[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 4, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31816-31831]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-12513]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XD74
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Offshore Exploratory Drilling in the Beaufort Sea off Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of receipt of application and proposed incidental take
authorization; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received an application from Shell Offshore, Inc.
(SOI) for an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take small
numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to conducting
open-water offshore exploratory drilling on Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS) oil lease blocks in the Beaufort Sea off Alaska. Under the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its
proposal to issue an IHA to SOI to incidentally take, by Level B
harassment, small numbers of several species of marine mammals during
the open water drilling program in 2008 and 2009.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than July 7,
2008.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the application should be addressed to
Mr. P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education
Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225, or by
telephoning the contact listed here. The mailbox address for providing
email comments is [email protected]. Comments sent via e-mail,
including all attachments, must not exceed a 10-megabyte file size. A
copy of the application (containing a list of the references used in
this document) and NMFS' 2007 Environmental Assessment (EA) on this
action may be obtained by writing to this address or by telephoning the
contact listed here and are also available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#iha.
Documents cited in this document, that are not available through
standard public library access methods, may be viewed, by appointment,
during regular business hours at this address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth Hollingshead, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 713-
[[Page 31817]]
2289 or Brad Smith, NMFS, Alaska Regional Office 907-271-3023.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking
is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is
provided to the public for review.
An authorization shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking
will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not
have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species
or stock(s) for subsistence uses and the permissible methods of taking
and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting
of such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact''
in 50 CFR 216.103 as ``...an impact resulting from the specified
activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably
likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.''
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process
by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization
to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment.
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ``harassment'' as: any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance
which
(i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to
disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by
causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering [Level B harassment].
Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS
review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and comment
period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of
marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the comment period, NMFS
must either issue or deny the authorization.
Summary of Request
Open Water Exploration Drilling
On February 24, 2008, SOI submitted to NMFS a revision to its
October 19, 2007, IHA application to take small numbers of marine
mammals, by harassment, incidental to conducting open-water offshore
exploratory drilling on Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil lease blocks
in the Beaufort Sea off Alaska for a 1-year period in 2008 and 2009. As
issuance of an IHA is limited to one-year, NMFS anticipates that SOI
would submit a new IHA application for this activity to carry its
program through to the end of the 2009 open-water season.
NMFS notes that SOI's original IHA application(October 19, 2007)
was for the incidental taking of marine mammals, by Level B behavioral
harassment, while conducting a two-ship drilling program and a
geotechnical program. A description of SOI's original work plan can be
found in NMFS' proposed 2007 IHA application notice by SOI (72 FR
17864, April 10, 2007) and is not repeated here. A copy of the October
19, 2007, IHA application is available upon request and a copy of the
revised application is available on line or upon request (see
ADDRESSES).
In its revised 2008 IHA application, SOI states that in 2008 it
would employ only a single drilling unit, the floating, portable marine
vessel, called the Kulluk in order to conduct a top-hole drilling
program at Sivulluq. SOI acquired this OCS lease site during the MMS
Lease Sale (LS) 195 in March 2005. The highest priority exploratory
targets for 2008/2009 are located offshore of Pt. Thomson and Flaxman
Island. However, given the locations of open water conditions during
2008 and permit/authorization stipulations, SOI may elect to re-
prioritize well locations on one, or more of their OCS leases (see
Figure 1 in SOI's IHA application). Re-prioritizing of drilling
prospects due to ice conditions may cause drilling to occur at other
Beaufort Sea OCS leases held by SOI, but only those that have been pre-
cleared by MMS. For this activity, therefore, the central Beaufort Sea
meets the ``specified geographic region'' requirement of section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA.
The Kulluk will be accompanied by two ice management vessels or
arctic class anchor handlers, and possibly an estimated two support
vessels. One of the arctic class supply vessels may make periodic re-
supply trips from Tuktoyaktuk, Northwest Territories, Canada to the
rig. The ice management vessels or arctic class anchor handlers which
likely will be used are: the M/V Vladimir Ignatjuk, and a vessel as yet
to be contracted, but similar to the Vladimir Ignatjuk. If one or more
of these specific vessels are not used, then similar vessel(s) will be
substituted. The re-supply effort will be undertaken by the M/V Jim
Kilabuk, and an additional multipurpose support vessel similar to the
Kilabuk.
Other vessels in addition to the Kulluk, ice management/ anchor
handling vessels, and drilling support vessels may include the arctic-
class barge, the Endeavor (or similar vessel), plus an associated tug,
and the Norseman II (or similar vessel), which will support the marine
mammal monitoring and mitigation program in the Beaufort Sea during the
2008 open water season. Specifications for the Kulluk, and some
prospective ice management vessels can be found in Attachment A of
SOI's 2008 IHA application (see ADDRESSES). Helicopter aircraft will
also be used during the drilling season, helping with crew change
support, provision re-supply and Search-and-Rescue operations. In
addition, fixed-wing aircraft will be used for marine mammal
surveillance over-flights. The aircraft operations will principally be
based in Deadhorse, AK.
The Kulluk is 81 meters (m) (266 feet (ft)) in diameter with an
11.5 m (38 ft) draft when drilling. It is moored using 12 anchor wires
(3.5 inches diameter), each connected to a 15 or 20-ton anchor. During
the non-drilling season (approximately from November, 2007 to June,
2008), the Kulluk overwintered in the Canadian Beaufort Sea. It is
attended at its overwinter location by an ice management vessel.
Open Water Exploration Drilling-Tophole Sections
SOI's Beaufort Sea open water exploration drilling program includes
plans to excavate/drill only the tophole sections for three exploratory
well locations. A tophole section typically includes excavation and
completion of a mudline cellar (MLC) and drilling and setting of two or
three deeper well sections. MLC completions are an essential component
of drilling exploration wells in the Arctic Ocean where ice keel gouge
might occur. The MLC is a large diameter excavation into which the
blow-out preventer and other sub-seabottom wellhead equipment are
installed below the depth of possible ice scour. MLCs avoid damage to
wellhead equipment possibly caused by the keel of an ice floe
excavating into the sea bottom. At times during drilling, the floating
drilling rig may need to disconnect from this sub-sea bottom equipment
and move away, and this
[[Page 31818]]
equipment remains to shut in the well. MLC excavations are typically 20
ft (6.1 m) in diameter and 40 ft (12.2 m) deep. Excavation of a MLC is
done by a large diameter bit that is turned by hydraulic motors. SOI
plans to excavate MLCs and complete tophole sections at Sivulliq during
2008 (see Figure 1 in SOI's IHA application).
The MLC and the next two or three deeper well sections collectively
extend to approximately 3,000 ft (914 m) below the seafloor, and are
referred to collectively as the ``tophole'' section. Topholes are
located thousands of feet above any prospective liquid hydrocarbon-
bearing strata. As a result, there is no measurable risk of
encountering liquid hydrocarbons during the drilling of these topholes.
As mentioned, SOI's priority drilling prospects for the 2008 open
water season occur at Sivulliq, located in Camden Bay of the Beaufort
Sea. SOI anticipates that the Kulluk will excavate and drill tophole
sections for three exploratory wells during the 2008 open water season.
For its 2008 tophole section drilling program, SOI will not operate the
Kulluk and associated vessels in Camden Bay until after the Kaktovik
and Nuiqsut fall bowhead whale subsistence harvests are completed.
Anticipated demobilization of the Kulluk from the Alaskan Beaufort Sea
will be in November 2008. In total, it is anticipated by SOI that the
tophole section drilling program will require approximately 60 days,
excluding weather or other operational delays, beginning with
mobilization from the Tuktoyaktuk Buoy and ending with return of the
Kulluk to the Canadian Beaufort Sea near Tuktoyaktuk. SOI assumes
approximately 50 of the 60 days of this program will include drilling,
while the remaining days include rig mobilization, rig moves between
locations, and rig demobilization.
SOI's plan is for the two ice management vessels to accompany the
Kulluk from its overwintering location (in the Canadian Beaufort Sea)
to Sivulliq. One of the ice-management vessels will travel north
through the Chukchi Sea and east through the Beaufort Sea after July 1,
2008, before arriving in Canadian waters to assist in the Kulluk
mobilization. After the 2008 drilling season, in November 2008, SOI
expects to demobilize the Kulluk. One or two ice management vessels,
along with various support vessels such as the MV Jim Kilabuk, will
accompany the Kulluk as it travels east to the Canadian Beaufort Sea
(McKinley Bay or Hershel Island). One or more of these ice management
vessels may remain with the Kulluk during the winter season if the rig
overwinters in the Canadian Beaufort Sea. SOI's base plan for exit from
the Beaufort Sea for ice management vessels which are not overwintered
with the Kulluk is to exit the Beaufort Sea westward. However, subject
to ice conditions alternate exit routes may be considered.
Open Water Geotechnical Program
The open water geotechnical program is expected to begin in July,
2008. SOI plans to bore up to 20 boreholes, each up to 500 ft (152.4 m)
in depth, to obtain geotechnical data for feasibility analyses of
shallow sub-sea sediments. The boreholes will be completed to depths
well above any liquid hydrocarbon-bearing strata. Approximately three
potential locations will be investigated at Sivulliq, as well as
locations along a prospective pipeline access corridor through Mary
Sachs Entrance to landfall in the vicinity of Point Thomson (see Figure
2 in SOI's IHA application). The open water geotechnical program will
use borehole excavating equipment mounted on the geotech vessel to
advance boreholes through a moonpool located approximately at mid-ship
of the geotechnical vessel. The geotech vessel also will have an
electronic cone penetrometer (CPT) mounted on it. If used, the CPT unit
will collect in-situ soil/sediment sub-sea samples to approximately 150
ft (152.4 m) below the mudline.
Shallow sub-sea bottom sampling for geotechnical analyses at the
Sivulliq Prospect and along the access corridor will use a seabed frame
to either push a sample tube or a CPT test into the seafloor. Other
bottom sediment sampling proposed includes piston coring to a maximum
depth of 10 ft (3 m) sub-sea bottom, and box coring to a maximum depth
of 1-ft sub-sea bottom.
SOI plans to complete the geotechnical program prior to the fall
bowhead whale subsistence harvests of the communities of Kaktovik and
Nuiqsut. Including operational delays, it is anticipated that
geotechnical bore-hole drilling, CPT sampling, piston and box coring
sampling may be completed in approximately 50 days of work. SOI states
that it will not operate the geotechnical program in Camden Bay during
the Kaktovik and Nuiqsut fall bowhead whale subsistence harvests. If
SOI is unable to complete the planned geotechnical program before the
onset of fall whaling for Kaktovik and Nuiqsut, SOI proposes to return
to Sivulliq, and/or the prospective pipeline corridor location after
the conclusion of the harvest to complete the program.
Marine Mammals
A total of three cetacean species (bowhead, gray, and beluga
whales), three species of pinnipeds (ringed, spotted, and bearded
seal), and one marine carnivore (polar bear) are known to occur in or
near the proposed drilling areas in the U.S. Beaufort Sea. Other extra-
limital species that occasionally occur in very small numbers in this
portion of the U.S. Beaufort Sea include the harbor porpoise and killer
whale. However, because of their rarity in this area, they are not
expected to be exposed to, or affected by, any activities associated
with the drilling, and are, therefore, not discussed further. The polar
bear is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) and is not discussed further in this document. A separate
application for a Letter of Authorization (LOA) has been submitted to
the USFWS by SOI.
The species and numbers of marine mammals likely to be found within
this portion of the Beaufort Sea are listed in Table 4-1 in SOI's IHA
application. A description of the biology and distribution of the
marine mammal species under NMFS' jurisdiction can be found in several
documents, including SOI's IHA applications, MMS' 2006 Final
Programmatic EA for Arctic seismic activities, the NMFS/MMS Draft
Programmatic EIS for Arctic Seismic in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas
and several other documents (e.g., MMS' Final EA for Lease Sales 195
and 202) Information on those marine mammal species under NMFS
jurisdiction can be found also in the NMFS Stock Assessment Reports.
The 2006 Alaska Stock Assessment Report is available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/region.htm. Please refer to these documents
for information on these potentially affected marine mammal species.
Potential Effects of Offshore Drilling Activities on Marine Mammals
Disturbance by drilling sounds is the principal means of taking by
this activity. Drilling vessels, support vessels including ice
management vessels, and aircraft may provide a potential second source
of noise. The physical presence of vessels and aircraft could also lead
to non-acoustic effects on marine mammals involving visual or other
cues.
As outlined in previous NMFS documents, the effects of noise on
marine mammals are highly variable, and can generally be categorized as
follows (based on Richardson et al., 1995):
(1) The noise may be too weak to be heard at the location of the
animal (i.e.,
[[Page 31819]]
lower than the prevailing ambient noise level, the hearing threshold of
the animal at relevant frequencies, or both);
(2) The noise may be audible but not strong enough to elicit any
overt behavioral response;
(3) The noise may elicit reactions of variable conspicuousness and
variable relevance to the well being of the marine mammal; these can
range from temporary alert responses to active avoidance reactions such
as vacating an area at least until the noise event ceases;
(4) Upon repeated exposure, a marine mammal may exhibit diminishing
responsiveness (habituation), or disturbance effects may persist; the
latter is most likely with sounds that are highly variable in
characteristics, infrequent and unpredictable in occurrence, and
associated with situations that a marine mammal perceives as a threat;
(5) Any anthropogenic noise that is strong enough to be heard has
the potential to reduce (mask) the ability of a marine mammal to hear
natural sounds at similar frequencies, including calls from
conspecifics, and underwater environmental sounds such as surf noise;
(6) If mammals remain in an area because it is important for
feeding, breeding or some other biologically important purpose even
though there is chronic exposure to noise, it is possible that there
could be noise-induced physiological stress; this might in turn have
negative effects on the well-being or reproduction of the animals
involved; and
(7) Very strong sounds have the potential to cause temporary or
permanent reduction in hearing sensitivity. In terrestrial mammals, and
presumably marine mammals, received sound levels must far exceed the
animal's hearing threshold for there to be any temporary threshold
shift (TTS) in its hearing ability. For transient sounds, the sound
level necessary to cause TTS is inversely related to the duration of
the sound. Received sound levels must be even higher for there to be
risk of permanent hearing impairment (called permanent threshold shift
or PTS). In addition, intense acoustic or explosive events may cause
trauma to tissues associated with organs vital for hearing, sound
production, respiration and other functions. This trauma may include
minor to severe hemorrhage.
The only anticipated impacts to marine mammals are associated with
noise propagation from tophole section drilling activities and
associated support vessels, the geotechnical program and from related
aircraft activities, including during marine mammal monitoring
activities. Impacts would consist of possible temporary and short term
displacement of seals and whales from ensonified zones produced by such
noise sources. NMFS and SOI believe that any impacts on the whale and
seal populations of the Beaufort Sea activity area are likely to be
short term and transitory arising from the temporary displacement of
individuals or small groups from locations they may be occupying at the
time they are exposed to drilling sounds at a received level of 120 dB
or greater (due to the nature of drilling and related vessel noises).
In the case of bowhead whales that displacement might well take the
form of a deflection of the swim paths of migrating bowheads away from
(seaward of) received noise levels at significant distances from the
noise source. While this deflection may not be biologically significant
(as the bowheads remain within the general migration corridor), it can
be significant for subsistence purposes (as will be discussed later).
Potential Impact of the Activity on the Species or Stocks of Marine
Mammals
SOI states that the only anticipated impacts to marine mammals
associated with drilling activities would be behavioral reactions to
noise propagation from the drilling units and associated support
vessels. NMFS notes however, that in addition to these sources of
anthropogenic sounds, additional disturbance to marine mammals may
result from aircraft overflights and the resulting visual disturbance
by the drilling vessels themselves. SOI and NMFS believe, however, that
the impacts would be temporary and result in only short term
displacement of seals and whales from ensonified zones produced by such
noise sources. Any impacts on the whale and seal populations of the
Beaufort Sea activity area are likely to be short term and transitory
arising from the temporary displacement of individuals or small groups
from locations they may occupy at the times they are exposed to
drilling sounds at the 160-190 db (or lower) received levels. As noted,
it is highly unlikely that animals will be exposed to sounds of such
intensity and duration as to physically damage their auditory
mechanisms. In the case of bowhead whales that displacement might well
take the form of a deflection of the swim paths of migrating bowheads
away from (seaward of) received noise levels. NMFS notes that, to date,
studies have not been conducted to test the hypothesis that after
deflection bowheads return to the swim paths they were following prior
to deflection at relatively short distances after their exposure to the
received sounds. However, there is no evidence (and little likelihood)
that bowheads exposed to noise resulting from oil drilling and support
activities will incur an injury to their auditory mechanisms.
Additionally, while there is no conclusive evidence that exposure to
sounds exceeding 160 db have displaced bowheads from feeding activity
(Richardson and Thomson, 2002), there is information that intermittent
sounds (e.g., oil drilling and vessel propulsion sounds) may cause a
deflection in the migratory path of whales (Malme et al., 1983, 1984),
but possibly not when the acoustic source is not in the direct
migratory path (Tyack and Clark, 1998). Finally, there is no indication
that seals are more than temporarily displaced from ensonified zones
and no evidence that seals have experienced physical damage to their
auditory mechanisms even within ensonified zones. As a result, the only
type of incidental taking requested by SOI is that of taking by
harassment due to the resultant noise from the oil drilling activity.
The only sources of project created noise for the tophole section
drilling will be those noises from the Kulluk and its support vessels,
while noise from the geotechnical program will be solely from the
geotech vessel. A sound source verification test will be performed on
this vessel early in the season. Although the bulk of the activity will
be centered in the area of tophole section drilling or geotechnical
activities, potential exposures, or impacts to marine mammals also will
occur as the drilling vessel, and ice management vessels, and/or
geotechnical vessel mobilize to and from Camden Bay for the respective
programs. These impacts were assessed previously in this document.
SOI notes in its IHA application that historical noise propagation
studies were performed on the Kulluk (Hall et al., 1994) in the Kuvlum
prospect drill sites (approximately 12 mi (19.3 km) east of SOI's
Sivulliq prospect) that SOI is proposing to drill during 2008 and 2009.
Acoustic recording devices were established at 10 m (39 ft) and 20 m
(66 ft) depths below water surface at varying distances from the Kulluk
and decibel levels were recorded during drilling operations. There were
large differences between sound propagation between the different
depths. At 10-m (39-ft) water depth, the 120-dB threshold had a 0.7-km
(0.43-mi) radius around the Kulluk. At a depth of 20 m (66 ft) below
water
[[Page 31820]]
surface, the 120-dB threshold had a radius of 8.5 km (5.3 mi). There is
no obvious explanation for the large differences in propagation at the
different levels, but possible explanations include the presence of an
acoustic layer due to melting ice during the sound studies and/or sound
being channeled into the lower depths due to the seafloor topography.
However, SOI plans for new sound propagation studies to be performed on
the Kulluk, ice management, and geotechnical vessel, once these vessels
are on locations for tophole section drilling or geotechnical
activities in the Beaufort Sea. The results of these sound source
verification tests will be used to establish monitoring, safety and
exclusion zones for SOI's drilling and support vessels.
Numbers of Marine Mammals Expected to Be Exposed to Noise from
Drilling, Geotech and Vessel Movement Activities
Using the marine mammal density estimates explained and presented
in SOI's IHA application (Table 6-1 for tophole drilling for bowhead
and beluga whales, Table 6-2 for tophole drilling for other cetaceans
and seals, Table 6-6 for the Kulluk transit to and from Camden Bay, and
Table 6-8 for SOI's geotechnical program), SOI provided estimates of
the numbers of potential marine mammal sound exposures in Tables 6-3
and 6-4 for tophole drilling, Table 6-7 for the Kulluk transit to
Camden Bay and Table 6-9 for the geotechnical program. Tables 1
(tophole drilling), 2 (transit), and 3 (geotechnical) in this document
provide SOI's estimate of the number of exposures the affected stocks
of marine mammals will receive from each component of SOI's planned
tophole drilling and geotechnical programs in 2008. It should be noted
that these tables have been modified from those in SOI's 2008 IHA
application that SOI provided to members of the public. These revisions
were made to eliminate duplicate counting and to differentiate between
non-authorized taking while in Canadian waters (see below). However,
neither NMFS nor SOI believe that harbor porpoise or the narwhal will
be affected by SOI's drilling program, SOI's estimated exposures to
sounds from its drilling program are provided here. For detailed
information on how SOI arrived at these estimates for noise exposures,
please see SOI's 2008 IHA application (see ADDRESSES). Next we provide
a summary of the anticipated exposure levels.
[[Page 31821]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JN08.000
[[Page 31822]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN04JN08.001
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Summary - Tophole Drilling
The proposed tophole section drilling activities in the Beaufort
Sea will involve one drilling vessel that will introduce continuous
sounds into the ocean while it is active and possibly two ice-
management vessels that would introduce non-continuous sounds if they
must break ice. Other routine vessel operations are conventionally
assumed not to affect marine mammals sufficiently to constitute
``taking''.
Cetaceans
Effects on cetaceans are generally expected to be restricted to
avoidance of a limited area around the drilling operation and short-
term changes in behavior, falling within the MMPA definition of ``Level
B harassment''. The estimated numbers of cetaceans potentially exposed
to sound levels sufficient to cause significant biological disturbances
are relatively low percentages of the population sizes in the Bering-
Chukchi-Beaufort seas, as described below. Based on the 120-dB
criterion for intermittent noise from Malme et al. (1984), the best
(average) estimates of the numbers of individual cetaceans exposed to
sounds [gteqt]120 dB re 1 microPa (rms) represent varying proportions
of the populations of each species in the Beaufort Sea and adjacent
waters. While SOI estimates approximately 4315 bowheads may be exposed
to received levels of greater than or equal to 120 dB and 160 dB and
that is approximately 32 percent of the Bering-Chukchi-Beaufort
population of about 13,326 (assuming 3.4 percent annual population
growth from the 2001 estimate of 10,545 animals (Zeh and Punt, 2005)),
SOI and NMFS estimate that, due to bowheads avoiding the area around
tophole drilling activities only 36 individuals will be exposed to
sounds [gteqt]160 dB which equals <1 percent of the population.
A few beluga whales may be exposed to sounds produced by the
drilling activities, and the numbers potentially affected are small
relative to the population sizes. The best estimate of the number of
belugas that might be exposed to [gteqt]120 dB (11) represents <1
percent of their Beaufort Sea population (39,258). No cetacean species,
other than the bowheads, are expected to be exposed to levels
[gteqt]160 dB. Narwhals are extremely rare in the U.S. Beaufort Sea and
none are expected to be encountered during the 2008 drilling activity.
Pinnipeds
A few pinniped species are likely to be encountered in the drilling
activity area, but the ringed seal is by far the most abundant marine
mammal that will be encountered. The best (average) estimates of the
numbers of individuals exposed to sounds at received levels [gteqt]120
dB re 1 microPa (rms) during the drilling activities are as follows:
ringed seals (647), bearded seals (33), and spotted seals (6),
(representing <1 percent of their respective Beaufort Sea populations).
Pinnipeds are unlikely to react to intermittent (steady) sounds until
they are at much higher sound pressure levels than 120 dB re 1 microPa,
so it is probable that only a small percentage of those would actually
be disturbed. Based on density calculations provided in SOI's IHA
application, no pinnipeds are estimated to be exposed to sounds
[gteqt]160 dB.
Summary - Geotechnical Program
As mentioned, the proposed geotechnical program activities in the
Beaufort Sea will involve one geotech vessel, that will introduce
intermittent/continuous sounds into the ocean while it is active. Other
routine vessel operations are conventionally assumed not to affect
marine mammals sufficiently to constitute rising to a level requiring
an authorization under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (provided they
are not conducting ice management activities or towing barges or
drilling equipment).
Cetaceans
Effects on cetaceans are generally expected to be restricted to
avoidance of a limited area around the geotechnical activities and
short-term changes in behavior, falling within the MMPA definition of
``Level B harassment''. Furthermore, the estimated numbers of animals
potentially exposed to sound levels sufficient to cause significant
[[Page 31823]]
biological disturbances are relatively low percentages of the
population sizes in the Bering-Chukchi-Beaufort seas, as described
next.
Based on the 120-dB criterion for intermittent/continuous noise
effects, the best (average) estimates of the numbers of individual
cetaceans exposed represent varying proportions of the populations of
each species in the Beaufort Sea and adjacent waters. For this
activity, SOI estimates that approximately 425 bowheads will be exposed
to sound pressure levels of 120 dB or greater. This level is
approximately 3.1 percent of the Bering-Chukchi-Beaufort population of
13,326 animals. However, due principally to diverting away from noise
from the drilling activity, SOI estimates that only 3 individuals are
estimated to be exposed to sounds [gteqt] 160 dB equaling < 1 percent
of the population. These animals may be feeding or engaging in non-
migratory behavior and therefore are unlikely to be affected by seismic
sounds <= 160 dB.
A few belugas may be exposed to sounds produced by the geotechnical
activities; therefore, the numbers potentially affected are small
relative to the population sizes. As mentioned previously, narwhals are
extremely rare in the U.S. Beaufort Sea and none are expected to be
encountered during the geotechnical work. The best estimate of the
number of belugas that might be exposed to [gteqt] 120 dB (10)
represents < 1 percent of their population. No species, other than the
bowhead whale, are expected to be exposed to levels [gteqt] 160 dB.
Pinnipeds
A few pinnipeds are likely to be encountered in the geotechnical
activities area, but the ringed seal is by far the most abundant marine
mammal that will be encountered. The best (average) estimates of the
numbers of individuals exposed to sounds at received levels [gteqt] 120
dB re 1 microPa (rms) during the geotechnical activities are as
follows: ringed seals (604), bearded seals (31), and spotted seals (6),
(representing < 1 percent of their respective Beaufort Sea
populations). SOI notes that pinnipeds are unlikely to react to steady
sounds until they are much stronger than 120 dB re 1 microPa, so it is
probable that only a small percentage of those would actually be
disturbed. Based on density calculations provided in SOI's IHA
application, no pinnipeds are estimated to be exposed to sounds > 160
dB.
Summary - Towing the Kulluk
A vessel towing the Kulluk through the Canadian Beaufort Sea from
Tuktoyaktuk to the US-Canadian border would travel about 358 km (222
mi). Transit from the US-Canadian border to the Sivulliq prospect in
western Camden Bay would be about 170 km (106 mi) in length for a total
transit length of approximately 528 km (328mi). Although SOI has
estimated potential exposure levels for both sections of the transit,
because the taking of marine mammals inside Canadian territorial waters
cannot be authorized under the MMPA, NMFS will authorize only those
takings (by harassment) estimated to result within U.S. waters.
Sounds produced by a vessel towing the Kulluk have not been
measured. As a surrogate, measurements of sounds produced by the
Gilavar in Camden Bay while it towed 32 airguns and four hydrophone
streamers were used as estimates of the [gteqt] 160 dB and [gteqt]120
dB distances. The estimated [gteqt]160 dB distance from the Gilavar
measurements is 10 m (3.3 ft) and the [gteqt] 120 dB distance is 6.3 km
(3.9 mi). Using these distances and the estimated trackline distance
above the area of water potentially ensonified to [gteqt]160 dB would
be approximately 11 km\2\ and to [gteqt] 120 dB would be approximately
6653 km\2\.
Average and maximum estimates of bowhead whale densities along the
transit route were estimated from aerial survey data collected during
the month of September near Kaktovik reported in Richardson and
Thompson (eds. 2002, Table 6-6). Densities of belugas used in this
analysis are the same as shown in the ``ice margin'' column of Table 6-
1 as these densities are also reasonable estimates of beluga density in
the waters through which this transit will likely occur. All other
species densities are the same as those presented in the ``nearshore''
(0-200 m water depth) column in Table 6-2 in SOI's 2008 IHA
application.
Cetaceans
Effects on cetaceans are generally expected to be restricted to
avoidance of a limited area around the towing vessel activities due to
the noise. These short-term changes in behavior fall within the MMPA
definition of ``Level B harassment''. Furthermore, the estimated
numbers of animals potentially exposed to sound levels sufficient to
cause disturbance are relatively low percentages of the population
sizes in the Bering-Chukchi-Beaufort seas, as described next.
Based on the 120-dB criterion for intermittent/continuous noise
effects caused by ship propulsion noise, the best (average) estimates
of the numbers of individual cetaceans exposed represent varying
proportions of the populations of each species in the Beaufort Sea. For
this activity, SOI estimates that approximately 196 bowheads (63 in
U.S., 133 in Canada) will be exposed to sound pressure levels of 120 dB
or greater. This level is less than 1 percent of the BCB population of
the BCB population of 13,326 animals. Also, due principally to
diverting away from noise from the drilling activity, SOI estimates
that no bowheads individuals will be exposed to sounds [gteqt] 160 dB.
Some belugas may be exposed to sounds produced by the Kulluk towing
activities; (total 208 (66 in U.S.; 141 in Canada). However, the number
of potentially affected belugas isare small relative to their
population size. The best estimate of the number of belugas that might
be exposed to [gteqt] 120 dB represents <1 percent of their population.
As mentioned previously, narwhals are extremely rare in the U.S.
Beaufort Sea and none are expected to be encountered during the towing
operation. Due to the time of the year that towing will take place, and
the small zone of influence by towing operatins, no cetacean species
are expected to be exposed to levels [gteqt]160 dB.
Pinnipeds
Pinnipeds are likely to be encountered while towing the Kulluk from
Tuktoyaktuk to Sivulluq with the ringed seal by far the most abundant
marine mammal that will be encountered. The best (average) estimates of
the numbers of individuals exposed to sounds at received levels
[gteqt]120 dB re 1 microPa (rms) during the towing activities are as
follows: ringed seals (755 in U.S.; 1605 in Canada), bearded seals (39
in U.S.; 82 in Canada), and spotted seals (8 in U.S.; 17 in Canada).
SOI notes that pinnipeds are unlikely to react to steady sounds, such
as those produced by a vessel towing another vessel, until the sound
levels are significantly higher than 120 dB re 1 microPa, so it is
probable that only a small percentage of those would actually be
disturbed. A total of 4 ringed seals potentially could be exposed to
sounds >160 dB.
Potential Impact On Habitat
SOI states that the proposed tophole drilling and related
activities will not result in any permanent impact on habitats used by
marine mammals, or to
[[Page 31824]]
their prey sources. Any effects would be temporary and of short
duration at any one location. The effects of the planned drilling
activities are expected to be negligible. It is estimated that only a
small portion of the animals utilizing the areas of the proposed
activities would be temporarily displaced from that habitat. During the
period of SOI's geotech activities, most marine mammals would be
dispersed throughout the Beaufort Sea area. The peak of the bowhead
whale migration through the Beaufort Sea typically occurs in September
and October, and SOI will discuss its efforts to reduce potential
impacts during this time with the affected whaling communities.
Starting in late-August, bowheads may travel in proximity to the
drilling activity and some might be displaced seaward by the planned
activities. The numbers of cetaceans and pinnipeds subject to
displacement are small in relation to abundance estimates for the
affected mammal stocks.
In addition, SOI states that feeding does not appear to be an
important activity by bowheads migrating through the eastern and
central part of the Alaskan Beaufort Sea in most years. In the absence
of important feeding areas, the potential diversion of a small number
of bowheads is not expected to have any significant or long-term
consequences for individual bowheads or their population. Bowheads,
gray, or beluga whales are not expected to be excluded from any
significant habitat.
The proposed activities are not expected to have any habitat-
related effects that would produce long-term affects to marine mammals
or their habitat due to the limited extent of the acquisition areas and
timing of the activities.
Potential Effects of Drilling Sounds and Related Activities on
Subsistence Needs
SOI notes that there could be an adverse impact on the Inupiat fall
bowhead subsistence hunt if whales were deflected seaward (further from
shore) in the traditional hunting areas north of Pt. Thomson in Camden
Bay. The impact could be that whaling crews would have to travel
greater distances to intercept westward migrating whales thereby
creating a safety hazard for whaling crews and/or limiting chances of
successfully striking and landing bowheads. For 2008, the geotechnical
program is planned to occur before subsistence whaling begins, while
the tophole section drilling will not occur until after the bowhead
whaling season has concluded.
This potential impact on the bowhead subsistence hunt is proposed
by SOI to be mitigated through the application of mitigation procedures
described later in this document and implemented by a Conflict
Avoidance Agreement (CAA) between SOI, the Alaska Eskimo Whaling
Commission (AEWC) and the whaling captains' associations of Kaktovik,
Nuiqsut and Barrow. SOI believes that the proposed mitigation measures
will minimize adverse effects on whales and whalers. (see Mitigation
later in this document). Regardless of whether a 2008 CAA is
successfully negotiated, SOI states that it is committed to the
mitigation measures described later in this document. As a result, NMFS
believes that there should not be an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the marine mammal species, particularly bowhead whales,
for subsistence uses.
Proposed Mitigation for Subsistence Hunting
NMFS regulations (50 CFR 216.104(b)(13)) require IHA applicants for
activities that take place in or near a traditional Arctic subsistence
hunting area and/or may affect the availability of a species or stock
of marine mammal for Arctic subsistence uses to submit a Plan of
Cooperation (POC) or similar information that identifies what measures
have been taken and/or will be taken to minimize any adverse effects on
the availability of marine mammals for subsistence uses. First, NMFS
regulations require a statement that the IHA applicant has notified and
provided the affected subsistence community with a draft POC. A summary
of SOI's POC meetings during 2006 and 2007 is provided in SOI's 2008
IHA application.
For the 2008 proposed open water activities, SOI met with the AEWC
and the whaling captains associations of Nuiqsut, Kaktovik, Wainwright,
Pt. Hope, and Barrow between February 7-11, 2008 to address concerns
from affected bowhead whale subsistence users regarding SOI's 2007 open
water program and planned upcoming 2008 open water activities. If
successfully negotiated and signed, a CAA would be a component of SOI's
2008-2009 POC and is anticipated it will cover the proposed Beaufort
Sea exploratory drilling program. In addition, in 2008 SOI held several
community POC meetings to discuss SOI's 2008 open water programs in the
Beaufort and Chukchi Seas.
Also, in order to assess the concerns of other affected subsistence
users, SOI also met with the marine mammal commissioners of the AEWC,
Alaska Beluga Whale Committee, Ice Seal Committee, and the Nanuuq
Commission during a two-day meeting December 12-13, 2007 in Anchorage
to discuss 2007/2008 programs. Additional meetings have been held
during the spring, 2008.
SOI plans to hold community meetings in Barrow, Nuiqsut, Kaktovik,
Wainwright, Point Hope, and Point Lay, regarding its Beaufort and
Chukchi Seas 2008 open water programs. During these meetings, SOI
states that it will focus on lessons learned from the 2007 open water
program and, present the proposed 2008 program activities, and describe
SOI's adaptive management approach toward conducting its activities.
SOI states that it will continue to hold meetings with the above
mentioned marine mammal commissions that are focused on ice seals,
walrus, polar bears, and beluga.
NMFS regulations also require affected IHA applicants to provide a
description of what measures the applicant has taken and/or will take
to ensure that proposed activities will not interfere with subsistence
whaling or sealing. For SOI's open water exploration drilling of the
tophole sections at Sivulluq, SOI states that the Kulluk and all
support vessels will operate in accordance with the provisions of the
POC. The POC is developed to mitigate effects of SOI's proposed
program(s) where activities would take place in or near a traditional
Arctic subsistence hunting area and/or may affect the availability of a
species or stock of marine mammal for Arctic subsistence uses. SOI has
consulted in the past and will consult this year with affected Beaufort
(and Chukchi) Sea communities and marine mammal associations for the
development and improvement of the POC. For the drilling program, SOI's
POC with Beaufort Sea villages will address vessel transit, drilling
and associated activities. It is the intention of SOI to negotiate a
CAA with the AEWC, and whaling captain's associations of affected
Beaufort and Chukchi Sea villages, as a component of the POC. If a CAA
is negotiated with AEWC, then the provisions of the CAA will be
included in the POC. In the absence of a signed CAA, SOI states that it
is committed to implementing the mitigation measures described later in
this section of the notice and will implement these measures, which are
intended to minimize any adverse effects on the availability of marine
mammals for subsistence uses.
In addition, NMFS notes that a POC will specify times and areas to
avoid in order to minimize possible conflicts with traditional
subsistence hunts by North Slope villages for transit and drilling
operations. For its 2008 tophole
[[Page 31825]]
section drilling program, SOI has stated that it will not operate the
Kulluk and associated vessels in Camden Bay until after the Kaktovik
and Nuiqsut fall bowhead whale subsistence harvests are completed.
Appropriate operational restrictions applicable for future open-water
drilling activities (2009 and beyond) will be developed in consultation
with affected communities via the POC.
The geotechnical vessel's activities will also operate in
accordance with the provisions of a POC. SOI plans to complete the
geotechnical program prior to the fall bowhead whale subsistence
harvests of the communities of Kaktovik and Nuiqsut. SOI states that it
will not operate the geotechnical program in Camden Bay during the
Kaktovik and Nuiqsut fall bowhead whale subsistence harvests. If SOI is
unable to complete the planned geotechnical program before the onset of
fall whaling for Kaktovik and Nuiqsut, SOI plans to return to Sivulliq,
and/or prospective pipeline corridor after the conclusion of the
harvest to complete the program.
SOI states that the Kulluk, the geotech vessel and all support
vessels and aircraft will operate in accordance with the conditions of
a CAA currently being negotiated with the AEWC. However, regardless of
whether a CAA is signed, SOI states that it will implement the
following key mitigation measure concepts that will be included in
SOI's POC:
1. If not completed prior to the bowhead whale subsistence hunt,
the geotechnical program will cease during the Kaktovik and Nuiqsut
(Cross Island) fall bowhead whale subsistence harvests. The
geotechnical vessel will be relocated out of Camden Bay during this
time.
2. Communications system between operator's vessels and the whaling
hunting crews. This includes the 24 hours per day operation of
communication centers in Kaktovik (Call center) and Deadhorse (Com
center) areas, which are staffed by Inupiat operators, and the
installation of radio equipment in the whaler's boats. The Deadhorse
Com center and Kaktovik Call center also provides a method for other
subsistence hunters, such as seal hunters, who can communicate with the
industry vessels.
3. Provision for marine mammal observers (MMOs) aboard all project
vessels (see below).
4. Conflict resolution procedures.
5. Plan all vessel and aircraft routes to minimize the impact on
subsistence hunts. Aircraft will not operate below 1000 ft. (309 m)
unless approaching, landing or taking off, or unless engaged in
providing assistance, or in poor weather low ceiling, or other
emergency situation.
6. A ``Good Neighbor Policy'' that provides for financial
compensation in the unlikely event that an oil spill diminishes the
availability or usability of subsistence resources such as bowhead or
beluga whales, seals, walrus, polar bear, fish or water fowl.
7. Provisions for rendering emergency assistance to subsistence
hunting crews.
Proposed Marine Mammal Mitigation and Monitoring Measures
SOI has proposed implementing a marine mammal mitigation and
monitoring program (4MP) that will consist of monitoring and mitigation
during the exploratory drilling activities. In conjunction with
monitoring during SOI's seismic and shallow-hazard surveys (subject to
an upcoming notice and review), monitoring will provide information on
the numbers of marine mammals potentially affected by these activities
and permit real time mitigation to prevent injury of marine mammals by
industrial sounds or activities. These goals will be accomplished by
conducting vessel-, aerial-, and acoustic-monitoring programs to
characterize the sounds produced by the drilling and to document the
potential reactions of marine mammals in the area to those sounds and
activities. Acoustic modeling will be used to predict the sound levels
produced by the shallow hazards and drilling equipment in the U.S.
Beaufort Sea. For the drilling program, acoustic measurements will also
be made to establish zones of influence (ZOIs) around the activities
that will be monitored by observers. Aerial monitoring and
reconnaissance of marine mammals and recordings of ambient sound
levels, vocalizations of marine mammals, and received levels should
they be detectable using bottom-founded acoustic recorders along the
Beaufort Sea coast will be used to interpret the reactions of marine
mammals exposed to the activities. The components of SOI's monitoring
program is briefly described next. Additional information can be found
in SOI's IHA application.
Mitigation and Monitoring Measures During Transit of the Chukchi and
Beaufort Seas
A Chukchi Sea vessel transit mitigation plan has been developed to
identify transit strategies that will minimize and mitigate possible
impacts to marine mammals and subsistence hunting activities in the
offshore and adjacent coastal areas along the transit route if vessels
associated with SOI's drilling program transit through the Chukchi Sea
on the way to the Sivulliq prospect in the eastern Alaskan Beaufort
Sea. The plan relies principally on strategies of avoidance,
minimization, monitoring, and communication to reduce exposure of
marine mammals to sound levels and visual stimuli that could be capable
of disturbance, displacement, or significant alteration of behavior.
Avoidance of areas where exposure of marine mammals to disturbance
will be accomplished in the Chukchi Sea by positioning the transit
route > 50 mi (80 km) offshore and, to the extent possible, in open
water. By remaining > 50 mi (80 km) offshore, the transit route remains
away from areas of coastal concentration of marine mammals, including
seals, walrus, and beluga whales. By remaining in open water, to the
greatest extent possible, noise levels will be kept to a minimum. In
open water, the transit will be relatively slow and steady and will not
require engine revving or other operations that increase cavitation.
In the event that the presence of ice in the transit route makes
the maintenance of a > 50 mi offshore buffer in the Chukchi Sea
practicable, SOI proposes to reduce this buffer in favor of maintenance
of a 0.5 mi (804 m) buffer between the transit route and the ice edge.
By staying out of the ice, the vessels will minimize sound emission
levels and will remain away from hauled out concentrations of walrus
and seals. The transit distance from shore may decrease below the
desired 50 mi buffer but SOI notes it will not enter the polynia zone.
On-board MMOs will be on duty on all vessels during the transit and
will direct vessel transit to remain, where possible, one-half mile or
greater from marine mammals (understanding that marine mammals may
approach the vessels) to and avoid collisions with marine mammals.
During ice transits, MMOs will supplement aerial surveys and assist in
the maintenance of buffers and observation of marine mammal
concentrations and behaviors. If such observations demonstrate
disturbance behavior, buffers will be adjusted as appropriate.
Vessel-based Marine Mammal Monitoring Program
The vessel-based operations will be the core of SOI's 4MP. The 4MP
will be designed to ensure that disturbance to marine mammals and
subsistence hunts is minimized, that effects on marine mammals are
documented, and to collect baseline data on the occurrence and
distribution of marine mammals in
[[Page 31826]]
the study area. Those objectives will be achieved, in part, through the
vessel-based monitoring and mitigation program.
The 4MP will be implemented by a team of experienced MMOs,
including both biologists and Inupiat personnel, approved in advance by
NMFS. The MMOs will be stationed aboard the drilling vessel, the
geotechnical vessel, and associated support vessels throughout the
drilling period. The duties of the MMOs will include watching for and
identifying marine mammals; recording their numbers, distances, and
reactions to the drilling operations; initiating mitigation measures
when appropriate; and reporting the results. Reporting of the results
of the vessel-based monitoring program will include the estimation of
the number of ``takes.''
The vessel-based operations of SOI's 4MP will be required to
support the vessel based drilling or geotechnical activities in the
central and eastern Alaskan Beaufort Sea (July through October). The
dates and operating areas will depend upon ice and weather conditions,
along with SOI's arrangements with agencies and stakeholders.
Exploratory drilling activities are expected to occur after whaling
during 2008, whereas geotechnical activities are expected to occur
prior to whaling during 2008. Vessel-based monitoring for marine
mammals will be done throughout the period of drilling operations in
compliance with monitoring requirements contained in the IHA issued to
SOI, if warranted.
The vessel-based work will provide: (1) the basis for real-time
mitigation, (2) information needed to estimate the ``take'' of marine
mammals by harassment, (3) data on the occurrence, distribution, and
activities of marine mammals in the areas where the drilling program is
conducted, (4) information to compare the distances, distributions,
behavior, and movements of marine mammals relative to the source
vessels at times with and without drilling or ice-management activity,
(5) a communication channel to Inupiat whalers and the Whaling
Coordination Center, and (6) employment and capacity building for local
residents, with one objective being to develop a larger pool of
experienced Inupiat MMOs.
All MMOs will be provided training through a program approved by
NMFS. At least one observer on each vessel will be an Inupiat who will
have the additional responsibility of communicating with the Inupiat
community and (during the whaling season) directly with Inupiat
whalers. Details of the vessel-based marine mammal monitoring program
are described in the IHA application.
Mitigation and Monitoring Measures During Drilling Activities
SOI's proposed offshore drilling program incorporates both design
features and operational procedures for minimizing potential impacts on
marine mammals and on subsistence hunts. The design features and
operational procedures have been described in the IHA applications and
are summarized here. Survey design features to reduce impacts include:
(1) timing and locating some drilling support activities to avoid
interference with the annual fall bowhead whale hunts from Kaktovik,
Nuiqsut (Cross Island), and Barrow; (2) conducting pre-work modeling
(and early season field assessments) to establish the appropriate 180
dB and 190 dB safety zones (if necessary), and the 160 and 120 dB
behavior radii; and (3) vessel-based (and aerial) monitoring to
implement appropriate mitigation (and to assess the effects of project
activities on marine mammals). Also, the potential disturbance of
marine mammals during drilling operations will be minimized further
through the implementation of several ship-based mitigation measures as
discussed below.
Under current NMFS guidance ``safety radii'' for marine mammals
around acoustic sources are customarily defined as the distances within
which received pulse levels are [gteqt] 180 dB re 1 microPa (rms) for
cetaceans and [gteqt]190 dB re 1 microPa (rms) for pinnipeds. These
safety criteria are based on an assumption that lower received levels
will not injure these animals or impair their hearing abilities, but
that higher received levels might have a potential for such effects.
Greene (1987) reported SPLs ranging from 130-136 dB (rms) at 0.2 km
(656 ft) from the Kulluk during drilling activities (drilling,
tripping, and cleaning) in the Arctic. (Higher received levels up to
148 dB (rms) were recorded for supply vessels that were underway and
for icebreaking activities.) As a result, SOI believes that the tophole
exploratory and geotechnical drilling and the activities of the support
vessels are not likely to produce sound levels 180 dB (rms) or greater
and thereby have potential to cause temporary hearing loss or permanent
hearing damage to any marine mammals. Consequently, standard mitigation
as described later in this document for seismic activities including
shut down of any drilling activity should not be necessary (unless
sound monitoring tests described elsewhere in this document indicate
SPLs at or greater than 180 dB). If testing indicates SPLs will reach
or exceed 180 dB or 190 dB, then appropriate mitigation measures would
be implemented by SOI to avoid potential Level A harassment of
cetaceans (at or above 180 dB) or pinnipeds (at or above 190 dB).
Mitigation measures may include reducing drilling or ice management
noises, whichever is appropriate. Moreover, SOI plans to use MMOs
onboard the drill ships and the various support and supply vessels to
monitor marine mammals and their responses to industry activities. In
addition, an acoustical program and an aerial survey program which are
discussed in previous sections will be implemented to determine
potential impacts of the drilling program on marine mammals.
Marine Mammal Observers
MMOs will be required onboard each vessel to ensure that
observations can be conducted efficiently and without fatigue. MMOs
will be required onboard each vessel to meet the following criteria:
(1) availability for monitoring and consultation coverage during
periods of drilling operations in daylight; (2) maximum of 4
consecutive hours on watch per MMO; (3) maximum of approx. 12 hours on
watch per day per MMO. The observer(s) (MMOs and Inupiat) will watch
for marine mammals from the best available vantage point on the
operating source vessel, which is usually the bridge or flying bridge.
The observer(s) will scan systematically with the naked eye and 7 50
reticle binoculars, supplemented with night-vision equipment when
needed (see below). Personnel on the bridge will assist the marine
mammal observer(s) in watching for pinnipeds and whales. The
observer(s) will give particular attention to the areas around the
vessel. When a mammal sighting is made, the following information about
the sighting will be recorded: (1) Species, group size, age/size/sex
categories (if determinable), behavior when first sighted and after
initial sighting, heading (if consistent), bearing and distance from
drilling vessel, apparent reaction to drilling noise (e.g., none,
avoidance, approach, paralleling, etc.), closest point of approach, and
behavioral pace; (2) time, location, heading, speed, and activity of
the vessel (if underway at the time), sea state, ice cover, visibility,
and sun glare; (3) the positions of other vessel(s) in the vicinity of
the source vessel. This information will be recorded by the MMOs at
times of whale and seal sightings.
The ship's position and its heading, and speed (if the vessel is
underway),
[[Page 31827]]
activity state (e.g., drilling, non-drilling), and water temperature,
water depth, sea state, ice cover, visibility, and sun glare will also
be recorded at the start and end of each observation watch, every 30
minutes during a watch, and whenever there is a change in any of those
variables. Distances to nearby marine mammals will be estimated with
binoculars containing a reticle to measure the vertical angle of the
line of sight to the animal relative to the horizon. Observers may use
a laser rangefinder to test and improve their abilities for visually
estimating distances to objects in the water. However, previous
experience showed that this Class 1 eye-safe device was not able to
measure distances to seals more than about 70 m (230 ft) away. However,
it was very useful in improving the distance estimation abilities of
the observers at distances up to about 600 m (1968 ft)-the maximum
range at which the device could measure distances to highly reflective
objects such as other vessels. Experience indicates that humans
observing objects of more-or-less known size via a standard observation
protocol, in this case from a standard height above water, quickly
become able to estimate distances within about plus or minus 20 percent
when given immediate feedback about actual distances during training.
In addition to routine MMO duties, Inupiat observers will be
encouraged to record comments about their observations into the
``comment'' field in the database. Copies of these records will be
available to the Inupiat observers for reference if they wish to
prepare a statement about their observations. If prepared, this
statement would be included in the 90-day and final reports documenting
the monitoring work.
Night-vision equipment (``Generation 3'' binocular image
intensifiers, or equivalent units) will be available for use when
needed during nighttime observations. However, past experience with
night-vision devices (NVDs) in the Beaufort Sea and elsewhere indicates
that NVDs are not nearly as effective as visual observation during
daylight hours (e.g., Harris et al., 1997, 1998; Moulton and Lawson,
2002). However, for drilling and geotechnical operations, the safety
zone is stationary and is sufficiently small to allow effective
monitoring of the safety zones.
Proposed Additional Mitigation Measures
In addition to the standard mitigation and monitoring measures
discussed in SOI's IHA application, NMFS is also proposing to require
in the IHA, additional mitigation measures to protect feeding and
migrating bowhead whales in the U.S. Beaufort Sea. These include (1)
not conducting drilling operations during the bowhead migration and
subsistence hunting periods and vessel and aerial monitoring
requirements to look for feeding gray and bowhead whale concentrations
and migrating bowhead whale cow/calf pairs. If changes in behavior are
observed during operations, drilling operations must cease until the
whales have migrated past the drilling location.
Underwater Acoustical Monitoring Program
As described in more detail in SOI's IHA application, sounds
produced during the drilling and geotechnical operations and vessels
supporting the offshore drilling program will be measured in the field
during typical operations. These measurements will be used to establish
potential disturbance radii for respective marine mammal groups within
the project area. The goals and objectives of SOI's planned work are:
(1) to measure the distances from the various sound sources to
broadband received levels of 170, 160, and 120 dB rms re 1 microPa
(sounds are not expected to reach 180 dB from the drilling and
geotechnical vessels), and (2) to measure the radiated vessel sounds
vs. distance for the source and support vessels. The measurements will
be made at the beginning of the specific activity (i.e., shallow
hazards survey activity and drilling activity) and all safety and
disturbance radii will be reported within 72 hours of completing the
measurements. For the drilling operation, a subsequent mid-season
assessment is proposed to be conducted to measure sound propagation
from combined drilling operations during ``normal'' operations. For
drilling activities, the primary radii of concern will be the 160-dB
disturbance radii (although measurements will be made to the 180-dB
isopleth). In addition to reporting the radii of specific regulatory
concern, distances to other sound pressure level isopleths down to 120
dB (if measurable) will be reported in increments of 10 dB. The
distance at which received sound levels become [gteqt]120 dB for
continuous sound (which occurs during drilling activities as opposed to
impulsive sound which occurs during seismic activities) is sometimes
considered to be a zone of potential disturbance for some cetacean
species by NMFS. SOI plans to use vessel-based MMOs to monitor the 160-
dB disturbance radii around the drilling vessels and, if necessary, to
implement mitigation measures for the 190- and 180-dB safety radii. An
aerial survey program will be implemented to monitor both the drilling
and seismic activities in the Beaufort Sea.
SOI plans to use a qualified acoustical contractor to measure the
sound propagation of the vessel-based drilling rig during periods of
drilling activity, and the drill ship, geotech vessel and support
vessels while they are underway at the start of the field season. Noise
from ships with ice-breaking capabilities will be measured during
periods of ice-breaking activity. These measurements will be used to
determine the sound levels produced by various equipment and to
establish any safety and disturbance radii if necessary. Bottom-founded
hydrophones similar to those used in 2006 and 2007 for measurements of
vessel-based seismic sound propagation will likely be used to determine
the levels of sound propagation from the drill rigs and associated
vessels. An initial sound source analysis will be supplied to NMFS and
the drilling operators within 72 hours of completion of the
measurements, if possible. NMFS proposed to clarify in the IHA that the
sound source analysis will be provided to NMFS within 24 hours of
submission to SOI. A detailed report on the methodology and results of
these tests will be provided to NMFS as part of the 90-day report
following completion of the drilling program.
Aerial Survey Monitoring Program
SOI proposes to conduct an aerial survey program in support of its
dual seismic exploration and drilling programs in the Beaufort Sea
during summer and fall of 2008. SOI notes that the objectives of the
aerial survey will be to: (1) advise operating vessels as to the
presence of marine mammals in the general area of operation; (2)
collect and report data on the distribution, numbers, movement and
behavior of marine mammals near the drilling operations with special
emphasis on migrating bowhead whales; (3) support regulatory reporting
and Inupiat communications related to the estimation of impacts of
drilling operations on marine mammals; (4) monitor the accessibility of
bowhead whales to Inupiat hunters and (5) to document how far west of
drilling activities bowhead whales travel before they return to their
normal migration paths, and if possible, to document how far east of
drilling operations the deflection begins.
The same aerial survey design will be implemented by SOI during the
summer (one week prior to beginning of offshore operations until August
20) and fall
[[Page 31828]]
(August 20 - five days after cessation of operations, or until
agreement is reached that the bowhead migration has ended) periods, but
during the early summer, the surveys will be flown twice a week and
during the late summer and fall, flights will be conducted daily.
During the early summer, few cetaceans are expected to be encountered
in the nearshore Alaskan Beaufort Sea where the drilling operation will
be conducted (see particularly Moore et al. (1989b), Moore and Clarke
(1989, 1991), Moore (1992), Moore et al. (1989a, 1993, 2000), Moore and
Reeves (1993), Moore and DeMaster (1997), Miller et al. (1998, 1999,
2002) and those that are encountered are expected to be either along
the coast (gray whales: (Maher (1960), Rugh and Fraker (1981), Miller
et al. (1999), Treacy (2000)) or among the pack ice (bowheads: Moore et
al. (1989b), and belugas: Moore et al. (1993), Clarke et al. (1993))
north of the area where drilling activities are to be conducted. During
some years a few gray whales are found feeding in shallow nearshore
waters from Barrow to Kaktovik but most sightings are in the western
part of that area.
During the late summer and fall, the bowhead whale is the primary
species of concern, but belugas and gray whales are also present.
Bowheads and belugas migrate through the Alaskan Beaufort Sea from
summering areas in the central and eastern Beaufort Sea and Amundsen
Gulf to their wintering areas in the Bering Sea (Clarke et al., 1993;
Moore et al., 1993; Miller et al., 2002). Small numbers of bowheads are
sighted in the eastern Alaskan Beaufort Sea starting mid-August and
near Barrow starting late August, but the main migration does not start
until early September. The bowhead migration tends to be through
nearshore and shelf waters, although in some years small numbers of
whales are seen near the coast and/or far offshore. Bowheads frequently
interrupt their migration to feed (Ljungblad et al., 1986a; Lowry,
1993; Landino et al. 1994; W[uuml]rsig et al. 2002; Lowry et al. 2004)
and their stops vary in duration from a few hours to a few weeks (Koski
et al., 2002). Opportunistic feeding areas are in coastal and shelf
waters near and east of Kaktovik.
The aerial survey procedures will be generally consistent with
those during earlier industry studies (Davis et al., 1985; Johnson et
al., 1986; Evans et al., 1987; Brueggeman et al., 1992; Miller et al.,
1997, 1998, 1999, 2002; Patterson, 2007). This will facilitate
comparison and pooling of data where appropriate. However, the specific
survey grids will be tailored to SOI's operations and the time of year.
During the 2008 field season SOI will coordinate and cooperate with the
aerial surveys conducted by MMS and any other groups conducting aerial
surveys in the same region.
SOI notes that the timing, duration, and location of SOI's drilling
operations are subject to change as a result of unpredictable weather
and ice issues, as well as regulatory and stakeholder concerns. As a
result, SOI's recommended approach is flexible and able to adapt at
short notice to changes in the operations. For information on SOI's
summer and fall aerial survey design, please refer to SOI's 2008 IHA
application.
Acoustic Monitoring Program
Determining the potential effects of drilling noise on migration
bowhead whales will be complicated by the presence of ice-management
and other support vessels that may contribute to underwater sound
levels. Miles et al. (1987) reported higher sound pressure levels
(SPLs) from ice-breakers underway in open water than from vessel-based
drilling activity. SPLs from dredging activity, a working tug, and an
icebreaker pushing ice were also greater than those produced by vessel-
based drilling activity. However, sounds produced during drilling
activity are relatively continuous while ice management vessel sounds
are considered to be intermittent, and there is some concern that
continuous and intermittent sounds may result in behavioral reactions
(at least in mysticete whales) at a greater distance than impulse sound
(i.e., seismic) of the same intensity.
Acoustic localization methods provide a possible alternative (or
supplement) to aerial surveys for addressing these questions. As
compared with aerial surveys, acoustic methods have the advantage of
providing a vastly larger number of whale detections, and can operate
day or night, independent of visibility, and to some degree independent
of ice conditions and sea state-all of which prevent or impair aerial
surveys. However, acoustic methods depend on the animals to call, and
to some extent one must assume that calling rate is unaffected by
exposure to industrial noise. Bowheads do call frequently in the fall,
but there is some evidence that their calling rate may be reduced upon
exposure to industrial sounds, complicating interpretation. Also,
acoustic methods require development and deployment of instruments that
are stationary (preferably mounted on the bottom) to record and
localize the whale calls. According to SOI, acoustic methods would
likely be more effective for studying impacts related to a stationary
sound source, such as a drilling rig that is operating within a
relatively localized area, than for a moving sound source such as that
produced by a seismic source vessel. SOI's proposed study is described
next.
Acoustic Study of Bowhead Deflections
SOI plans to deploy an acoustic net array program in the Beaufort
Sea in 2008, similar to that which was done in 2007, but enhanced by
the use of directional acoustic systems that permit localization of
bowhead whale and other marine mammal vocalizations. The purpose of the
array will be to further understand, define, and document sound
characteristics and propagation resulting from vessel-based drilling
operations that may have the potential to cause deflections of bowhead
whales from their migratory pathway. Of particular interest will be the
east-west extent of deflection (i.e. how far east of a sound source do
bowheads begin to deflect and how far to the west beyond the sound
source does deflection persist). Of additional interest will be the
extent of offshore (or towards shore) deflection that occurs.
Greeneridge Sciences plans to conduct the whale migration
monitoring using the passive acoustics techniques developed and used
successfully since 2001 for monitoring the migration past BP's
Northstar production island northwest of Prudhoe Bay. Those techniques
involve using directional autonomous seafloor acoustic recorders
(DASARs) to measure the arrival angles of bowhead calls at known
locations, then triangulating to locate the calling whale. Thousands,
in some years tens of thousands, of whale calls have been located each
year since 2001. Greeneridge Sciences developed and tested a new model
of DASAR under SOI's sponsorship in 2006. The new design proved to be
operational during field deployment in 2006 and is proposed for use in
the 2008 migration monitoring.
This acoustic localization method will provide important
information for addressing the whale deflection question. As compared
with aerial surveys, acoustic methods have the advantage of providing a
vastly larger number of whale detections, and can operate day or night,
independent of visibility, and to some degree independent of ice
conditions and sea state-all of which prevent or impair aerial surveys.
However, acoustic methods depend on the animals to call, and to some
extent assume that calling
[[Page 31829]]
rate is unaffected by exposure to industrial noise. Bowheads do call
frequently in fall, but there is some evidence that their calling rate
may be reduced upon exposure to industrial sounds, complicating
interpretation. The combined use of acoustic and aerial survey methods
will provide a suite of information that should be very useful in
assessing the potential effects of drilling operations on migrating
bowhead whales.
The objective of this study is to provide information on bowhead
migration paths along the Alaskan coast, particularly with respect to
industrial operations and whether and to what extent there is
deflection due to industrial sound levels. Using passive acoustics with
directional autonomous recorders, the locations of calling whales will
be observed for a six- to ten-week continuous monitoring period at five
coastal sites (subject to favorable ice and weather conditions).
Essential to achieving this objective is the continuous measurement of
sound levels near the drillship. For more information on SOI's proposed
acoustic program, please see its IHA application.
Reporting
Daily Reporting
In its IHA application, SOI proposes to collect, via the aerial
flights, unanalyzed bowhead sighting and flightline data which will be
exchanged between MMS and SOI on a daily basis during the field season.
Each team will also submit its sighting information to NMFS in
Anchorage each day. After the SOI and MMS data files have been reviewed
and finalized, they will be shared in digital form.
90-day Technical Report
The results of the 2008 SOI vessel-based monitoring, including
estimates of take by harassment, will be presented in the ``90 day and
technical report(s)'' that are usually required by NMFS under IHAs. SOI
proposes that these technical report(s) will include: (1) summaries of
monitoring effort: total hours, total distances, and distribution
through study period, sea state, and other factors affecting visibility
and detectability of marine mammals; (2) analyses of the effects of
various factors influencing detectability of marine mammals: sea state,
number of observers, and fog/glare; (3) species composition,
occurrence, and distribution of marine mammal sightings including date,
water depth, numbers, age/size/gender categories, group sizes, and ice
cover; (4) sighting rates of marine mammals versus operational state
(and other variables that could affect detectability); (5) initial
sighting distances versus operational state; (6) closest point of
approach versus seismic state; (7) observed behaviors and types of
movements versus operational state; (8) numbers of sightings/
individuals seen versus operational state; (9) distribution around the
drilling vessel and support vessels versus operational state; and (10)
estimates of take based on (a) numbers of marine mammals directly seen
within the relevant zones of influence (160 dB, 180 dB, 190 dB (if SPLs
of that level are measured)), and (b) numbers of marine mammals
estimated to be there based on sighting density during daytime hours
with acceptable sightability conditions.
In addition, the 90-day report will contain an analysis of all
acoustic data in order to address the following primary data analysis
questions: (a) to determine when, where, and what species of animals
are acoustically detected on each DASAR, (b) to analyze data as a whole
to determine offshore distributions as a function of time, (c) to
quantify spatial and temporal variability in the ambient noise, and (d)
to measure received levels of seismic survey events and drill ship
activities. The detection data will be used to develop spatial and
temporal animal detection distributions. Statistical analyses will be
used to test for changes in animal detections and distributions as a
function of different variables (e.g., time of day, time of season,
environmental conditions, ambient noise, vessel type, operation
conditions).
Comprehensive Report
Following the 2008 open-water season a comprehensive report
describing the proposed acoustic, vessel-based, and aerial monitoring
programs will be prepared. The comprehensive report will describe the
methods, results, conclusions and limitations of each of the individual
data sets in detail. The report will also integrate (to the extent
possible) the studies into a broad based assessment of industry
activities and their impacts on marine mammals in the Beaufort Sea
during 2008. The report will form the basis for future monitoring
efforts and will establish long term data sets to help evaluate changes
in the Beaufort Sea ecosystem. The report will also incorporate studies
being conducted in the Chukchi Sea and will attempt to provide a
regional synthesis of available data on industry activity in offshore
areas of northern Alaska that may influence marine mammal density,
distribution and behavior.
This report will consider data from many different sources
including two relatively different types of aerial surveys; several
types of acoustic systems for data collection (net array, vertical
array, DASARB, and OBH systems), and vessel based observations.
Collection of comparable data across the wide array of programs will
help with the synthesis of information. However, interpretation of
broad patterns in data from a single year is inherently limited. Much
of the 2008 data will be used to assess the efficacy of the various
data collection methods and to establish protocols that will provide a
basis for integration of the data sets over a period of years.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
NMFS issued a Biological Opinion on June 16, 2006, regarding the
effects of this action on ESA-listed species and critical habitat under
the jurisdiction of NMFS. The Opinion concluded that this action is not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
Due to the presence of fin and humpback whales in the Chukchi and
Beaufort seas in 2007, the MMS has begun additional consultation on the
proposed seismic survey activities in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas
during 2008. NMFS will also consult on the issuance of the IHA under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA to SOI for this activity. Consultation
will be concluded prior to NMFS making a determination on the issuance
of an IHA. A copy of the 2006 Biological Opinion is available at:
http://www.mms.gov/alaska/ref/BioOpinions/ARBOIII-2.pdf.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
In July, 2004, the MMS prepared an EA for LS-195 to determine
whether or not new information indicates that the proposed lease sale
would cause new significant impacts; ones that were not addressed in
the Final EIS for Beaufort Sea Planning Area Oil and Gas Lease Sales
186, 195, and 202 (MMS, 2003a) (the Multiple-Sale EIS). This EA
incorporated all of the relevant material in the Multiple-Sale EIS by
reference. It also reexamined the potential environmental effects of
the Proposed Action and alternatives as a result of new information on
potential impacts and issues that were not available at the time MMS
completed the Multiple-Sale EIS in February 2003. Because the Beaufort
Sea sale proposals and projected activities are very similar, if not
almost identical for each lease sale, MMS prepared a single EIS for all
three Beaufort Sea sales that was first analyzed in the 5-year OCS
Leasing
[[Page 31830]]
Program for 2002-2007 (MMS, 2002a). The Multiple-Sale approach focuses
the NEPA/EIS process on the identification of differences among the
proposed sales and on new information and issues.
Subsequent to releasing the EA on LS-195, in August, 2006, MMS
released a third NEPA document for the proposed Beaufort Sea Planning
Area OCS LS-202. That EA further updated the information contained in
the two previously mentioned NEPA documents. However, SOI's proposed
2008 exploratory drilling project is on leases obtained from MMS as a
result of the Beaufort Sea LS-195, not LS 202. However, the EA for LS
202 updates the environmental information found in the EA for LS 195.
The MMS made a FONSI for LS-195 on July 2, 2004, based on
information contained within its EA, that implementation of the subject
action is not a major Federal action having significant effects on the
environment within the meaning of NEPA. The MMS determined, therefore,
that a new EIS would not be prepared.
In accordance with NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 (Environmental
Review Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act, May 20, 1999), NMFS has reviewed the information contained in
these three MMS NEPA documents and determined that while these NEPA
documents accurately and completely describe the environmental setting
for NMFS' proposed action (the 20087 SOI exploratory drilling project)
and other identified alternatives, the potential impacts on marine
mammals, endangered species, and other marine life that could be
impacted by the preferred alternative and the other alternatives has
not been fully described and analyzed, especially as it relates to
NMFS' issuance of authorizations under the MMPA, and the potential
impacts due to NMFS' IHA issuance. To update these documents, NMFS
completed its own EA in 2007 which incorporates by reference relevant
information contained in the Multiple-Sale EIS, the Beaufort Sea Lease
Sale 195 EA, and the Beaufort Sea Lease Sale 202 EA. On October 24,
2007, NMFS also issued a FONSI to support theon its issuance of an IHA
to SOI for taking marine mammals incidental to its offshore drilling
project. As a result of the EA and FONSI, NMFS has determined that the
preparation of an EIS wais not necessary and none was prepared. A copy
of NMFS' EA and FONSI for this action are available electronically (see
ADDRESSES).
For 2008, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the proposed
action discussed in this document is not substantially different from
the 2007 action. A final decision on whether the action differs in a
manner requiring NMFS to amend its 2007 EA and issue a new FONSI will
be made by NMFS prior to making a final decision on the proposed
issuance of an IHA to SOI for this activity.
Preliminary Conclusions
Based on the information provided in SOI's application and other
referenced documentation, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the
impact of SOI conducting its exploratory, tophole and geotechnical
drilling programs in the U.S. Beaufort Sea in 2008 will have no more
than a negligible impact on a small number of marine mammals. NMFS has
preliminarily determined that the short-term impact of conducting
exploratory drilling by the two drilling vessels (Kulluk and the
geotechnical vessel) and by supporting vessels, including ice
management vessels in the U.S. Beaufort Sea may result, at worst, in a
temporary modification in behavior by certain species of marine
mammals, including vacating the immediate vicinity around the two
activity areas due to noise resulting from drilling and ship movements.
While behavioral and avoidance reactions may be made by these
species in response to the resultant noise, this behavioral change is
expected to have a negligible impact on the animals. While the number
of potential incidental harassment takes will depend on the
distribution and abundance of marine mammals (which vary annually due
to variable ice conditions and other factors) in the area of drilling
operations, the number of potential harassment takings is estimated to
be small as indicated in Tables 1, 2 and 3 in this document. In
addition, no take by death and/or serious injury is anticipated or
would be authorized; there is almost a zero potential for an oil spill
to result from the drilling activity as it will not penetrate into oil
bearing strata, and the potential for temporary or permanent hearing
impairment is low due to the low SPLs associated with drilling
activities. Also, harassment takings are likely to be minimized through
the incorporation of the monitoring and mitigation measures mentioned
in this document and required by the authorization. No rookeries,
mating grounds, areas of concentrated feeding, or other areas of
special significance for marine mammals occur within or near the
planned area of operations during the season of operations.
As SOI notes in its IHA application, there could be an adverse
impact on the Inupiat bowhead subsistence hunt if the whales were
deflected seaward (further from shore) in the traditional hunting areas
north of Pt. Thomson in Camden Bay. NMFS believes that this could
result in whaling crews being forced to travel greater distances to
intercept westward migrating whales thereby creating a significant
safety hazard for whaling crews (with a potential loss of life),
limiting chances of successfully striking and landing bowheads, and/or
not landing bowheads quickly before decomposition and spoilage occurs.
Prior to issuing an IHA for activities that take place in Arctic
waters, NMFS must ensure that the taking by the activity will not have
an unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence uses of marine mammals. In
50 CFR 216.103, NMFS has defined an ``unmitigable adverse impact'' to
mean:
an impact resulting from the specified activity: (1) That is
likely to reduce the availability of the species to a level
insufficient for a harvest to meet subsistence needs by: (i) Causing
the marine mammals to abandon or avoid hunting areas; (ii) Directly
displacing subsistence users; or (iii) Placing physical barriers
between the marine mammals and the subsistence hunters; and (2) That
cannot be sufficiently mitigated by other measures to increase the
availability of marine mammals to allow subsistence needs to be met.
SOI states that the potential impact on subsistence users of marine
mammals will be reduced mitigated throughby the application of
mitigation procedures described in its application and implemented by a
CAA between the SOI, the AEWC and the whaling captains' associations of
Kaktovik, Nuiqsut and Barrow. Mitigation measures implemented by NMFS
under Letters of Authorization or IHAs previously included: (1) warm
shutdown of drilling operations during the subsistence hunt, and (2)
moving the drilling vessels either further offshore or behind the
barrier islands. For example, in 2007, measures taken to ensure that
there would not be an unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence uses of
marine mammals included: (1) limiting the activity to a single
exploratory drilling vessel, (2)cease drilling operations beginning
August 25,2007, and (3) to relocate all equipment and related vessels
offsite no later than August 27, 2007.
Therefore, presuming that effective mitigation and monitoring
measures will be contained in SOI's 2008 IHA and will be fully
implemented by SOI, NMFS has preliminarily determined
[[Page 31831]]
that SOI's proposed drilling and geotechnical activity would result in
the harassment of small numbers of marine mammals; would have no more
than a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal stocks; and,
subject to development of mitigation measures during discussions with
interested parties, would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of species or stocks for subsistence uses. In addition,
implementation of these effective mitigation measures ensures that the
taking, by Level B harassment of marine mammals by SOI's offshore
drilling activity will have the least practicable effect on marine
mammal individuals and populations.
As a result, NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to SOI for conducting an
offshore drilling program in the U.S. Beaufort Sea in 2008, provided
the previously mentioned monitoring and reporting requirements are
incorporated.
Dated: May 29, 2008.
Helen W. Golde
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E8-12513 Filed 6-3-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S