experience that may be up, shutdown, testing, shooting, ramp- recorded such as water depth of the considered includes, but is not limited up completion, end of operations, hydrophone array, bearing of the animal to (1) secondary education and/or streamers, etc.). to the vessel (if determinable), species experience comparable to PSO duties; The following information should be or taxonomic group (if determinable), (2) previous work experience recorded upon visual observation of any spectrogram screenshot, and any other conducting academic, commercial, or protected species: notable information.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55663

Reporting Vessel strike—In the event of a ship is no longer needed. Otherwise, A report must be submitted to NMFS strike of a marine mammal by any vessel shutdown procedures will remain in within 90 days after the end of the involved in the activities covered by the effect until the Director of OPR, NMFS cruise. The report would describe the authorization, L–DEO shall report the (or designee) determines and advises L– operations that were conducted and incident to OPR, NMFS and to the DEO that all live animals involved have sightings of marine mammals near the NMFS Alaska Regional Stranding left the area (either of their own volition operations. The report would provide Coordinator as soon as feasible. The or following an intervention). full documentation of methods, results, report must include the following If further observations of the marine and interpretation pertaining to all information: mammals indicate the potential for re- • monitoring. The 90-day report must Time, date, and location (latitude/ stranding, additional coordination with longitude) of the incident; the IHA-holder will be required to summarize the dates and locations of • seismic operations, all marine mammal Vessel’s speed during and leading determine what measures are necessary up to the incident; to minimize that likelihood (e.g., sightings (dates, times, locations, • activities, associated seismic survey Vessel’s course/heading and what extending the shutdown or moving activities), and all information required operations were being conducted (if operations farther away) and to to be collected (as listed in the applicable); implement those measures as • Status of all sound sources in use; appropriate. preceding section). • The draft report shall also include Description of avoidance measures/ Additional Information Requests—if geo-referenced time-stamped vessel requirements that were in place at the NMFS determines that the tracklines for all time periods during time of the strike and what additional circumstances of any marine mammal which airguns were operating. measure were taken, if any, to avoid stranding found in the vicinity of the strike; activity suggest investigation of the Tracklines should include points • recording any change in airgun status Environmental conditions (e.g., association with survey activities is (e.g., when the airguns began operating, wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea warranted, and an investigation into the when they were turned off, or when state, cloud cover, visibility) stranding is being pursued, NMFS will immediately preceding the strike; submit a written request to L–DEO they changed from full array to single • gun or vice versa). GIS files shall be Species identification (if known) or indicating that the following initial description of the animal(s) involved; available information must be provided provided in ESRI shapefile format and • include the UTC date and time, latitude Estimated size and length of the as soon as possible, but no later than 7 in decimal degrees, and longitude in animal that was struck; business days after the request for • Description of the behavior of the decimal degrees. All coordinates shall information: animal immediately preceding and • be referenced to the WGS84 geographic Status of all sound source use in the coordinate system. In addition to the following the strike; 48 hours preceding the estimated time • If available, description of the report, all raw observational data shall of stranding and within 50 km of the presence and behavior of any other be made available to NMFS. The report discovery/notification of the stranding marine mammals present immediately must summarize the data collected as by NMFS; and preceding the strike; • described above and in the IHA. A final If available, description of the • Estimated fate of the animal (e.g., report must be submitted within 30 days behavior of any marine mammal(s) dead, injured but alive, injured and following resolution of any comments observed preceding (i.e., within 48 moving, blood or tissue observed in the on the draft report. hours and 50 km) and immediately after water, status unknown, disappeared); the discovery of the stranding. Reporting Injured or Dead Marine and In the event that the investigation is Mammals • To the extent practicable, still inconclusive, the investigation of Discovery of injured or dead marine photographs or video footage of the the association of the survey activities is mammals—In the event that personnel animal(s). still warranted, and the investigation is still being pursued, NMFS may provide involved in survey activities covered by Actions To Minimize Additional Harm additional information requests, in the authorization discover an injured or to Live-Stranded (or Milling) Marine writing, regarding the nature and dead marine mammal, the L–DEO shall Mammals report the incident to the Office of location of survey operations prior to In the event of a live stranding (or Protected Resources (OPR), NMFS and the time period above. near-shore atypical milling) event to the NMFS Alaska Regional Stranding within 50 km of the survey operations, Negligible Impact Analysis and Coordinator as soon as feasible. The where the NMFS stranding network is Determination report must include the following engaged in herding or other NMFS has defined negligible impact information: • Time, date, and location (latitude/ interventions to return animals to the as an impact resulting from the longitude) of the first discovery (and water, the Director of OPR, NMFS (or specified activity that cannot be updated location information if known designee) will advise L–DEO of the need reasonably expected to, and is not and applicable); to implement shutdown procedures for reasonably likely to, adversely affect the • Species identification (if known) or all active acoustic sources operating species or stock through effects on description of the animal(s) involved; within 50 km of the stranding. annual rates of recruitment or survival • Condition of the animal(s) Shutdown procedures for live stranding (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact (including carcass condition if the or milling marine mammals include the finding is based on the lack of likely animal is dead); following: If at any time, the marine adverse effects on annual rates of • Observed behaviors of the mammal the marine mammal(s) die or recruitment or survival (i.e., population- animal(s), if alive; are euthanized, or if herding/ level effects). An estimate of the number • If available, photographs or video intervention efforts are stopped, the of takes alone is not enough information footage of the animal(s); and Director of OPR, NMFS (or designee) on which to base an impact • General circumstances under which will advise the IHA-holder that the determination. In addition to the animal was discovered. shutdown around the animals’ location considering estimates of the number of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55664 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ represents an aversive stimulus, conditions expected within humpback through harassment, NMFS considers especially at levels that would be feeding BIAs) were less likely to other factors, such as the likely nature expected to result in PTS, given respond and cease foraging than whales of any responses (e.g., intensity, sufficient notice of the R/V Langseth’s feeding on deep, dispersed prey when duration), the context of any responses approach due to the vessel’s relatively exposed to simulated sonar sources, (e.g., critical reproductive time or low speed when conducting seismic suggesting that the benefits of feeding location, migration), as well as effects surveys. We expect that the majority of for humpbacks foraging on high-density on habitat, and the likely effectiveness takes would be in the form of short-term prey may outweigh perceived harm of the mitigation. We also assess the Level B behavioral harassment in the from the acoustic stimulus, such as the number, intensity, and context of form of temporary avoidance of the area seismic survey (Southall et al., 2016). estimated takes by evaluating this or decreased foraging (if such activity Additionally, L–DEO will shut down information relative to population were occurring), reactions that are the airgun array upon observation of an status. Consistent with the 1989 considered to be of low severity and aggregation of six or more large whales, preamble for NMFS’s implementing with no lasting biological consequences which would reduce impacts to regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, (e.g., Southall et al., 2007, Ellison et al., cooperatively foraging animals. For all 1989), the impacts from other past and 2012). habitats, no physical impacts to habitat ongoing anthropogenic activities are Marine mammal habitat may be are anticipated from seismic activities. incorporated into this analysis via their impacted by elevated sound levels, but While SPLs of sufficient strength have impacts on the environmental baseline these impacts would be temporary. Prey been known to cause injury to fish and (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status species are mobile and are broadly fish and invertebrate mortality, in of the species, population size and distributed throughout the project areas; feeding habitats, the most likely impact growth rate where known, ongoing therefore, marine mammals that may be to prey species from survey activities sources of human-caused mortality, or temporarily displaced during survey would be temporary avoidance of the ambient noise levels). activities are expected to be able to affected area and any injury or mortality To avoid repetition, our analysis resume foraging once they have moved of prey species would be localized applies to all species listed in Tables 1, away from areas with disturbing levels around the survey and not of a degree given that NMFS expects the anticipated of underwater noise. Because of the that would adversely impact marine effects of the planned geophysical relatively short duration (16 days) and mammal foraging. The duration of fish survey to be similar in nature. Where temporary nature of the disturbance, the avoidance of a given area after survey there are meaningful differences availability of similar habitat and effort stops is unknown, but a rapid between species or stocks, or groups of resources in the surrounding area, the return to normal recruitment, species, in anticipated individual impacts to marine mammals and the distribution and behavior is expected. responses to activities, impact of food sources that they utilize are not Given the short operational seismic time expected take on the population due to expected to cause significant or long- near or traversing important habitat differences in population status, or term consequences for individual areas, as well as the ability of cetaceans impacts on habitat, NMFS has identified marine mammals or their populations. and prey species to move away from species-specific factors to inform the The tracklines of this survey either acoustic sources, NMFS expects that analysis. traverse or are proximal to critical there would be, at worst, minimal NMFS does not anticipate that serious habitat areas for the Steller sea lion and impacts to animals and habitat within injury or mortality would occur as a to a feeding BIA for humpback whales. these areas. result of L–DEO’s planned survey, even However, only a portion of seismic in the absence of mitigation, and none survey days would actually occur in or Negligible Impact Conclusions is authorized. Similarly, non-auditory near these areas. As described The survey will be of short duration physical effects, stranding, and vessel previously, L–DEO’s planned tracklines (16 days of seismic operations), and the strike are not expected to occur. do not extend within 3 nmi of any acoustic ‘‘footprint’’ of the survey will We are authorizing a limited number island, and L–DEO has agreed to reduce be small relative to the ranges of the of instances of Level A harassment of the active array by half of the elements, marine mammals that would potentially seven species (low- and high-frequency also reducing the total array volume by be affected. Sound levels will increase cetacean hearing groups only) and Level half, over the 10 percent of planned in the marine environment in a B harassment only of the remaining tracklines that are closest to shore. relatively small area surrounding the marine mammal species. However, we Finally, L–DEO has agreed to maintain vessel compared to the range of the believe that any PTS incurred in marine a standoff distance around specific marine mammals within the survey mammals as a result of the planned Steller sea lion haul-outs and rookeries area. Short-term exposures to survey activity would be in the form of only a such that the modeled Level B operations are not likely to significantly small degree of PTS, not total deafness, harassment zone would not overlap a disrupt marine mammal behavior, and because of the constant movement of 3,000-ft (0.9-km) buffer around those the potential for longer-term avoidance both the R/V Langseth and of the marine areas. Impacts to Steller sea lions within of important areas is limited. The survey mammals in the project areas, as well as these areas, and throughout the survey vessel would pass Steller sea lion the fact that the vessel is not expected area, are expected to be limited to short- critical habitat only briefly, and would to remain in any one area in which term behavioral disturbance, with no operate at half volume during the ten individual marine mammals would be lasting biological consequences. percent of tracklines closest to the expected to concentrate for an extended Yazvenko et al. (2007b) reported no islands. period of time. Since the duration of apparent changes in the frequency of The required mitigation measures are exposure to loud sounds will be feeding activity in Western gray whales expected to reduce the number and/or relatively short it would be unlikely to exposed to airgun sounds in their severity of takes by allowing for affect the fitness of any individuals. feeding grounds near Sakhalin Island. detection of marine mammals in the Also, as described above, we expect that Goldbogen et al. (2013) found blue vicinity of the vessel by visual and marine mammals would likely move whales feeding on highly concentrated acoustic observers, and by minimizing away from a sound source that prey in shallow depths (such as the the severity of any potential exposures

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices 55665

via shutdowns of the airgun array. minimize potential impacts to marine the authorized taking to be of no greater Based on previous monitoring reports mammals (both amount and severity). than small numbers. First, Wade (2017) for substantially similar activities that Based on the analysis contained provides a more recent estimate of have been previously authorized by herein of the likely effects of the 14,693 whales for the summer (feeding NMFS, we expect that the mitigation specified activity on marine mammals area) abundance in the Aleutian Islands will be effective in preventing, at least and their habitat, and taking into and Bering Sea, which includes the to some extent, potential PTS in marine consideration the implementation of the survey area. The total estimated take of mammals that may otherwise occur in mitigation and monitoring measures, humpback whale (1,948 take incidents) the absence of the mitigation (although NMFS finds that the total marine would be 13.3 percent of this estimated all authorized PTS has been accounted mammal take from the proposed activity summer abundance, i.e., less than for in this analysis). will have a negligible impact on all NMFS’ small numbers threshold of one- NMFS concludes that exposures to affected marine mammal species or third of the best available abundance marine mammal species and stocks due stocks. estimate. Second, we expect that only to L–DEO’s survey will result in only Small Numbers 2.1 percent of whales encountered in short-term (temporary and short in this area would be from the WNP DPS. duration) effects to individuals exposed, As noted above, only small numbers If we consider the WNP DPS to be a over relatively small areas of the of incidental take may be authorized reasonable approximation of the historic affected animals’ ranges. Animals may under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of WNP stock designation, then the MMPA for specified activities other temporarily avoid the immediate area, approximately 41 takes should be than military readiness activities. The but are not expected to permanently expected to accrue to the stock (or MMPA does not define small numbers abandon the area. Major shifts in habitat approximately 3.7 percent of the 2006 and so, in practice, where estimated use, distribution, or foraging success are abundance estimate for the WNP stock). numbers are available, NMFS compares not expected. NMFS does not anticipate This information supports a the number of individuals taken to the the takes to impact annual rates of determination that the take most appropriate estimation of recruitment or survival. authorization for humpback whales abundance of the relevant species or would be of no greater than small In summary and as described above, stock in our determination of whether the following factors primarily support numbers, for any stock. an authorization is limited to small The stock abundance estimates for the our determination that the impacts numbers of marine mammals. When the resulting from this activity are not fin, minke, beaked, and sperm whale predicted number of individuals to be stocks that occur in the survey area are expected to adversely affect the species taken is fewer than one-third of the or stock through effects on annual rates unknown, according to the latest SARs. species or stock abundance, the take is Therefore, we reviewed other scientific of recruitment or survival: considered to be of small numbers. information in making our small • No serious injury or mortality is Additionally, other qualitative factors numbers determinations for these anticipated or authorized; may be considered in the analysis, such species. As noted previously, partial • The activity is temporary and of as the temporal or spatial scale of the abundance estimates of 1,233 and 2,020 relatively short duration (16 days); activities. • minke whales are available for shelf and The anticipated impacts of the There are several stocks for which the nearshore waters between the Kenai activity on marine mammals would estimated instances of take appear high Peninsula and Amchitka Pass and for primarily be temporary behavioral when compared to the stock abundance the eastern Bering Sea shelf, changes due to avoidance of the area (Table 6), or for which there is no respectively. For the minke whale, these around the survey vessel; currently accepted stock abundance • partial abundance estimates alone are The number of instances of estimate. These include the humpback sufficient to demonstrate that the take potential PTS that may occur are whale, fin whale, minke whale, sperm number of 29 is of small numbers. The expected to be very small in number. whale, four species of beaked whale, same surveys produced partial Instances of potential PTS that are and the offshore stock of killer whales. abundance estimates of 1,652 and 1,061 incurred in marine mammals are However, when other qualitative factors fin whales, for the same areas, expected to be of a low level, due to are used to inform an assessment of the respectively. For the fin whale, we must constant movement of the vessel and of likely number of individual marine turn to the only available region-wide the marine mammals in the area, and mammals taken, the resulting numbers abundance estimate. Ohsumi and Wada the nature of the survey design (not are appropriately considered small. We (1974) provided an estimated North concentrated in areas of high marine discuss these in further detail below. Pacific abundance of 13,620–18,680 mammal concentration); For all other stocks (aside from those whales. Using the lower bound • The availability of alternate areas of referenced above and discussed below), produces a proportion of 12.9 percent. similar habitat value for marine the authorized take is less than one- As noted previously, Kato and mammals to temporarily vacate the third of the best available stock Miyashita (1998) produced an survey area during the survey to avoid abundance (recognizing that some of abundance estimate of 102,112 sperm exposure to sounds from the activity; those takes may be repeats of the same whales in the western North Pacific. • The potential adverse effects on fish individual, thus rendering the actual However, this estimate is believed to be or invertebrate species that serve as prey percentage even lower). positively biased. We therefore refer to species for marine mammals from the Existing stock abundance estimates Barlow and Taylor (2005)’s estimate of survey will be temporary and spatially for humpback whales, based on 2006 26,300 sperm whales in the northeast limited, and impacts to marine mammal surveys, are 10,103 animals for the CNP temperate Pacific to demonstrate that foraging will be minimal; and stock and 1,107 animals for the WNP the take number of 43 is a small • The mitigation measures, including stock. If all takes are assumed to accrue number. There is no abundance visual and acoustic monitoring, to the WNP stock, the resulting information available for any Alaskan shutdowns, and use of the reduced array percentage would not be a small stock of beaked whale. However, the in certain areas adjacent to Steller sea number. Here, we refer to additional take numbers are sufficiently small lion critical habitat are expected to pieces of information that demonstrate (ranging from 9–106) that we can safely

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1 55666 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 175 / Wednesday, September 9, 2020 / Notices

assume that they are small relative to unaware of any other subsistence uses whale (Western North Pacific DPS and any reasonable assumption of likely of the affected marine mammal stocks or Mexico DPS), western North Pacific gray population abundance for these stocks. species that could be implicated by this whale, and western DPS of Steller sea For reference, current abundance action. Therefore, NMFS has lion. estimates for other Pacific beaked whale determined that the total taking of Authorization stocks include 3,044 Mesoplodont affected species or stocks would not beaked whales (California/Oregon/ have an unmitigable adverse impact on As a result of these determinations, Washington stock), 3,274 Cuvier’s the availability of such species or stocks NMFS has issued an IHA to L–DEO for beaked whales (CA/OR/WA stock), for taking for subsistence purposes. conducting a marine geophysical survey 2,105 Blainville’s beaked whales in the Aleutian Islands beginning in National Environmental Policy Act (Hawaii Pelagic stock), 7,619 Longman’s September 2020, provided the beaked whales (Hawaii stock), and 723 In compliance with the National previously mentioned mitigation, Cuvier’s beaked whales (HI Pelagic Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 monitoring, and reporting requirements stock). U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by are incorporated. For the offshore stock of killer whale, the regulations published by the Dated: September 2, 2020. Council on Environmental Quality (40 it would be unreasonable to assume that Donna S. Wieting, all takes would accrue to this stock CFR parts 1500–1508), the National Science Foundation prepared an Director, Office of Protected Resources, (which would result in the take of 47 National Marine Fisheries Service. percent of the population). During Environmental Analysis (EA) to [FR Doc. 2020–19815 Filed 9–8–20; 8:45 am] surveys from the Kenai Fjords to consider the direct, indirect, and Amchitka Pass in the central Aleutian cumulative effects to the human BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Islands, 59 groups totaling 1,038 environment from this marine geophysical survey in the Aleutian individual killer whales were seen, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE including 39 (66 percent) residents, 14 Islands. NSF’s EA was made available to (24 percent) transients, 2 (3 percent) the public for review and comment in National Oceanic and Atmospheric offshore, and 4 (7 percent) unknown relation to its suitability for adoption by Administration (Wade et al., 2003). Based on this NMFS in order to assess the impacts to information, we assume it relatively the human environment of issuance of [RTID 0648–XA426] unlikely that encountered killer whales an IHA to L–DEO. In compliance with Caribbean Fishery Management will be of the offshore stock, and that NEPA and the CEQ regulations, as well Council; Public Meeting take of offshore killer whales, if any, as NOAA Administrative Order 216–6, would be of small numbers. NMFS has reviewed the NSF’s EA, AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Based on the analysis contained determined it to be sufficient, and Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and herein of the activity (including the adopted that EA and signed a Finding Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), mitigation and monitoring measures) of No Significant Impact (FONSI). NSF’s Commerce. and the anticipated take of marine EA is available at www.nsf.gov/geo/oce/ ACTION: Notice of public meeting. mammals, NMFS finds that small envcomp/, and NMFS’ FONSI is numbers of marine mammals will be available at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ SUMMARY: The Caribbean Fishery taken relative to the population size of action/incidental-take-authorization- Management Council (CFMC) will hold the affected species or stocks. lamont-doherty-earth-observatory- its 171st public meeting (virtual) to marine-geophysical-survey-2. address the items contained in the Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis tentative agenda included in the and Determination Endangered Species Act (ESA) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. There is some sealing by indigenous Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered DATES: The CFMC 171st public meeting groups in the survey area in the Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. (virtual) will be held on September 25, Aleutian Islands. However, given the 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal 2020, from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. The meeting temporary nature of the planned agency insure that any action it will be at Eastern Day Time. activities and the fact that all operations authorizes, funds, or carries out is not ADDRESSES: You may join the CFMC would occur more than 3 nmi from likely to jeopardize the continued 171st public meeting (virtual) via shore, the activity would not be existence of any endangered or GoToMeeting from a computer, tablet or expected to have any impact on the threatened species or result in the smartphone by entering the following availability of the species or stocks for destruction or adverse modification of address: subsistence users. L–DEO conducted designated critical habitat. To ensure outreach to the Aleut Marine Mammal ESA compliance for the issuance of CFMC September 25, 2020, 9 a.m. to Commission and to the Alaska Sea Otter IHAs, NMFS consults internally 3 p.m. and Steller Sea Lion Commission to whenever we propose to authorize take Please join the meeting from your notify subsistence hunters of the for endangered or threatened species. computer, tablet or smartphone. https:// planned survey, to identify the The NMFS Office of Protected global.gotomeeting.com/join/971749317 measures that would be taken to Resources (OPR) ESA Interagency You can also dial in using your minimize any effects on the availability Cooperation Division issued a Biological phone. of marine mammals for subsistence Opinion under section 7 of the ESA, on United States: +1 (408) 650–3123. uses, and to provide an opportunity for the issuance of an IHA to L–DEO under Access Code: 971–749–317. comment on these measures. L–DEO section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA by the New to GoToMeeting? Get the app received confirmation from the Aleut NMFS OPR Permits and Conservation now and be ready when the first Marine Mammal Commissioners that Division. The Biological Opinion meeting starts: there were no concerns regarding the concluded that the proposed action is https://global.gotomeeting.com/install/ potential effects of the planned survey not likely to jeopardize the continued 971749317 on the potential availability of marine existence of the sei whale, fin whale, In case there are problems with mammals for subsistence uses. NMFS is blue whale, sperm whale, humpback GoToMeeting, and we cannot reconnect

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:06 Sep 08, 2020 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09SEN1.SGM 09SEN1