Notice2022-20240
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Office of Naval Research's Arctic Research Activities in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas (Year 5)
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 20, 2022
Effective
September 14, 2022
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the Office of Naval Research (ONR) to incidentally harass, by Level B harassment only, marine mammals during active acoustic testing associated with Arctic Research Activities (ARA) in the Beaufort Sea and eastern Chukchi Sea. The ONR's activities are considered military readiness activities pursuant to the MMPA, as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2004 (2004 NDAA).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 181 (Tuesday, September 20, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57458-57472]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-20240]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XC223]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Office of Naval Research's
Arctic Research Activities in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas (Year 5)
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
the Office of Naval Research (ONR) to incidentally harass, by Level B
harassment only, marine mammals during active acoustic testing
associated with Arctic Research Activities (ARA) in the Beaufort Sea
and eastern Chukchi Sea. The ONR's activities are considered military
readiness activities pursuant to the MMPA, as amended by the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2004 (2004 NDAA).
DATES: This Authorization is effective from September 14, 2022 through
September 13, 2023.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jessica Taylor, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in
this document, may be obtained online at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities</a>. In case of problems
accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) 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 proposed or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a
proposed IHA is provided to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings 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 taking for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as
``mitigation''), and requirements pertaining to the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth.
The 2004 NDAA (Pub. L. 108-136) removed the ``small numbers'' and
``specified geographical region'' limitations indicated above and
amended the definition of ``harassment'' as applied to a ``military
readiness activity.'' The activity for which incidental take of marine
mammals is being authorized addressed here qualifies as a military
readiness activity. The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory
terms cited above are included in the relevant sections below.
Summary of Request
On March 21, 2022, NMFS received a request from ONR for an IHA to
take marine mammals incidental to ARA in the Beaufort and eastern
Chukchi Seas. The application was deemed adequate and complete on June
30, 2022. ONR's request is for take of beluga whales (Delphinapterus
leucas; two stocks) and ringed seals (Pusa hispida hispida) by Level B
harassment. Neither ONR nor NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to
result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
This IHA covers the fifth year of a larger project for which ONR
obtained prior IHAs (83 FR 48799, September 27, 2018; 84 FR 50007,
September 24, 2019; 85 FR 53333, August 28, 2020; 86 FR 54931, October
5, 2021) and may request take authorization for subsequent facets of
the overall project. This IHA is valid for a period of 1 year from the
date of issuance. The larger project supports the development of an
under-ice navigation system under the ONR Arctic Mobile Observing
System (AMOS) project. ONR has complied with all the requirements
(e.g., mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of the previous IHAs (83
FR 48799, September 27, 2018; 84 FR 50007, September 24, 2019; 85 FR
53333, August 28, 2020; 86 FR 54931, October 5, 2021).
Description of Specified Activity
Overview
ONR's ARA include scientific experiments to be conducted in support
of the programs named above. Specifically, the project includes the
AMOS experiments in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. Project activities
involve acoustic testing and a multi-frequency navigation system
concept test using left-behind active acoustic sources. More
specifically, these experiments involve the deployment of moored,
drifting, and ice-tethered active acoustic sources from the Research
Vessel (R/V) Sikuliaq. Another vessel will be used to
[[Page 57459]]
retrieve the acoustic sources. Underwater sound from the acoustic
sources may result in Level B harassment of marine mammals.
Dates and Duration
This action will occur from mid- September 2022 through mid-
September 2023. The 2022 cruise will leave from Nome, Alaska on
September 14, 2022 using the R/V Sikuliaq and involve 120 hours of
active source testing. During this first cruise, several acoustic
sources will be deployed from the ship. Some acoustic sources will be
left behind to provide year-round observation of the Arctic
environment. Gliders deployed during the September 2022 cruise may be
recovered before the research vessel departs the study area or during
the September 2023 cruise. Up to seven fixed acoustic navigation
sources transmitting at 900 hertz (Hz) will remain in place for a year.
Drifting and moored oceanographic sensors will record environmental
parameters throughout the year. Autonomous weather stations and ice
mass balance buoys will also be deployed to record environmental
measurements throughout the year (Table 1). The research vessel is
planned to return to Nome, Alaska on October 28, 2022. ONR will apply
for a renewal or separate IHA for activities conducted during the
planned September 2023 cruise.
During the scope of this project, other activities may occur at
different intervals that will assist ONR in meeting the scientific
objectives of the various projects discussed above. However, these
activities are designated as de minimis sources in ONR's 2022-2023 IHA
application (consistent with analyses presented in support of previous
Navy ONR IHAs), or will not produce sounds detectable by marine mammals
(see discussion on de minimis sources below). These include the
deployment of a Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) micromodem,
acoustic Doppler current profilers (ADCP), and ice profilers (Table 2).
Geographic Region
This action will occur across the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone
(EEZ) in both the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas, partially in the high seas
north of Alaska, the Global Commons, and within a part of the Canadian
EEZ (in which the appropriate permits will be obtained by the Navy)
(Figure 1). The action will primarily occur in the Beaufort Sea, but
the analysis considers the drifting of active sources on buoys into the
eastern portion of the Chukchi Sea. The closest point of the study area
to the Alaska coast is 110 nautical miles (nm) (204 km). The study area
is approximately 639,267 km\2\.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 57460]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN20SE22.000
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
The ONR Arctic and Global Prediction Program supports two major
projects: Stratified Ocean Dynamics of the Arctic (SODA) and AMOS. The
SODA and AMOS projects have been previously discussed in association
with previously issued IHAs (83 FR 40234, August 14, 2018; 84 FR 37240,
July 31, 2019). However, only activities relating to the AMOS project
will occur during the period covered by this action.
The AMOS project constitutes the development of a new system
involving very low (35 hertz (Hz)), low (900 Hz), and mid-frequency
transmissions (10 kilohertz (kHz)). The AMOS project will utilize
acoustic sources and receivers to provide a means of performing under-
ice navigation for gliders and unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs).
This will allow for the possibility of year-round
[[Page 57461]]
scientific observations of the environment in the Arctic. As an
environment that is particularly affected by climate change, year-round
observations under a variety of ice conditions are required to study
the effects of this changing environment for military readiness, as
well as the implications of environmental change to humans and animals.
Very-low frequency technology is important in extending the range of
navigation systems. The technology also has the potential to allow for
development and use of navigational systems that would not be heard by
some marine mammal species, and therefore would be less impactful
overall.
Active acoustic sources will be lowered from the cruise vessel
while stationary, deployed on gliders and UUVs, or deployed on fixed
AMOS moorings. This project will use groups of drifting buoys with
sources and receivers communicating oceanographic information to a
satellite in near real time. These sources will employ low-frequency
transmissions only (900 Hz).
The action will utilize non-impulsive acoustic sources, although
not all sources will cause take of marine mammals. Any marine mammal
takes will only arise from the operation of non-impulsive active
sources. Although not currently planned, icebreaking could occur as
part of this action if a research vessel needs to return to the study
area before the end of the IHA period to ensure scientific objectives
are met. In this case, icebreaking could result in potential Level B
harassment takes.
Below are descriptions of the equipment and platforms that will be
deployed at different times during the authorized action.
Research Vessels
The R/V Sikuliaq will perform the research cruise in September 2022
and conduct testing of acoustic sources during the cruise, as well as
leave sources behind to operate as a year-round navigation system
observation. R/V Sikuliaq has a maximum speed of approximately 12 knots
(6.2 m/s) with a cruising speed of 11 knots (5.7 m/s) (University of
Alaska Fairbanks, 2014). The R/V Sikuliaq is not an ice breaking ship,
but an ice strengthened ship. It will not be icebreaking and therefore
acoustic signatures of icebreaking for the R/V Sikuliaq are not
relevant.
The ship to be used in September 2023 to retrieve any acoustic
sources could potentially be the Coast Guard Cutter (CGC) Healy. CGC
Healy travels at a maximum speed of 17 knots (8.7 m/s) with a cruising
speed of 12 knots (6.2 m/s) (United States Coast Guard, 2013), and a
maximum speed of 3 knots (1.5 m/s) when traveling through 4.5 feet
(1.07 m) of sea ice (United States Coast Guard, 2013). While no
icebreaking cruise on the CGC Healy is scheduled during the IHA period,
need may arise. Therefore, for the purposes of this IHA application, an
icebreaking cruise is considered.
The R/V Sikuliaq, CGC Healy, or any other vessel operating a
research cruise associated with this action may perform the following
activities during their research cruises:
<bullet> Deployment of moored and/or ice-tethered passive sensors
(oceanographic measurement devices, acoustic receivers);
<bullet> Deployment of moored and/or ice-tethered active acoustic
sources to transmit acoustic signals;
<bullet> Deployment of UUVs;
<bullet> Deployment of drifting buoys, with or without acoustic
sources; or,
<bullet> Recovery of equipment.
Moored and Drifting Acoustic Sources
During the September 2022 cruise, active acoustic sources will be
lowered from the cruise vessel while stationary, deployed on gliders
and UUVs, or deployed on fixed AMOS moorings. This will be done for
intermittent testing of the system components. The total amount of
active source testing for ship-deployed sources used during the cruise
will be 120 hours. The testing will take place near the seven source
locations on Figure 1, with UUVs running tracks within the designated
box. During this testing, 35 Hz, 900 Hz, and 10 kHz acoustic signals,
as well as acoustic modems will be employed.
Up to seven fixed acoustic navigation sources transmitting at 900
Hz will remain in place for a year and continue transmitting during
this time. These moorings will be anchored on the seabed and held in
the water column with subsurface buoys. All sources will be deployed by
shipboard winches, which will lower sources and receivers in a
controlled manner. Anchors will be steel ``wagon wheels'' typically
used for this type of deployment. Two very low frequency (VLF) sources
transmitting at 35 Hz will be deployed in a similar manner. Two Ice
Gateway Buoys (IGB) will also be configured with active acoustic
sources. Autonomous vehicles will be able to navigate by receiving
acoustic signals from multiple locations and triangulating. This is
needed for vehicles that are under ice and cannot communicate with
satellites. Source transmits will be offset by 15 minutes from each
other (i.e., sources will not be transmitting at the same time). All
navigation sources will be recovered. The purpose of the navigation
sources is to orient UUVs and gliders in situations when they are under
ice and cannot communicate with satellites. For the purposes of this
action, activities potentially resulting in take will not be included
in the fall 2023 cruise; a subsequent application will be provided by
ONR depending on the scientific plan associated with that cruise.
Table 1--Characteristics for the Modeled Acoustic Sources for the Action
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal strength (dB
Platform Acoustic source Purpose/function Frequency re1uPa @ 1m) \1\ Band width
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REMUS 600 UUV (1).................. WHOI \2\/Micro-modem.. Acoustic 900-950 Hz \3\.......... NTE \3\ 180 dB by sys 50 Hz.
communication. design limits.
UUV/WHOI Micro-modem.. Acoustic 8-14 kHz \3\............ NTE 185 dB by sys 5 kHz.
communication. design limits.
IGB \3\ (drifting) (2)............. WHOI Micro-modem...... Acoustic 900-950 Hz.............. NTE 180 dB by sys 50 Hz.
communication. design limits.
WHOI Micro-modem...... Acoustic 8-14 kHz................ NTE 185 dB by sys 5 kHz.
communication. design limits.
Mooring (9)........................ WHOI Micro-modem (7).. Acoustic navigation.. 900-950 Hz.............. NTE 180 dB by sys 50 Hz.
design limits.
VLF \3\ (2)........... Acoustic navigation.. 35 Hz................... NTE 190 dB........... 6 Hz.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ dB re 1 [micro]Pa at 1 m = decibels referenced to 1 micropascal at 1 meter.
\2\ WHOI = Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.
\3\ Hz = Hertz; IGB = Ice Gateway Buoy; kHz = 1 kilohertz; NTE = not to exceed; VLF = very low frequency.
[[Page 57462]]
Activities Not Likely To Result in Take
The following in-water activities have been determined to be
unlikely to result in take of marine mammals. These activities are
described here but they are not discussed further in this document.
De minimis Sources--De minimis sources have the following
parameters: Low source levels, narrow beams, downward directed
transmission, short pulse lengths, frequencies outside known marine
mammal hearing ranges, or some combination of these factors (Department
of the Navy, 2013). The following are some of the planned de minimis
sources which will be used during this action: WHOI micromodem, ADCPs,
ice profilers, and additional sources below 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa used
during towing operations. ADCPs may be used on moorings. Ice-profilers
measure ice properties and roughness. The ADCPs and ice-profilers will
all be above 200 kHz and therefore out of marine mammal hearing ranges,
with the exception of the 75 kHz ADCP which has the characteristics and
de minimis justification listed in Table 2. They may be employed on
moorings or UUVs. Descriptions of some de minimis sources are discussed
below and in Table 2. More detailed descriptions of these de minimis
sources can be found in ONR's IHA application under Section 1.1.1.2.
Table 2--Parameters for De Minimis Non-Impulsive Active Sources
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sound
pressure level Pulse Duty cycle
Source name Frequency range (kHz) (dB re 1 length(s) (percent) De minimis justification
[mu]Pa at 1 m)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADCP..................................... >200, 150, or 75................ 190 <0.001 <0.1 Very low pulse length,
narrow beam, moderate
source level.
Nortek Signature 500 kHz Doppler Velocity 500............................. 214 <0.1 <13 Very high frequency.
Log.
CTD\1\ Attached Echosounder.............. 5-20............................ 160 0.004 2 Very low source level.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Conductivity Temperature Depth.
Drifting Oceanographic Sensors
Observations of ocean-ice interactions require the use of sensors
that are moored and embedded in the ice. For this action, it will not
be required to break ice to do this, as deployments can be performed in
areas of low ice-coverage or free floating ice. Sensors are deployed
within a few dozen meters of each other on the same ice floe. Three
types of sensors will be used: autonomous ocean flux buoys, Integrated
Autonomous Drifters, and ice-tethered profilers. The autonomous ocean
flux buoys measure oceanographic properties just below the ocean-ice
interface. The autonomous ocean flux buoys will have ADCPs and
temperature chains attached, to measure temperature, salinity, and
other ocean parameters in the top 20 ft (6 m) of the water column.
Integrated Autonomous Drifters will have a long temperate string
extending down to 656 ft (200 m) depth and will incorporate
meteorological sensors, and a temperature spring to estimate ice
thickness. The ice-tethered profilers will collect information on ocean
temperature, salinity and velocity down to 820 ft (250 m) depth.
Up to 20 Argo-type autonomous profiling floats may be deployed in
the central Beaufort Sea. Argo floats drift at 4,921 ft (1,500 m)
depth, profiling from 6,562 ft (2,000 m) to the sea surface once every
10 days to collect profiles of temperature and salinity.
Moored Oceanographic Sensors
Moored sensors will capture a range of ice, ocean, and atmospheric
conditions on a year-round basis. These will be bottom anchored, sub-
surface moorings measuring velocity, temperature, and salinity in the
upper 1,640 ft (500 m) of the water column. The moorings also collect
high-resolution acoustic measurements of the ice using the ice
profilers described above. Ice velocity and surface waves will be
measured by 500 kHz multibeam sonars from Nortek Signatures. The moored
oceanographic sensors described above use only de minimis sources and
are therefore not anticipated to have the potential for impacts on
marine mammals or their habitat.
On-Ice Measurements
On-ice measurement systems will be used to collect weather data.
These will include an Autonomous Weather Station and an Ice Mass
Balance Buoy. The Autonomous Weather Station will be deployed on a
tripod; the tripod has insulated foot platforms that are frozen into
the ice. The system will consist of an anemometer, humidity sensor, and
pressure sensor. The Autonomous Weather Station also includes an
altimeter that is de minimis due to its very high frequency (200 kHz).
The Ice Mass Balance Buoy is a 20 ft (6 m) sensor string, which is
deployed through a 2 inch (5 cm) hole drilled into the ice. The string
is weighted by a 2.2 lb (1 kg) lead weight, and is supported by a
tripod. The buoy contains a de minimis 200 kHz altimeter and snow depth
sensor. Autonomous Weather Stations and Ice Mass Balance Buoys will be
deployed, and will drift with the ice, making measurements, until their
host ice floes melt, thus destroying the instruments (likely in summer,
roughly one year after deployment). After the on-ice instruments are
deployed they cannot be recovered, and will sink to the seafloor as
their host ice floes melted.
Mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in
detail later in this document (please see Mitigation and Monitoring and
Reporting).
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to ONR was published in
the Federal Register on July 25, 2022 (87 FR 44339). That notice
described, in detail, ONR's activity, the marine mammal species that
may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated effects on marine
mammals. During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS received one
non-substantive public comment that did not present relevant
information and did not change our determinations or any aspects of the
IHA as described in the proposed Federal Register notice (87 FR 44339,
July 25, 2022).
Changes From Proposed IHA to Final IHA
There were no changes from the proposed IHA to the final IHA.
[[Page 57463]]
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and
behavior and life history of the potentially affected species. NMFS
fully considered all of this information, and we refer the reader to
these descriptions, incorporated here by reference, instead of
reprinting the information. Additional information regarding population
trends and threats may be found in NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports
(SARs; <a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>) and more general information about these
species (e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on
NMFS' website (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>).
Table 3 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and
authorized for this action, and summarizes information related to the
population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and
Endangered Species Act (ESA) and potential biological removal (PBR),
where known. PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of
animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a
marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its
optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS' SARs). While no
serious injury or mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and
annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are
included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and
other threats.
Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area.
NMFS' stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend
beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in
NMFS' U.S. 2021 SARs (e.g., Muto et al., 2022). All values presented in
Table 3 are the most recent available at the time of publication and
are available in the 2021 SARs (Muto et al., 2022).
Table 3--Marine Mammal Species 6 Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock abundance
ESA/MMPA (CV, Nmin, most
Common name Scientific name Stock status; recent PBR Annual M/
strategic abundance SI \3\
(Y/N) \1\ survey) \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Artiodactyla--Infraorder Cetacea--Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Monodontidae:
Beluga Whale............. Delphinapterus Beaufort Sea... -, -, N 39,258 (0.229, UND 104
leucas. N/A, 1992). \4\.
Beluga Whale............. Delphinapterus Eastern Chukchi -, -, N 13,305 (0.51, 178... 55
leucas. Sea. 8,875, 2012).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Pinnipedia
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (earless
seals):.
Ringed Seal \5\.......... Pusa hispida Arctic......... T, D, Y 171,418 (N/A, 5,100. 6,459
hispida. 158,507,
171,418.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-)
indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the
MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is
determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or
stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: <a href="http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/">www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/</a>. CV is coefficient of
variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable [explain if
this is the case].
\3\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury
from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined
precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality
due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
\4\ The 2016 guidelines for preparing SARs state that abundance estimates older than 8 years should not be used
to calculate PBR due to a decline in the reliability of an aged estimate. Therefore, the PBR for this stock is
considered undetermined (UND).
\5\ Abundance and associated values for ringed seals are for the U.S. population in the Bering Sea only.
\6\ Information on the classification of marine mammal species can be found on the web page for The Society for
Marine Mammalogy's Committee on Taxonomy (<a href="https://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/">https://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/</a>; Committee on Taxonomy (2022)).
As indicated above, the two species (with three managed stocks) in
Table 3 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the
degree that take is reasonably likely to occur. While bowhead whales
(Balaena mysticetus), gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus), bearded
seals (Erignathus barbatus), spotted seals (Phoca largha), ribbon seals
(Histiophoca fasciata), have been documented in the area, the temporal
and/or spatial occurrence of these species is such that take is not
expected to occur, and they are not discussed further beyond the
explanation provided here.
Due to the location of the study area (i.e., northern offshore,
deep water), there were no calculated exposures for the bowhead whale,
gray whale, spotted seal, bearded seal, and ribbon seal from
quantitative modeling of acoustic sources. Bowhead and gray whales are
closely associated with the shallow waters of the continental shelf in
the Beaufort Sea and are unlikely to be exposed to acoustic harassment
(Carretta et al., 2018; Muto et al., 2018). Similarly, spotted seals
tend to prefer pack ice areas with water depths less than 200 m during
the spring and move to coastal habitats in the summer and fall, found
as far north as 69-72[deg] N (Muto et al., 2018). Although the study
area includes some waters south of 72[deg] N, the acoustic sources with
the potential to result in take of marine mammals are not found below
that latitude and spotted seals are not expected to be exposed. Ribbon
seals are found year-round in the Bering Sea but may seasonally range
into the Chukchi Sea (Muto et al., 2018). The authorized action occurs
primarily in the Beaufort Sea, outside of the core range of ribbon
seals, thus ribbon seals are not expected to be behaviorally harassed.
Narwhals (Monodon monoceros) are considered extralimital in the project
area and are not expected to be encountered. As no harassment is
expected of the bowhead whale, gray whale, spotted seal, bearded seal,
narwhal, and ribbon seal, these
[[Page 57464]]
species will not be discussed further in this notice.
A detailed description of the species likely to be affected by the
ONR ARA, including brief introductions to the species and relevant
stocks, as well as available information regarding population trends
and threats, and information regarding local occurrence, were provided
in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (87 FR 44339, July
25, 2022); since that time, we are not aware of any changes in the
status of these species and stocks. Therefore, detailed descriptions
are not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for
these descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS's website (<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>) for generalized species accounts.
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine
mammals are able to hear. Not all marine mammal species have equal
hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and
Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al.
(2007, 2019) recommended that marine mammals be divided into hearing
groups based on directly measured (behavioral or auditory evoked
potential techniques) or estimated hearing ranges (behavioral response
data, anatomical modeling, etc.). Note that no direct measurements of
hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e.,
low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described
generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65
decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with
the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the
lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower
bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing
groups and their associated hearing ranges are provided in Table 4.
Table 4--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups (NMFS, 2018)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
(dolphins, toothed whales, beaked
whales, bottlenose whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
Cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
(true seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
(sea lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al., 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt,
2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
The effects of underwater noise from ONR's ARA have the potential
to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals in the vicinity of
the survey area. The notice of the proposed IHA (87 FR 44339, July 25,
2022) included a discussion of the effects of anthropogenic noise ONR's
ARA on marine mammals and their habitat. That information and analysis
is incorporated by reference into this final IHA determination and is
not repeated here; please refer to the notice of proposed IHA (87 FR
44339, July 25, 2022).
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration
of ``small numbers'' and the negligible impact determinations.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. For this military readiness activity, the MMPA defines
``harassment'' as (i) any act that injures or has the significant
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
(Level A harassment); or (ii) any act that disturbs or is likely to
disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including, but not limited
to, migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to
a point where the behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly
altered (Level B harassment).
Authorized takes will be by Level B harassment only, in the form of
disruption of behavioral patterns and/or temporary threshold shift
(TTS) for individual marine mammals resulting from exposure to ONR's
acoustic sources. Based on the nature of the activity, Level A
harassment is neither anticipated nor authorized.
As described previously, no serious injury or mortality has been
authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the authorized take
numbers are estimated.
For acoustic impacts, generally speaking, we estimate take by
considering: (1) acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best
available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally
harassed or incur some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the
area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a
day; (3) the density or occurrence of marine mammals within these
ensonified areas; and, (4) the number of days of activities. We note
that while these factors can contribute to a basic calculation to
provide an initial prediction of potential takes, additional
information that can qualitatively inform take estimates is also
sometimes available (e.g., previous monitoring results or average group
size). ONR employed an advanced model known as the Navy Acoustic
Effects Model (NAEMO) for assessing the impacts of underwater sound.
Below, we describe the factors
[[Page 57465]]
considered here in more detail and present the authorized take
estimates.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS recommends the use of acoustic thresholds that identify the
received level of underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals
would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to
Level B harassment) or to incur a permanent threshold shift (PTS) of
some degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment--Though significantly driven by received level,
the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure
is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the
source or exposure context (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty
cycle, duration of the exposure, signal-to-noise ratio, distance to the
source), the environment (e.g., bathymetry, other noises in the area,
predators in the area), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography, life stage, depth) and can be difficult to
predict (e.g., Southall et al., 2007, 2021; Ellison et al., 2012).
Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to
use a threshold based on a metric that is both predictable and
measurable for most activities, NMFS typically uses a generalized
acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of
behavioral harassment. NMFS generally predicts that marine mammals are
likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner considered to be Level B
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above root-
mean-squared pressure received levels (RMS SPL) of 120 dB (referenced
to 1 micropascal (re 1 [mu]Pa)) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile-
driving, drilling) and above RMS SPL 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for non-
explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g.,
scientific sonar) sources.
In this case, NMFS is adopting the Navy's approach to estimating
incidental take by Level B harassment from the active acoustic sources
for this action, which includes use of dose response functions. The
Navy's dose response functions were developed to estimate take from
sonar and similar transducers, but are not applicable to icebreaking.
Multi-year research efforts have conducted sonar exposure studies for
odontocetes and mysticetes (Miller et al., 2012; Sivle et al., 2012).
Several studies with captive animals have provided data under
controlled circumstances for odontocetes and pinnipeds (Houser et al.,
2013a; Houser et al., 2013b). Moretti et al. (2014) published a beaked
whale dose-response curve based on passive acoustic monitoring of
beaked whales during a U.S. Navy training activity at Atlantic
Underwater Test and Evaluation Center during actual Anti-Submarine
Warfare exercises. This information necessitated the update of the
behavioral response criteria for the U.S. Navy's environmental
analyses.
Southall et al. (2007), and more recently Southall et al. (2019),
synthesized data from many past behavioral studies and observations to
determine the likelihood of behavioral reactions at specific sound
levels. While in general, the louder the sound source the more intense
the behavioral response, it was clear that the proximity of a sound
source and the animal's experience, motivation, and conditioning were
also critical factors influencing the response (Southall et al., 2007;
Southall et al., 2019). After examining all of the available data, the
authors felt that the derivation of thresholds for behavioral response
based solely on exposure level was not supported because context of the
animal at the time of sound exposure was an important factor in
estimating response. Nonetheless, in some conditions, consistent
avoidance reactions were noted at higher sound levels depending on the
marine mammal species or group allowing conclusions to be drawn. Phocid
seals showed avoidance reactions at or below 190 dB re 1 [mu]Pa at 1m;
thus, seals may actually receive levels adequate to produce TTS before
avoiding the source.
Odontocete behavioral criteria for non-impulsive sources were
updated based on controlled exposure studies for dolphins and sea
mammals, sonar, and safety (3S) studies where odontocete behavioral
responses were reported after exposure to sonar (Antunes et al., 2014;
Houser et al., 2013b; Miller et al., 2011; Miller et al., 2014; Miller
et al., 2012). For the 3S study, the sonar outputs included 1-2 kHz up-
and down-sweeps and 6-7 kHz up-sweeps; source levels were ramped up
from 152-158 dB re 1 [micro]Pa to a maximum of 198-214 re 1 [micro]Pa
at 1 m. Sonar signals were ramped up over several pings while the
vessel approached the mammals. The study did include some control
passes of ships with the sonar off to discern the behavioral responses
of the mammals to vessel presence alone versus active sonar.
The controlled exposure studies included exposing the Navy's
trained bottlenose dolphins to mid-frequency sonar while they were in a
pen. Mid-frequency sonar was played at 6 different exposure levels from
125-185 dB re 1 [micro]Pa (rms). The behavioral response function for
odontocetes resulting from the studies described above has a 50 percent
probability of response at 157 dB re 1 [micro]Pa. Additionally,
distance cutoffs (20 km for MF cetaceans) were applied to exclude
exposures beyond which the potential of significant behavioral
responses is considered to be unlikely.
The pinniped behavioral threshold was updated based on controlled
exposure experiments on the following captive animals: hooded seal,
gray seal (Halichoerus grypus), and California sea lion (G[ouml]tz et
al., 2010; Houser et al., 2013a; Kvadsheim et al., 2010). Hooded seals
were exposed to increasing levels of sonar until an avoidance response
was observed, while the grey seals were exposed first to a single
received level multiple times, then an increasing received level. Each
individual California sea lion was exposed to the same received level
10 times. These exposure sessions were combined into a single response
value, with an overall response assumed if an animal responded in any
single session. The resulting behavioral response function for
pinnipeds has a 50 percent probability of response at 166 dB re 1
[mu]Pa. Additionally, distance cutoffs (10 km for pinnipeds) were
applied to exclude exposures beyond which the potential of significant
behavioral responses is considered unlikely. For additional information
regarding marine mammal thresholds for PTS and TTS onset, please see
NMFS (2018) and Table 6.
Empirical evidence has not shown responses to non-impulsive
acoustic sources that would constitute take beyond a few km from a non-
impulsive acoustic source, which is why NMFS and the Navy
conservatively set distance cutoffs for pinnipeds and mid-frequency
cetaceans (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2017a). The cutoff distances
for fixed sources are different from those for moving sources, as they
are treated as individual sources in Navy modeling given that the
distance between them is significantly greater than the range to which
environmental effects can occur. Fixed source cutoff distances used
were 2.7 nm (5 km) for pinnipeds and 5.4 nm (10 km) for beluga whales
(Table 5). As some of the on-site drifting sources could come closer
together, the drifting source cutoffs applied were 5.4 nm (10 km) for
pinnipeds and 10.8 nm (20 km) for beluga whales (Table 5). Regardless
of the received level at that distance, take is not estimated to occur
beyond these cutoff distances. Range to thresholds were calculated for
the noise associated with icebreaking in the study
[[Page 57466]]
area. These all fall within the same cutoff distances as non-impulsive
acoustic sources; range to behavioral threshold for both beluga whales
and ringed seal were under 2.7 nm (5 km), and range to TTS threshold
for both under 15 m (Table 5).
Table 5--Thresholds \1\ and Cutoff Distances for Sources by Species
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drifting
Fixed source source
Behavioral behavioral behavioral Behavioral Ice breaking
Species threshold for threshold threshold threshold for source cutoff TTS threshold PTS threshold
non-impulsive cutoff cutoff ice breaking distance \3\
acoustic sources distance \3\ distance \3\ sources (km)
(km) (km)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ringed Seal.................. Pinniped Dose 5 10 120 dB re 1 <5 181 dB SEL \4\ 201 dB SEL
Response [mu]Pa step cumulative. cumulative.
Function \2\. function.
Beluga Whale................. Mid-Frequency 10 20 120 dB re 1 <15 178 dB SEL 198 dB SEL
BRF dose [mu]Pa step cumulative. cumulative.
Response function.
Function \2\.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The threshold values provided are assumed for when the source is within the animal's best hearing sensitivity. The exact threshold varies based on
the overlap of the source and the frequency weighting.
\2\ See Figure 6-1 in application.
\3\ Take is not estimated to occur beyond these cutoff distances, regardless of the received level.
\4\ SEL = Sound exposure level.
Level A harassment--NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0)
(Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory
injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups
(based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from
two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). ONR's
activity includes the use of non-impulsive acoustic sources; however,
Level A harassment is not expected as a result of these activities nor
is it authorized by NMFS.
These thresholds are provided in the table below. The references,
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS' 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at:
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance</a>.
Table 6--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset thresholds * (received level)
Hearing group -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans.......... Cell 1: Lp,0-pk,flat: 219 Cell 2: LE,p,LF,24h: 199 dB.
dB; LE,p,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans.......... Cell 3: Lp,0-pk,flat: 230 Cell 4: LE,p,MF,24h: 198 dB.
dB; LE,p,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans......... Cell 5: Lp,0-pk,flat: 202 Cell 6: LE,p,HF,24h: 173 dB.
dB; LE,p,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater).... Cell 7: Lp,0-pk,flat: 218 Cell 8: LE,p,PW,24h: 201 dB.
dB; LE,p,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater)... Cell 9: Lp,0-pk,flat: 232 Cell 10: LE,p,OW,24h: 219 dB.
dB; LE,p,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS
onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds
associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds are recommended for consideration.
Note: Peak sound pressure level (Lp,0-pk) has a reference value of 1 [micro]Pa, and weighted cumulative sound
exposure level (LE,p) has a reference value of 1[micro]Pa\2\s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to be
more reflective of International Organization for Standardization standards (ISO, 2017). The subscript
``flat'' is being included to indicate peak sound pressure are flat weighted or unweighted within the
generalized hearing range of marine mammals (i.e., 7 Hz to 160 kHz). The subscript associated with cumulative
sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF,
and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The
weighted cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying
exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate
the conditions under which these thresholds will be exceeded.
Quantitative Modeling
The Navy performed a quantitative analysis to estimate the number
of marine mammals that could be exposed to underwater acoustic
transmissions above the previously described threshold criteria during
this action. Inputs to the quantitative analysis included marine mammal
density estimates obtained from the Kaschner et al. (2006) habitat
suitability model and Ca[ntilde]adas et al. (2020), marine mammal depth
occurrence (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2017b), oceanographic and
mammal hearing data, and criteria and thresholds for levels of
potential effects. The quantitative analysis consists of computer
modeled estimates and a post-model analysis to determine the number of
potential animal exposures. The model calculates sound energy
propagation from the non-impulsive acoustic sources, the sound received
by animat (virtual animal) dosimeters representing marine mammals
distributed in the area around the modeled activity, and whether the
sound received by animats exceeds the thresholds for effects.
The Navy developed a set of software tools and compiled data for
estimating acoustic effects on marine mammals without consideration of
behavioral avoidance or mitigation. These tools and data sets serve as
integral components of the NAEMO. In NAEMO, animats are distributed
non-uniformly based on species-specific density, depth distribution,
and group size information and animats record energy received at their
location in the water column. A fully three-dimensional environment is
used for calculating sound propagation and animat exposure in NAEMO.
Site-specific bathymetry, sound speed profiles, wind speed, and bottom
properties are incorporated into the propagation modeling process.
NAEMO
[[Page 57467]]
calculates the likely propagation for various levels of energy (sound
or pressure) resulting from each source used during the training event.
NAEMO then records the energy received by each animat within the
energy footprint of the event and calculates the number of animats
having received levels of energy exposures that fall within defined
impact thresholds. Predicted effects on the animats within a scenario
are then tallied and the highest order effect (based on severity of
criteria; e.g., PTS over TTS) predicted for a given animat is assumed.
Each scenario, or each 24-hour period for scenarios lasting greater
than 24 hours is independent of all others, and therefore, the same
individual marine mammal (as represented by an animat in the model
environment) could be impacted during each independent scenario or 24-
hour period. In a few instances, although the activities themselves all
occur within the study location, sound may propagate beyond the
boundary of the study area. Any exposures occurring outside the
boundary of the study area are counted as if they occurred within the
study area boundary. NAEMO provides the initial estimated impacts on
marine species with a static horizontal distribution (i.e., animats in
the model environment do not move horizontally).
There are limitations to the data used in the acoustic effects
model, and the results must be interpreted within this context. While
the best available data and appropriate input assumptions have been
used in the modeling, when there is a lack of definitive data to
support an aspect of the modeling, conservative modeling assumptions
have been chosen (i.e., assumptions that may result in an overestimate
of acoustic exposures):
<bullet> Animats are modeled as being underwater, stationary, and
facing the source and therefore always predicted to receive the maximum
potential sound level at a given location (i.e., no porpoising or
pinnipeds' heads above water);
<bullet> Animats do not move horizontally (but change their
position vertically within the water column), which may overestimate
physiological effects such as hearing loss, especially for slow moving
or stationary sound sources in the model;
<bullet> Animats are stationary horizontally and therefore do not
avoid the sound source, unlike in the wild where animals would most
often avoid exposures at higher sound levels, especially those
exposures that may result in PTS;
<bullet> Multiple exposures within any 24-hour period are
considered one continuous exposure for the purposes of calculating
potential threshold shift, because there are not sufficient data to
estimate a hearing recovery function for the time between exposures;
and
<bullet> Mitigation measures were not considered in the model. In
reality, sound-producing activities would be reduced, stopped, or
delayed if marine mammals are detected by visual monitoring.
Due to these inherent model limitations and simplifications, model-
estimated results should be further analyzed, considering such factors
as the range to specific effects, avoidance, and the likelihood of
successfully implementing mitigation measures. This analysis uses a
number of factors in addition to the acoustic model results to predict
acoustic effects on marine mammals, as described below in the Marine
Mammal Occurrence and Take Estimation section.
The underwater radiated noise signature for icebreaking in the
central Arctic Ocean by CGC Healy during different types of ice-cover
was characterized in Roth et al. (2013). The radiated noise signatures
were characterized for various fractions of ice cover. For modeling,
the 8/10 and 3/10 ice cover were used. Each modeled day of icebreaking
consisted of 16 hours of 8/10 ice cover and 8 hours of 3/10 ice cover.
The sound signature of the 5/10 icebreaking activities, which would
correspond to half-power icebreaking, was not reported in (Roth et al.,
2013); therefore, the full-power signature was used as a conservative
proxy for the half-power signature. Icebreaking was modeled for 8 days
total. Since ice forecasting cannot be predicted more than a few weeks
in advance, it is unknown if icebreaking would be needed to deploy or
retrieve the sources after one year of transmitting. Therefore, the
potential for an icebreaking cruise on CGC Healy was conservatively
analyzed within this request for an IHA. As the R/V Sikuliaq is not
expected to be icebreaking, acoustic noise created by icebreaking is
only modeled for the CGC Healy. Figures 5a and 5b in Roth et al. (2013)
depict the source spectrum level versus frequency for 8/10 and 3/10 ice
cover, respectively. The sound signature of each of the ice coverage
level was broken into 1-octave bins (Table 7). In the model, each bin
was included as a separate source on the modeled vessel. When these
independent sources go active concurrently, they simulate the sound
signature of CGC Healy. The modeled source level summed across these
bins was 196.2 dB for the 8/10 signature and 189.3 dB for the 3/10 ice
signature. These source levels are a good approximation of the
icebreaker's observed source level (provided in Figure 4b of (Roth et
al., 2013)). Each frequency and source level was modeled as an
independent source, and applied simultaneously to all of the animats
within NAEMO. Each second was summed across frequency to estimate sound
pressure level (root mean square [SPL<INF>RMS</INF>]). Any animat
exposed to sound levels greater than 120 dB was considered a take by
Level B harassment. For PTS and TTS, determinations, sound exposure
levels were summed over the duration of the test and the transit to the
deep water deployment area. The method of quantitative modeling for
icebreaking is considered to be a conservative approach; therefore, the
number of takes estimated for icebreaking are likely an overestimate
and would not be expected to reach that level.
Table 7--Modeled Bins for 8/10 (Full Power) and 3/10 (Quarter Power) Ice
Coverage Ice Breaking on the CGC Healy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8/10 3/10
Frequency (Hz) source source
level (dB) level (dB)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
25............................................ 189 187
50............................................ 188 182
100........................................... 189 179
200........................................... 190 177
400........................................... 188 175
800........................................... 183 170
1,600......................................... 177 166
3,200......................................... 176 171
6,400......................................... 172 168
12,800........................................ 167 164
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For non-impulsive sources, NAEMO calculates the SPL and SEL for
each active emission during an event. This is done by taking the
following factors into account over the propagation paths: bathymetric
relief and bottom types, sound speed, and attenuation contributors such
as absorption, bottom loss, and surface loss. Platforms such as a ship
using one or more sound sources are modeled in accordance with relevant
vehicle dynamics and time durations by moving them across an area whose
size is representative of the testing event's operational area.
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Estimation
In this section we provide information about the occurrence of
marine mammals, including density or other relevant information that
will inform the take calculations. We also describe
[[Page 57468]]
how the marine mammal occurrence information is synthesized to produce
a quantitative estimate of the take that is authorized and reasonably
likely to occur.
The beluga whale density numbers utilized for quantitative acoustic
modeling are from the Navy Marine Species Density Database (Department
of the Navy, 2014). Where available (i.e., June through 15 October over
the continental shelf primarily), density estimates used were from Duke
density modeling based upon line-transect surveys (Ca[ntilde]adas et
al., 2020). The remaining seasons and geographic area were based on the
habitat-based modeling by Kaschner et al. (2006) and Kaschner (2004).
Density for beluga whales was not distinguished by stock and varied
throughout the project area geographically and monthly; the range of
densities in the project area during September I shown in Table 8. The
density estimates for ringed seals are based on the habitat suitability
modeling by Kaschner et al. (2006) and Kaschner (2004) and shown in
Table 8 as well.
Table 8--Density Estimates of Impacted Species
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Density estimates
Common name (animals/km\2\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beluga whale (Beaufort Sea) Stock.............. 0.000506 to 0.5176
Beluga whale (Eastern Chukchi Sea Stock).......
------------------------
Ringed seal (Arctic Stock)..................... 0.1108 to 0.3562
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take of all species will occur by Level B harassment only. NAEMO
estimated for potential TTS exposure and predicted one exposure of
ringed seals may occur as a result of the authorized activities. Table
9 shows the total number of authorized takes by Level B harassment that
NMFS has authorized for both beluga whale stocks and the Arctic ringed
seal stock based upon NAEMO modeled results.
Density estimates for beluga whales are equal as estimates were not
distinguished by stock (Kaschner et al., 2006; Kaschner, 2004). The
ranges of the Beaufort Sea and Eastern Chukchi Sea beluga whales vary
within the study area throughout the year (Hauser et al., 2014). Based
upon the limited information available regarding the expected spatial
distributions of each stock within the study area, take has been
apportioned equally to each stock (Table 9). In addition, in NAEMO,
animats do not move horizontally or react in any way to avoid sound.
Therefore, the current model may overestimate non-impulsive acoustic
impacts.
Table 9--Authorized Take by Level B Harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total authorized Percentage of
Non-impulsive Icebreaking Icebreaking take stock
Species active acoustics (behavioral) (TTS) ------------------ authorized for
(behavioral) Behavioral/TTS take \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beluga whale--Beaufort Sea 134 11 0 145/0 0.369
Stock......................
Beluga whale--Eastern 134 11 0 145/0 1.09
Chukchi Sea Stock..........
Ringed seal................. 2,839 538 1 3,377/1 1.97
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Percentage of stock taken calculated based on proportion of number of Level B takes per the stock population
estimate provided in Table 3-1 in the application.
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to the
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of the species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses. NMFS regulations require applicants for incidental
take authorizations to include information about the availability and
feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and
manner of conducting the activity or other means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks, and
their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)). The NDAA for FY 2004 amended the
MMPA as it relates to military readiness activities and the incidental
take authorization process such that ``least practicable impact'' shall
include consideration of personnel safety, practicality of
implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the military
readiness activity.
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, NMFS
considers two primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat,
as well as subsistence uses. This considers the nature of the
potential adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range).
It further considers the likelihood that the measure will be
effective if implemented (probability of accomplishing the
mitigating result if implemented as planned), the likelihood of
effective implementation (probability implemented as planned), and;
(2) The practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
The Navy will be required to abide by the mitigation measures
below. These measures are expected to: further minimize the likelihood
of ship strikes; reduce the likelihood that marine mammals are exposed
to sound levels during acoustic source deployment that would be
expected to result in TTS or more severe behavioral responses and also
to ensure that there are no other
[[Page 57469]]
interactions between the deployed gear and marine mammals, and further
ensure that there are no impacts to subsistence uses.
Ships operated by or for the Navy are required to have at least one
personnel assigned to stand watch at all times, day and night, when
moving through the water. Watch personnel must be trained through the
U.S. Navy Marine Species Awareness Training Program, which standardizes
watch protocols and trains personnel in marine species detection to
prevent adverse impacts to marine mammal species. While in transit,
ships must be alert at all times, use extreme caution and proceed at a
safe speed such that the ship can take proper and effective action to
avoid a collision with any marine mammals.
During mooring or UUV deployment, visual observation will start 15
minutes prior to and continue throughout the deployment within the
mitigation zone of 180 ft (55 m, roughly one ship length) around the
deployed mooring. Deployment will stop if a marine mammal is visually
detected within the exclusion zone. Deployment will re-commence if any
one of the following conditions are met: (1) The animal is observed
exiting the exclusion zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited
the exclusion zone based on its course and speed, or (3) the exclusion
zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 15
minutes for pinnipeds and 30 minutes for cetaceans.
Ships will avoid approaching marine mammals head-on and will
maneuver to maintain a mitigation zone of 500 yards (yd; 457 m) around
observed cetaceans, and 200 yd (183 m) around all other marine mammals,
provided it is safe to do so in ice-free waters. Ships captains and
subsistence whalers will also maintain at-sea communication to avoid
conflict of ship transit with hunting activity.
If a marine mammal species for which take is not authorized is
encountered or observed within the mitigation zone, or a species for
which authorization was granted but the authorized number of takes have
been met, activities must cease. Activities may not resume until the
animal is confirmed to have left the area.
These requirements do not apply if a vessel's safety is at risk,
such as when a change of course would create an imminent and serious
threat to safety, person, or vessel, and to the extent that vessels are
restricted in their ability to maneuver. No further action is necessary
if a marine mammal other than a cetacean continues to approach the
vessel after there has already been one maneuver and/or speed change to
avoid the animal. Avoidance measures should continue for any observed
cetacean in order to maintain a mitigation zone of 500 yd (457 m).
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's measures, NMFS has
determined that the mitigation measures provide the means of effecting
the least practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and
their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating
grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of
such species or stock for subsistence uses.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA 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
authorizations 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 while
conducting the activities. Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
<bullet> Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density);
<bullet> Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
<bullet> Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
<bullet> How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks;
<bullet> Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat); and,
<bullet> Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
While underway, the ships (including non-Navy ships operating on
behalf of the Navy) utilizing active acoustics will have at least one
watch person during activities. Watch personnel must undertake
extensive training through the Navy's Marine Species Awareness
Training. Their duties may be performed in conjunction with other job
responsibilities, such as navigating the ship or supervising other
personnel. While on watch, personnel will employ visual search
techniques, including the use of binoculars, using a scanning method in
accordance with the U.S. Navy Marine Species Awareness Training or
civilian equivalent. A primary duty of watch personnel is to detect and
report all objects and disturbances sighted in the water that may be
indicative of a threat to the ship and its crew, such as debris, or
surface disturbance. Per safety requirements, watch personnel also
report any marine mammals sighted that have the potential to be in the
direct path of the ship as a standard collision avoidance procedure.
While underway, the ships (including non-Navy ships operating on
behalf of the Navy) utilizing active acoustics and towed in-water
devices will have at least one watch person during activities. While
underway, watch personnel must be alert at all times and have access to
binoculars. Each day, the following information will be recorded:
<bullet> Vessel name;
<bullet> Watch personnel names and affiliations;
<bullet> Effort type (i.e., transit or deployment); and
<bullet> Environmental conditions (at the beginning of watch
personnel shift and whenever conditions changed significantly),
including Beaufort Sea State and any other relevant weather conditions
including cloud cover, fog, sun glare, and overall visibility to the
horizon.
Watch personnel must use standardized data collection forms,
whether electronic or hard copy, as well as distinguish between marine
mammal sightings that occur during ship transit or acoustic source
deployment. Watch personnel must distinguish between sightings that
occur on transit, during deployment of acoustic sources, and during ice
breaking. Data must be recorded on all days of activities even if
marine mammals are not sighted.
[[Page 57470]]
Upon visual observation of a marine mammal, the following
information will be recorded:
<bullet> Date/time of sighting;
<bullet> Identification of animal (e.g., genus/species, lowest
possible taxonomic level, or unidentified) and the composition of the
group if there is a mix of species;
<bullet> Location (latitude/longitude) of sighting;
<bullet> Estimated number of animals (high/low/best);
<bullet> Description (as many distinguishing features as possible
of each individual seen, including length, shape, color, pattern, scars
or markings, shape and size of dorsal fin, shape of head, and blow
characteristics);
<bullet> Detailed behavior observations (e.g., number of blows/
breaths, number of surfaces, breaching, spyhopping, diving, feeding,
traveling; as explicit and detailed as possible; length of time the
animal was observed within the harassment zone; note any observed
changes in behavior);
<bullet> Distance from ship to animal;
<bullet> Direction of animal's travel relative to the vessel;
<bullet> Platform activity at time of sighting (i.e., transit,
deployment); and
<bullet> Weather conditions (i.e., Beaufort Sea State, cloud
cover).
During ice breaking, the following information must be recorded:
<bullet> Start and end time of ice breaking; and
<bullet> Ice cover conditions.
The U.S. Navy has coordinated with NMFS to develop an overarching
program plan in which specific monitoring would occur. This plan is
called the Integrated Comprehensive Monitoring Program (ICMP)
(Department of the Navy, 2011). The ICMP has been developed in direct
response to Navy permitting requirements established through various
environmental compliance efforts. As a framework document, the ICMP
applies by regulation to those activities on ranges and operating areas
for which the Navy is seeking or has sought incidental take
authorizations. The ICMP is intended to coordinate monitoring efforts
across all regions and to allocate the most appropriate level and type
of effort based on a set of standardized research goals, and in
acknowledgement of regional scientific value and resource availability.
The ICMP is focused on Navy training and testing ranges where the
majority of Navy activities occur regularly as those areas have the
greatest potential for being impacted. ONR's ARA in comparison is a
less intensive test with little human activity present in the Arctic.
Human presence is limited to the deployment of sources that will take
place over several weeks. Additionally, due to the location and nature
of the testing, vessels and personnel will not be within the study area
for an extended period of time. As such, more extensive monitoring
requirements beyond the basic information being collected will not be
feasible as it would require additional personnel and equipment to
locate seals and a presence in the Arctic during a period of time other
than what is planned for source deployment. However, ONR will record
all observations of marine mammals, including the marine mammal's
species identification, location (latitude and longitude), behavior,
and distance from project activities. ONR will also record date and
time of sighting. This information is valuable in an area with few
recorded observations.
If any injury or death of a marine mammal is observed during the
2022-2023 ARA, the Navy will immediately halt the activity and report
the incident to the Office of Protected Resources (OPR), NMFS, and the
Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS. The following information
must be provided:
<bullet> Time, date, and location of the discovery;
<bullet> Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
<bullet> Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if
the animal is dead);
<bullet> Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
<bullet> If available, photographs or video footage of the
animal(s); and
<bullet> General circumstances under which the animal(s) was
discovered (e.g., deployment of moored or drifting sources or by
transiting vessel).
ONR will provide NMFS, OPR, and Alaska Regional Office (AKR) with a
draft monitoring report within 90 days of the conclusion of each
research cruise, or 60 days prior to the issuance of any subsequent IHA
for this project, whichever comes first. All monitoring reports must be
reviewed and checked for accuracy prior to submission to NMFS. The
draft monitoring report will include data regarding acoustic source use
and any mammal sightings or detection documented. The report will
include the estimated number of marine mammals taken during the
activity. The report will also include information on the number of
shutdowns recorded. If no comments are received from NMFS within 30
days of submission of the draft final report, the draft final report
will constitute the final report. If comments are received, a final
report must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of comments.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact 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 (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any impacts or responses (e.g., intensity, duration),
the context of any impacts or responses (e.g., critical reproductive
time or location, foraging impacts affecting energetics), as well as
effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We
also assess the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by
evaluating this information relative to population status. Consistent
with the 1989 preamble for NMFS' implementing regulations (54 FR 40338,
September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing
anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their
impacts on the baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of
the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing
sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, the discussion of our analysis applies to
beluga whales and ringed seals, given that the anticipated effects of
this activity on these different marine mammal stocks are expected to
be similar. Where there are meaningful differences between species or
stocks, or groups of species, in anticipated individual responses to
activities, impact of expected take on the population due to
differences in population status, or impacts on habitat, they are
described independently in the analysis below.
Underwater acoustic transmissions associated with ONR's ARA, as
outlined previously, have the potential to result in Level B harassment
of beluga whales and ringed seals in the form of behavioral
disturbances. No serious injury, mortality, or Level A harassment are
anticipated to result from these described activities. Effects on
[[Page 57471]]
individual belugas or ringed seals taken by Level B harassment could
include alteration of dive behavior and/or foraging behavior, effects
to breathing rates, interference with or alteration of vocalization,
avoidance, and flight. More severe behavioral responses are not
anticipated due to the localized, intermittent use of active acoustic
sources. However, exposure duration is likely to be short-term and
individuals will, most likely, simply be temporarily displaced by
moving away from the acoustic source. Exposures are, therefore,
unlikely to result in any significant realized decrease in fitness for
affected individuals or adverse impacts to stocks as a whole.
Arctic ringed seals are listed as threatened under the ESA. The
primary concern for Arctic ringed seals is the ongoing and anticipated
loss of sea ice and snow cover resulting from climate change, which is
expected to pose a significant threat to ringed seals in the future
(Muto et al., 2022). In addition, Arctic ringed seals have also been
experiencing an Unusual Mortality Event (UME) since 2019 although the
cause of the UME is currently undetermined. As mentioned earlier, no
mortality or serious injury to ringed seals is anticipated nor
authorized. Due to the short-term duration of expected exposures and
required mitigation measures to reduce adverse impacts, we do not
expect the ARA to affect annual rates of ringed seal survival and
recruitment that may threaten population recovery or exacerbate the
ongoing UME.
A small portion of the ARA study area overlaps with ringed seal
critical habitat. Although this habitat contains features necessary for
ringed seal formation and maintenance of subnivean birth lairs, basking
and molting, and foraging, these features are also available throughout
the rest of the designated critical habitat area. Displacement of
ringed seals from the ARA study area would likely not interfere with
their ability to access necessary habitat features. Therefore, we
expect minimal impacts to any displaced ringed seals as similar
necessary habitat features would still be available nearby.
The ARA study area also overlaps with a beluga whale migratory
Biologically Important Area (BIA). Due to the small amount of overlap
between the BIA and the ARA study area, as well as the low intensity
and short-term duration of acoustic sources and required mitigation
measures, we expect minimal impacts to migrating belugas. Shutdown
zones will reduce the potential for Level A harassment of belugas and
ringed seals, as well as the severity of any Level B harassment. The
requirements of trained dedicated watch personnel and speed
restrictions will also reduce the likelihood of any ship strikes to
migrating belugas.
In all, ONR's ARA are expected to have minimal adverse effects on
marine mammal habitat. While the activities may cause some fish to
leave the area of disturbance, temporarily impacting marine mammals'
foraging opportunities, this would encompass a relatively small area of
habitat leaving large areas of existing fish and marine mammal foraging
habitat unaffected. As such, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are
not expected to impact the health or fitness of any marine mammals.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity
are not expected to adversely affect any of the species or stocks
through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
<bullet> No serious injury or mortality is anticipated or
authorized;
<bullet> Impacts will be limited to Level B harassment only;
<bullet> Only temporary behavioral modifications are expected to
result from these activities;
<bullet> Impacts to marine mammal prey or habitat will be minimal
and short-term.
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 monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the
authorized activity will have a negligible impact on all affected
marine mammal species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must find that the specified
activity will not have an ``unmitigable adverse impact'' on the
subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal species or stocks by
Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined ``unmitigable adverse impact'' in 50
CFR 216.103 as 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.
Subsistence hunting is important for many Alaska Native
communities. A study of the North Slope villages of Nuiqsut, Kaktovik,
and Utqiagvik (formerly Barrow) identified the primary resources used
for subsistence and the locations for harvest (Stephen R. Braund &
Associates, 2010), including terrestrial mammals (caribou, moose, wolf,
and wolverine), birds (geese and eider), fish (Arctic cisco, Arctic
char/Dolly Varden trout, and broad whitefish), and marine mammals
(bowhead whale, ringed seal, bearded seal, and walrus). Ringed seals
and beluga whales are likely located within the project area during
this action, yet the action will not remove individuals from the
population nor behaviorally disturb them in a manner that would affect
their behavior more than 100 km farther inshore where subsistence
hunting occurs. The permitted sources will be placed far outside of the
range for subsistence hunting. The closest active acoustic source
(fixed or drifting) within the project site that is likely to cause
Level B take is approximately 110 nm (204 km) from land. This ensures a
significant standoff distance from any subsistence hunting area. The
closest distance to subsistence hunting (70 nm, or 130 km) is well the
largest distance from the sound sources in use at which behavioral
harassment would be expected to occur (20 km) described above.
Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that any behavioral
disturbance of beluga whales or ringed seals that occurs far offshore
(we do not anticipate any Level A harassment) would affect their
subsequent behavior in a manner that would interfere with subsistence
uses should those animals later interact with hunters.
In addition, ONR has been communicating with the Native communities
about the action. The ONR chief scientist for AMOS gave a virtual
briefing on ONR research planned for 2022-2023 at the Alaska Eskimo
Whaling Commission (AEWC) meeting in February 2022. This briefing
communicated the lack of effect on subsistence hunting due to the
distance of the sources from hunting areas. ONR scientists also attend
Arctic Waterways Safety Committee (AWSC) and AEWC meetings regularly to
discuss past, present, and future ARA. While no take is anticipated to
result during transit, points of contact for at-sea communication will
also be established between ship captains and whalers to avoid any
conflict of ship transit with hunting activity.
[[Page 57472]]
Based on the description of the specified activity, distance of the
study area from subsistence hunting grounds, the measures described to
minimize adverse effects on the availability of marine mammals for
subsistence purposes, and the planned mitigation and monitoring
measures, NMFS has determined that there will not be an unmitigable
adverse impact on subsistence uses from ONR's planned ARA.
Peer Review of the Monitoring Plan--The MMPA requires that
monitoring plans be independently peer reviewed where the activity may
affect the availability of a species or stock for taking for
subsistence uses (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)(ii)(III)). Given the factors
discussed above, NMFS has also determined that the activity is not
likely to affect the availability of any marine mammal species or stock
for taking for subsistence uses, and therefore, peer review of the
monitoring plan is not warranted for this project.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS consults internally whenever we propose to authorize take for
endangered or threatened species, in this case with AKR.
There is one marine mammal species (Arctic ringed seal) with
confirmed occurrence in the study area that is listed as threatened
under the ESA. The NMFS Alaska Regional Office of Protected Resources
Division issued a Biological Opinion on September 13, 2022 under
section 7 of the ESA, on the issuance of an IHA to ONR under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA by the NMFS Permits and Conservation Division.
The Biological Opinion concluded that the action is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of Arctic ringed seals, and is not
likely to destroy or adversely modify Arctic ringed seal critical
habitat.
National Environmental Policy Act
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) as implemented by the regulations
published by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) (40 CRF parts
1500-1508), ONR prepared an Overseas Environmental Assessment (OEA) to
consider the direct, indirect, ad cumulative effects to the human
environment resulting from the ARA project. In compliance with NEPA and
the CEQ regulations, as well as NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, NMFS
has reviewed ONR's OEA, determined it to be sufficient, and adopted
that OEA and signed a Finding of Significant Impact (FONSI) on
September 13, 2022.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to ONR for the potential harassment of small
numbers of two species of marine mammals incidental to ARA in the
Beaufort Sea and eastern Chukchi Sea, provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are followed.
Dated: September 14, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-20240 Filed 9-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 20, 2022.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.