[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 203 (Thursday, October 21, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64996-65005]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-26547]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XZ60
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Marine Geophysical Survey in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean,
October Through November 2010
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental take authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)
regulations, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an
Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to Scripps Institution of
Oceanography (SIO), a part of the University of California, to take
small numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to
conducting a marine geophysical survey in the eastern tropical Pacific
Ocean (ETP), October through November, 2010.
DATES: Effective October 19, 2010, through November 30, 2010.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the IHA and application are available by writing
to 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 or by
telephoning the contacts listed here. A copy of the application
containing a list of the references used in this document may be
obtained by writing to the above address, telephoning the contact
listed here (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or visiting the
Internet at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications. The following associated documents are
also available at the same Internet address: SIO's application, the
Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared by NMFS, and the finding of no
significant impact (FONSI). The NMFS Biological Opinion will be
available online at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/consultation/opinions.htm. Documents cited in this notice may be viewed, by
appointment, during regular business hours, at the aforementioned
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Laws or Candace Nachman, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 713-2289.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) directs
the Secretary of Commerce to authorize, upon request, the incidental,
but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals of a
species or population stock, by United States citizens who engage in a
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings are made and, if the taking is
limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided
to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental taking of small numbers of marine
mammals 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. The authorization must set forth the
permissible methods of taking, other means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact on the species or stock and its habitat, and
monitoring and reporting of such takings. 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.
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 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 small numbers of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the
close of the public comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny the
authorization.
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].
[[Page 64997]]
Summary of Request
NMFS received an application on May 28, 2010 from SIO for the
taking, by harassment, of marine mammals, incidental to conducting a
marine geophysical survey in the ETP. SIO, with research funding from
the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), plans to conduct a marine
seismic survey in the ETP, from October through November 2010.
SIO plans to use one source vessel, the R/V Melville (Melville),
with a seismic airgun array to conduct a geophysical survey in the ETP.
In addition to the operations of the seismic airgun array, SIO intends
to operate a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and a sub-bottom profiler
(SBP) continuously throughout the survey. The purpose of this project
is to better understand how marine sediments record paleo-oceanographic
information.
Acoustic stimuli (i.e., increased underwater sound) generated
during the operation of the seismic airgun array may have the potential
to cause marine mammals in the survey area to be behaviorally disturbed
in a manner that NMFS considers to be Level B harassment. This is the
principal means of marine mammal taking associated with these
activities and SIO has requested an authorization for the incidental
take, by Level B harassment only, of up to 21 species of marine
mammals. These species include: Bryde's whale; blue whale; sperm whale;
humpback whale; Cuvier's beaked whale; Blainville's beaked whale; pygmy
beaked whale; gingko-toothed beaked whale; rough-toothed dolphin;
bottlenose dolphin; pantropical spotted dolphin; spinner dolphin;
striped dolphin; Fraser's dolphin; short-beaked common dolphin; Risso's
dolphin; melon-headed whale; pygmy killer whale; false killer whale;
killer whale; and short-finned pilot whale. Blainville's beaked whale,
pygmy beaked whale, and gingko-toothed beaked whale are hereafter
grouped as Mesoplodon sp., as these species are expected to be
encountered only infrequently and are difficult to distinguish from one
another.
Description of the Specified Activity
The Melville is expected to depart Puntarenas, Costa Rica, on
October 19, 2010, and spend approximately fifteen days conducting
seismic surveys, ten days collecting water and core samples, and
approximately two days in transit, arriving at Arica, Chile, on
November 14, 2010. The proposed survey will encompass the area from
approximately 8[deg] N-12[deg] S and 80-91[deg] W, off the coasts of
Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru, in the high seas and
within the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of Costa Rica, Panama,
Colombia, and Ecuador. At each of four sites (see Figure 1 of SIO's
application), seismic operations will be conducted for approximately
two days, and each water sampling and coring station will be occupied
for one to two days. SIO will operate the Melville to deploy an airgun
array and tow a hydrophone streamer to complete the survey. Some minor
deviation from these dates is possible, depending on logistics and
weather. Therefore, NMFS plans to issue an authorization that extends
to November 30, 2010.
The Melville will deploy a pair of low-energy generator-injector
(GI) airguns as an energy source at a depth of 2 m (each with a
discharge volume of 45 in \3\), plus either of two towed hydrophone
streamers, one 725 m (2,378.6 ft) long with 40 channels, and the other
350 m (1,148.3 ft) long with 16 channels. Hydrophone streamers are
towed at adjustable depth to afford best reception of returning seismic
signals, depending upon surface conditions, but are typically towed at
approximately 10 m. The energy to the GI airgun is compressed air
supplied by compressors onboard the source vessel. As the GI airgun is
towed along the survey lines, the receiving systems will receive the
returning acoustic signals. The study (e.g., equipment testing,
startup, line changes, repeat coverage of any areas) will take place in
waters deeper than 1,000 m (3,280 ft). All planned geophysical data
acquisition activities will be conducted by SIO with on-board
assistance by the scientists who have proposed the study. The Chief
Scientist is Dr. Franco Marcantonio of Texas A&M University. The vessel
will be self-contained, and the crew will live aboard the vessel for
the entire cruise.
NMFS outlined the purpose of the program in a previous notice for
the proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010). The activities to be
conducted have not changed between the proposed IHA notice and this
final notice announcing the issuance of the IHA. For a more detailed
description of the authorized action, including vessel and acoustic
source specifications, the reader should refer to the aforementioned
proposed IHA notice.
Several errors found in the notice for the proposed IHA (75 FR
54095, September 3, 2010) have been corrected in this document. These
errors are as follows:
The notice for proposed IHA referenced 40, 16, and 12
channel hydrophone streamers. The 12 channel streamer was referenced in
error; 40 and 16 channel streamers will be utilized as discussed in
this document.
Several errors were corrected with regard to exposure
estimates and the resulting take authorization (see Estimated Take of
Marine Mammals by Incidental Harassment and Table 2 of this document).
[cir] Take estimate for sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) was
presented as 23 due to a calculation error and has been revised to 22.
[cir] Take estimate for striped dolphins (Stenella coeruleoalba)
was presented as six, due to the erroneous use of Fraser's dolphin
(Lagenodelphis hosei) density estimates. Take estimate, as well as
density estimate, for striped dolphin has been corrected to 192.
[cir] Exposure estimates and take authorization numbers have been
corrected for several species by rounding up rather than down. As there
can be no portion of an individual in estimating take, NMFS has rounded
up in all cases where exposure estimates have some non-negligible
portion of a whole (see Table 2 in this document).
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of the SIO application and proposed IHA was
published in the Federal Register on September 3, 2010 (75 FR 54095).
During the comment period, NMFS received comments from the Marine
Mammal Commission (Commission). The public comments can be found online
at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. Following are
their comments and NMFS' responses.
Comment 1: The Commission recommends that NMFS require the
applicant to use location-specific environmental parameters to re-
estimate safety zones and then recalculate associated exposures. The
Commission further suggests that the applicant should be required to
use in-situ measurements to verify and, if need be, refine the safety
zones prior to or at the beginning of the survey, and that the
applicant should be required to determine actual exposures based on
refined safety zones, sightability, and relevant detection functions.
Response: NMFS is confident in the peer-reviewed results of the
Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory seismic equipment calibration studies
which, although viewed as conservative, are used to determine cruise-
specific exclusion zones and which factor into exposure estimates. With
the expected low density of marine mammals, combined with the remote,
deep-water survey location, NMFS has determined that the exclusion
zones identified in
[[Page 64998]]
the IHA are appropriate for the survey and that additional field
measurement is not necessary at this time. While exposures of marine
mammals to acoustic stimuli are difficult to estimate, NMFS is
confident that the levels of take authorized herein are estimated based
upon the best available scientific information and estimation
methodology. The safety zones used to estimate exposure are appropriate
and sufficient.
Comment 2: The Commission recommends that NMFS provide additional
justification for its preliminary determination that the planned
monitoring program will be sufficient to detect, with a high level of
confidence, all marine mammals within or entering the identified safety
zones.
Response: As discussed in the proposed rule, combined with the fact
that a portion of marine mammals would be expected to avoid exposure to
the higher levels of sound present within the designated safety zone,
as well as the comparatively small size of the safety zone, NMFS
believes that the planned monitoring program will be sufficient to,
with reasonable certainty, minimize the exposure of marine mammals to
sound within the identified exclusion zones (EZ). This monitoring,
along with the required mitigation measures, will help ensure the
authorized taking effects the least practicable adverse impact on the
affected species or stocks and will have a negligible impact on the
affected species or stocks. Until proven technological advances are
made, nighttime mitigation measures during operations include
combinations of the use of protected species observers (PSOs) and night
vision devices. In the event of a complete shut-down of the airgun
array, for mitigation or repairs, airgun operations will be suspended
until nautical twilight-dawn (when PSOs are able to clear the EZ).
Airgun operations will not begin until the entire EZ radius is visible
for at least 30 minutes.
Comment 3: The Commission recommends that NMFS propose to SIO that
it revise its study design to include collection of meaningful baseline
data on the distribution and behavior of marine mammals.
Response: The purpose of this cruise is for marine geophysical
research, not to conduct a dedicated marine mammal research survey.
Extending or altering the survey is not practicable from either an
operational or research standpoint for the applicant. Due to the remote
location of the survey and the length of time needed to conduct the
requested research, there may be little time left for the vessel to
operate without the need for refueling and servicing.
During the cruise, there will be significant amounts of transit
time pre- and post-survey during which PSOs will be on watch (e.g.,
prior to and after the seismic portions of the survey). The collection
of this observational data by PSOs may provide meaningful baseline data
on marine mammals, but it is unlikely that the information would result
in any statistically robust conclusions for this particular seismic
survey. As the monitoring program is currently devised, one PSO (at
minimum) will be on watch not only during all daylight airgun
operations, or start-up of airguns at any time, but at all times when
effective observation is possible. Any further revisions of study
design are impractical.
In addition, SIO is not responsible for the study design. Through a
cooperative agreement with the NSF, SIO is the operator of the
Melville, which hosts the field research program. The study is designed
by the Principal Investigator and is submitted to NSF as a proposal for
funding consideration and subsequently reviewed by a merit review
panel. This study was selected based on its scientific merits, and
extension or modification of the field component would require
scientific justification and NSF approval and potentially further merit
review.
Comment 4: The Commission recommends that NMFS extend the
monitoring period to at least one hour before initiation of seismic
activities and at least one hour before the resumption of airgun
activities after a power-down because of a marine mammal sighting
within a safety zone.
Response: As the Commission points out, several species of deep-
diving cetaceans are capable of remaining underwater for more than 30
minutes, however, for the following reasons NMFS believes that 30
minutes is an adequate length for the monitoring period prior to the
start-up of airguns: (1) In most cases PSOs are making observations
during times when seismic sources are not being operated and will
actually be observing prior to the 30 min observation period anyway,
(2) the majority of the species that may be exposed do not stay
underwater more than 30 minutes, and (3) if deep-diving individuals
happened to be in the area in the short time immediately prior to the
pre-start-up monitoring and if an animal's maximum underwater time is
45 min, there is only a one in three chance that the last random
surfacing would be prior to the beginning of the required 30 min
monitoring period.
Also, seismic vessels are moving continuously (because of the long,
towed array) and NMFS believes that unless the animal submerges and
follows at the speed of the vessel (highly unlikely, especially when
considering that a significant part of their movements is vertical
[deep-diving]), the vessel will be far beyond the length of the safety
radii within 30 min, and therefore it will be safe to resume
acquisition. Finally, due to the nature of the seismic source to be
used during the survey, power-down (as mentioned in the Commission's
comment) will not be used as a mitigation measure.
In addition, mitigation measures are required to be
``practicable.'' NMFS believes that the framework for visual monitoring
will (1) be effective at spotting almost all species for which take is
requested; and (2) that imposing additional requirements, such as those
suggested by the Commission, would not meaningfully increase the
effectiveness of observing marine mammals approaching or entering the
exclusion zones. The Commission's recommendation would cause additional
impact on the science mission, limiting acquisition opportunity without
dramatically increasing overall effectiveness of visual monitoring.
Comment 5: The Commission recommends that NMFS continue to require
ramp-up and power-down procedures as a mitigation measure pending the
outcome of a meeting to discuss these procedures.
Response: NMFS will continue to require ramp-up and power-down
procedures as mitigation measures, when applicable, unless or until
these measures are proven to be ineffective or other measures are
proven to be more effective.
Comment 6: The Commission recommends that NMFS not include detailed
information and analyses for species that are not expected to be in the
proposed survey area in future Federal Register notices.
Response: NMFS agrees that detailed information and analyses for
species that are not expected to be in the proposed survey area should
not be included in Federal Register notices. NMFS considers the
information included in the Federal Register notice of proposed IHA (75
FR 54095, September 3, 2010) in this case to be necessary justification
for determinations to not authorize take for certain species.
In closing, NMFS is planning to meet with the Commission to further
discuss the broad issues raised in their
[[Page 64999]]
comments, which relate to more than just the IHA contemplated here.
Description of the Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
Forty-three species of marine mammals, including 29 odontocetes, 7
mysticetes, 6 pinnipeds, and the marine sea otter (Enhydra lutris), are
known to occur in the ETP. Of these, 21 cetacean species are likely to
occur in the proposed survey areas in the ETP during October-November
(see Table 2 in this document), and are considered further here. Three
of these cetacean species are listed under the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) as Endangered: The sperm (Physeter macrocephalus), humpback
(Megaptera novaeangliae), and blue (Balaenoptera musculus) whales.
NMFS has presented a more detailed discussion of the status of
these stocks and their occurrence in the ETP in the notice of the
proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010).
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
Summary of Potential Effects of Airgun Sounds
Level B harassment of cetaceans has the potential to occur during
the seismic survey due to acoustic stimuli caused by the firing of
airguns, which introduces sound into the marine environment. The
effects of sounds from airguns might include one or more of the
following: tolerance, masking of natural sounds, behavioral
disturbance, temporary or permanent hearing impairment, or non-auditory
physical or physiological effects (Richardson et al., 1995; Gordon et
al., 2004; Nowacek et al., 2007; Southall et al., 2007). Permanent
hearing impairment, in the unlikely event that it occurred, would
constitute injury, but temporary threshold shift (TTS) is not an injury
(Southall et al., 2007). Although the possibility cannot be entirely
excluded, it is unlikely that the project would result in any cases of
temporary or permanent hearing impairment, or any significant non-
auditory physical or physiological effects. Some behavioral disturbance
is expected, but NMFS expects the disturbance to be localized and
short-term.
The notice of the proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010)
included a discussion of the effects of sounds from airguns on
mysticetes and odontocetes, including tolerance, masking, behavioral
disturbance, hearing impairment, and other non-auditory physical
effects. Additional information on the behavioral reactions (or lack
thereof) by all types of marine mammals to seismic vessels can be found
in SIO's application and NMFS' EA. The notice of the proposed IHA also
included a discussion of the potential effects of the multibeam
echosounder (MBES) and the sub-bottom profiler (SBP). Because of the
shape of the beams of these sources and their power, NMFS believes it
unlikely that marine mammals will be exposed to either the MBES or the
SBP at levels at or above those likely to cause harassment. Further,
NMFS believes that the brief exposure of cetaceans to a few signals
from the multi-beam bathymetric sonar system is not likely to result in
the harassment of marine mammals.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
A detailed discussion of the potential effects of this action on
marine mammal habitat, including physiological and behavioral effects
on marine fish and invertebrates was included in the proposed IHA (75
FR 54095, September 3, 2010). Based on the discussion in the proposed
IHA notice and the nature of the activities (limited duration), the
authorized operations are not expected to result in any permanent
impact on habitats used by marine mammals, including the food sources
they use. The main impact associated with the activity will be
temporarily elevated noise levels and the associated direct effects on
marine mammals.
Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization (ITA) under
sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA, NMFS must, where applicable,
set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity,
and other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses (where relevant).
Mitigation and monitoring measures to be implemented for the
seismic survey have been developed and refined during previous SIO
seismic studies and associated EAs, IHA applications, and IHAs. The
mitigation and monitoring measures described herein represent a
combination of procedures required by past IHAs for other similar
projects and on best practices recommended in Richardson et al. (1995),
Pierson et al. (1998), and Weir and Dolman (2007). The measures are
described in detail below.
Mitigation measures to be implemented by SIO during the survey
include (1) visual monitoring by protected species observers (discussed
later in this document), (2) establishment of an exclusion zone (EZ),
(3) speed or course alteration, provided that doing so will not
compromise operational safety requirements, (4) GI airgun shut down
procedures, and (5) ramp-up procedures. Although power-down procedures
are often standard operating practice for seismic surveys, they will
not be used here because powering down from two airguns to one airgun
would make only a small difference in the 180-dB safety radius. The
difference is not enough to allow continued one-airgun operations if a
mammal came within the safety radius for two airguns.
Exclusion Zones--As discussed previously in this document, NMFS has
determined that for acoustic effects, using acoustic thresholds in
combination with corresponding safety radii is an effective way to
consistently apply measures to avoid or minimize the impacts of an
action. Thresholds are used to establish a mitigation shut-down, or
exclusion, zone, i.e., if an animal enters an area calculated to be
ensonified above the level of an established threshold, a sound source
is shut down.
As a matter of past practice and based on the best available
information at the time regarding the effects of marine sound, NMFS
estimates that Level A harassment from acoustic sources may occur when
cetaceans are exposed to levels above 180 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) level.
NMFS also considers 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) as the criterion for
estimating the onset of Level B harassment from acoustic sources
producing impulse sounds, as in this seismic survey.
Empirical data concerning the 180- and 160-dB distances have been
acquired based on measurements during the acoustic verification study
conducted by L-DEO in the northern Gulf of Mexico from May 27-June 3,
2003 (Tolstoy et al., 2004). The empirical data indicate that, for this
survey, the assumed 180- and 160-dB radii are 40 m (131.2 ft) and 400 m
(1,312.3 ft), respectively (see Table 1 in this document).
[[Page 65000]]
Table 1--Predicted Distances to Which Sound Levels [gteqt]190, 180 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) Might Be
Received From Two 45 in\3\ GI Airguns That Will Be Used During the Seismic Surveys in the Eastern Tropical
Pacific Ocean During October-November 2010
[Distances are based on model results provided by L-DEO.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Distances at Received Levels
(m)
Source and volume Tow depth (m) Water depth ---------------------------------------
180 dB 160 dB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two GI airguns, 45 in\3\ each... 2 Deep (>1,000 m) 40 400
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speed or Course Alteration--If a marine mammal is detected outside
the EZ but is likely to enter it based on relative movement of the
vessel and the animal, and if safety and scientific objectives allow,
the vessel speed and/or course will be adjusted to minimize the
likelihood of the animal entering the EZ. In the event that safety and/
or scientific objectives do not allow for alteration of speed and/or
course as a needed mitigation measure, shut-down procedures will still
be utilized (see below). Major course and speed adjustments are often
impractical when towing long seismic streamers and large source arrays
but are possible in this case because only a small source and short
streamers will be used.
Shut-down Procedures--If a marine mammal is detected by PSOs
outside the EZ but is likely to enter the EZ, and if the vessel's speed
and/or course cannot be changed to avoid having the animal enter the
EZ, the airgun array, MBES, and SBP will be shut down before the animal
is within the EZ. Likewise, if a marine mammal is already within the EZ
when first detected, the airgun array, MBES, and SBP will be shut down
immediately. Following a shut down, seismic activity will not resume
until the marine mammal has cleared the EZ. The animal will be
considered to have cleared the EZ if it (a) is visually observed to
have left the EZ, or (b) has not been seen within the EZ for 15 min in
the case of small odontocetes, or has not been seen within the EZ for
30 min in the case of mysticetes and large odontocetes, including sperm
and beaked whales.
Ramp-up Procedures--A ramp-up procedure will be followed when the
GI airguns begin operating after a specified period without GI airgun
operations. It is proposed that, for the present cruise, this period
would be approximately 1-2 min. This period is based on the 180-dB
radii for the GI airguns (see Table 1 in this document) in relation to
the planned speed of the Melville while shooting. Ramp-up will begin
with a single GI airgun (45 in\3\). The second GI airgun (45 in\3\)
will be added after 5 min. During ramp up, the PSOs will monitor the
exclusion zone, and, if marine mammals are sighted, a shut-down will be
implemented as though both GI airguns were operational.
If the complete EZ has not been visible for at least 30 min prior
to the start of operations in either daylight or nighttime, ramp-up
will not commence. If one GI airgun has operated, ramp-up to full power
will be permissible at night or in poor visibility on the assumption
that marine mammals will be alerted to the approaching seismic vessel
by the sounds from the single GI airgun and could move away if they
choose. A ramp-up from a shut-down may occur at night, but only when
the entire EZ is visible, and it has been determined from the pre-ramp
up watch that the EZ is clear of marine mammals. Ramp-up of the GI
airguns will not be initiated if a marine mammal is sighted within or
near the applicable EZ during day or night.
NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation
measures in the context of ensuring that NMFS prescribes the means of
effecting the least practicable impact on the affected marine mammal
species and stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation of potential
measures included consideration of the following factors in relation to
one another:
The manner in which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize
adverse impacts to marine mammals;
The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to
minimize adverse impacts as planned; and
The practicability of the measure for applicant
implementation.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as well
as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of effecting
the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and
their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating
grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth ``requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such taking.'' The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for IHAs
must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary
monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the
species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be present in the action area.
SIO will sponsor marine mammal monitoring during the present
project, in order to implement the mitigation measures that require
real-time monitoring, and to satisfy the monitoring requirements of the
IHA. SIO's Monitoring Plan is described below this section and was
planned as a self-contained project independent of any other related
monitoring projects that may be occurring simultaneously in the same
regions. SIO is prepared to discuss coordination of its monitoring
program with any related work that might be done by other groups
insofar as this is practical.
Vessel-Based Visual Monitoring
Three protected species observers (PSOs) will be based aboard the
seismic source vessel for the duration of the cruise and will watch for
marine mammals near the vessel during daytime airgun operations and
during start-up of airguns at any time. Watches will be conducted by at
least one observer 100% of the time during seismic surveys in daylight
hours. Daylight observation by at least one observer will continue
during non-seismic periods, as long as weather conditions make
observations meaningful, for comparison of sighting rates and animal
behavior during periods with vs. without airgun operations. PSOs will
be appointed by SIO with NMFS concurrence after a review of their
qualifications.
[[Page 65001]]
The Melville is a suitable platform for marine mammal observations.
The observer platform is located one deck below and forward of the
bridge (12.46 meters (40.88 ft) above the waterline), affording a
relatively unobstructed 180-degree forward view. Aft views can be
obtained along the port and starboard decks. During daytime hours, the
observer(s) will scan the area systematically using reticulated 25 x
150 big-eye binoculars and 7 x 50 hand-held binoculars to determine
bearing and distance of sightings. A clinometer is used to determine
distances of animals in close proximity to the vessel. Hand-held fixed
rangefinders and distance marks on the ship's side rails are used to
measure the exact location of the safety zone. Laser rangefinders,
which have proven to be less reliable for open water sighting, are also
provided. During darkness, night-vision equipment will be available.
The PSOs will be in wireless communication with ship's officers on the
bridge and scientists in the vessel's operations laboratory, so they
can advise promptly of the need for avoidance maneuvers or GI airgun
shut down.
Before commencing seismic operations during daylight hours, two
observers will maintain a 360-degree watch for all marine mammals for
at least 30 minutes prior to the start of seismic operations after an
extended shutdown of the airguns (1-2 minutes, depending on vessel
speed). If no marine mammals are observed within the EZ during this
time, the observers will notify the seismic personnel of an ``all
clear'' status. Watch periods are scheduled as a 2-hour rotation. The
observers continually scan the water from the horizon to the ship's
hull, and forward of 90 degrees from the port and starboard beams.
Based on PSO observations, the GI airgun(s) will be shut down (as
described earlier in this document) when marine mammals are detected
within or about to enter a designated EZ that corresponds to the 180-dB
re 1 [micro]Pa (rms) isopleth. The PSOs will continue to maintain watch
to determine when the animal(s) are outside the EZ, and airgun
operations will not resume until the animal has left that EZ. The
predicted distance for the 180-dB EZ is listed in Table 1 earlier in
this document. Seismic operations will resume only after the animals
are seen to exit the safety radius or after no further visual detection
of the animal for 15 minutes (for small odontocetes and pinnipeds) or
30 minutes (for mysticetes and large odontocetes, including beaked
whales).
The bridge officers and other crew will be instructed to alert the
observer on watch of any suspected marine mammal sighting. If needed,
the bridge will be contacted in order to maneuver the ship to avoid
interception with approaching marine mammals.
PSO Data and Documentation
PSOs will record data to estimate the numbers of marine mammals
exposed to various received sound levels and to document reactions or
lack thereof. Data will be used to estimate numbers of animals
potentially ``taken'' by harassment (as defined in the MMPA). They will
also provide information needed to order a shutdown of the seismic
source when a marine mammal is within or near the EZ. When a sighting
is made, the following information about the sighting will be recorded:
Species, group size, and age/size/sex categories (if
determinable); behavior when first sighted and after initial sighting;
heading (if consistent), bearing and distance from seismic vessel;
sighting cue, apparent reaction to the seismic source or vessel (e.g.,
none, avoidance, approach, paralleling, etc.); and behavioral pace; and
Time, location, heading, speed, activity of the vessel,
sea state, visibility, cloud cover, and sun glare.
The data will also be recorded at the start and end of each observation
watch and during a watch whenever there is a change in one or more of
the variables.
All observations, as well as information regarding seismic source
shutdown, will be recorded in a standardized format. Data collection
procedures are adapted from the line-transect protocols developed by
the SWFSC for their marine mammal abundance research cruises. A laptop
computer is located on the observer platform for ease of data entry.
The computer is connected to the ship's Global Positioning System,
which allows a record of time and position to be made at 3-minute
intervals and for each event entered (such as sightings, weather
updates and effort changes). Data accuracy will be verified by the PSOs
at sea and preliminary reports will be prepared during the field
program and summaries forwarded to the SIO's shore facility and to NSF
weekly or more frequently. PSO observations will provide the following
information:
The basis for decisions about shutting down the airgun
arrays;
Information needed to estimate the number of marine
mammals potentially ``taken by harassment'', which will be reported to
NMFS;
Data on the occurrence, distribution, and activities of
marine mammals in the area where the seismic study is conducted; and
Data on the behavior and movement patterns of marine
mammals seen at times with and without seismic activity.
A report will be submitted to NMFS within 90 days after the end of
the cruise. The report will describe the operations that were conducted
and sightings of marine mammals near the operations. The report will be
submitted to NMFS, providing full documentation of methods, results,
and interpretation pertaining to all monitoring. The 90-day report will
summarize the dates and locations of seismic operations and all marine
mammal sightings (dates, times, locations, activities, associated
seismic survey activities). The report will also include estimates of
the amount and nature of potential ``take'' of marine mammals by
harassment or in other ways.
All injured or dead marine mammals (regardless of cause) will be
reported to NMFS as soon as practicable. The report should include
species or description of animal, condition of animal, location, time
first found, observed behaviors (if alive), and photo or video, if
available.
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals by Incidental Harassment
With respect to the activities described 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].
All anticipated takes will be by Level B harassment, involving
temporary changes in behavior. The mitigation and monitoring measures
described herein are expected to minimize the possibility of injurious
or lethal takes such that take by Level A harassment, serious injury or
mortality is considered remote. However, as noted earlier, there is no
specific information demonstrating that injurious or lethal ``takes''
would occur even in the absence of the planned mitigation and
monitoring measures. The sections here describe methods to estimate
``take by Level B harassment'' and present estimates of the numbers of
marine mammals that might be affected during the proposed seismic
program. The estimates of ``take'' are based on data collected in the
ETP by NMFS SWFSC during 12 ship-based cetacean and ecosystem
assessment surveys
[[Page 65002]]
conducted during July-December from 1986-2006.
It is assumed that, during simultaneous operations of the seismic
sources and the other sources, any marine mammals close enough to be
affected by the MBES or SBP would already be affected by the seismic
sources. However, whether or not the seismic sources are operating
simultaneously with the other sources, marine mammals are expected to
exhibit no more than short-term and inconsequential responses to the
MBES and SBP given their characteristics (e.g., narrow downward-
directed beam) and other considerations described above, such as the
unlikelihood of being exposed to the source at higher levels and the
fact that it would likely only be for one or two pulses. Such reactions
are not considered to constitute ``taking'' (NMFS, 2001). Therefore, no
additional allowance is included for animals that might be affected by
sound sources other than the seismic sources (i.e., airguns).
Extensive systematic ship-based surveys have been conducted by NMFS
SWFSC for marine mammals in the ETP. SWFSC has recently developed
habitat modeling as a method to estimate cetacean densities on a finer
spatial scale than traditional line-transect analyses by using a
continuous function of habitat variables, e.g., sea surface
temperature, depth, distance from shore, and prey density (Barlow et
al., 2009). The models have been incorporated into a web-based
Geographic Information System (GIS) developed by Duke University's
Department of Defense Strategic Environmental Research and Development
Program (SERDP) team in close collaboration with the SWFSC SERDP team
(Read et al., 2009). The GIS was used to obtain densities for the 10
cetaceans in the model (Bryde's whale, blue whale, Mesoplodon spp.,
rough-toothed, bottlenose, pantropical spotted, spinner, striped, and
short-beaked common dolphins, and short-finned pilot whale) in each of
eight areas: The four proposed survey areas (see Figure 1 in SIO's
application), and corridors 1[deg] wide and centered on the tracklines
between the survey areas and from the southernmost survey area to the
EEZ of Peru. For species sighted in SWFSC surveys whose sample sizes
were too small to model density (sperm whale, humpback whale, Cuvier's
beaked whale, Fraser's dolphin, Risso's dolphin, melon-headed, pygmy
killer, false killer, and killer whales), SIO used densities from the
surveys conducted during summer and fall 1986-1996, as summarized by
Ferguson and Barlow (2001). Densities were calculated from Ferguson and
Barlow (2003) for 5[deg] x 5[deg] blocks that include the proposed
survey areas and corridors. Those blocks included 27,275 km (16,947.9
mi) of survey effort in Beaufort sea states 0-5 and 2,564 km (1,593.2
mi) of survey effort in Beaufort sea states 0-2. Densities were
obtained for an additional eight species that were sighted in one or
more of those blocks.
Oceanographic conditions, including occasional El Nino and La Nina
events, influence the distribution and numbers of marine mammals
present in the ETP, resulting in considerable year-to-year variation in
the distribution and abundance of many marine mammal species (Escorza-
Trevino, 2009). Thus, for some species, the densities derived from
recent surveys may not be representative of the densities that will be
encountered during the proposed seismic survey.
Table 3 in SIO's application gives the average (or ``best'') and
maximum densities for each species of cetacean likely to occur in the
study area, i.e., species for which densities were obtained or
assigned. These densities have been corrected for both detectability
and availability bias by the study authors. Detectability bias is
associated with diminishing sightability with increasing lateral
distance from the trackline. Availability bias refers to the fact that
there is less than 100 percent probability of sighting an animal that
is present along the survey trackline. The estimated numbers of
individuals potentially exposed are presented next based on the 160-dB
re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) Level B harassment criterion for all cetaceans. It is
assumed that marine mammals exposed to airgun sounds at that level
might change their behavior sufficiently to be considered ``taken by
harassment''.
It should be noted that the following estimates of ``takes by
harassment'' assume that the surveys will be undertaken and completed;
in fact, the planned number of line-kilometers has been increased to
accommodate lines that may need to be repeated, equipment testing, etc.
As is typical on offshore ship surveys, inclement weather and equipment
malfunctions are likely to cause delays and may limit the number of
useful line-kilometers of seismic operations that can be undertaken.
Furthermore, any marine mammal sightings within or near the designated
EZ will result in the shutdown of seismic operations as a mitigation
measure. Thus, the following estimates of the numbers of marine mammals
potentially exposed to 160-dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) sounds are
precautionary and probably overestimate the actual numbers of marine
mammals that might be taken. These estimates assume that there will be
no weather, equipment, or mitigation delays, which is highly unlikely.
There is some uncertainty about the representativeness of the data and
the assumptions used in the calculations presented here. However, the
approach used here is believed to be the best available approach.
The number of different individuals that may be exposed to GI
airgun sounds with received levels >=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) on one or
more occasions was estimated by considering the total marine area that
would be within the 160-dB radius around the operating airgun array on
at least one occasion, along with the expected density of animals in
the area. The proposed seismic lines do not run parallel to each other
in close proximity, which minimizes the number of times an individual
mammal may be exposed during the survey; in this case, an individual
could be exposed 1.01 times on average. The numbers of different
individuals potentially exposed to >=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) were
calculated by multiplying the expected species density, times the
anticipated area to be ensonified to that level during GI airgun
operations.
The area expected to be ensonified was determined by entering the
planned survey lines into a MapInfo GIS, using the GIS to identify the
relevant areas by ``drawing'' the applicable 160-dB buffer (see Table 1
in this document) around each seismic line, and then calculating the
total area within the buffers. Areas where overlap occurred (because of
intersecting lines) were included only once when estimating the number
of individuals exposed.
Applying the approach described here, approximately 4,340 km\2\
(1,675.7 mi\2\) would be within the 160-dB isopleth on one or more
occasions during the surveys. In calculating exposure estimates, this
figure was increased by 25% (i.e., to 5,425 km\2\) in order to account
for the potential need to re-survey lines or other contingency. This
approach does not allow for turnover in the mammal populations in the
study area during the course of the survey. That might underestimate
actual numbers of individuals exposed, although the conservative
distances used to calculate the area may offset this. In addition, the
approach assumes that no cetaceans will move away or toward the
trackline as the Melville approaches in response to increasing sound
levels prior to the time the levels reach 160 dB. Another way of
interpreting the estimates that follow (Table 2 in this document) is
that they
[[Page 65003]]
represent the number of individuals that are expected (in the absence
of a seismic program) to occur in the waters that will be exposed to
>=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms). The take estimates presented here do not
take the proposed mitigation measures into consideration and thus are
likely to be overestimates.
Table 2--The Estimates of the Possible Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to Sound Levels Greater Than or Equal
to 160 dB During SIO's Proposed Seismic Survey in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean in Oct-Nov 2010. The
Proposed Sound Source is a Pair of GI Airguns. Received Levels Are Expressed in dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) (Averaged
Over Pulse Duration), Consistent With NMFS' Practice. Not All Marine Mammals Will Change Their Behavior When
Exposed to These Sound Levels, But Some May Alter Their Behavior When Levels Are Lower (see text). See Tables 2-
4 in SIO's Application for Further Detail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Approx. %
individuals regional Take
Species exposed (best) population authorization
\1\ (best) \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mysticetes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryde's whale (Balaenoptera edeni)........................ 3 0.02 3
Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus)........................ **2 0.05 2
Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae)................... **2 \3\ NA 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Odontocetes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus)...................... 22 0.09 22
Cuvier's beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris)............... 10 0.05 10
Mesoplodon sp. (unidentified)............................. **2 <0.01 **2
Rough-toothed dolphin (Steno bredanensis)................. 9 0.01 *15
Pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata).......... **68 0.01 *131
Spinner dolphin (Stenella longirostris)................... 21 <0.01 *109
Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus)................... **83 0.02 **83
Striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba)................... 192 <0.01 192
Fraser's dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei).................... 6 <0.01 *440
Short-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis)........... 777 0.02 777
Pygmy killer whale (Feresa attenuata)..................... **4 0.01 *30
Melon-headed whale (Peponocephala electra)................ **16 0.03 *258
Risso's dolphin (Grampus griseus)......................... **56 0.05 **56
False killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens)................. **3 0.01 *11
Killer whale (Orcinus orca)............................... 5 0.05 5
Short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus)..... **35 0.01 **35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Requested take authorization increased from `best' exposure estimate to mean group size as reported in
Ferguson et al. (2006).
** Rounded-up, where proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010) presented figures rounded down. See
Description of the Specified Activity in this document for discussion.
\1\ Best (mean) estimate density are from Table 3 of SIO's application. Humpback whale estimates calculated
independently using methodology described previously.
\2\ Regional population size estimates are from Table 2 in the proposed IHA (75 FR 54095, September 3, 2010).
\3\ Southern Hemisphere population sizes are poorly understood. However, the number of individuals potentially
exposed is low relative to regional population.
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers Analysis
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.'' In making a negligible impact determination,
NMFS considers:
(1) The number of anticipated mortalities;
(2) The number and nature of anticipated injuries;
(3) The number, nature, and intensity, and duration of Level B
harassment; and
(4) The context in which the takes occur.
As mentioned previously, NMFS estimates that 21 species of marine
mammals (including three species categorized as Mesoplodon sp.) could
be potentially affected by Level B harassment over the course of the
IHA. For each species, these numbers are small (each, less than one
percent) relative to the population size.
No takes by (Level A harassment), serious injury, or mortality are
anticipated to occur as a result of the SIO's marine geophysical
survey, and none are authorized. Only short-term behavioral disturbance
is anticipated to occur due to the brief and sporadic duration of the
survey activities, and these takes are not expected to occur in a place
that is of specific biological importance to marine mammals, such as in
a known breeding, calving, or feeding area, as no such times or places
are known for the project location or time. If such a place, previously
unknown, does exist in the project area, NMFS would still anticipate
that the impacts would be negligible due to their temporary nature in
space and time. Due to the nature, degree, and context of the
behavioral harassment anticipated, the activity is not expected to
impact rates of recruitment or survival.
For reasons stated previously, the specified activities associated
with the survey are not likely to cause TTS, PTS or other non-auditory
injury, serious injury, or death to affected marine mammals because:
(1) The likelihood that, given sufficient notice through relatively
slow ship speed, marine mammals are expected to move away from a noise
source that is annoying prior to its becoming potentially injurious;
(2) The fact that cetaceans would have to be closer than 40 m
(0.025 mi) in deep water when the full array is in use at a 2 m (6.6
ft) tow depth from the vessel to be exposed to levels of sound
[[Page 65004]]
believed to have even a minimal chance of causing PTS;
(3) The fact that marine mammals would have to be closer than 400 m
(0.25 mi) in deep water when the full array is in use at a 2 m (6.6 ft)
tow depth from the vessel to be exposed to levels of sound (160 dB)
believed to have even a minimal chance at causing TTS; and
(4) The likelihood that marine mammal detection ability by trained
observers is high at that short distance from the vessel;
(5) The incorporation of other required mitigation measures (i.e.,
ramp-up, shut-down, temporal and spatial avoidance, and additional
mitigation measures); and
(7) The relatively limited duration and geographically widespread
distances of the seismic survey (approximately 15 days).
As a result, no take by injury, serious injury, or death is
anticipated or authorized, and the potential for temporary or permanent
hearing impairment is very low and will be avoided through the
incorporation of the monitoring and mitigation measures.
While the number of marine mammals potentially incidentally
harassed will depend on the distribution and abundance of marine
mammals in the vicinity of the survey activity, the number of potential
Level B incidental harassment takings (see Table 2) is estimated to be
small, less than one percent of any of the estimated population sizes
based on the data disclosed in Table 2 of this notice, and has been
mitigated to the lowest level practicable through incorporation of the
monitoring and mitigation measures mentioned previously in this
document. Also, there are no known important reproductive or feeding
areas in the action area.
NMFS has determined, provided that the aforementioned mitigation
and monitoring measures are implemented, that the impact of conducting
a marine geophysical survey in the ETP, October through November 2010,
may result, at worst, in a temporary modification in behavior and/or
low-level physiological effects (Level B harassment) of small numbers
of certain species of marine mammals.
While behavioral modifications, including temporarily vacating the
area during the operation of the airgun(s), may be made by these
species to avoid the resultant acoustic disturbance, the availability
of alternate areas within these areas and the short and sporadic
duration of the research activities, have led NMFS to determine that
this action will have a negligible impact on the species in the
specified geographic region.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring
measures, NMFS finds that SIO's planned research activities, will
result in the incidental take of small numbers of marine mammals, by
Level B harassment only, and that the total taking from the marine
geophysical survey will have a negligible impact on the affected
species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species or Stock for Taking for
Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action.
Endangered Species Act
Of the 21 species of marine mammals that may occur in the survey
area, three are listed as endangered under the ESA, including the
humpback, blue, and sperm whales. Under Section 7 of the ESA, NSF had
initiated formal consultation with the NMFS, Office of Protected
Resources, Endangered Species Division, on this seismic survey. NMFS'
Office of Protected Resources, Permits, Conservation and Education
Division, also initiated formal consultation under Section 7 of the ESA
with NMFS' Office of Protected Resources, Endangered Species Division,
to obtain a Biological Opinion (BiOp) evaluating the effects of issuing
the IHA on threatened and endangered marine mammals and, consistent
with the requirements for mitigation and monitoring set forth in the
IHA, authorizing incidental take. On October 15, 2010, NMFS concluded
formal Section 7 consultation with itself and issued a BiOp which
concluded that the proposed action and issuance of the IHA are not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the humpback, blue, and
sperm whales and leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), green (Chelonia
mydas), loggerhead (Caretta caretta), hawksbill (Eretmochelys
imbricata), and olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) sea turtles. The
BiOp also concluded that designated critical habitat for these species
does not occur in the action area and would not be affected by the
survey. SIO must comply with the Relevant Terms and Conditions of the
Incidental Take Statement corresponding to NMFS' BiOp issued to both
NSF and NMFS' Office of Protected Resources.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
To meet NMFS' National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.) requirements for the issuance of an IHA to SIO, NMFS has
prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) titled ``Issuance of an
Incidental Harassment Authorization to the Scripps Institution of
Oceanography to Take Marine Mammals by Harassment Incidental to a
Marine Geophysical Survey off of Central and South America in the
Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean, October-November 2010''. This EA
incorporates by reference the NSF's Environmental Analysis Pursuant To
Executive Order 12114 (NSF, 2010) and an associated report (Report)
prepared by LGL Limited Environmental Research Associates (LGL) for
NSF, titled, ``Environmental Assessment of a Marine Geophysical Survey
by the R/V Melville in the Pacific Ocean off Central and South America,
October-November 2010'' (LGL, 2010) by reference pursuant to 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) 1502.21 and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO)
216-6 Sec. 5.09(d). NMFS' EA analyzes the direct, indirect and
cumulative environmental impacts of the specified activities on marine
mammals including those listed as threatened or endangered under the
ESA. NMFS also evaluated and considered comments provided by the public
in finalizing the EA and addressing the intensity of impacts to marine
mammals
The NMFS has made a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and,
therefore, will not prepare an environmental impact statement for the
issuance of an IHA to SIO for this activity. The EA and the NMFS FONSI
for this activity are available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Determinations
NMFS has determined that the impact of conducting the specific
seismic survey activities described in this notice and the IHA request
in the specific geographic region in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean
may result, at worst, in a temporary modification in behavior (Level B
harassment) of small numbers of marine mammals. Further, this activity
is expected to result in a negligible impact on the affected species or
stocks of marine mammals. The provision requiring that the activity not
have an unmitigable impact on the availability of the affected species
or stock of marine mammals for subsistence uses is not implicated for
this action.
[[Page 65005]]
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, NMFS proposes to issue an IHA
to SIO for conducting a marine geophysical survey in the eastern
tropical Pacific Ocean, provided the previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. The duration
of the IHA would not exceed one year from the date of its issuance.
Dated: October 15, 2010.
Helen M. Golde,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-26547 Filed 10-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P