Proposed Rule2024-01366
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Space Force Launches and Supporting Activities at Vandenberg Space Force Base, Vandenberg, California
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
January 29, 2024
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
NMFS has received a request from the U.S. Space Force (USSF) for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to launches and supporting activities at Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) in Vandenberg, California from April, 2024 to April, 2029. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue regulations governing the incidental taking of marine mammals incidental to the specified activities. NMFS is proposing regulations to govern that take, and requests comments on the proposed regulations. NMFS will consider public comments prior to making any final decision on the issuance of the requested MMPA authorization and agency responses will be summarized in the final notice of our decision. Missile launches conducted at VSFB, which comprise a smaller portion of the activities, are considered military readiness activities pursuant to the MMPA, as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (2004 NDAA).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 19 (Monday, January 29, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 19 (Monday, January 29, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5451-5479]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-01366]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 217
[240118-0018]
RIN 0648-BM48
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Space Force Launches and
Supporting Activities at Vandenberg Space Force Base, Vandenberg,
California
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule, Request for Comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the U.S. Space Force (USSF)
for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to launches and
supporting activities at Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) in
Vandenberg, California from April, 2024 to April, 2029. Pursuant to the
Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its
proposal to issue regulations governing the incidental taking of marine
mammals incidental to the specified activities. NMFS is proposing
regulations to govern that take, and requests comments on the proposed
regulations. NMFS will consider public comments prior to making any
final decision on the issuance of the requested MMPA authorization and
agency responses will be summarized in the final notice of our
decision. Missile launches conducted at VSFB, which comprise a smaller
portion of the activities, are considered military readiness activities
pursuant to the MMPA, as amended by the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (2004 NDAA).
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than February
28, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-
Rulemaking Portal. Go to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> and type NOAA-
NMFS-2024-0008 in the Search box (note: copying and pasting the FDMS
Docket Number directly from this document may not yield search
results). Click on the ``Comment'' icon, complete the required fields,
and enter or attach your comments.
Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period,
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business
information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily
by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous
comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in
Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
A copy of the USSF's application and other supporting documents and
documents cited herein may be obtained online at:
<a href="http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities">www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities</a>. In case of problems
accessing these documents, please use the contact listed here (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leah Davis, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
[[Page 5452]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Regulatory Action
This proposed rule, if promulgated, would establish a framework
under the authority of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) for NMFS to
authorize the take of marine mammals incidental to space vehicle
(rocket) launches, missile launches, and aircraft operations at VSFB.
We received an application from the USSF requesting 5-year
regulations and an associated letter of authorization to incidentally
take marine mammals. Take is expected to occur by Level B harassment
incidental to launch noise and sonic booms. Please see ``Background''
below for definitions of harassment.
Legal Authority for the Proposed Action
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.) generally 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, regulations
are promulgated (when applicable), and public notice and an opportunity
for public comment are provided.
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). If such findings are made, NMFS must prescribe the
permissible methods of taking; ``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 as ``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the monitoring
and reporting of such takings.
Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA and the implementing regulations
at 50 CFR part 216, subpart I provide the legal basis for proposing
and, if appropriate, issuing regulations and an associated letters of
authorization, or LOA(s). This proposed rule describes permissible
methods of taking and mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements for USSF's proposed activities.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (2004
NDAA, Pub. L. 108-136) amended the MMPA to remove the ``small numbers''
and ``specified geographical region'' limitations indicated above and
amended the definition of ``harassment'' as applied to a ``military
readiness activity.'' Missile launches conducted at VSFB, which
comprise a small portion of the activities, are considered military
readiness activities pursuant to the MMPA, as amended by the 2004 NDAA.
A subset of the activities described here and for which incidental
take of marine mammals is being requested (specifically, missile
launches) qualifies as a military readiness activity.
Summary of Major Provisions Within the Rule
Following is a summary of the major provisions of the regulations
regarding USSF rocket and missile launches and supporting activities.
These measures include:
<bullet> Scheduling launches to avoid lowest tides during harbor
seal and California sea lion pupping seasons, when practicable;
<bullet> Required flight paths for aircraft takeoffs and landings
and minimum altitude requirements to reduce disturbance to haul out
areas;
<bullet> Required minimum altitudes for unscrewed aerial systems
(UAS);
<bullet> Required acoustic and biological monitoring during a
subset of launches to record the presence of marine mammals and
document marine mammal responses to the launches; and
<bullet> Required semi-monthly surveys of marine mammal haulouts at
VSFB and NCI.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A,
NMFS must evaluate our proposed action (i.e., the promulgation of
regulations and subsequent issuance of incidental take authorization)
and alternatives with respect to potential impacts on the human
environment.
This action is consistent with categories of activities identified
in Categorical Exclusion B4 of the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A,
which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for
significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for
which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would
preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has
preliminarily determined that the proposed action qualifies to be
categorically excluded from further National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) review.
Information in the USSF application and this notice collectively
provide the environmental information related to proposed issuance of
these regulations and subsequent incidental take authorization for
public review and comment. We will review all comments submitted in
response to this notice prior to concluding our NEPA process or making
a final decision on the request for incidental take authorization.
Summary of Request
On November 2, 2022, NMFS received a request from USSF requesting
authorization for the take of marine mammals incidental to rocket and
missile launch activities and aircraft operations at VSFB in
Vandenberg, California. Following NMFS' review of the materials
provided, USSF submitted a revised application on May 25, 2023. The
application was deemed adequate and complete on May 26, 2023. USSF's
request for authorization pertains to incidental take of 6 species of
marine mammals, by Level B harassment only.
On June 15, 2023, we published a notice of receipt of the USSF's
application in the Federal Register (88 FR 39231), requesting comments
and information related to the USSF request for 30 days. We received no
responsive comments.
The take of marine mammals incidental to rocket and missile
launches and aircraft operations at VSFB is currently authorized by
NMFS via an LOA issued under current incidental take regulations, which
are effective from April 10, 2019 through April 10, 2024 (84 FR 14314;
April 10, 2019). To date, NMFS has promulgated incidental take
regulations under the MMPA for substantially similar activities at the
site four times.
Responsibility for activities at the site were transferred from the
U.S. Air Force (USAF) to the USSF in May, 2021 and both entities
complied with the requirements (e.g., mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting) of the current LOA. Information regarding the monitoring
results may be found in the Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine
Mammals and their Habitat.
Description of Proposed Activity
Overview
USSF operations include launch activities for commercial entities,
as well as the Department of Defense,
[[Page 5453]]
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. VSFB is the primary west
coast launch facility for placing commercial, government and military
satellites into polar orbit on uncrewed rockets. A subset of rocket
launches include a ``boost-back'' maneuver, wherein the first stage
booster returns to land at VSFB or at a barge located offshore, for
recovery and future re-use. VSFB is also the site of launches for
testing and evaluation of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs)
and sub-orbital target and interceptor missiles. The missile
activities, which represent a small subset of the activities, are
considered Military Readiness Activities.
Rocket and missile launch activities create noise (launch noise
and/or sonic booms (overpressure of high-energy impulsive sound)) and
visual stimulus that can take pinnipeds hauled out on shore along the
periphery of VSFB by Level B harassment. In addition, a subset of
rocket launches can create noise that affects pinniped haul outs along
the shoreline of the Northern Channel Islands (NCI), particularly San
Miguel and Santa Rosa islands.
The USSF anticipates incremental increases in launch activity each
year with a peak in activity of no more than 110 rocket launches and 15
missile launches occurring in any one year (table 1).
Table 1--Anticipated Number of Launches and UAS Operations, by Year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Rocket launches Missile launches UAS operations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2024................................................... 40 15 100
2025................................................... 55 15 100
2026................................................... 75 15 100
2027................................................... 100 15 100
2028................................................... 110 15 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to rocket and missile launch activities at VSFB,
aircraft conduct flight operations to support activities at VSFB. Here,
``aircraft'' includes crewed fixed wing airplanes and rotary wing
helicopters, and different types of UAS. Slightly more than 600
aircraft flights occur each year, and approximately 100 of those
flights are UAS. These flight operations address mission needs
including emergency response, search-and-rescue, delivery of rocket
components, launch mission support, security reconnaissance, and
training. VSFB no longer has aircraft stationed on site, but
``transient'' aircraft may be stationed at the site on a temporary
basis several times per year for periods of two or more weeks per
operation. Take of hauled out pinnipeds from crewed fixed-wing
airplanes and helicopter operations are not anticipated because these
aircraft adhere to flight paths, minimum altitude requirements, and a
buffer zone established to avoid haulouts when possible. In addition,
pinnipeds that customarily haul out at sites near the airfield may be
acclimated to aircraft and helicopter overflights. However, there is a
limited potential for take to result from UAS operations. UAS are
categorized by size into five classes, 0-5. While harassment of hauled
out pinnipeds from UAS classes 0-2 is unlikely to occur at altitudes of
200 feet (ft) and above (Erbe et al., 2017; Pomeroy et al., 2015;
Sweeney et al., 2016; Sweeney and Gelatt, 2017), given that classes 0-3
fly at lower altitudes, USSF anticipates that these classes could cause
take of hauled out marine mammals due to visual disturbance, and NMFS
concurs. Larger UAS (classes 4 and 5) that utilize the airfield for
take offs and landings, must adhere to minimum altitude criteria and
buffer zones around haul-out areas, as described in the Proposed
Mitigation section. While pinnipeds at nearby haulouts may show brief
reactions during takeoffs and landings of classes 4 and 5, animals near
these haulouts are generally habituated to these activities and are not
expected to have behavioral reactions that would rise to the level of
take by Level B harassment.
Dates and Duration
The activities proposed by USSF would occur for 5 years, from April
2024 through April 2029. Activities would occur year-round and could
occur at any time of day, during any or all days of the week. As annual
launch numbers increase, more than one launch could occur on some days.
Specified Geographical Region
VSFB occupies approximately 99,100 acres of land and approximately
68 kilometers (km) of coastline in central Santa Barbara County,
California (Figure 1). The Santa Ynez River and State Highway 246
divide the base into two distinct parts, North Base and South Base.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 5454]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP29JA24.026
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Pinnipeds making use of haul-out sites along the coastline of VSFB
are affected by launch noise. In addition to these effects at VSFB,
some of the rocket launches and first-stage recoveries originating at
VSFB may result in sonic booms that impact portions of the NCI, and as
such NCI is also considered part of the project area. The NCI comprises
four islands (San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, and Anacapa) located
approximately 50 km south of Point
[[Page 5455]]
Conception, which is located on the mainland approximately 6.5 km south
of VSFB. The most proximate launch facility on the base and the nearest
landmark on the NCI (Harris Point on San Miguel Island) are separated
by more than 55 km.
Rocket and missile flights originate from several different launch
locations on VSFB, distributed across both North Base and South Base.
Currently, there are nine active missile launch sites and seven active
space launch facilities. In addition, two new launch sites and one
former site on the base are expected to become operational in the
future. The two largest classes of UAS use the VSFB airfield, three
smaller classes of UAS can be launched from any location that is in
keeping with buffers to pinniped haulout and rookery sites. The
proximity of the launch sites in relation to specific pinniped haul-out
and rookery areas at VSFB is shown in table 2. LF-09 is the closest
active missile launch facility to a haul-out area, located about 0.5 km
from Little Sal, and LF-10 is the most remote facility from any haul-
out area, located about 2.7 km from Lion's Head (see figure 2 in USSF's
application).
While rocket and missile launches do not occur in National Marine
Sanctuary waters, depending on the direction of a given launch, rockets
and missiles may cross over the Channel Islands National Marine
Sanctuary.
Table 2--Representative Rocket Launch Activities and Distance to Nearest Haul-Out Site
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rocket Rocket height Distance to
Rocket diameter (ft) (ft) Launch facility Nearest pinniped haul-out haul-out (km)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current (and recent) launch programs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlas V.................................. 12.5 191 SLC-3E......................... North Rocky Point........... 9.9
Firefly.................................. 6 95 SLC-2W......................... Purisima Point.............. 2.3
Delta IV................................. 16 236 SLC-6.......................... North Rocky Point........... 2.3
Falcon 9................................. 12 230 SLC-4E......................... North Rocky Point........... 8.2
Minotaur................................. 8 81 SLC-8.......................... North Rocky Point........... 1.6
Minotaur/Taurus.......................... 8 91 LF-576E........................ South Spur Road............. 0.8
Minotaur/Buzzard......................... 6 63 TP-01.......................... Purisima Point.............. 7.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Future launch programs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vector................................... 4 40 SLC-8.......................... North Rocky Point........... 1.6
Daytona.................................. 5 62 SLC-5.......................... Point Arguello.............. 3.9
New Glenn................................ 23 200 SLC-9.......................... Point Arguello.............. 10.2
Vulcan................................... 17.7 >220 SLC-3E......................... Point Arguello.............. 8.75
Terran................................... 7.5 126 SLC-11......................... North Rocky Point........... 1.2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations: SLC = Space Launch Complex; LF = Launch Facility; E = East; W = West; TBD: To be determined.
Detailed Description of the Specified Activity
VSFB is the primary west coast launch facility for placing
commercial, government, and military satellites into polar orbit on
uncrewed launch vehicles, and for the testing and evaluation of ICBMs
and sub-orbital target and interceptor missiles by the Missile Defense
Agency (MDA). Below, we discuss in detail, USSF's proposed rocket
launches and recoveries, missile launches, and aircraft operations
including UAS.
Rocket Launches
Table 1 shows estimates of the numbers proposed rocket launches,
missile launches, and UAS activities for each year. Reporting years
would span one year from date of LOA issuance and each successive year
thereafter, in accordance with the reporting requirements described in
the Proposed Monitoring and Reporting section, below. The anticipated
maximum number of launches in one year shown in table 1 is similar to
the maximum number of launches in one year analyzed in the 2019
rulemaking (84 FR 14314; April 10, 2019), with a small increase. For
this rulemaking, USSF anticipates that the total number of launches
would increase from the 500 analyzed for the 2019 rulemaking to 550
over the effective period of this rule. Similarly, the estimated number
of launches that may cause a sonic boom that affect haulouts at NCI are
proposed to increase from 88 to 104 over the effective period of this
rulemaking.
A large percentage of this anticipated increase is expected to
consist of smaller launch payloads moved by smaller rockets than
previously utilized at VSFB. Accordingly, USSF is developing a new
Small Launch Vehicles program (SLV) for the South Base launch sites at
VSFB. This program is expected to require as many as 100 launches
annually (included in the basewide 110 rocket launch/year total) and
may involve two launches per day on some days. We note that ``small''
rockets (generally those less than 100 ft tall) are less likely to
generate sonic booms that could disturb animals at haul outs.
Whether or not sonic booms from launches originating at VSFB affect
the NCI depends on the trajectory of the launch, the size of the
rocket, and other factors such as environmental conditions. In any
given year of this proposed rule, it is expected that fewer than 10
percent of small rockets, 25 percent of medium rockets and 33 percent
of large rockets would ``boom'' the NCI. When these sonic booms events
do occur, they tend to disturb animals at haulouts on San Miguel and
(occasionally) Santa Rosa Islands. Santa Cruz and Anacapa Islands are
not expected to be impacted by sonic booms in excess of 1 pound per
square foot (psf). Further, based on several years of onsite behavioral
observations and monitoring data, VSFB maintains and NMFS concurs that
harassment of marine mammals is unlikely to occur when the intensity of
a sonic boom is below 2(psf). Although exact numbers are uncertain,
launches that generate a sonic boom at NCI higher than 2 psf are
expected to occur no more than 5 times in authorization year 2024, 12
times in 2025, 24 times in 2026, 30 times in 2027 and 33 times in 2028.
Some rocket launches include ``boost back'' and landing of a rocket
component at a launch site on the base or on a floating offsite
recovery barge.
[[Page 5456]]
These activities include the use of parachutes and parafoils to control
the descent of components to the barge. These are usually recovered,
but on occasion, parachutes or parafoils are abandoned, and they sink
to the ocean floor. The parachutes would sink to a depth of 1,000 ft
within 46 minutes and the parafoil (if it is not recovered) would reach
the same depth in one to two hours. Therefore, given the short duration
that an unrecovered parachute or parafoil would remain in the water
column for a given launch, NMFS does not anticipate that they would
take marine mammals, and the likelihood is further reduced by the
relative infrequency of instances where parachutes or parafoils are
used but not recovered.
Missiles
A variety of small missiles are launched from various Launch
Facilities (LFs) on north VSFB including Minuteman III, an ICBM which
is launched from underground silos. USSF is currently modifying several
existing silos for testing of the new Ground Based Strategic Defense
(GBSD) program, which is expected to replace the Minuteman III as early
as 2026. Several types of interceptor and target vehicles are also
launched for the MDA. The MDA develops various systems including the
Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). The MDA estimates that no more
than three missile tests per quarter will be conducted each year over
the next 5 years, and none of the missiles would be significantly
larger than the Minuteman III currently in use. This limitation (three
missiles per quarter and none being larger than the Minuteman III)
represents the anticipated extent of missile testing at VSFB over the
next 5 years. No more than 15 missiles would be launched per year
(table 1).
The trajectories of all missile launches are generally westward and
USSF indicates that they do not cause sonic boom impacts on the
California mainland or the NCI. Missiles also transition to nearly
horizontal flight within seconds of launch and do not create extended
noise impacts to the coastline or result in a high degree of response
from hauled-out pinnipeds. For these reasons, take on the NCI arising
from missile launch operations is not anticipated or requested. All
take associated with missile launch operations would occur on VSFB.
Aircraft Operations
The VSFB airfield, located on north VSFB, supports various aircraft
operations. Aircraft operations include fixed wing airplanes, rotary
wing helicopters and UAS. Of these, only UAS is expected to result in
take, as discussed below.
Over the past 5 years, an average of slightly more than 600 flights
has occurred each year, approximately 100 of which have been UAS, and
USSF anticipates 100 UAS flights per year during the effective period
of this proposed rule (table 1). Fixed-wing aircraft use VSFB for
various purposes, including delivering rocket or missile components and
training exercises. Helicopter (or, rotary wing) operations also
occasionally occur at VSFB including transits through the area,
exercises and mission support. Emergency helicopter operations,
including but not limited to search-and-rescue and wildfire containment
actions, also occur occasionally.
Three approved flight paths for airfield access have been
configured in order to avoid disturbances from aircraft at established
pinniped haul out sites. As a result of these routing measures and
minimum altitude criteria, and given that pinnipeds that haul out at
VSFB are acclimatized to aircraft and helicopter overflights, USSF does
not anticipate take of hauled out pinnipeds from fixed-wing and
helicopter operations using the airfield, and NMFS concurs. In
addition, no pinniped responses to fixed or rotary wing aircraft have
ever been reported and none are anticipated (MMCG and SAIC 2012a).
UAS operations at VSFB may include either rotary or fixed wing
uncrewed aircraft. These are typically divided into as many as six
classes, which graduate in size from class 0 (which are often smaller
than 5 inches in diameter and always weigh less than one pound) to
class 5 (which can be as large as a small piloted aircraft). UAS
classes 03 can be used in almost any location, while classes 4 and 5
typically require a runway and for that reason would only be operated
from the VSFB airfield. The launch frequency and class of UAS
conducting the flights is not possible to predict. As stated above,
there is a limited potential for take to result from UAS operations.
While harassment of hauled out pinnipeds from class 02 is unlikely to
occur at altitudes of 200 ft and above (Erbe et al., 2017; Pomeroy et
al., 2015; Sweeney et al., 2016; Sweeney and Gelatt, 2017), given that
classes 0-3 fly at lower altitudes, USSF anticipates that these classes
could cause take of hauled out marine mammals due to visual
disturbance, and NMFS concurs.
Other Activities
In addition to the activities described above, USSF operates a
small harbor on the south coast, immediately adjacent to a haulout
area. Operation of the harbor currently entails a maximum of two large
vessel visits per year and one dredging operation typically conducted
every other year. In addition, VSFB estimates that SpaceX conducts
approximately 30 2-day operations per year using smaller vessels. NMFS
does not anticipate take of marine mammals due to these activities for
the reasons described herein, and they are not discussed further beyond
the brief explanation provided here. While marine mammals may
behaviorally respond in some small degree to the noise generated by
dredging operations, given the slow, predictable movements of these
vessels, and absent any other contextual features that would cause
enhanced concern, NMFS does not expect the proposed dredging to result
in the take of marine mammals. Further, routine harbor operations are
not anticipated to result in take of marine mammals.
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are
described in detail later in this document (see Proposed Mitigation and
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting).
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
relevant behavior and life history of the potentially affected species.
NMFS fully considered all of this information, and we refer the reader
to these descriptions and to additional information regarding
population trends and threats that may be found in NMFS' Stock
Assessment Reports (SARs); <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>). 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
proposed to be authorized for this activity, 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
[[Page 5457]]
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 proposed to be authorized here, PBR and
annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are
included here as gross indicators of the status of the species or
stocks 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. We also refer to studies and onsite monitoring to
inform abundance and distribution trends within the project area. For
some species, such as the Guadalupe fur seal, this geographic area may
extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are
assessed in NMFS' SARs. All values presented in table 3 are the most
recent available at the time of publication and are available online
at: <a href="https://ww.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments">https://ww.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments</a>.
Table 3--Marine Mammal Species \1\ Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/
\2\ abundance survey) \3\ SI \4\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
California Sea Lion................. Zalophus californianus. United States.......... -, -, N 257,606 (N/A, 233,515, 14,011 >321
2014).
Guadalupe Fur Seal.................. Arctocephalus townsendi Mexico................. T, D, Y 34,187 (N/A, 31,019, 1,062 >=3.8
2013).
Northern Fur Seal................... Callorhinus ursinus.... California............. -, D, N 14,050 (N/A, 7,524, 451 1.8
2013).
Steller Sea Lion.................... Eumetopias jubatus..... Eastern................ -, -, N 43,201 (N/A, 43,201, 2,592 112
2017).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor Seal......................... Phoca vitulina......... California............. -, -, N 30,968 (N/A, 27,348, 1,641 43
2012).
Northern Elephant Seal.............. Mirounga angustirostris California Breeding.... -, -, N 187,386 (N/A, 85,369, 5,122 13.7
2013).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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)).
\2\ 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.
\3\ NMFS marine mammal SARss online at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region</a>.
CV is the coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance.
\4\ 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.
As indicated above, all six species (with six managed stocks)
temporally and spatially co-occur with the specified activity to the
degree that take is reasonably likely to occur. In addition to the 6
species of pinniped expected to be affected by the specified
activities, an additional 28 species of cetaceans are expected to occur
or could occur in the waters near the project area. However, we have
determined that the potential stressors associated with the specified
activities that could result in take of marine mammals (i.e., launch
noise, sonic booms and disturbance from aircraft operations) only have
the potential to result in harassment of marine mammals that are hauled
out of the water. Noise from the specified activities is unlikely to
ensonify subsurface waters to an extent that could result in take of
cetaceans. Therefore, we have concluded that the likelihood of the
proposed activities resulting in the harassment of any cetacean to be
so low as to be discountable. Accordingly, cetaceans are not considered
further in this proposed rule. Further, only one live northern fur seal
has been reported at VSFB in the past 25 years (SBMMC 2012), at least
two deceased fur seals have been found on VSFB. Guadalupe fur seals
have yet to be reported at VSFB. Therefore, it is extremely unlikely
that any fur seals will be taken at that site. However as discussed
below, NMFS anticipates that both species could be taken at NCI.
Steller sea lions are not anticipated to occur at NCI, and therefore,
are not expected to be taken at that site, but are likely to be taken
at VSFB. Harbor seal, northern elephant seal, and California sea lion
are likely to be taken at both NCI and VSFB.
California sea otters (Enhydra lutris nereis) may also be found in
waters off of VSFB, which is near the southern extent of their range.
However, California sea otters are managed by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and are not considered further in this proposed rule.
Pacific Harbor Seal (California Stock)
Harbor seals haul out on intertidal sandbars, rocky shores and
beaches along the California coast and islands including VSFB and, to a
lesser extent, NCI. Coastwide, from 400 to 600 haul-out sites exist
(Carretta et al., 2011; Caretta et al., 2012) and few to several
hundred animals may occupy each site when conditions are favorable.
Harbor seals generally haul out in greatest numbers during the
afternoon but at some sites the beach profile and tidal inundation
results in limited or no suitable haul out area. This is the case in
some areas around VSFB, where shifting of coastal landforms including
beaches, banks and bluffs affect availability of suitable haul out
area. Considerable haul out area is consistently available at NCI,
irrespective of tidal influence.
Harbor seals generally forage locally but individuals, particularly
juveniles, may travel up to 500 km either to find food or suitable
breeding areas. The greatest numbers haul out during the molting
season, from May into August throughout California (Carretta et al.,
2011; Caretta et al., 2012). In the vicinity of the project area, the
pupping season peaks from mid-February through April; and at VSFB, it
extends from March through June. Molting season follows, sometimes
overlapping the pupping
[[Page 5458]]
season. Harbor seal numbers at VSFB haul out areas usually peak in
June, but there is some variability (in some years the highest counts
occurred in the fall or winter months). Harbor seal pupping also occurs
on NCI from March to June.
Harbor seals regularly use haulouts along the shoreline at VSFB.
Haulout sites on VSFB can be found on both south VSFB and north VSFB,
including Lion's Head and Little Sal.
California Sea Lion (U.S. Stock)
The California sea lion occurs in the eastern north Pacific from
Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, through the Gulf of California and north along
the west coast of North America to the Gulf of Alaska (Barlow et al.,
2008; DeLong et al., 2017b; Jefferson et al., 2008). Typically, during
the summer, California sea lions congregate near rookery islands and
specific open-water areas, including NCI where one of the largest
rookeries is found. The primary rookeries off the coast of the United
States are on San Nicolas (SNI), San Miguel, Santa Barbara, and San
Clemente Islands (Le Boeuf & Bonnell 1980; Lowry et al., 1992; Carretta
et al., 2000; Lowry & Forney 2005; Lowry et al., 2017). About 50
percent of the births on San Miguel Island occur in the Point Bennett
area, during a pupping season that runs from May to August.
In the nonbreeding season, beginning in late summer, adult and
subadult males migrate northward along the coast of California to more
northerly states, and are largely absent from the southern breeding
areas until the following spring (Laake, 2017; Lowry & Forney, 2005).
Females and juveniles also disperse to areas north and west of NCI, but
tend to stay in the Southern California area. (Lowry & Forney, 2005;
Melin & DeLong, 2000; Thomas et al., 2010).
California sea lions also occur in open ocean and coastal waters
(Barlow et al., 2008; Jefferson et al., 2008). Animals usually occur in
waters over the continental shelf and slope; however, they are also
known to occupy locations far offshore in deep, oceanic waters, such as
Guadalupe Island and Alijos Rocks off Baja California (Jefferson et
al., 2008; Melin et al., 2008; Urrutia & Dziendzielewski, 2012; Zavala-
Gonzalez & Mellink, 2000). California sea lions are the most frequently
sighted pinnipeds offshore of Southern California during the spring,
and peak abundance is during the May through August breeding season
(Green et al., 1992; Keiper et al., 2005; Lowry et al., 2017).
California sea lions haul out at sites in the southern portion of
VSFB and have not been observed at any northern VSFB haulout locations,
except for rare individuals affected by domoic acid poisoning (USAF
2020; Evans, 2020). There is no known successful breeding of this
species on VSFB.
In 2019 a significant die-off of California sea lions, presumed to
be caused by domoic acid toxicity associated with red tide algal
blooms, was noted. This event included most of Southern and Central
California and included more than 80 deceased California sea lions on
VSFB beaches (USAF 2020; Evans, 2020).
California sea lion pupping season begins in late May, peaking on
or around the third week of June. Female sea lions nurse their pups for
1 to 2 days, before embarking on progressively longer spans of time
away from the haulout site to forage. Typically, the adult female
spends 2 to 5 days feeding, before returning to nurse the pup. Females
continue a pattern of going to sea for several days and nursing ashore
for several days until pups are weaned. The weaning period continues
for about 8 to 12 months (Carretta et al., 2011; Caretta et al., 2012).
Females usually range from the Mexican border to as far north as
San Francisco. If prey is scarce, particularly during El Ni[ntilde]o
years, they have been known to extend their range into Oregon. Adult
males claim their breeding territories in late May, usually leaving by
August, with most animals moving north. Adult males may venture as far
north as British Columbia or southeast Alaska.
Northern Elephant Seal (California Breeding Stock)
The California breeding stock of the Northern elephant seal extends
from the Channel Islands to the southeast Farallon Islands (Carretta et
al., 201; Caretta et al., 2012). There are two distinct populations of
northern elephant seals: one that breeds in Baja California, Mexico;
and a population that breeds in California (Garcia-Aguilar et al.
2018). The northern elephant seals in the VSFB Project Area are from
the California Breeding stock, although elephant seals from Baja Mexico
migrate through the Project Area (Aurioles-Gamboa & Camacho-Rios 2007;
Carretta et al., 2017; Carretta et al., 2020). Females and juveniles
feed from California into Washington, while males travel as far as
Alaska and the Aleutians. Males and females return between March and
August to molt.
Northern elephant seals spend little time nearshore and migrate
four times a year, traveling to and from breeding/pupping and molting
areas and spending more than 80 percent of their annual cycle at sea
(Robinson et al., 2012; Lowry et al., 2014; Lowry et al., 2017;
Carretta et al., 2020). Peak abundance in California is during the
January-February breeding season and when adults return to molt from
April to July (Lowry et al. 2014; Lowry et al., 2017).
Although northern elephant seals haul out at south VSFB locations,
they were not observed at north VSFB haul outs in 2019 or in 2020.
Breeding has been observed on south VSFB since 2017 (Evans, 2020), and
pupping at VSFB was first documented in January 2017. Additional
pupping has been observed every year since 2017, increasing each year,
with a maximum of approximately 40 pups in 2022. Pupping occurs from
January through March, with peak breeding in mid-February. Pups are
weaned at 3 to 4 weeks of age, then abandoned and undergo their first
molt, which can take several weeks. They then return to sea and
customary offshore waters at the end of the molting cycle. Currently,
the Amphitheatre Cove haul out at VSFB is the primary site used by
elephant seals for breeding and pupping, however another location,
Boathouse Beach, was the site for two successful pups each year in 2021
and 2022. All age classes and sexes haul out on VSFB, at different
times of the year, to rest, undergo molting and to reproduce or
occasionally to rest at other times of year. On NCI, pupping activity
occurs from December through March. While some animals disperse after
the weaning period, elephant seals also haul out onshore during the
seasonal molting period from March to August.
Steller Sea Lion (Eastern U.S. Stock)
The eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea lions ranges from Cape
Suckling, Alaska, to California (Cape Suckling is almost at the
northernmost part of the Gulf of Alaska, at long. 140[deg] W).
A[ntilde]o Nuevo Island, in central California, is now the southernmost
known breeding colony for Steller sea lions (Carretta et al., 2011;
Caretta et al., 2012), although they did breed at San Miguel Island
until the 1982-1983 El Ni[ntilde]o. Sightings were rare after that.
From 2010 to 2012, individual Steller sea lions have shown up along the
mainland coast of the Southern California Bight, often hauled out on
navigation buoys. At VSFB, Steller sea lions have been observed in
generally low numbers since approximately 2012, but no breeding or
pupping behavior has been documented.
Steller sea lions range along the north Pacific from northern Japan
to California (Perrin et al., 2009), with centers of
[[Page 5459]]
abundance and distribution in the Gulf of Alaska and Aleutian Islands
(Muto et al., 2020). There have also been reports of Steller sea lions
in waters off Mexico as far south as the various islands off the port
of Manzanillo in Colima, Mexico (Gallo-Reynoso et al., 2020). The
eastern U.S. stock (or DPS) of Steller sea lion is defined as the
population occurring east of long. 144[deg] W. The locations and
distribution of the eastern population's breeding sites along the U.S.
Pacific coast have shifted northward, with fewer breeding sites in
southern California and more sites established in Washington and
southeast Alaska (Pitcher et al., 2007; Wiles, 2015). Steller sea lions
pups were known to be born at San Miguel Island up until 1981 (Pitcher
et al., 2007; National Marine Fisheries Service 2008; Muto et al.,
2020), and as the population continues to increase, Steller sea lions
may re-establish a breeding colony on San Miguel Island. However,
currently no pupping occurs on NCI.
Despite the species' general absence from the area, some Steller
sea lions (one to two individuals at a time) have been sighted in the
Channel Islands and vicinity. Individual adult and subadult male
Steller sea lions have been seen hauled out at San Miguel Island during
the fall and winter, and adult and subadult males have occasionally
been seen on rocks north of Northwest Point at San Miguel Island in the
summer (Delong, 2019). Aerial surveys for pinnipeds in the Channel
Islands from 2011 to 2015 encountered a single Steller sea lion at SNI
in 2013 (Lowry et al., 2017). Additional sightings have included a
single male that was seen hauled out on an oil production structure off
Long Beach during the winter of 2015 and 2016, a Steller observed in
2018 hauled out on a buoy outside Ventura Harbor, and a lone adult
female that gave birth to and reared a pup on San Miguel Island in the
summer of 2017 (Delong 2019).
In April and May 2012 Steller sea lions were observed at VSFB
marking the first time this species had been reported at VSFB over the
prior two decades. Since 2012, Steller sea lions have been observed
occasionally in routine monthly surveys, with a peak of 16 individuals
recorded. In 2019, up to four Steller sea lions were observed on south
VSFB during monthly marine mammal counts, and none were observed during
monthly counts in the years that followed. While flying to VSFB from
Santa Maria for an unrelated project, contract biologists observed and
photographed three Steller sea lions at Lion Rock (Point Sal) in
October 2017 (Ball, 2017). This offshore haulout site can be exposed to
in-air noise levels from missile launches and is included in the take
estimates provided below.
Northern Fur Seal (San Miguel Island Stock)
Northern fur seals range from southern California to the Bering Sea
and west to the Okhotsk Sea and Japan. About 74 percent of the breeding
population occurs far north of the project area, on the Pribilof
Islands of the southern Bering Sea. The San Miguel Island stock
comprises less than one percent of the population. In general, Northern
fur seals are highly pelagic, and adult northern fur seals spend more
than 300 days per year (about 80 percent of their time) at sea,
generally well offshore. While at sea, northern fur seals range
throughout the North Pacific (Carretta et al., 2011; Caretta et al.,
2012). Migrating seals and those along the U.S. west coast are
typically found over the edge of the continental shelf and slope
(Kenyon & Wilke 1953; Sterling & Ream 2004; Gentry 2009; Adams et al.
2014). Northern fur seals have not been observed at any VSFB haulout
location (NMFS, 2020b) and are not expected to be subject to noise
levels at the base that may cause behavioral effects.
Adult males stay on or near haul-outs on NCI from May through
August, with some non-breeding individuals remaining until November.
Beginning in May, male seals start returning to the breeding islands.
Upon arrival males seek to occupy and defend optimal breeding
territories before the females arrive. Because males do not leave the
breeding territory to feed, their ability to fast is critical. Males
remain on their territory an average of 46 days. Adult females
generally stay on or near haul-outs beginning in June and extending to
fall, sometimes to as late as November. Peak pupping is in early July.
Females nurse their newborn pups for 5 to 6 days and then go to sea to
forage for 3.5 to 9.8 days. Females continue to cycle between land and
sea for the remainder of the nursing period. Their time on land
declines to less than 2 days and their time at sea generally increases.
Pups are nursed until weaned (about 4 months) and leave the breeding
site before their mothers to forage independently. Some juveniles are
present year-round, but most juveniles and adults head for the open
ocean and a pelagic existence until the following year. Pupping occurs
at NCI (San Miguel Island) from June through August. Pupping does not
occur at VSFB.
Guadalupe Fur Seal (Mexico)
Satellite tracking data from Guadalupe fur seals tagged at
Guadalupe Island in Mexico, have shown that the seals transit through
offshore waters between 50 and 300 km from the U.S. west coast (Norris
et al. 2015; Norris, 2017b; Norris, 2017a; Norris & Elorriaga-
Verplancken, 2020). Based on that data, the seals could occur in ocean
and coastal waters within or adjacent to the VSFB Project Area.
However, Guadalupe fur seals have not been observed at any VSFB haulout
locations (USAF 2020; Evans, 2020) and are not expected to be subject
to in-air noise levels at VSFB that may cause behavioral disturbance.
Guadalupe fur seals are only rarely observed on San Miguel and San
Nicolas Islands, typically at Point Bennett, and are almost always
sighted as a lone individual. Lone adult males twice established
territories on San Nicolas Island which lasted a few years each time,
but no females arrived (Carretta et al., 2011; Caretta et al., 2012).
As such, there is no pupping activity within the project area.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section provides a discussion of the ways in which components
of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat.
The Estimated Take of Marine Mammals section later in this document
includes a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are
expected to be taken by this activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis
and Determination section considers the content of this section, the
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals section, and the Proposed Mitigation
section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these
activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals
and whether those impacts are reasonably expected to, or reasonably
likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
In-air acoustic effects resulting from rocket launches and
recoveries, missile launches and UAS operations may affect hauled out
marine mammals. The effects of noise from the USSF's proposed
activities have the potential to result in Level B harassment of marine
mammals in the action area.
Description of Sound Sources
This section contains a brief technical background on sound, the
characteristics of certain sound types, and on metrics used in this
proposal inasmuch as the information is relevant
[[Page 5460]]
to the specified activity and to a discussion of the potential effects
of the specified activity on marine mammals found later in this
document.
Sound travels in waves, the basic components of which are
frequency, wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. Frequency is the number
of pressure waves that pass by a reference point per unit of time and
is measured in hertz (Hz) or cycles per second. Wavelength is the
distance between two peaks or corresponding points of a sound wave
(length of one cycle). Higher frequency sounds have shorter wavelengths
than lower frequency sounds, and typically attenuate (decrease) more
rapidly, except in certain cases in shallower water. Amplitude is the
height of the sound pressure wave or the ``loudness'' of a sound and is
typically described using the relative unit of the dB. A sound pressure
level (SPL) in dB is described as the ratio between a measured pressure
and a reference pressure and is a logarithmic unit that accounts for
large variations in amplitude; therefore, a relatively small change in
dB corresponds to large changes in sound pressure. The source level
(SL) represents the SPL referenced at a distance of 1 m from the source
while the received level is the SPL at the listener's position. Note
that all airborne sound levels in this document are referenced to a
pressure of 20 [micro]Pa.
Root mean square (rms) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over
the duration of an impulse. Root mean square is calculated by squaring
all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the
square root of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean square accounts for
both positive and negative values; squaring the pressures makes all
values positive so that they may be accounted for in the summation of
pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 2005). This measurement is often
used in the context of discussing behavioral effects, in part because
behavioral effects, which often result from auditory cues, may be
better expressed through averaged units than by peak pressures.
Sound exposure level (SEL; represented as dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s)
represents the total energy contained within a pulse and considers both
intensity and duration of exposure. Peak sound pressure (also referred
to as zero-to-peak sound pressure or 0-p) is the maximum instantaneous
sound pressure measurable in the water at a specified distance from the
source and is represented in the same units as the rms sound pressure.
Another common metric is peak-to-peak sound pressure (pk-pk), which is
the algebraic difference between the peak positive and peak negative
sound pressures. Peak-to-peak pressure is typically approximately 6 dB
higher than peak pressure (Southall et al., 2007).
A-weighting is applied to instrument-measured sound levels in an
effort to account for the relative loudness perceived by the human ear,
as the ear is less sensitive to low audio frequencies, and is commonly
used in measuring airborne noise. The relative sensitivity of pinnipeds
listening in air to different frequencies is more-or-less similar to
that of humans (Richardson et al., 1995), so A-weighting may, as a
first approximation, be relevant to pinnipeds listening to moderate-
level sounds.
The sum of the various natural and anthropogenic sound sources at
any given location and time--which comprise ``ambient'' or
``background'' sound--depends not only on the source levels (as
determined by current weather conditions and levels of biological and
human activity) but also on the ability of sound to propagate through
the environment. In turn, sound propagation is dependent on the
spatially and temporally varying properties of the water column and sea
floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a result of the dependence on a
large number of varying factors, ambient sound levels can be expected
to vary widely over both coarse and fine spatial and temporal scales.
Sound levels at a given frequency and location can vary by 10-20 dB
from day to day (Richardson et al., 1995). The result is that,
depending on the source type and its intensity, sound from a given
activity may be a negligible addition to the local environment or could
form a distinctive signal that may affect marine mammals. Details of
source types are described in the following text.
Sounds are often considered to fall into one of two general types:
Pulsed and non-pulsed (defined in the following). The distinction
between these two sound types is important because they have differing
potential to cause physical effects, particularly with regard to
hearing (e.g., Ward, 1997 in Southall et al., 2007). Please see
Southall et al. (2007) for an in-depth discussion of these concepts.
Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns, explosions, gunshots, sonic
booms, impact pile driving) produce signals that are brief (typically
considered to be less than one second), broadband, atonal transients
(ANSI, 1986; ANSI, 2005; Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 1998; ISO, 2003) and
occur either as isolated events or repeated in some succession. Pulsed
sounds are all characterized by a relatively rapid rise from ambient
pressure to a maximal pressure value followed by a rapid decay period
that may include a period of diminishing, oscillating maximal and
minimal pressures, and generally have an increased capacity to induce
physical injury as compared with sounds that lack these features.
Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, narrowband, or broadband, brief or
prolonged, and may be either continuous or non-continuous (ANSI, 1995;
NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-pulsed sounds can be transient signals
of short duration but without the essential properties of pulses (e.g.,
rapid rise time). Examples of non-pulsed sounds include those produced
by vessels, aircraft, machinery operations such as drilling or
dredging, vibratory pile driving, and active sonar systems (such as
those used by the U.S. Navy). The duration of such sounds, as received
at a distance, can be greatly extended in a highly reverberant
environment.
The effects of sounds on marine mammals are dependent on several
factors, including the species, size, and behavior (feeding, nursing,
resting, etc.) of the animal; the intensity and duration of the sound;
and the sound propagation properties of the environment. Impacts to
marine species can result from physiological and behavioral responses
to both the type and strength of the acoustic signature (Viada et al.,
2008). The type and severity of behavioral impacts are more difficult
to define due to limited studies addressing the behavioral effects of
sounds on marine mammals. Potential effects from impulsive sound
sources can range in severity from effects such as behavioral
disturbance or tactile perception to physical discomfort, slight injury
of the internal organs and the auditory system, or mortality (Yelverton
et al., 1973).
The effects of sounds from the proposed activities are expected to
result in behavioral disturbance of marine mammals. Due to the expected
sound levels of the activities proposed and the distance of the
activity from marine mammal habitat, the effects of sounds from the
proposed activities are not expected to result in temporary or
permanent hearing impairment (TTS and PTS, respectively), non-auditory
physical or physiological effects, or masking in marine mammals. Data
from monitoring reports associated with authorizations issued by NMFS
previously for similar activities in the same location as the planned
activities (described further below) provides further support for the
assertion that TTS, PTS, non-auditory physical or physiological
effects, and masking are not likely to occur (USAF, 2013b; SAIC,
[[Page 5461]]
2012). Therefore, TTS, PTS, non-auditory physical or physiological
effects, and masking are not discussed further in this section.
Disturbance Reactions
Disturbance includes a variety of effects, including subtle changes
in behavior, more conspicuous changes in activities, and displacement.
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, ambient noise,
and the receiving animal's hearing, motivation, experience, demography,
behavior at time of exposure, life stage, depth) and can be difficult
to predict (e.g., Southall, et al., 2007, Southall et al., 2021;
Ellison et al., 2012).
Habituation can occur when an animal's response to a stimulus wanes
with repeated exposure, usually in the absence of unpleasant associated
events (Wartzok et al., 2003). Animals are most likely to habituate to
sounds that are predictable and unvarying. The opposite process is
sensitization, when an unpleasant experience leads to subsequent
responses, often in the form of avoidance, at a lower level of
exposure. Behavioral state may affect the type of response as well. For
example, animals that are resting may show greater behavioral change in
response to disturbing sound levels than animals that are highly
motivated to remain in an area for feeding (Richardson et al., 1995;
NRC, 2003; Wartzok et al., 2003).
Controlled experiments with captive marine mammals have shown
pronounced behavioral reactions, including avoidance of loud underwater
sound sources (Ridgway et al., 1997; Finneran et al., 2003). These may
be of limited relevance to the proposed activities given that airborne
sound, and not underwater sound, may result in harassment of marine
mammals as a result of the proposed activities; however we present this
information as background on the potential impacts of sound on marine
mammals. Observed responses of wild marine mammals to loud pulsed sound
sources (typically seismic guns or acoustic harassment devices) have
been varied but often consist of avoidance behavior or other behavioral
changes suggesting discomfort (Morton and Symonds, 2002; Thorson and
Reyff, 2006; Gordon et al., 2004; Wartzok et al., 2003; Nowacek et al.,
2007).
The onset of noise can result in temporary, short term changes in
an animal's typical behavior and/or avoidance of the affected area.
These behavioral changes may include: reduced/increased vocal
activities; changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such
as socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive
behavior; avoidance of areas where sound sources are located; and/or
flight responses (Richardson et al., 1995). Not all behavioral
responses are indicative of a take. For further discussion of
behavioral responses as they relate to take, see table 5.
The biological significance of many of these behavioral
disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected
disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral
modification could potentially be biologically significant if the
change affects growth, survival, or reproduction. The onset of
behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic sound is dependent upon a
number of contextual factors including, but not limited to, sound
source frequencies, whether the sound source is moving towards the
animal, hearing ranges of marine mammals, behavioral state at time of
exposure, status of individual exposed (e.g., reproductive status, age
class, health) and an individual's experience with similar sound
sources. Southall et al., (2021), Ellison et al. (2012) and Moore and
Barlow (2013), among others, emphasize the importance of context (e.g.,
behavioral state of the animals, distance from the sound source) in
evaluating behavioral responses of marine mammals to acoustic sources.
Marine mammals that occur in the project area could be exposed to
in-air sound that has the potential to result in behavioral harassment
of pinnipeds that are hauled out. Airborne sound at certain levels is
expected to result in behavioral responses similar to those discussed
above in relation to underwater sound. For instance, anthropogenic
sound could cause hauled out pinnipeds to exhibit changes in their
normal behavior such as a change from resting state to an `alert'
posture or to flush from a haulout site into the water.
The results from studies of pinniped response to acoustic
disturbance arising from launches and associated sonic booms at VSFB
and NCI are highly variable (Holst et al., 2005; Ugoretz and Greene Jr.
2012). Pinniped responses to rocket launches at the sites have been
monitored for well over two decades. Monitoring data have consistently
shown that the degree of pinniped reactions to sonic booms varies among
species (table 4), with harbor seals typically showing the highest
levels of disturbance, followed by California sea lions, and with
northern elephant seals generally being much less responsive. Steller
sea lions are only rarely observed in the project area and react to
launch noise infrequently. Types of responses range from no response to
heads-up alerts, from startle responses to some movements on land, and
from some movements into the water to one instance of stampede.
Table 4--Representative Pinniped Responses to Sonic Booms at San Miguel Island, Documented in U.S. Air Force
Launch Monitoring Reports
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sonic
boom
Launch event level Monitoring location Species observed and responses
(psf)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Athena II (April 27, 1999).............. 1 Adams Cove................ California sea lion: 866
alerted; 232 (27 percent)
flushed into water.
Northern elephant seal: alerted
but did not flush.
Northern fur seal: alerted but
did not flush.
Athena II (September 24, 1999).......... 0.95 Point Bennett............. California sea lion: 12 of 600
(2 percent) flushed into
water.
Northern elephant seal: alerted
but did not flush.
Northern fur seal: alerted but
did not flush.
Delta II 20 (November 20, 2000)......... 0.4 Point Bennett............. California sea lion: 60 pups
flushed into water; no
reaction from focal group.
Northern elephant seal: no
reaction.
[[Page 5462]]
Atlas II (September 8, 2001)............ 0.75 Cardwell Point............ California sea lion (Group 1):
no reaction (1,200 animals).
California sea lion (Group 2):
no reaction (247 animals).
Northern elephant seal: no
reaction.
Harbor seal: 2 of 4 flushed
into water.
Delta II (February 11, 2002)............ 0.64 Point Bennett............. California sea lions and
northern fur seals: no
reaction among 485 animals in
3 groups.
Northern elephant seal: no
reaction among 424 animals in
2 groups.
Atlas II (December 2, 2003)............. 0.88 Point Bennett............. California sea lion:
approximately 40 percent
alerted; several flushed to
water (number unknown--night
launch).
Northern elephant seal: no
reaction.
Delta II (July 15, 2004)................ 1.34 Adams Cove................ California sea lion: 10 percent
alerted (number unknown--night
launch).
Atlas V (March 13, 2008)................ 1.24 Cardwell Point............ Northern elephant seal: no
reaction (109 pups).
Delta II (May 5, 2009).................. 0.76 West of Judith Rock....... California sea lion: no
reaction (784 animals).
Atlas V (April 14, 2011)................ 1.01 Cuyler Harbor............. Northern elephant seal: no
reaction (445 animals).
Atlas V (September 13, 2012)............ 2.10 Cardwell Point............ California sea lion: no
reaction (460 animals).
Northern elephant seal: no
reaction (68 animals).
Harbor seal: 20 of 36 (56
percent) flushed into water.
Atlas V (April 3, 2014)................. 0.74 Cardwell Point............ Harbor seal: 1 of ~25 flushed
into water; no reaction from
others.
Atlas V (December 12, 2014)............. 1.18 Point Bennett............. California sea lion: 5 of ~225
alerted; none flushed.
Atlas V (October 8, 2015)............... 1.96 East Adams Cove of Point California sea lion: ~60
Bennett. percent of CSL alerted and
raised their heads. None
flushed.
Northern elephant seal: No
visible response to sonic
boom, none flushed.
Northern fur seal: 60 percent
alerted and raised their
heads. None flushed.
Atlas V (March 1, 2017)................. \a\ ~0.8 Cuyler Harbor on San Northern elephant seal: 13 of
Miguel Island. 235 (6 percent) alerted; none
flushed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Peak sonic boom at the monitoring site was ~2.2 psf, but was in infrasonic range--not audible to pinnipeds.
Within the audible frequency spectrum, boom at monitoring site estimated at ~0.8 psf.
Post-launch monitoring of pinniped behavior shows that return to
pre-launch numbers of animals and types of behaviors occurs within
minutes or up to an hour or two after each launch event, regardless of
species.
Responsiveness also varies with time of year and age class, with
juvenile pinnipeds being more likely to react by entering the water and
temporarily leaving the haulout site. The probability and type of
behavioral response also depends on the season, the group composition,
and the type of activity or behavior at the time of disturbance. For
example, in some cases, harbor seals have been found to be more
responsive during the pupping/breeding season (Holst et al., 2005a;
Holst et al., 2008) while in other instances, lone individuals seem
more prone to react than mothers and pups (Ugoretz and Greene Jr.,
2012). California sea lions seem to be consistently less responsive
during the pupping season (Holst et al., 2010; Holst et al., 2005a;
Holst et al., 2008; Holst et al., 2011; Holst et al., 2005b; Ugoretz
and Greene Jr., 2012).
Pup abandonment could theoretically result in instances where
adults flush into the water as a result of sound from an in-season
launch. In its application, USSF cites one instance of a stampede on
NCI that was triggered by launch noise in excess of that predicted to
occur from USSF's proposed activity. No instances of pup abandonment
are reflected in site-specific monitoring data. Given there is only one
known instance of a stampede and no known pup abandonment, we find that
abandonment is not likely to occur from future activities that create
similar sound levels as those in the past. While reactions are
variable, and can involve abrupt movements by some individuals,
biological impacts of observed responses to launch activities and
supporting operations appear to be limited in duration and consist of
behavioral disruption including temporary abandonment of a haul out
area.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
Habitat includes, but is not necessarily limited to, rookeries,
mating grounds, feeding areas, and areas of similar significance. We do
not anticipate that the proposed activities would result in any
temporary or permanent effects on the habitats used by the marine
mammals in the proposed area, including the food sources they use
(i.e., fish and invertebrates). Therefore, it is not expected that the
specified activities would impact feeding success of pinnipeds.
While it is anticipated that the proposed activity may result in
marine mammals avoiding certain haulout areas due to temporary
ensonification of out-of-water habitat, this impact is temporary and
reversible and was discussed earlier in this document, in the context
of behavioral modification. No impacts are anticipated to accrue to
prey species or to foraging areas and in-water habitat frequented by
pinnipeds. The main impact associated with the proposed activity will
be temporarily elevated in-air noise levels and the associated reaction
of certain pinnipeds, previously discussed in this proposed rule.
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
proposed
[[Page 5463]]
for this rule, 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. Except with respect to military readiness activities,
section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of pursuit,
torment, or annoyance, which: (i) has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii)
has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in
the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but
not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering (Level B harassment). As stated above, a comparatively small
portion of USSF's activities are considered military readiness
activities. For military readiness activities, 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). The take estimate methodology outlined
below is considered appropriate for the quantification of take by Level
B harassment based on either of the two definitions.
Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form
of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals
resulting from exposure to launch related visual or auditory stimulus.
Based on the nature of the activity and as shown in activity-specific
studies (described below), Level A harassment is neither anticipated
nor proposed to be authorized. As described previously, no serious
injury or mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized for
this activity. Below we describe how the proposed 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 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). Below, we describe
the factors considered here (which include thresholds for take from
launches and UAS, considered in combination with pinniped survey data
in the form of daily counts) in more detail and present the proposed
take estimates.
Acoustic Thresholds
For underwater sounds, NMFS recommends the use of acoustic
thresholds that identify the received levels above which exposed marine
mammals would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed
(equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of some degree (equated
to Level A harassment). Thresholds have also been developed identifying
the received level of in-air sound above which exposed pinnipeds would
likely be behaviorally harassed. Here, thresholds for behavioral
disturbance from launch activities have been developed based on
observations of pinniped responses before, during, and after launches
and UAS activity. For rocket and missile launches at VSFB, given the
sound levels and proximity, NMFS assumes that all rocket launches will
behaviorally harass pinnipeds of any species hauled out at sites around
the periphery of the base. For rocket launches from VSFB that transit
over or near NCI, based on several years of onsite behavioral
observations and monitoring data, NMFS predicts that those that create
a sonic boom over 2.0 psf could behaviorally harass pinnipeds of any
species hauled out on NCI. For UAS activity NMFS predicts that, given
the potential variability of locations, routing and altitudes necessary
to meet mission needs, classes 0-3 could behaviorally harass pinnipeds
of any species hauled out at VSFB.
Regarding potential hearing impairment, the effects of launch noise
on pinniped hearing were the subject of studies at the site in the
past. In addition to monitoring pinniped haul-out sites before, during
and after launches, researchers were previously required to capture
harbor seals at nearby haulouts and Point Conception to test their
sensitivity to launch noises. Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) tests
were performed under 5-year SRPs starting in 1997. The goal was to
determine whether launch noise affected the hearing of pinnipeds (MMCG
and SAIC 2012a). The low frequency sounds from launches can be intense,
with the potential of causing a temporary threshold shift (TTS), in
which part or all of an animal's hearing range is temporarily
diminished. In some cases, this diminishment can last from minutes to
days before hearing returns to normal. None of the seals tested in
these studies over a span of 15 years showed signs of TTS or PTS,
supporting a finding that launch noise at the levels tested is unlikely
to cause PTS and that any occurrence of TTS may be of short duration.
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that are used in estimating the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds, including source levels and transmission loss
coefficient.
Because the haulouts at NCI are more distant from the rocket launch
sites than those at VSFB, different methods are used to predict when
launches are likely to impact pinnipeds at the two sites. As stated
above, for rocket and missile launches at VSFB, NMFS conservatively
assumes that all rocket launches will behaviorally harass pinnipeds of
any species hauled out at sites around the periphery of the base. For
rocket launches from VSFB that transit over or near NCI, NMFS predicts
that those that are projected to create a sonic boom over 2 psf could
behaviorally harass pinnipeds of any species hauled out on NCI. For UAS
activity, NMFS predicts that classes 0-3 could behaviorally harass
pinnipeds of any species hauled out at VSFB.
The USSF is not able to predict the exact areas that will be
impacted by noise associated with the specified activities, including
sonic booms, launch noise and UAS operations. Many different types of
launch vehicle types are operated from VSFB. Different combinations of
vehicles and launch sites create different sound profiles, and dynamic
environmental conditions also bear on sound transmission. As such, the
different haul-out sites around the periphery of the base are
ensonified to varying degrees when launches and, when applicable,
recoveries of first stage boosters occur. USSF is not able to predict
the exact timing, types and trajectories of these future rocket launch
programs. However, as described below, rocket launches are expected to
behaviorally disturb pinnipeds at VSFB and some launches are also
expected to disturb pinniped hauled out at NCI. Missiles are only
expected to impact pinnipeds at Lion Rock (Point Sal), and
[[Page 5464]]
UAS impacts are only expected to occur at Small Haulout 1 (in VSFB).
Therefore, for the purposes of estimating take, we conservatively
estimate that all haulout sites at VSFB will be ensonified by rocket
launch noise above the level expected to result in behavioral
disturbance. Different space launch vehicles also have varying
trajectories, which result in different sonic boom profiles, some of
which are likely to affect areas on the NCI (San Miguel, Santa Rosa,
Santa Cruz, and Anacapa). Based on several years of onsite monitoring
data, harassment of marine mammals is unlikely to occur when the
intensity of a sonic boom is below 2 psf. Santa Cruz and Anacapa
Islands are not expected to be impacted by sonic booms in excess of 2
psf (USAF, 2018), therefore, USSF does not anticipate take of marine
mammals on these islands, and NMFS concurs. Sonic booms from VSFB
launches or recoveries can impact haul out areas and may take marine
mammals on San Miguel Island and occasionally on Santa Rosa Island. In
order to accommodate the variability of possible launches and (when
applicable) sonic booms over NCI, USSF estimates that 25 percent of
pinniped haulouts on San Miguel and Santa Rosa Islands may be
ensonified to a level above 2 psf. NMFS concurs, and we consider this
to be a conservative assumption based on sonic boom models which show
that areas predicted to be impacted by a sonic boom with peak
overpressures of 2 psf and above are typically limited to isolated
parts of a single island, and sonic boom model results tend to
overestimate actual recorded sonic booms on the NCI (personal
communication: R. Evans, USSF, to J. Carduner, NMFS, OPR).
Modeling has not been required for launches of currently deployed
missiles because of their trajectories west of VSFB and north of San
Miguel Island and the previously well-documented acoustic properties of
the missiles. The anticipated GBSD is expected to utilize approximately
the same trajectories as the current ICBM, and the GBSD program will be
required to model at least one representative launch. When missiles are
launched in a generally western direction (they turn south several
hundred miles from VSFB and at high altitude), there is no sonic boom
impact on the NCI; thus take of pinnipeds on NCI is not anticipated
from missile launches. Given flight characteristics and trajectories,
take from missile launch is not anticipated for most species. However,
given proximity and the generally western trajectory, noise from
missile launches from North Base may take California sea lions that
haul out at Lion Rock (Point Sal) near VSFB's northern boundary.
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Estimation
In this section, we bring together the information above and
describe take from the three different activity types (rockets,
missiles, and UAS) expected to occur at VSFB and NCI, the marine mammal
occurrence data (based on two survey series specific to VSFB and NCI),
species and location-specific data related the likelihood of either
exposure (e.g., tidal differences) or response (e.g., proportion of
previously recorded responses that qualify as take), and the amount of
activity. We describe the calculations used to arrive at the take
estimates for each activity, species, and location, and present the
total estimated take in table 14.
NMFS uses a three-tiered scale to determine whether the response of
a pinniped on land to stimuli is indicative of Level B harassment under
the MMPA (table 5). NMFS considers the behaviors that meet the
definitions of both movements and flushes in table 5 to qualify as
behavioral harassment. Thus a pinniped on land is considered by NMFS to
have been behaviorally harassed if it moves greater than two times its
body length, or if the animal is already moving and changes direction
and/or speed, or if the animal flushes from land into the water.
Animals that become alert or stir without other movements indicative of
disturbance are not considered harassed. Prior observations of pinniped
responses to certain exposures may be used to predict future responses
and assist in estimating take. Here, the levels of observed responses
of particular species during monitoring are used to inform take
estimate correction factors as described in the species and activity-
specific sections below.
Table 5--Levels of Pinniped Behavioral Disturbance on Land
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characterized as
Level Type of response Definition behavioral harassment
by NMFS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.................................. Alert................. Seal head orientation or No.
brief movement in response
to disturbance, which may
include turning head
towards the disturbance,
craning head and neck
while holding the body
rigid in a u-shaped
position, changing from a
lying to a sitting
position, or brief
movement of less than
twice the animal's body
length.
2.................................. Movement.............. Movements in response to Yes.
the source of disturbance,
ranging from short
withdrawals at least twice
the animal's body length
to longer retreats over
the beach, or if already
moving a change of
direction of greater than
90 degrees.
3.................................. Flush................. All retreats (flushes) to Yes.
the water.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data collected from marine mammal surveys including monthly marine
mammal surveys and launch-specific monitoring conducted by the USSF at
VSFB, and observations collected by NMFS at NCI, represent the best
available information on the occurrence of the six pinniped species
expected to occur in the project area. Monthly marine mammal surveys at
VSFB are conducted to document the abundance, distribution and status
of pinnipeds at VSFB. When possible, these surveys are timed to
coincide with the lowest afternoon tides of each month, when the
greatest numbers of animals are usually hauled out. Data gathered
during monthly surveys include: species, number, general behavior,
presence of pups, age class, gender, reactions to natural or human-
caused disturbances, and environmental conditions. Some species are
observed regularly at VSFB and the NCI (e.g., California sea lion),
while other species are observed less frequently (e.g., northern fur
seals and Guadalupe fur seals).
Take estimates were calculated separately for each stock in each
year the proposed regulations would be valid
[[Page 5465]]
(from 2024 to 2029), on both VAFB and the NCI, based on the number of
animals assumed hauled out at each location that are expected to be
behaviorally harassed by the stimuli associated with the specified
activities (i.e., launch, sonic boom, or UAS noise). First, the number
of hauled out animals per month was estimated at both VAFB and the NCI
for each stock, based on survey data and subject matter expert input.
Second, we estimated the percentage of animals that would be taken by
harassment from a launch at a given site, using the corrections and
adjustments. In order to determine that percentage, we considered
whether certain factors could result in fewer than the total estimated
number at a location being harassed. These factors include whether the
extent of ensonification is expected to affect only a portion of the
animals in an area, tidal inundation that displaces animals from
affected areas and for species reactivity to launch noise, life history
patterns and, where appropriate, seasonal dispersal patterns.
Launches covered in this authorization are not expected to produce
a sonic boom over the mainland except that some first stage recoveries
back to launch facilities on the base that may do so. Because first
stage recoveries always occur within ten minutes of the initial launch,
a response from any given animal to both launch and recovery are
considered to be one instance of take, even when both launch and
recovery meet or exceed the 2 psf threshold for calculating take.
Vandenberg Space Force Base
As described above, rocket launches, missile launches, and UAS
activities are expected to result in take of pinnipeds on VSFB at haul
outs along the periphery of the base. Because the supporting
information and/or methods are different for these three activity
types, we describe them separately below. Launches from different
launch facilities at VSFB create different degrees of ensonification at
specific haul out sites, and further, USSF has limited ability to
forecast which launch sites may be used for future launches. As
described previously, some launches also involve the recovery of a
booster component back to the launch site, or to an alternate offshore
location.
As noted above, NMFS first estimated the number of hauled out
animals per month at VAFB for each stock. NMFS used marine mammal
counts collected by USSF during monthly marine mammal surveys to
approximate haulout abundance. NMFS compared monthly counts for a given
species from 2020 to 2022 and selected the highest count (sum across
all haul out sites) for each month for each species, as indicated in
table 6. NMFS then selected the highest monthly count for each species
and used that as the estimated number of animals that would be hauled
out at any given time during a launch. Because launches from different
SLCs impact different haul-outs, we expect that using this highest
monthly estimate will result in a conservative take estimate.
Therefore, NMFS considers the 2020-2022 survey data relied upon to be
the best data available.
As further indicated in the table 7, and described below, the
predicted number of animals taken by each launch, by species, is
adjusted as indicated to account for the fact that (1) for some
species, animals are only hauled out and available to be taken during
low tide and (2) years of monitoring reports showing that different
species respond behaviorally to launches in a different manner.
Table 6--VSFB Max Counts From Monthly Surveys, 2020-2022
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor California sea Northern elephant
Month seal lion Steller sea lion seal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan.............................. 61 11 None in USSF record 76
2020-2022.
Feb.............................. 73 9 0................... 63
Mar.............................. 105 0 0................... 50
Apr.............................. 87 3 0................... 173
May.............................. 95 * 112 0................... * 302
Jun.............................. * 149 72 0................... 78
Jul.............................. 61 26 0................... 20
Aug.............................. 60 1 0................... 11
Sept............................. 54 16 0................... 82
Oct.............................. 59 2 0................... 228
Nov.............................. 65 28 0................... 251
Dec.............................. 51 16 0................... 122
USSF Estimated Max:
* 5.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: * indicates the highest monthly count for a given species.
Rocket Launches at VSFB
USSF assumes that all rocket launches would take, by Level B
harassment, animals hauled out at sites around the periphery of the
base. Some rocket launches create overpressure at time of launch, and
some recoveries of first-stage boosters can create a sonic boom when
they return to the launch pad. Some flights also transit over or near
portions of the NCI, but potential impacts to marine mammals at the NCI
are discussed separately, below. Table 8 lists the proposed take by
Level B harassment from rocket launch and recovery activities at VSFB,
and below, we describe how NMFS estimated take for each species. Note
that northern fur seal and Guadalupe fur seal are not anticipated to
occur at VSFB, and therefore, NMFS does not anticipate impacts to these
species at VSFB.
Harbor Seals
Pacific harbor seals haul out regularly at more than ten sites on
both north and south VSFB. They are the most widespread pinniped
species on VSFB and have been seen in all months, with decades of
successful pupping. Rocket launches from sites closer to the haulouts
are more likely to cause disturbance, including noise and visual
impacts. Many of their haulout sites are inundated during high tide,
and NMFS anticipates that take of this species would only occur during
low tides. Rocket launches from sites closer to the haulouts are more
likely to cause disturbance, including noise and visual impacts.
However, to capture variability, we assume that all rocket launches
result in Level B harassment of 100 percent of the harbor seals at all
VSFB haulouts.
To determine the number of animals that would be taken by Level B
harassment, we multiplied the max
[[Page 5466]]
count indicated in table 6 by the number of proposed launches per year
(table 8) for each year of the proposed authorization. As noted in
table 6, monitoring data show that, generally speaking, most if not all
harbor seals exposed to launch noise exhibit a behavioral response to
launch stimulus that equates to take by Level B harassment and,
therefore, we predict that 100 percent of animals exposed to launch
noise will be taken per launch. However, given that most haulout sites
at VSFB are inundated at high tide, NMFS applied a 50 percent
correction factor (table 7). Therefore, estimated takes = max daily
count (149) X tidal correction factor (0.5) X number of rocket launches
in the area for each year for each year (40 in year 1, etc.), and the
resulting take numbers NMFS proposes to authorize are listed in table
8.
California Sea Lion
California sea lions on VSFB only haul out regularly at Rocky Point
(north and south) and Amphitheatre Cove. California sea lions are most
abundant at the haul out in Zone G at Lion Rock (Point Sal). Rocket
launches from SLC-6, SLC-8, and the future SLC-11, which are closest to
North Rocky Point, would be the most likely to result in noise and
visual impacts. Rocket launches from SLC-3E and SLC-4E, both farther
inland and some four times the distance, are less likely to impact
California sea lions at North Rocky Point. During very high tides and
strong winds, when spray is heavy, the sea lions often leave this site
or are unable to access it. Therefore, NMFS assumes that for any given
rocket launch at VSFB, 50 percent of the maximum number of California
sea lions that haul out at VSFB may be taken by Level B harassment.
To determine the number of animals that would be taken by Level B
harassment, we multiplied the max count indicated in table 6 by the
number of proposed launches per year (table 8) for each year of the
proposed authorization. As noted in table 6, monitoring data show that,
generally speaking, most if not all California sea lions hauled out at
VSFB would exhibit a behavioral response to launch stimulus that
equates to take by Level B harassment and, therefore, we predict that
100 percent of animals exposed to launch noise will be taken per
launch. However, given that most haulout sites at VSFB are inundated at
high tide, NMFS applied a 50 percent correction factor (table 7).
Therefore, the number of estimated takes = max daily count (112) x
tidal correction factor (0.5) x number of rocket launches in the area
(40 in year 1, etc.), and the resulting take numbers NMFS proposes to
authorize are listed in table 8.
Northern Elephant Seal
Northern elephant seals historically hauled out at VSFB only
rarely, and most animals observed onsite were subadult males. In 2004,
a record count of 188 animals was made, mostly newly weaned seals (MMCG
and SAIC 2012a); these numbers continued to increase (unpublished data,
however reported annually to NMFS). In November 2016, mature adults
were observed in Amphitheatre Cove, and pupping was first documented in
January 2017 with 18 pups born and weaned. In January 2018, a total of
25 pups were born and weaned; 26 in 2019, 34 in 2020, 33 in 2021 and 49
in 2022. Two pups were born and weaned at Boathouse Beach in both 2021
and 2022. We assume that this site, in addition to Amphitheater, will
support pupping in future years. Pupping occurs from December through
March, with peak breeding in mid-February.
To determine the number of animals that would be taken by Level B
harassment, we multiplied the max count indicated in table 6 by the
number of proposed launches per year (table 8) for each year of the
proposed authorization. As noted in table 6, given elephant seals'
known lack of sensitivity to noise, based on VSFB monitoring reports
and the literature, NMFS predicts that only 15 percent of elephant
seals exposed to the launch noise would respond in a manner that
constitutes take by Level B harassment, and, therefore, a 15 percent
correction factor was applied. We also note that, unlike for harbor
seals and California sea lions, Northern elephant seal presence and
numbers are not affected by tides. Therefore, the number of estimated
takes = highest daily count (302) x behavioral harassment correction
factor (0.15) x number of rocket launches in the area for each year (40
in year 1, etc.), and the resulting take numbers NMFS proposes to
authorize are listed in table 8.
Steller Sea Lion
Steller sea lions have been observed at VSFB since April 2012 (MMCG
and SAIC 2012c), though as indicated in table 6, they were not observed
between 2020 and 2022. For purposes of estimating take, USSF estimates
that up to five Steller sea lions may haul out at VSFB during any given
launch. NMFS multiplied this number by the number of proposed launches
per year for each year of the proposed authorization (Table 8). NMFS
assumes that all rocket launches result in behavioral disturbance
(i.e., Level B harassment) of 100 percent of the Steller sea lions
hauled out at VSFB. Therefore, the number of estimated takes = 5
animals x number of rocket launches in the area (40 in year 1, etc.),
and the resulting take numbers NMFS proposes to authorize are listed in
table 8.
Table 7--Corrections and Adjustments by Stock at VSFB 1 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VSFB, behavioral
Stock VSFB, tidal inundation disturbance correction
correction (percent) (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal (California).................................... 50 100
California sea lion (California)............................ 50 100
Northern elephant seal (CA Breeding)........................ N/A 15
Steller sea lion (eastern).................................. N/A 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Northern elephant seals and Steller sea lion takes are adjusted to reflect observed species-specific
reactivity to launch stimulus.
\2\ ``N/A'' indicates that no tidal adjustment was made.
[[Page 5467]]
Table 8--Proposed Annual and 5-Year Instances of Incidental Take From Rocket Launch and Recovery Activities at VSFB
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5-year total
2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 estimated
takes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Rocket Launches............................... 40 55 75 100 110 ..............
Pacific harbor seal (CA)................................ 2,980 4,098 5,588 7,450 8,195 28,310
California sea lion (U.S.).............................. 2,240 3,080 4,200 5,600 6,160 21,280
Northern elephant seal (CA breeding).................... 1,812 2,492 3,398 4,530 4,983 17,214
Steller sea lion (Eastern).............................. 200 275 375 500 550 1,900
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UAS at VSFB
As stated in the Description of Proposed Activity section, while
harassment of hauled out pinnipeds from UAS classes 0-2 is unlikely to
occur at altitudes of 200 ft and above (Erbe et al., 2017; Pomeroy et
al., 2015; Sweeney et al., 2016; Sweeney and Gelatt, 2017), USSF
conservatively assumes that UAS classes 0-3 operations would take, by
Level B harassment, some animals hauled out at Small Haul-Out 1 at
VSFB. Aircraft are required to maintain a 1000-ft buffer around
pinniped haul-out and rookery areas except in emergency circumstances,
such as Search and Rescue. However, Small Haul-Out 1, has a reduced
500-ft buffer because pinnipeds using this particular site have
acclimated to the activity. Therefore, a small number of takes by Level
B harassment may result from UAS activity at Small Haul-Out 1, only.
Table 9 lists the proposed take by Level B harassment at VSFB from UAS
activities, and below, we describe how NMFS estimated take for each
species. Note that northern fur seal and Guadalupe fur seal are not
anticipated to occur at VSFB, and therefore, NMFS does not anticipate
impacts to these species at VSFB. While Northern elephant seals have
been observed on nearby beaches, only Pacific harbor seals and
California sea lions are known to use Small Haul-Out 1, and therefore,
these are the only species anticipated to be taken by UAS activities.
Pacific Harbor Seal
Pacific harbor seals are the most common species at Small Haul-Out
1. USSF estimates that up to six harbor seals may be taken by Level B
harassment at Small Haul-Out 1 during any given UAS activity, based
upon previous monitoring data at Small Haul-Out site 1. NMFS concurs,
and multiplied this number by the number of proposed UAS class 0-3
activities per year (100). Therefore, the number of estimated takes per
year = 6 animals x 100 UAS activities, and the resultingtake numbers
NMFS proposes to authorize are listed in table 9.
California Sea Lion
California sea lions haul out at Small Haul-Out 1, though they are
less abundant than Pacific harbor seal at that site. USSF estimates
that up to 1 California sea lion may be taken by Level B harassment at
Small Haul-Out 1 during any given UAS activity, based upon previous
monitoring data at Small Haul-Out site 1. NMFS concurs, and multiplied
this number by the number of proposed UAS class 0-3 activities per year
(100). Therefore, the number of estimated takes per year = 1 animal X
100 UAS activities, and the resulting take numbers NMFS proposes to
authorize are listed in table 9.
Table 9--Take by Level B Harassment of Pinnipeds From UAS Activity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual take by 5-year total take
Species Level B by Level B
harassment harassment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor seal............... 600 3,000
California sea lion............... 100 500
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missiles at VSFB
USSF oversees missile launches from seven locations on VSFB. The
launches occur on a routine basis up to 15 times per year. In addition
to originating from different locations than rockets, missile
trajectories are also different. All missile launches tend in north-
westerly direction, and missiles in flight transition to a near-
horizontal profile shortly after launch. USSF's application describes
that missile launches are not anticipated to result in take of
pinnipeds at south VSFB, as they do not create a ``boom.'' However,
USSF anticipates, and NMFS concurs, that missile launches from sites in
North Base could take California sea lions at Lion Rock (Point Sal), an
off-base location. Lion Rock (Point Sal) is the only site at which USSF
anticipates that take of pinnipeds may occur during missile activities,
and NMFS concurs. Lowry et al. (2021) provides marine mammal occurrence
data at Lion Rock (Point Sal) for July 2016 and July 2017. While NMFS
used more recent data (2020 to 2022) to estimate take of pinnipeds
during rocket launch and UAS activities (described above), those
surveys did not include Lion Rock (Point Sal), and therefore, NMFS has
relied on the Lowry et al. (2021) data for missile launch impacts.
For purposes of estimating take, NMFS conservatively estimates that
up to 518 California sea lions may haul out at Lion Rock (Point Sal)
during any given missile launch. This is the higher count of California
sea lions at the site from 2016 (Lowry et al. 2021). NMFS multiplied
this number by the number of proposed launches per year (15 launches).
NMFS conservatively assumes that all California sea lions at the site
would be taken by Level B harassment during any given missile launch,
though it is relatively unlikely that all 15 launches would fly close
enough to this site to cause Level B harassment. Therefore, the number
of estimated takes = 518 animals x number of rocket launches in the
area in a given year (15), and NMFS proposes to authorize 7,770 takes
by Level B harassment of California sea lion annually (38,850 over the
duration of the proposed authorization) from
[[Page 5468]]
missile launches at VSFB, as indicated in table 10.
Table 10--Proposed Instances of Incidental Take From Missile Launches (Military Readiness Activity) at VSFB
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5-year total
Species Location High count Launches/year Annual takes takes \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion............................. Lion Rock, Point Sal.............. 518 (2019) 15 7,770 38,850
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Annual take * 5 years.
NCI
While USSF does not propose launching rockets from NCI, as noted
previously, a subset of VSFB rocket launches transit over or near NCI,
and a subset of those may create a sonic boom that affects some portion
of pinniped haulouts on NCI (San Miguel and Santa Rosa). No take of
pinnipeds on NCI is expected to result from missile launches or UAS
activities. To estimate take of marine mammals at NCI resulting from
rocket launches at VSFB, NMFS first estimated the number of hauled out
animals per species across all potentially affected haulouts on San
Miguel and Santa Rosa Islands. NMFS selected the high count from San
Miguel and Santa Rosa Islands between 2017 and 2019 (NOAA Technical
Memorandum SWFSC-656 (Lowry et al., 2021) and summed the high counts
from each site (table 11). NMFS then applied a correction factor to
this estimate to account for whether a given species is expected to be
hauled out in the area during all or a portion of the year (table 12).
This is referred to as Step 1 below.
Next, NMFS determined the approximate number of sonic booms over 2
psf anticipated to occur over the NCI (28 over 5 years, as reflected in
USSF's application). USSF's application indicates that during previous
monitoring of pinnipeds on NCI during rocket launches, few to no
behavioral reactions that would qualify as Level B harassment using the
the 3-point scale (table 5) were observed during sonic booms of less
than 2 psf. Therefore, in estimating take herein, NMFS assumes that
take of marine mammals will only occur during sonic booms of 2 psf or
greater. Summarizing 20 years of sonic boom modeling (MMCG and SAIC,
2012a), we anticipate that no more than 25 percent of space launches
will produce a sonic boom greater than 2 psf over the NCI (estimated to
be 28 launches over 5 years). On one occasion, pinnipeds on one side of
San Miguel Island, reacted to a boom, while animals four miles away on
the other did not react, nor was the boom detected there by acoustic
instruments (MMCG and SAIC, 2012a). Therefore, NMFS multiplied the
number of annual booms (table 13) by a 0.25 correction factor for all
species and rounded each year up to the next whole number. This is
referred to as step 2 below.
Next, NMFS multiplied the number of animals anticipated to be at a
haulout during a launch (calculated in step 1) by the number of annual
launches anticipated to affect animals at the haulouts (calculated in
step 2), and then multiplied the product by the likelihood of a given
species responding in a manner that would be considered take by Level B
harassment (table 13). NMFS describes the calculations in further
detail for each species, below.
Table 11--NCI, High Count 2017-2019 From SWFSC-656
[Lowry et al. (2021)]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
High count
2017 2019 from 2017 and
2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor seal:
San Miguel.................................................. 230 254 254 (2019)
Santa Rosa.................................................. 266 148 266 (2017)
-----------------------------------------------
Sum......................................................... .............. .............. 520
California sea lion:
San Miguel.................................................. 49,252 60,277 60,277 (2019)
Santa Rosa.................................................. 2,692 1,618 2,692 (2017)
-----------------------------------------------
Sum......................................................... .............. .............. 62,969
Northern elephant seal:
San Miguel.................................................. 2,327 2,791 2,791 (2019)
Santa Rosa.................................................. 1,169 1,015 1,169 (2017)
-----------------------------------------------
Sum......................................................... .............. .............. 3,960
Northern fur seal:
San Miguel.................................................. 4,520 4,377 4,520 (2017)
Santa Rosa.................................................. N/R N/R N/R
-----------------------------------------------
Sum......................................................... .............. .............. 4,520
Guadalupe fur seal:
San Miguel.................................................. N/R N/R N/R
Santa Rosa.................................................. N/R N/R N/R
-----------------------------------------------
Sum......................................................... .............. .............. N/R
Steller sea lion:
[[Page 5469]]
San Miguel.................................................. N/R N/R N/R
Santa Rosa.................................................. N/R N/R N/R
-----------------------------------------------
Sum......................................................... .............. .............. 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: N/R: No sightings recorded.
Harbor Seals
For harbor seal, the sum of the high counts at the San Miguel and
Santa Rosa haulouts during 2017 and 2019 is 520. NMFS expects Pacific
harbor seals to occur at the haulouts year round, and therefore did not
apply a correction for seasonal occurrence. NMFS multiplied the harbor
seal haulout abundance (520) by the number of booms anticipated to
overlap the haulouts (table 13, calculated in step 2 above). Based on
years of monitoring reports showing the responses of harbor seals at
NCI (which is farther from the launch sites than the VSFB sites) to
launches, NMFS anticipates that 50 percent of harbor seals exposed to a
sonic boom overlapping a haulout will be taken by Level B harassment.
Therefore, for each year, the number of estimated takes = 520 animals x
number of sonic booms over 2 psf x 0.5, and the resulting take numbers
NMFS proposes to authorize are listed in table 13.
California Sea Lions
For California sea lion, the sum of the high counts at the San
Miguel and Santa Rosa haulouts during 2017 and 2019 is 62,969. While
some California sea lions remain in the general vicinity of southern
California throughout the year and may haul out onshore, the use of
haulout sites at NCI is principally for breeding during peak summer
months. Given the fact that most male sea lions and a substantial
portion of all sea lions are not onshore at NCI outside of the breeding
season, we applied a 50 percent correction factor to better relate
instances of take to the number of individuals that may be hauled out
and subject to acoustic effects of launches. NMFS multiplied the
California sea lion haulout abundance (62,969) by the number of booms
anticipated to overlap the haulouts (Table 13, calculated in Step 2
above). Based on years of monitoring reports showing the responses of
California sea lions at NCI to launches, NMFS anticipates that 25
percent of California sea lions exposed to a sonic boom overlapping a
haulout will be taken by Level B harassment. Therefore, for each year,
the number of estimated takes = 62,969 animals x number of sonic booms
over 2 psf x 0.25, and the resulting take numbers NMFS proposes to
authorize are listed in table 13.
Northern Elephant Seals
For Northern elephant seal, the sum of the high counts at the San
Miguel and Santa Rosa haulouts during 2017 and 2019 is 3,960. NMFS
expects Northern elephant seals to occur at the haulouts year round,
and therefore did not apply a correction for seasonal occurrence. NMFS
multiplied the Northern elephant seal haulout abundance (3,960) by the
number of booms anticipated to overlap the haulouts (table 13,
calculated in step 2 above). Based on years of monitoring reports
showing the responses of Northern elephant seals at NCI to launches,
NMFS anticipates that 5 percent of Northern elephant seals exposed to a
sonic boom overlapping a haulout will be taken by Level B harassment.
Therefore, for each year, the number of estimated takes = 3,960 animals
x number of sonic booms over 2.0 psf x 0.05, and the resulting take
numbers NMFS proposes to authorize are listed in table 13.
Northern Fur Seal
For Northern fur seal, the sum of the high counts at the San Miguel
and Santa Rosa haulouts during 2017 and 2019 is 4,377. Northern fur
seals spend approximately 80 percent of the year at sea, generally well
offshore (Carretta et al., 2011; Caretta et al., 2012). To account for
that seasonal occurrence, NMFS applied a conservative seasonal
correction factor of 60 percent. NMFS multiplied the Northern fur seal
haulout abundance (4,377) by the number of booms anticipated to overlap
the haulouts (table 13, calculated in step 2 above). Based on years of
monitoring reports showing the responses of Northern fur seals at NCI
to launches, NMFS anticipates that 5 percent of Northern fur seals
exposed to a sonic boom overlapping a haulout will be taken by Level B
harassment. Therefore, for each year, the number of estimated takes =
4,377 animals x number of sonic booms over 2 psf x 0.05, and the
resulting take numbers NMFS proposes to authorize are listed in table
13.
Guadalupe Fur Seal
For Guadalupe fur seal, the sum of the high counts at the San
Miguel and Santa Rosa haulouts during 2017 and 2019 is 5. NMFS
estimates the potential for Guadalupe fur seals to occur at the
haulouts to be comparable throughout the year and, therefore, did not
apply a correction for seasonal occurrence. NMFS multiplied the
Guadalupe fur seal haulout abundance (5) by the number of booms
anticipated to overlap the haulouts (table 13, calculated in step 2
above). Based on years of monitoring reports showing the responses of
Guadalupe fur seals at NCI to launches, NMFS anticipates that 50
percent of Guadalupe fur seals exposed to a sonic boom overlapping a
haulout will be taken by Level B harassment. Therefore, for each year,
the number of estimated takes = 5 animals x number of sonic booms over
2 psf x 0.5, and the resulting take numbers NMFS proposes to authorize
are listed in table 13.
[[Page 5470]]
Table 12--Corrections and Adjustments by Stock at NCI 1 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species response Seasonal
Species to sonic boom occurrence
(percent) (percent of year)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal....................... 50 100
California sea lion............... 25 50
Northern elephant seal............ 5 100
Northern fur seal................. 25 \3\ 60
Guadalupe fur seal................ 50 \4\ N/A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Northern elephant seals and Steller sea lion takes are adjusted to
reflect observed species-specific reactivity to launch stimulus.
\2\ ``N/A'' indicates that a species is not expected to occur at the
location.
\3\ Of note, from November to May, there are approximately 125
individuals at the NCI (S. Melin, 2019), further supporting a seasonal
correction factor.
\4\ Guadalupe fur seal are generally not expected to occur on the NCI.
However, as described herein, given that they have occasionally been
sighted on the NCI, NMFS is conservatively proposing to authorize take
of Guadalupe fur seal as described herein.
Table 13--Proposed Take by Level B Harassment at NCI
[San Miguel and Santa Rosa]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5-year total
2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 take
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum number of sonic booms................. 5 12 24 30 33 ..............
Maximum number of sonic booms over 2.0 psf.... 2 3 6 8 9 ..............
Pacific harbor seal........................... 520 780 1,560 2,080 2,340 7,280
California sea lion........................... 15,742 23,613 47,227 62,969 70,840 220,392
Northern elephant seal........................ 396 594 2,970 3,960 4,455 12,375
Northern fur seal............................. 1,313 1,970 3,939 5,252 5,909 18,383
Guadalupe fur seal............................ 5 8 15 20 23 70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Proposed Take
Table 14 sums the take estimates described above for VSFB (rocket
launches, missile launches, and UAS) and NCI (rocket launches only).
These takes represent the number of instances of harassment of
pinnipeds following exposure to the indicated activities. However,
every take does not necessarily, and in this case is not expected to,
represent a separate individual. Rather, given the known repeated use
of haulouts by pinnipeds of all species, it is reasonable to expect
that some subset of the calculated takes represent repeated takes of
the same individuals, which means that the number of individuals taken
is expected to be significantly smaller than the number of instances of
take.
Table 14--Total Estimated Annual and 5-Year Take \1\ Proposed for Authorization
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highest annual
Highest 1- Stock instances of take
Stock 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 year take abundance as percent of
estimated stock abundance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor seal.................... 4,100 5,478 7,748 10,130 11,135 11,135 30,968 36
California sea lion.................... 25,852 34,563 59,297 76,439 84,870 84,870 257,606 33
Northern elephant seal................. 2,208 3,086 6,368 8,490 9,438 9,438 187,386 5
Steller sea lion....................... 200 275 375 500 550 550 43,201 1
Northern fur seal...................... 1,313 1,970 3,939 5,252 5,909 5,909 14,050 42
Guadalupe fur seal..................... 5 8 15 20 23 23 34,187 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Given the known repeated use of haulouts by pinnipeds of all species, it is reasonable to expect that some subset of the calculated takes represent
repeated takes of the same individuals, which means that the number of individuals taken is expected to be significantly smaller than the number of
instances of take.
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue regulations and an LOA under section 101(a)(5)(A)
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 (latter not applicable for this
action). NMFS regulations require applicants 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 Fiscal Year 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
[[Page 5471]]
expected to reduce impacts to marine mammals, marine mammal species or
stocks, and their habitat. 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 and 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.
Below, we describe the proposed mitigation measures for launches
(rocket and missile), manned aircraft, and UAS.
Launches (Rocket and Missile)
USSF must provide pupping information to launch proponents at the
earliest possible stage in the launch planning process to maximize
their ability to schedule launches to minimize pinniped disturbance
during pupping seasons on VSFB from 1 March to 30 April and on the
Northern Channel Islands from 1 June-31 July. If practicable, rocket
launches predicted to produce a sonic boom on the Northern Channel
Islands >3 psf from 1 June-31 July will be scheduled to coincide with
tides in excess of +1.0 ft, with an objective to do so at least 50
percent of the time. USSF will provide a detailed plan to NMFS for
approval that outlines how this measure will be implemented. This
measure will minimize occurrence of launches during low tides when
harbor seals and California sea lions are anticipated to haul out in
the greatest numbers during times of year when pupping may be
occurring, therefore further reducing the already unlikely potential
for separation of mothers from pups and potential for injury during
stampedes. While harbor seal pupping extends through June, harbor seals
reach full size at approximately two months old, at which point they
are less vulnerable to disturbances. In consideration of that and
practicability concerns raised by USSF, this measure does not extend
through the later portion of the harbor seal pupping season at VSFB.
Manned Aircraft
For manned flight operations, aircraft must use approved routes for
testing and evaluation. Manned aircraft must also remain outside of a
1,000-ft buffer around pinniped rookeries and haul-out sites (except in
emergencies such as law enforcement response or Search and Rescue
operations, and with a reduced, 500-ft buffer at Small Haul-out 1). As
discussed earlier, use of these routes and implementation of the buffer
would avoid behavioral disturbance of marine mammals from manned
aircraft operations.
UAS
UAS classes 0-2 must maintain a minimum altitude of 300 ft over all
known marine mammal haulouts when marine mammals are present, except at
take-off and landing. Class 3 must maintain a minimum altitude of 500
ft, except at take-off and landing. UAS classes 4 and 5 only operate
from the VSFB airfield and must maintain a minimum altitude of 1,000 ft
over marine mammal haulouts except at take-off and landing. USSF must
not fly class 4 or 5 UAS below 1,000 ft over haulouts.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, NMFS
has preliminarily determined that the proposed 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.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for
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 activity; 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.
The USSF has proposed a suite of monitoring measures on both VSFB
and the NCI to document impacts of the specified activities on marine
mammals. These proposed monitoring measures include both routine, semi-
monthly counts at all haul out sites on VSFB, and launch-specific
monitoring at VSFB and/or NCI when specific criteria are met. For
monitoring at VSFB and NCI, monitoring must be conducted by at least
one NMFS-approved PSO trained in marine mammal science. PSOs must have
demonstrated proficiency in the identification of all age and sex
classes of both common and uncommon pinniped species found at VSFB and
the NCI. They must be knowledgeable of approved count methodology and
have experience in observing pinniped behavior, especially that due to
human disturbances, to document pinniped activity at the monitoring
site(s) and to record marine mammal response to base operations. In the
event that the requirement for PSO monitoring cannot be met (such as
when access is prohibited due to safety concerns), daylight or night-
time video monitoring may be used in lieu of PSO monitoring. Specific
requirements for monitoring locations at VSFB and NCI respectively, are
described in additional detail below.
Rocket Launch Monitoring at VSFB
At VSFB, USSF must conduct marine mammal monitoring and take
acoustic measurements for all new rockets (for both existing and new
launch proponents using the existing facilities) that are larger or
louder than those that
[[Page 5472]]
have been previously launched from VSFB during their first three
launches, and for the first three launches from any new facilities
during March through July (i.e., the period during which harbor seals
are pupping occurs and California sea lions are present).
For the purposes of establishing monitoring criteria for VSFB
haulouts, computer software is used to model sound pressure levels
anticipated to occur for a given launch and/or recovery. Sonic boom
modeling will be performed prior to the first three small or medium
rocket launches from new launch proponents or at new launch facilities,
and all heavy or super-heavy rocket launches. PCBoom, a commercially
available modeling program, or an acceptable substitute, will be used
to model sonic booms from new vehicles.
Launch parameters specific to each launch will be incorporated into
each model run, including: launch direction and trajectory, rocket
weight, length, engine thrust, engine plume drag, and launch profile
(vehicle position versus time from launch to first-stage burnout),
among other aspects. Various weather scenarios will be analyzed from
NOAA weather records for the region, then run through the model. Among
other factors, these will include the presence or absence of the jet
stream, and if present, its direction, altitude and velocity. The type,
altitude, and density of clouds will also be considered. From these
data, the models will predict peak amplitudes and impacted locations.
As described below, this approach is also used to assess whether
thresholds (Table 16) for marine mammal monitoring on NCI could be
exceeded or not, and whether marine mammal monitoring will be necessary
for animals hauled out at NCI.
In general, on both VSFB and NCI, event-specific monitoring
typically involves four to six observations of each significant haul-
out area each day, over a period of 3 to 5 hours. For launches that
occur during the harbor seal pupping season (March 1 through June 30)
or when higher numbers of California sea lions are present (June 1
through July 31), monitoring will be conducted by at least one NMFS-
approved protected species observer (PSO) trained in marine mammal
science. Authorized PSOs shall have demonstrated proficiency in the
identification of all age and sex classes of all marine mammal species
that occur at VSFB. They shall be knowledgeable of approved count
methodology and have experience in observing pinniped behavior,
especially that due to human disturbances.
When launch monitoring is required, monitoring will begin at least
72 hours prior to the launch and continue through at least 48 hours
after the launch. For launches within the harbor seal pupping season, a
two-week follow-up pup survey will be required to ensure that there
were no adverse effects to pups. During daylight monitoring, time-lapse
video recordings will be made to capture the reactions of pinnipeds to
each launch, and during nighttime monitoring, USSF will employ night
video monitoring, when feasible. Monitoring will include multiple
surveys each day. When possible, PSOs will record: species, number,
general behavior, presence of pups, age class, gender, and reaction to
launch noise, or to natural or other human-caused disturbances. They
will also record environmental conditions, including visibility, air
temperature, clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, and swell height
and direction.
NCI Launch Monitoring
USSF will conduct marine mammal monitoring and take acoustic
measurements at the NCI if the sonic boom model indicates that
pressures from a boom will reach or exceed the psf level detailed in
table 15 during the indicated date range. These dates were determined
to be appropriate to account for sensitive seasons, primarily pupping,
for the various pinniped species.
Table 15--Proposed NCI Sonic Boom Level Requiring Monitoring, by Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dates Sonic boom level
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 March-31 July......................... >5 psf.
1 August-30 September................... >7 psf.
1 October-28 February................... no monitoring.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USSF will use specialized acoustic instruments to record sonic
booms generated by launches from VSFB and resulting overflights or
recoveries predicted to affect NCI haul out sites. VSFB will analyze
the recordings to determine the intensity, duration, and frequency of
sonic booms and resulting marine mammal responses in order to compare
monitoring results with levels considered potentially harmful to marine
mammals. The analysis can also be used to validate the efficacy of the
model.
Monitoring locations on NCI will be selected based upon the model
results, prioritizing a significant haulout site on one of the islands
where the maximum sound pressures are expected to occur. Currently,
monitoring the reactions of northern fur seals and Pacific harbor seals
to sonic booms is of a higher priority than monitoring of California
sea lions and northern elephant seals, for which more data is currently
available (Table 8). Monitoring the reactions of mother-pup pairs of
any species is also a high priority.
Considering the large numbers of pinnipeds (sometimes thousands)
that occur on some NCI beaches, while estimates of the entire beach
population will be made and their reactions to the launch noise noted,
more focused and detailed monitoring will be conducted on a smaller
subset or focal group. Photos and/or video recordings will be collected
for daylight launches when feasible, and if the launch occurs in
darkness night vision equipment will be used. Potential impediments to
effective use of photographic and video equipment include periods of
reduced visibility, terrain that obscures animals from view from one
observation point, severe glare and fog that can occur, and/or other
factors.
Monitoring will be conducted by at least one NMFS-approved PSO who
is trained in marine mammal science. Another person will accompany the
monitor for safety reasons. Monitoring will commence at least 72 hours
prior to the launch, during the launch and at least 48 hours after the
launch, unless no sonic boom is detected by the monitors and/or by the
acoustic recording equipment, at which time monitoring would be
stopped. If the launch occurs in darkness, night vision equipment will
be used. Monitoring for each launch will include multiple surveys each
day that record, when possible: species, number, general behavior,
presence of pups, age class, gender, and reaction to sonic booms or
natural or human-caused disturbances. Photos and/or video recordings
will be taken when feasible. Environmental conditions will also be
recorded, including visibility, air temperature, clouds, wind speed and
direction, tides, and swell height and direction.
USSF will continue to test equipment and emerging technologies,
including but not limited to night vision cameras, newer models of
remote video cameras and other means of remote monitoring at both VSFB
and on the NCI. UAS-based or space-based technologies that may become
available will be evaluated for suitability and practicability, and for
any advantage that remote sensing may provide to existing monitoring
approaches, including ensuring coverage when scheduling constraints or
other factors impede onsite monitoring at NCI.
[[Page 5473]]
Missile Launch Monitoring
Multiple years of monitoring indicates that missile launches do not
result in significant take (i.e., only a subset of pinnipeds, in the
vicinity of the launch trajectory, respond in a manner that would
qualify as a take, and the impacts appear comparatively minor and of
short duration). Therefore, monitoring of marine mammals is only
required for the first three launches of the missiles for the new GBSD
during the months of March through July (i.e., the period during which
harbor seals are pupping and California sea lions are present) across
the 5-year duration of this rule.
When missile launch monitoring is required, monitoring will include
multiple surveys each day. When possible, PSOs will record: species,
number, general behavior, presence of pups, age class, gender, and
reaction to launch noise, or to natural or other human-caused
disturbances. They will also record environmental conditions, including
visibility, air temperature, clouds, wind speed and direction, tides,
and swell height and direction.
USSF Semi-Monthly Sentinel Surveys
USSF conducts marine mammal surveys on a regular basis in addition
to the monitoring that is required based on launch characteristics and
sound pressure thresholds, described above. These regular surveys help
characterize onsite trends in pinniped presence and abundance and, over
the longer term, provide important context for interpreting seasonal
trends and launch-specific monitoring results. The current monthly
surveys have allowed researchers to assess haul-out patterns and
relative abundance over time, presenting a better picture of pinniped
population trends at VSFB and whether USSF operations are resulting in
cumulative impacts. For the period of this LOA, and in conjunction with
proposed changes of monitoring criteria for launches, the applicant
proposes to change the frequency of sentinel surveys from monthly to
semi-monthly (two surveys per month).
Past surveys have captured important data including novel
occurrences (such as unsuccessful California sea lion pupping on VSFB
in 2003 and northern elephant seal pupping in 2017) and emerging or
fleeting trends (such as greater numbers of northern elephant seals
hauling out in 2004, and a temporary increase in California sea lions
onsite in 2018 and 2019). These results, in conjunction with
anticipated changes in launch activity and environmental factors
underscore the value of consistent surveys collected on a regular
basis, to provide sound context for launch-specific monitoring results.
USSF will conduct semi-monthly surveys (two surveys per month,
rather than the current monthly surveys) to monitor the abundance,
distribution, and status of pinnipeds at VSFB. Whenever possible, these
surveys will be timed to coincide with the lowest afternoon tides of
each month when the greatest numbers of animals are usually hauled out.
South VSFB surveys start about two hours before the low tide and end
two hours afterward. North VSFB surveys are either conducted by a
separate surveyor on the same day as south VSFB, or on the day before/
after south VSFB surveys. North VSFB surveys require approximately 90
minutes. Monitoring during nighttime low tides is not possible because
of the dangerously unstable nature of the bluffs overlooking many of
the observation points. Occasional VSFB or area closures also sometimes
preclude monitoring on a given day, in which case the next best day
will be selected.
NMFS-approved PSOs will gather the following data at each site:
species, number, general behavior, presence of pups, age class, gender,
and any reactions to natural or human-caused disturbances. They will
also record environmental conditions, including visibility, air
temperature, clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, and swell height
and direction.
Adaptive Management
The regulations governing the take of marine mammals incidental to
launches and supporting activities at VSFB contain an adaptive
management component. Our understanding of the effects of launches and
supporting activities (e.g., acoustic and visual stressors) on marine
mammals continues to evolve, which makes the inclusion of an adaptive
management component both valuable and necessary within the context of
5-year regulations.
The reporting requirements associated with this rule are designed
to provide NMFS with monitoring data from the previous year to allow
NMFS to consider whether any changes to existing mitigation, monitoring
or reporting requirements are appropriate. The use of adaptive
management also allows NMFS to consider new information from different
sources to determine (with input from the USSF regarding
practicability) on an annual or biennial basis if mitigation or
monitoring measures should be modified (including additions or
deletions). Mitigation measures could be modified if new data suggests
that such modifications will have a reasonable likelihood of more
effectively accomplishing the goals of the mitigation and monitoring
and if the measures are practicable. If the modifications to the
mitigation, monitoring, or reporting measures are substantial, NMFS
will publish a notice of the planned LOA in the Federal Register and
solicit public comment.
Reporting
Proposed reporting requirements would include launch monitoring
reports for each launch where monitoring is required or conducted,
annual reports describing all activities and monitoring conducted in
the project area that are covered under this proposed rule during each
year, and a comprehensive 5-year report.
A launch monitoring report containing the following information
would be submitted to NMFS within 90 days after each rocket launch
where monitoring is required:
<bullet> Date(s) and time(s) of the launch (and sonic boom, if
applicable);
<bullet> Monitoring program design; and
<bullet> Results of the monitoring program, including, but not
necessarily limited to:
[cir] Date(s) and location(s) of marine mammal monitoring;
[cir] Number of animals observed, by species, on the haulout prior
to commencement of the launch or recovery;
[cir] General behavior and, if possible, age (including presence of
pups) and sex class of pinnipeds hauled out prior to the launch or
recovery;
[cir] Number of animals, by species, age, and sex class, that
responded at a level indicative of harassment;
[cir] Number of animals, by species, age, and sex class that
entered the water, and any behavioral responses by pinnipeds that were
likely in response to the specified activities, including in response
to launch noise or a sonic boom;
[cir] Environmental conditions including visibility, air
temperature, clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, and swell height
and direction; and
[cir] Results of acoustic monitoring, including the recorded sound
levels associated with the launch and/or sonic boom (if applicable).
If a dead or seriously injured pinniped is found during post-launch
monitoring, the incident must be reported to the NMFS Office of
Protected Resources and the NMFS West Coast Regional Office
immediately.
USSF must submit an annual report to NMFS on March 1st of each year
that summarizes the data reported in all
[[Page 5474]]
launch reports for the previous calendar year (as described above)
including a summary of documented numbers of instances of harassment
incidental to the specified activities. Annual reports would also
include the results of the semi-monthly sentinel marine mammal
monitoring and describe any documented takings incidental to the
specified activities not included in the launch reports (e.g., takes
incidental to aircraft or helicopter operations observed during the
semi-monthly surveys).
A final comprehensive 5- year report would be submitted to NMFS no
later than 180 days prior to expiration of these regulations. This
report must summarize the findings made in all previous reports and
assess both the impacts at each of the major rookeries and assess any
cumulative impacts on marine mammals from the specified activities.
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, this introductory discussion of our analysis
applies to all the species listed in table 3, given that many of the
anticipated effects of this project on different marine mammal stocks
are expected to be relatively similar in nature. 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.
Activities associated with the proposed activities, as outlined
previously, have the potential to disturb and temporarily displace
marine mammals. Specifically, the specified activities may result in
take, in the form of Level B harassment only, from airborne sounds
resulting from launches and recoveries, including sonic booms from
certain launches and sound or visual stimuli from UAS operations. Based
on the best available information, including monitoring reports from
similar activities conducted at the site, the Level B harassment of
pinnipeds would likely be limited to reactions such as moving a short
distance, with some hauled out animals moving toward or entering the
water for a period of time following the disturbance.
As mentioned previously, different species of marine mammals and
different conditions at haul out sites can result in different degrees
of response from the animals. Sufficient data collected onsite can be
used to characterize the relative tendency of species to react to
acoustic disturbance and, specifically, to noise from VSFB launches and
operations.
These distinctions in species response are discussed above in the
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat section, and correction factors for species sensitivity are
applied to the take estimates provided in this document.
As discussed earlier, Level B harassment of pinnipeds from rocket
and missile launch activities or UAS exposure is primarily expected to
be of relatively short duration, in the form of changing position,
direction, or location on the haulout or, on a subset of occasions,
flushing into the water for some amount of time (up to a few hours).
UAS flights would be conducted in accordance with minimum altitude
requirements designed to minimize impacts over haulouts and planning
measures are in place to minimize launch effects to pinnipeds on
beaches where pupping is occurring. Given the potential for seasonal
site fidelity, it is likely that some individuals will be taken
multiple times during the course of the year as a result of exposure to
multiple launches, and potentially UAS overflights. However, given the
intermittency of the launches and the fact that they do not all
originate from the same location, these repeated exposures are not
expected to result in prolonged exposures over multiple days. Thus,
even repeated instances of Level B harassment of some small subset of
an overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant realized
decrease in fitness of those individuals, and thus would not result in
any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. Level B harassment would be
reduced to the level of least practicable adverse impact through use of
mitigation measures described above.
As discussed earlier, some of the beaches that may be impacted by
launch activities and UAS overflights support pupping in some months,
specifically for harbor seals (March through June on VSFB and NCI),
California sea lions (May through August on NCI), elephant seal
(January through March on VSFB and December through March on NCI), and
northern fur seal (June through August on San Miguel Island, NCI).
Broadly speaking, flushing of pinnipeds into the water has the
potential to result in mother-pup separation, or in extreme
circumstances could result in a stampede, either of which could
potentially result in serious injury or mortality. However, based on
the best available information, including reports from over 20 years of
monitoring pinniped response to launch noise at VSFB and the NCI, no
serious injury or mortality of marine mammals is anticipated as a
result of the proposed activities. Further, USSF is required to provide
pupping information to launch proponents at the earliest possible stage
in the launch planning process, to maximize their ability to schedule
launches to minimize pinniped disturbance during Pacific harbor seal
pupping on Vandenberg SFB (1 March to 30 April) and California sea lion
pupping on the Northern Channel Islands (1 June-31 July of each year).
If practicable, rocket launches predicted to produce a sonic boom on
the Northern Channel Islands >5 psf during the California sea lion
pupping season will be scheduled to coincide with tides in excess of
+1.0 ft, with an objective to achieve such avoidance at least 50
percent of the time which is expected to minimize the impacts at places
and times where pupping could be occurring. Even in the instances of
pinnipeds being harassed by sonic booms from rocket launches at VSFB,
no
[[Page 5475]]
evidence of abnormal behavior, injuries or mortalities, or pup
abandonment as a result of sonic booms (SAIC 2013; CEMML, 2018) has
been presented. These findings are supported by more than two decades
of surveys at VSFB and the NCI (MMCG and SAIC, 2012). Post-launch
monitoring generally reveals a return to normal behavioral patterns
within minutes up to an hour or two of each launch, regardless of
species. For instance and of note, research on abundance and fecundity
has been conducted at San Miguel Island (recognized as an important
pinniped rookery) for decades. This research, as well as SARs, support
a conclusion that operations at VSFB have not had significant impacts
on the numbers of animals observed at San Miguel Island rookeries and
haulouts (SAIC, 2012). In addition, northern elephant seal pupping was
documented on VSFB for the first time in 2017 and continued into 2022,
further indicating that the effects of ongoing launch activities do not
preempt new marine mammal activity and are unlikely to have impacted
annual rates of recruitment or survival among affected species.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our preliminary determination that the impacts resulting from
this activity are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock
through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
<bullet> No injury, serious injury, or mortality are anticipated or
authorized;
<bullet> The anticipated instances of Level B harassment are
expected to consist of, at worst, temporary modifications in behavior
(i.e., short distance movements and occasional flushing into the water
with return to haulouts within approximately 60-120 minutes), which are
not expected to adversely affect the fitness of any individuals;
<bullet> The proposed activities are expected to result in no long-
term changes in the use by pinnipeds of rookeries and haulouts in the
project area, based on over 20 years of monitoring data; and
<bullet> The presumed efficacy of planned mitigation measures in
reducing the effects of the specified activity to the level of least
practicable adverse impact.
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 proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine
mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on
all affected marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted previously, only take of small numbers of marine mammals
may be authorized under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for
specified activities other than military readiness activities. Here, a
small portion of the activities (missile launches only) are considered
military readiness activities, but we have conducted the assessment
considering the totality of the take considered for this proposed rule.
The MMPA does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where
estimated numbers are available, NMFS compares the maximum number of
individuals taken in any year to the most appropriate estimation of
abundance of the relevant species or stock in our determination of
whether an authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals.
When the predicted maximum annual number of individuals to be taken is
fewer than one-third of the species or stock abundance, the take is
considered to be of small numbers. See 86 FR 5438-5440, January 19,
2021. Additionally, other qualitative factors may be considered in the
analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of the activities.
Here, we considered the tendency to show site fidelity among affected
species, their seasonal distribution trends and the likelihood of
individual animals being disturbed repeatedly (i.e., taken by multiple
launches across multiple days within a year), rather than proceeding as
though each instance of take affecting a different individual.
For every year, the instances of take proposed for authorization of
northern elephant seal, Steller sea lion, and Guadalupe fur seal
comprise less than one-third of the best available population
abundances (table 14). The number of animals authorized to be taken
from these stocks would be considered small relative to the relevant
stock's abundances even if each estimated instance of take occurred to
a new individual, which is an unlikely scenario.
For harbor seals and California sea lions (years 4 and 5 only), and
Northern fur seals (years 3, 4, and 5 only), the highest annual
estimated instances of take are greater than or equal to one-third of
the best available stock abundance (36, 33, and 42 percent,
respectively). However, as noted previously, the number of expected
instances of take do not necessarily represent the number of individual
animals expected to be taken. The same individual can incur multiple
takes by Level B harassment over the course of an activity that occurs
multiple times in the same area (such as the USSF's proposed activity)
and especially where species have documented site fidelity to a
location within the project area, as is the case here. Additionally,
due to the nature of the specified activity--launch activities
affecting animals at specific haul out locations, rather than a mobile
activity occurring throughout the much larger stock range--only a much
smaller portion of the stock would be expected to be impacted. Thus,
while we propose to authorize the instances of incidental take of these
species shown in table 14, the number of individuals that would be
incidentally taken by the proposed activities would, in fact, be
substantially lower than the authorized instances of take, and less
than one third of the stock abundance for each of these species. We
base the small numbers determination on the number of individuals taken
versus the number of instances of take, as is appropriate when the
information is available.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals would be taken relative to the population
size of the affected species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA 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 ITAs, NMFS consults
internally whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or
threatened species, in this case with the NMFS Southwest Fisheries
Science Center.
NMFS is proposing to authorize a limited amount of take, by Level B
harassment (5-23 annually, 70 over the
[[Page 5476]]
course of the 5-year rule), of Guadalupe fur seals which are listed as
Threatened under the ESA. On December 20, 2023, NMFS' West Coast
Regional Office concurred with OPR's determination that USSF's proposed
activities are consistent with those addressed by the region's February
15, 2019 letter of concurrence for the current LOA, and are not likely
to adversely affect the Guadalupe fur seal.
National Marine Sanctuaries Act
Federal agency actions that are likely to injure national marine
sanctuary resources are subject to consultation with the Office of
National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) under section 304(d) of the National
Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA). While rocket and missile launches do not
occur in national marine sanctuary waters, depending on the direction
of a given launch, rockets and missiles may cross over the Channel
Islands National Marine Sanctuary. NMFS will work with NOAA's Office of
National Marine Sanctuaries to fulfill our responsibilities under the
NMSA as warranted and will complete any NMSA requirements prior to a
determination on the issuance of the final rule and LOA.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) andNAO 216-6A, NMFS must review its proposed
action (i.e., the issuance of an ITA) with respect to potential impacts
on the human environment.
This action is consistent with categories of activities identified
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (ITAs with no anticipated serious injury or
mortality) of the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A, which do not
individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts
on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not
identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this
categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the issuance of the proposed ITA qualifies to be categorically
excluded from further NEPA review.
We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice
prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final decision on the
ITA request.
Request for Information
NMFS requests interested persons to submit comments, information,
and suggestions concerning the USSF request and the proposed
regulations (see ADDRESSES). All comments will be reviewed and
evaluated as we prepare a final rule and make final determinations on
whether to issue the requested authorization. This notice and
referenced documents provide all environmental information relating to
our proposed action for public review.
Classification
Pursuant to the procedures established to implement Executive Order
12866, the Office of Management and Budget has determined that this
proposed rule is not significant.
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
the Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce has
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The USSF is the sole entity that would be subject to the requirements
in these proposed regulations, and the USSF is not a small governmental
jurisdiction, small organization, or small business, as defined by the
RFA. Because of this certification, a regulatory flexibility analysis
is not required and none has been prepared. This rule does not contain
a collection-of-information requirement subject to the provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act because the applicant is a Federal agency.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 217
Exports, Fish, Imports, Marine mammals, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Transportation.
Dated: January 19, 2024.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
PART 217--REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE TAKE OF MARINE MAMMALS
INCIDENTAL TO SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 217 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq., unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Revise subpart G to read as follows:
Subpart G--Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to U.S. Space Force Launches and Operations at
Vandenberg Space Force Base, California
Sec.
217.60 Specified activity and specified geographical region.
217.61 Effective dates.
217.62 Permissible methods of taking.
217.63 Prohibitions.
217.64 Mitigation requirements.
217.65 Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
217.66 Letters of Authorization.
217.67 Renewals and modifications of Letter of Authorization.
217.68-217.69 [Reserved]
Sec. 217.60 Specified activity and specified geographical region.
(a) Regulations in this subpart apply only to the United States
Space Force (USSF) and those persons it authorizes to conduct
activities on its behalf, for the taking of marine mammals that occurs
in the areas outlined in paragraph (b) of this section incidental to
rocket and missile launches and supporting operations.
(b) The incidental taking of marine mammals under these regulations
may be authorized in a Letter of Authorization (LOA) only for
activities originating at Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB).
Sec. 217.61 Effective dates.
(a) Regulations in this subpart are effective from April 10, 2024,
through April 10, 2029.
(b) [Reserved]
Sec. 217.62 Permissible methods of taking.
(a) Under an LOA issued pursuant to Sec. 216.106 of this chapter
and Sec. Sec. 217.66 or 217.67, the Holder (hereinafter the USSF) may
incidentally, but not intentionally, take marine mammals by Level B
harassment, as described in Sec. 217.60(a) and (b), provided the
activity is in compliance with all terms, conditions, and requirements
of the regulations in this subpart and the appropriate LOA.
(b) The incidental take of marine mammals by the activities listed
in Sec. 217.60 is limited to the following species and stocks:
Table 1 to Sec. 217.62(b)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Stock
------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion....................... United States.
Northern fur seal......................... California.
Guadalupe fur seal........................ Mexico.
Steller sea lion.......................... Eastern.
Harbor seal............................... California.
Northern elephant seal.................... California Breeding.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 217.63 Prohibitions.
(a) Except for takings contemplated in Sec. 217.62 and authorized
by a LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and Sec. Sec.
217.66 and 217.67, it shall be unlawful for any person to do any of the
following in connection with the activities listed in Sec. 217.60:
(1) Violate, or fail to comply with, the terms, conditions, and
requirements of
[[Page 5477]]
this subpart or a LOA issued under Sec. Sec. 216.106 of this chapter
and Sec. Sec. 217.66 or 217.67 of this chapter;
(2) Take any marine mammal species or stock not specified in such
LOAs;
(3) Take any marine mammal specified in such LOAs in any manner
other than as specified; or
(4) Take a marine mammal specified in such LOAs if NMFS determines
after notice and comment that the taking allowed for one or more
activities under 16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(A) is having or may have more
than a negligible impact on the species or stocks of such marine
mammal.
(b) [Reserved]
Sec. 217.64 Mitigation requirements.
(a) When conducting the activities identified in Sec. 217.60(a)
and (b), the mitigation measures contained in any Letter of
Authorization issued under Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and Sec. Sec.
217.66 or 217.67 must be implemented. These mitigation measures include
(but are not limited to):
(1) USSF must provide pupping information to launch proponents at
the earliest possible stage in the launch planning process and direct
launch proponents to, if practicable, avoid scheduling launches during
pupping seasons on VSFB from 1 March to 30 April and on the Northern
Channel Islands from 1 June-31 July. If practicable, rocket launches
predicted to produce a sonic boom on the Northern Channel Islands >3
psf from 1 June-31 July will be scheduled to coincide with tides in
excess of +1.0 ft, with an objective to do so at least 50 percent of
the time.
(2) For manned flight operations, aircraft must use approved routes
for testing and evaluation. Manned aircraft must also remain outside of
a 1,000-ft buffer around pinniped rookeries and haul-out sites (except
in emergencies such as law enforcement response or Search and Rescue
operations, and with a reduced, 500-ft buffer at Small Haul-out 1).
(3) UAS classes 0-2 must maintain a minimum altitude of 300 ft over
all known marine mammal haulouts when marine mammals are present,
except at take-off and landing. Class 3 must maintain a minimum
altitude of 500 ft, except at take-off and landing. UAS classes 4 and 5
only operate from the VSFB airfield and must maintain a minimum
altitude of 1,000 ft over marine mammal haulouts except at take-off and
landing. USSF must not fly class 4 or 5 UAS below 1,000 ft over
haulouts.
(b) [Reserved]
Sec. 217.65 Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
(a) Monitoring at VSFB and NCI must be conducted by at least one
NMFS-approved Protected Species Observer (PSO) trained in marine mammal
science. PSOs must have demonstrated proficiency in the identification
of all age and sex classes of all marine mammal species that occur at
VSFB and on NCI. They must be knowledgeable of approved count
methodology and have experience in observing pinniped behavior,
especially that due to human disturbances.
(b) In the event that the PSO requirements described in paragraph
(a) of this section cannot be met (e.g., access is prohibited due to
safety concerns), daylight or night-time video monitoring may be used
in lieu of PSO monitoring.
(c) At VSFB, USSF must conduct marine mammal monitoring and take
acoustic measurements for all new rockets (for both existing and new
launch proponents using the existing facilities) that are larger or
louder than those that have been previously launched from VSFB during
their first three launches and for the first three launches from any
new facilities during March through July.
(1) For launches that occur during the harbor seal pupping season
(March 1 through June 30) or when higher numbers of California sea
lions are present (June 1 through July 31), monitoring must be
conducted by at least one NMFS-approved PSO trained in marine mammal
science.
(2) When launch monitoring is required, monitoring must begin at
least 72 hours prior to the launch and continue through at least 48
hours after the launch. Monitoring must include multiple surveys each
day.
(3) For launches within the harbor seal pupping season, USSF must
conduct a follow-up survey of pups.
(4) For launches that occur during daylight, USSF must make time-
lapse video recordings to capture the reactions of pinnipeds to each
launch. For launches that occur at night, USSF will employ night video
monitoring, when feasible.
(5) When possible, PSOs must record: species, number, general
behavior, presence and number of pups, age class, gender, and reaction
to launch noise, or to natural or other human-caused disturbances. PSOs
must also record environmental conditions, including visibility, air
temperature, clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, and swell height
and direction.
(d) USSF must conduct sonic boom modeling prior to the first three
small or medium rocket launches from new launch proponents or at new
launch facilities, and all heavy or super-heavy rocket launches.
(e) USSF must conduct marine mammal monitoring and take acoustic
measurements at the NCI if the sonic boom model indicates that
pressures from a boom will reach or exceed 5 psf from 1 March through
31 July or 7 psf from 1 August through 30 September. No monitoring is
required on NCI from 1 October through 28 February.
(1) The monitoring site must be selected based upon the model
results, prioritizing a significant haulout site on one of the islands
where the maximum sound pressures are expected to occur.
(2) USSF must estimate the number of animals on the monitored beach
and record their reactions to the launch noise and conduct more focused
monitoring on a smaller subset or focal group.
(3) Monitoring must commence at least 72 hours prior to the launch,
during the launch and at least 48 hours after the launch, unless no
sonic boom is detected by the monitors and/or by the acoustic recording
equipment, at which time monitoring may be stopped.
(4) For launches that occur in darkness, USSF must use night vision
equipment.
(5) Monitoring for each launch must include multiple surveys each
day that record, when possible: species, number, general behavior,
presence of pups, age class, gender, and reaction to sonic booms or
natural or human-caused disturbances.
(6) USSF must collect photo and/or video recordings for daylight
launches when feasible, and if the launch occurs in darkness night
vision equipment will be used.
(7) USSF must record environmental conditions, including
visibility, air temperature, clouds, wind speed and direction, tides,
and swell height and direction.
(f) USSF must continue to test equipment and emerging technologies,
including but not limited to night vision cameras, newer models of
remote video cameras and other means of remote monitoring at both VSFB
and on the NCI.
(g) USSF must evaluate UAS based or space-based technologies that
become available for suitability, practicability, and for any advantage
that remote sensing may provide to existing monitoring approaches.
(h) USSF must monitor marine mammals during the first three
launches of the missiles for the new Ground Based Strategic Defense
program during
[[Page 5478]]
the months of March through July across the 5-year duration of this
rule.
(1) When launch monitoring is required, monitoring must include
multiple surveys each day.
(2) When possible, PSOs must record: species, number, general
behavior, presence and number of pups, age class, gender, and reaction
to launch noise, or to natural or other human-caused disturbances. PSOs
must also record environmental conditions, including visibility, air
temperature, clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, and swell height
and direction.
(i) USSF must conduct semi-monthly surveys (two surveys per month)
to monitor the abundance, distribution, and status of pinnipeds at
VSFB. Whenever possible, these surveys will be timed to coincide with
the lowest afternoon tides of each month when the greatest numbers of
animals are usually hauled out. If a VSFB or area closure precludes
monitoring on a given day, USSF must monitor on the next best day.
(1) PSOs must gather the following data at each site: species,
number, general behavior, presence and number of pups, age class,
gender, and any reactions to natural or human-caused disturbances. PSOs
must also record environmental conditions, including visibility, air
temperature, clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, and swell height
and direction.
(j) For each rocket or missile launch where monitoring is required
as described in paragraphs (a), (c), and (e) of this section, USSF must
submit a launch report to NMFS' West Coast Region and Office of
Protected Resources within 90 days. This report must contain the
following information:
(1) Date(s) and time(s) of the launch (and sonic boom, if
applicable);
(2) Monitoring program design; and
(3) Results of the monitoring program, including, but not
necessarily limited to:
(i) Date(s) and location(s) of marine mammal monitoring;
(ii) Number of animals observed, by species, on the haulout prior
to commencement of the launch or recovery;
(iii) General behavior and, if possible, age (including presence
and number of pups) and sex class of pinnipeds hauled out prior to the
launch or recovery;
(iv) Number of animals, by species, age, and sex class, that
responded at a level indicative of harassment;
(v) Number of animals, by species, age, and sex class that entered
the water, and any behavioral responses by pinnipeds that were likely
in response to the specified activities, including in response to
launch noise or a sonic boom;
(vi) Environmental conditions including visibility, air
temperature, clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, and swell height
and direction; and
(vii) Results of acoustic monitoring, including the recorded sound
levels associated with the launch and/or sonic boom (if applicable).
(k) If the activity identified in Sec. 217.60(a) likely resulted
in the mortality or injury of any marine mammals or in any take of
marine mammals not identified in Sec. 217.62, then the USSF must
notify the NMFS Office of Protected Resources and the NMFS West Coast
Region stranding coordinator within 48 hours of the discovery of the
injured or dead marine mammal.
(i) USSF must submit an annual report each year to NMFS Office of
Protected Resources. This report must summarize the data reported in
all launch reports for the previous calendar year (as described in
paragraph (g) of this section) including a summary of documented
numbers of instances of harassment incidental to the specified
activities. The annual reports must also include the results of the
semi-monthly sentinel marine mammal monitoring and describe any
documented takings incidental to the specified activities not included
in the launch reports (e.g., takes incidental to aircraft or helicopter
operations observed during the semi-monthly surveys).
(l) USSF must submit a final, comprehensive 5-year report to NMFS
Office of Protected Resources. This report must:
(1) Summarize the activities undertaken and the results reported in
all previous reports;
(2) Assess the impacts at each of the major rookeries; and
(3) Assess the cumulative impacts on pinnipeds and other marine
mammals from the activities specified in Sec. 217.60(a) and (b);
Sec. 217.66 Letters of Authorization.
(a) To incidentally take marine mammals pursuant to this subpart,
the USSF must apply for and obtain an LOA in accordance with Sec.
216.106 of this chapter.
(b) An LOA, unless suspended or revoked, may be effective for a
period of time not to exceed expiration of this subpart.
(c) If an LOA expires prior to the expiration date of this subpart,
the USSF may apply for and obtain a renewal LOA.
(d) In the event of projected changes to the activity or to
mitigation, monitoring, or reporting (excluding changes made pursuant
to the adaptive management provision of Sec. 217.67(c)(1) required by
an LOA, USSF must apply for and obtain a modification of the LOA as
described in Sec. 217.67.
(e) Each LOA will set forth:
(1) Permissible methods of incidental taking;
(2) Means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact (i.e.,
mitigation) on the species, its habitat, and on the availability of the
species for subsistence uses; and
(3) Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
(f) Issuance of the LOA shall be based on a determination that the
level of taking will be consistent with the findings made for the total
taking allowable under these regulations.
(g) Notice of issuance or denial of a LOA shall be published in the
Federal Register within 30 days of a determination.
Sec. 217.67 Renewals and modifications of Letter of Authorization.
(a) A LOA issued under Sec. Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and
217.66 for the activity identified in Sec. 217.60(a) and (b) shall be
modified upon request by the applicant, provided that:
(1) The specified activity and mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures, as well as the anticipated impacts, are the same as
those described and analyzed for this subpart (excluding changes made
pursuant to the adaptive management provision in paragraph (c)(1) of
this section); and
(2) NMFS determines that the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
measures required by the previous LOA under these regulations were
implemented.
(b) For LOA modification or renewal requests by the applicant that
include changes to the activity or the mitigation, monitoring, or
reporting measures (excluding changes made pursuant to the adaptive
management provision in paragraph (c)(1) of this section) that do not
change the findings made for the regulations or that result in no more
than a minor change in the total estimated number of takes (or
distribution by species or stock or years), NMFS may publish a notice
of proposed changes to the LOA in the Federal Register, including the
associated analysis of the change, and solicit public comment before
issuing the LOA.
(c) An LOA issued under Sec. Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and
217.66 for the activity identified in Sec. 217.60(a) and (b) may be
modified by NMFS under the following circumstances:
[[Page 5479]]
(1) After consulting with the USSF regarding the practicability of
the modifications, NMFS, through adaptive management, may modify
(including adding or removing measures) the existing mitigation,
monitoring, or reporting measures if doing so creates a reasonable
likelihood of more effectively accomplishing the goals of the
mitigation and monitoring.
(i) Possible sourc
[…truncated; see source link]Indexed from Federal Register on January 29, 2024.
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.