Notice2024-02383
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental To Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Navy 2024 Ice Exercise Activities in the Arctic Ocean
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
February 6, 2024
Effective
February 1, 2024
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the U.S. Navy (Navy) to incidentally harass marine mammals during submarine training and testing activities associated with a 2024 Ice Exercise (ICEX24) Activities in the Arctic Ocean.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 25 (Tuesday, February 6, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 6, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8172-8183]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02383]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XD588]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental To Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Navy 2024 Ice Exercise
Activities in the Arctic Ocean
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
the U.S. Navy (Navy) to incidentally harass marine mammals during
submarine training and testing activities associated with a 2024 Ice
Exercise (ICEX24) Activities in the Arctic Ocean.
DATES: This authorization is effective from February 1, 2024 through
April 30, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the application and supporting
documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document,
may be obtained online at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-military-readiness-activities</a>. In case of problems accessing these documents,
please call the contact listed below.
[[Page 8173]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leah Davis, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361
et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to
allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of
small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations
are proposed or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a
proposed IHA is provided to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth. The definitions
of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the
relevant sections below.
The 2004 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA; Pub. L. 108-136)
removed the ``small numbers'' and ``specified geographical region''
limitations indicated above and amended the definition of
``harassment'' as applied to a ``military readiness activity.'' The
activity for which incidental take of marine mammals is being requested
qualifies as a military readiness activity.
Summary of Request
On May 24, 2023, NMFS received a request from the Navy for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to submarine training and testing
activities including establishment of a tracking range on an ice floe
in the Arctic Ocean, north of Prudhoe Bay, Alaska. Following NMFS'
review of the application, the Navy submitted a revised application on
October 13, 2023 that removed the request for take of bearded seal and
included an updated take estimate for ringed seals. The application was
deemed adequate and complete on October 19, 2023. The Navy's request is
for take of ringed seal by Level B harassment. Neither the Navy nor
NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to result from this activity
and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
NMFS previously issued IHAs to the Navy for similar activities (83
FR 6522, February 14, 2018; 85 FR 6518, February 5, 2020; 87 FR 7803,
February 10, 2022). The Navy complied with all the requirements (e.g.,
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of the previous IHAs, and
information regarding their monitoring results may be found in the
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals section.
Description of the Specified Activity
The Navy proposes to conduct submarine training and testing
activities, which includes the establishment of a tracking range and
temporary ice camp, and research in the Arctic Ocean for six weeks
beginning in February 2024. Submarine active acoustic transmissions may
result in occurrence of Level B harassment, including direct behavioral
disturbance or temporary hearing impairment (temporary threshold shift
(TTS)), of ringed seals. A detailed description of the planned ICEX24
activities is provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed
IHA (88 FR 85244, December 7, 2023). Since that time, no changes have
been made to the planned activities. Therefore, a detailed description
is not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for
the description of the specific activity.
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA to the Navy was
published in the Federal Register on December 7, 2023 (88 FR 85244).
That notice described, in detail, the Navy's activity, the marine
mammal species that may be affected by the activity, and the
anticipated effects on marine mammals. In that notice, we requested
public input on the request for authorization described therein, our
analyses, the proposed authorization, and any other aspect of the
notice of proposed IHA, and requested that interested persons submit
relevant information, suggestions, and comments. During the 30-day
public comment period, NMFS did not receive any public comments.
Changes From the Proposed IHA to Final IHA
Since publication of the proposed IHA, NMFS made two updates to the
required mitigation measures. The proposed IHA required that fixed wing
aircraft must operate at the highest altitudes practicable taking into
account safety of personnel, meteorological conditions, and need to
support safe operations of a drifting ice camp. Aircraft must not
reduce altitude if a seal is observed on the ice. In general, cruising
elevation must be 305 meters (m; 1,000 feet (ft)) or higher. This final
IHA requires that cruising elevation must be 457 m (1,500 ft) or
higher. This change aligns with NMFS' biological opinion and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service's requirements for polar bears. Further, NMFS
updated its requirement for personnel on foot and operating on-ice
vehicles to avoid areas of deep snowdrifts and pressure ridges to
clarify that a deep snow drift is one that is >0.5 m, and these areas
must be avoided by 0.8 kilometers (km), consistent with NMFS'
biological opinion.
NMFS also added a requirement that when traveling away from camp,
each snow machine must have a dedicated observer (not the vehicle
operator) or each expeditionary team must have at least one observer.
Observers must be capable of observing and recording marine mammal
presence and behaviors, and accurately and completely record data. When
traveling, observers will have no other primary duty than to watch for
and report observations related to marine mammals and human/seal
interactions. Dedicated observers can also serve as the communicator
between the field party and camp. These changes and additions align
with NMFS' biological opinion.
Last, NMFS added several reporting measures to this final IHA to
align with NMFS' biological opinion. The Navy must report the
following: the minimum distance between human activities and seals or
seal lairs; the duration of time during which seals or seal lairs were
known to be present within 150 m of human activities, and the behaviors
exhibited by the seals during those observation periods; and an account
of the status of all seal lairs located within 150 m of camps or ice
trails through time.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and
behavior and life history of the potentially
[[Page 8174]]
affected species. NMFS fully considered all of this information, and we
refer the reader to these descriptions, instead of reprinting the
information. Additional information regarding population trends and
threats 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>) and more general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS'
website (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>).
Table 1 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and
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 mortalities, that may be removed from a
marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its
optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS' SARs). While no
serious injury or mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and
annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are
included here as gross indicators of the status of the species or
stocks and other threats. That said, in this case for the Arctic stock
of ringed seals and as explained in footnote 5 of table 1, the lack of
complete population information significantly impacts the usefulness of
PBR in considering the status of the stock, as explained below.
Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area.
NMFS' stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend
beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in
NMFS' U.S. Alaska SARs (Young et al. 2023). All values presented in
table 2 are the most recent available at the time of publication and
are available online at: <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>. However, for
the same reason noted above and as described in footnote 5 of table 1,
the lack of complete population information for the Arctic stock of
ringed seals impacts the usefulness of these numbers in considering the
impacts of the anticipated take on the stock.
Table 1--Species Likely Impacted by the Specified Activities \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/ MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/SI
\2\ abundance survey) \3\ \4\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ringed Seal........................ Pusa hispida.......... Arctic................ T, D, Y UND \5\ (UND, UND, UND \6\ 6,459
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\ ESA status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). 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 SARs 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 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.
\5\ A reliable population estimate for the entire stock is not available. Using a sub-sample of data collected from the U.S portion of the Bering Sea,
an abundance estimate of 171,418 ringed seals has been calculated, but this estimate does not account for availability bias due to seals in the water
or in the shorefast ice zone at the time of the survey. The actual number of ringed seals in the U.S. portion of the Bering Sea is likely much higher.
Using the Nmin based upon this negatively biased population estimate, the PBR is calculated to be 4,755 seals, although this is also a negatively
biased estimate.
\6\ The majority of the M/SI for this stock (6,454 of 6,459 animals) is a result of the Alaska Native subsistence harvest. While M/SI appears to exceed
PBR, given that the reported PBR is based on a partial stock abundance estimate, and is therefore an underestimate for the full stock, M/SI likely
does not exceed PBR.
As indicated in table 1, ringed seals (with one managed stock)
temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that
take is reasonably likely to occur. While beluga whales (Delphinapterus
leucas), gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus), bowhead whales (Balaena
mysticetus), and spotted seals (Phoca largha) may occur in the ICEX24
Study Area, the temporal and/or spatial occurrence of these species is
such that take is not expected to occur, and they are not discussed
further beyond the explanation provided here. Bowhead whales are
unlikely to occur in the ICEX24 Study Area between February and April,
as they spend winter (December to April) in the northern Bering Sea and
southern Chukchi Sea, and migrate north through the Chukchi Sea and
Beaufort Sea during April and May (Young et al. 2023). On their spring
migration, the earliest that bowhead whales reach Point Hope in the
Chukchi Sea, well south of Point Barrow, is late March to mid-April
(Braham et al. 1980). Although the ice camp location is not known with
certainty, the distance between Point Barrow and the closest edge of
the Ice Camp Study Area is over 200 km (124.3 miles (mi)). The distance
between Point Barrow and the closest edge of the Navy Activity Study
Area is over 50 km (31 mi), and the distance between Point Barrow and
Point Hope is an additional 525 km (326.2 mi; straight line distance);
accordingly, bowhead whales are unlikely to occur in the ICEX24 Study
Area before ICEX24 activities conclude. Beluga whales follow a
migration pattern similar to bowhead whales. They typically overwinter
in the Bering Sea and migrate north during the spring to the eastern
Beaufort Sea where they spend the summer and early fall months (Young
et al. 2023). Though the beluga whale migratory path crosses through
the ICEX24 Study Area, they are unlikely to occur in the ICEX24 Study
Area between February and April. (Of note, the ICEX24 Study Area does
overlap the northernmost portion of the North Bering Strait, East
Chukchi, West Beaufort Sea beluga whale migratory Biologically
Important Area (BIA; April and May), though the data support for this
BIA is low, the boundary certainty is low, and the importance score is
moderate. Given the spring migratory direction, the northernmost
portion of the BIA is likely more important later in the April and May
period, and overlap with this BIA does not imply that belugas are
likely to be in the ICEX24 Study Area during the Navy's activities.)
Gray whales feed primarily in the Beaufort Sea, Chukchi Sea, and
[[Page 8175]]
Northwestern Bering Sea during the summer and fall, but migrate south
to winter in Baja California lagoons (Young et al. 2023). Typically,
northward migrating gray whales do not reach the Bering Sea before May
or June (Frost and Karpovich 2008), after the ICEX24 activities would
occur, and several hundred kilometers south of the ICEX24 Study Area.
Further, gray whales are primarily bottom feeders (Swartz et al. 2006)
in water less than 60 m (196.9 ft) deep (Pike 1962). Therefore, on the
rare occasion that a gray whale does overwinter in the Beaufort Sea
(Stafford et al. 2007), we would expect an overwintering individual to
remain in shallow water over the continental shelf where it could feed.
Therefore, gray whales are not expected to occur in the ICEX24 Study
Area during the ICEX24 activity period. Spotted seals may also occur in
the ICEX24 Study Area during summer and fall, but they are not expected
to occur in the ICEX24 Study Area during the ICEX24 timeframe (Muto et
al. 2020).
Further, while the Navy initially requested take of bearded seals
(Erignathus barbatus), which do occur in the ICEX24 Study Area during
the project timeframe, NMFS does not expect that bearded seals would
occur in the areas near the ice camp or where submarine activities
involving active acoustics would occur, and therefore incidental take
is not anticipated to occur and has not been proposed for
authorization. Bearded seals are not discussed further beyond the
explanation provided here. The Navy anticipates that the ice camp would
be established 100-200 nautical miles (nmi; 185-370 km) north of
Prudhoe Bay in water depths of 800 m (2,625 ft) or more, and also that
submarine training and testing activities would occur in water depths
of 800 m (2,625 ft) or more. Although acoustic data indicate that some
bearded seals remain in the Beaufort Sea year round (MacIntyre et al.
2013, 2015; Jones et al. 2014), satellite tagging data (Boveng and
Cameron 2013; ADF&G 2017) show that large numbers of bearded seals move
south in fall/winter with the advancing ice edge to spend the winter in
the Bering Sea, confirming previous visual observations (Burns and
Frost 1979; Frost et al. 2008; Cameron and Boveng 2009). The southward
movement of bearded seals in the fall means that very few individuals
are expected to occur along the Beaufort Sea continental shelf in
February through April, the timeframe for ICEX24 activities. The
northward spring migration through the Bering Strait, begins in mid-
April (Burns and Frost 1979).
In the event some bearded seals were to remain in the Beaufort Sea
during the season when ICEX24 activities will occur, the most probable
area in which bearded seals might occur during winter months is along
the continental shelf. Bearded seals feed extensively on benthic
invertebrates (e.g., clams, gastropods, crabs, shrimp, bottom-dwelling
fish; Quakenbush et al. 2011; Cameron et al. 2010) and are typically
found in water depths of 200 m (656 ft) or less (Burns 1970). The
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) conducted an aerial survey
from June through October that covered the shallow Beaufort and Chukchi
Sea shelf waters and observed bearded seals from Point Barrow to the
border of Canada (Clarke et al. 2015). The farthest from shore that
bearded seals were observed was the waters of the continental slope
(though this study was conducted outside of the ICEX24 time frame). The
Navy anticipates that the ice camp will be established 185-370 km (100-
200 nmi) north of Prudhoe Bay in water depths of 800 m (2,625 ft) or
more. The continental shelf near Prudhoe Bay is approximately 55 nmi
(100 km) wide. Therefore, even if the ice camp were established at the
closest estimated distance (100 nmi from Prudhoe Bay), it would still
be approximately 45 nmi (83 km) distant from habitat potentially
occupied by bearded seals. Empirical evidence has not shown responses
to sonar that would constitute take beyond a few km from an acoustic
source, and therefore, NMFS and the Navy conservatively set a distance
cutoff of 10 km (6.2 mi). Regardless of the source level at that
distance, take is not estimated to occur beyond 10 km (6.2 mi) from the
source. Although bearded seals occur 20 to 100 nmi (37 to 185 km)
offshore during spring (Simpkins et al. 2003, Bengtson et al. 2005),
they feed heavily on benthic organisms (Hamilton et al. 2018; Hjelset
et al. 1999; Fedoseev 1965), and during winter bearded seals are
expected to select habitats where food is abundant and easily
accessible to minimize the energy required to forage and maximize
energy reserves in preparation for whelping, lactation, mating, and
molting. Bearded seals are not known to dive as deep as 800 m (2,625
ft) to forage (Boveng and Cameron, 2013; Cameron and Boveng 2009;
Cameron et al. 2010; Gjertz et al. 2000; Kovacs 2002), and it is highly
unlikely that they would occur near the ice camp or where the submarine
activities would be conducted. This conclusion is supported by the fact
that the Navy did not visually observe or acoustically detect bearded
seals during the 2020 or 2022 ice exercises.
In addition, the polar bear (Ursus maritimus) may be found in the
ICEX24 Study Area. However, polar bears are managed by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and are not considered further in this document.
A detailed description of the of the Arctic stock of ringed seals,
including brief introductions to the species and stock as well as
available information regarding population trends and threats, and
information regarding local occurrence, were provided in the Federal
Register notice for the proposed IHA (88 FR 85244, December 7, 2023);
since that time, we are not aware of any changes in the status of these
species and stocks; therefore, detailed descriptions are not provided
here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for these
descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS' website (<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species</a>) for generalized species accounts.
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine
mammals are able to hear. Not all marine mammal species have equal
hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et al. 1995; Wartzok and Ketten,
1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007,
2019) recommended that marine mammals be divided into hearing groups
based on directly measured (behavioral or auditory evoked potential
techniques) or estimated hearing ranges (behavioral response data,
anatomical modeling, etc.). Note that no direct measurements of hearing
ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes (i.e., low-
frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described generalized
hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized
hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 decibels (dB)
threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception
for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was
deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall
et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing groups and their
associated hearing ranges are provided in table 2.
[[Page 8176]]
Table 2--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2018]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized hearing range
Hearing group *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose
whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
Cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger &
L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
seals).
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al. 2006; Kastelein et al. 2009; Reichmuth and Holt,
2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
The underwater noise from the Navy's submarine training and testing
activities has the potential to result in behavioral harassment of
marine mammals in the vicinity of the ICEX24 Study Area. The notice of
proposed IHA (88 FR 85244, December 7, 2023) included a discussion of
the effects of anthropogenic noise on marine mammals and the potential
effects of underwater noise from Navy's activities on marine mammals
and their habitat. That information and analysis is referenced in this
final IHA determination and is not repeated here; please refer to the
notice of proposed IHA (88 FR 85244, December 7, 2023).
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through this IHA, which will inform NMFS' consideration of
the negligible impact determinations and impacts on subsistence uses.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. For this military readiness activity, the MMPA defines
``harassment'' as (i) Any act that injures or has the significant
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
(Level A harassment); or (ii) Any act that disturbs or is likely to
disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including, but not limited
to, migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to
a point where the behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly
altered (Level B harassment).
Authorized takes for individual marine mammals resulting from
exposure to acoustic transmissions are by Level B harassment only, in
the form of direct behavioral disturbance including TTS, which can be
associated with disruptions in behavioral patterns resulting from an
animal missing some acoustic cues during the time that their hearing
sensitivity is reduced. Based on the nature of the activity, Level A
harassment is neither anticipated nor authorized. As described
previously, no serious injury or mortality is anticipated nor
authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take numbers
are estimated.
For acoustic impacts, generally speaking, we estimate take by
considering: (1) acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best
available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally
harassed or incur some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the
area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a
day; (3) the density or occurrence of marine mammals within these
ensonified areas; and (4) the number of days of activities. We note
that while these factors can contribute to a basic calculation to
provide an initial prediction of potential takes, additional
information that can qualitatively inform take estimates is also
sometimes available (e.g., previous monitoring results or average group
size). Below, we describe the factors considered here in more detail
and present the take estimates.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS recommends the use of acoustic thresholds that identify the
received level of underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals
would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to
Level B harassment) or to incur permanent threshold shift (PTS) of some
degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment--In coordination with NMFS, the Navy developed
behavioral thresholds to support environmental analyses for the Navy's
testing and training military readiness activities utilizing active
sonar sources; these behavioral harassment thresholds are used here to
evaluate the potential effects of the active sonar components of the
proposed specified activities. Though significantly driven by received
level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise
exposure is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related
to the source or exposure context (e.g., frequency, predictability,
duty cycle, duration of the exposure, signal-to-noise ratio, distance
to the source), the environment (e.g., bathymetry, other noises in the
area, predators in the area), and the receiving animals (hearing,
motivation, experience, demography, life stage, depth) and can be
difficult to predict (e.g., Southall et al. 2007, 2021; Ellison et al.
2012).
The Navy's Phase III proposed pinniped behavioral threshold was
updated based on controlled exposure experiments on the following
captive animals: Hooded seal, gray seal, and California sea lion
(G[ouml]tz et al. 2010; Houser et al. 2013a; Kvadsheim et al. 2010).
Overall exposure levels were 110-170 dB referenced to 1 micropascal (re
1 [mu]Pa) for hooded seals, 140-180 dB re 1 [mu]Pa for gray seals, and
125-185 dB re 1 [mu]Pa for California sea lions; responses occurred at
received levels ranging from 125-185 dB re 1 [mu]Pa. However, the means
of the response data were between 159 and 170 dB re 1 [mu]Pa. Hooded
seals were exposed to increasing levels of sonar until an avoidance
response was observed, while the grey seals were exposed first to a
single received level multiple times, then an increasing received
level. Each
[[Page 8177]]
individual California sea lion was exposed to the same received level
10 times. These exposure sessions were combined into a single response
value, with an overall response assumed if an animal responded in any
single session. Because these data represent a dose-response type
relationship between received level and a response, and because the
means were all tightly clustered, the Bayesian biphasic Behavioral
Response Function for pinnipeds most closely resembles a traditional
sigmoidal dose-response function at the upper received levels and has a
50 percent probability of response at 166 dB re 1 [mu]Pa. Additionally,
to account for proximity to the source discussed above and based on the
best scientific information, a conservative distance of 10 km is used
beyond which exposures would not constitute a take under the military
readiness definition of Level B harassment.
Level A harassment--NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0)
(Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory
injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups
(based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from
two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). The Navy's
activities include the use of non-impulsive (active sonar) sources.
These thresholds are provided in the table below. The references,
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS' 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at:
<a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance</a>.
For previous ICEXs, the Navy's PTS/TTS analysis began with
mathematical modeling to predict the sound transmission patterns from
Navy sources, including sonar. These data were then coupled with marine
species distribution and abundance data to determine the sound levels
likely to be received by various marine species. These criteria and
thresholds were applied to estimate specific effects that animals
exposed to Navy-generated sound may experience. For weighting function
derivation, the most critical data required were TTS onset exposure
levels as a function of exposure frequency. These values can be
estimated from published literature by examining TTS as a function of
sound exposure level (SEL) for various frequencies.
Table 3 below provides the weighted criteria and thresholds used in
previous ICEX analyses for estimating quantitative acoustic exposures
of marine mammals from the specified activities.
Table 3--Acoustic Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Behavioral Disturbance, TTS, and PTS for Non-Impulsive
Sound Sources \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physiological criteria
Behavioral -------------------------------------
Functional hearing group Species criteria TTS threshold SEL PTS threshold SEL
(weighted) (weighted)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phocid Pinnipeds (Underwater).. Ringed seal.......... Pinniped Dose 181 dB SEL 201 dB SEL
Response Function cumulative. cumulative.
\2\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The threshold values provided are assumed for when the source is within the animal's best hearing
sensitivity. The exact threshold varies based on the overlap of the source and the frequency weighting.
\2\ See Figure 6-1 in the Navy's IHA application.
Note: SEL thresholds in dB re: 1 [mu]Pa\2\s.
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and Estimation
In previous ICEX analyses, the Navy has performed a quantitative
analysis to estimate the number of ringed seals that could be harassed
by the underwater acoustic transmissions during the proposed specified
activities using marine mammal density estimates (Kaschner et al. 2006;
Kaschner 2004), marine mammal depth occurrence distributions (U.S
Department of the Navy, 2017), oceanographic and environmental data,
marine mammal hearing data, and criteria and thresholds for levels of
potential effects. Given the lack of recent density estimates for the
ICEX Study Area and the lack of ringed seal observations and acoustic
detections during ICEXs in the recent past (described in further detail
below), NMFS expects that the ringed seal density relied upon in
previous ICEX analyses was an overestimate to a large degree, and that
the resulting take estimates were likely overestimates as well. Please
see the notice of the final IHA for ICEX 22 for additional information
on that analysis (87 FR 7803, January 10, 2022).
For ICEX24, rather than relying on a density estimate, the Navy
estimated take of ringed seals based on an occurrence estimate of
ringed seals within the ICEX Study Area. Ringed seal presence in the
ICEX Study Area was obtained using sighting data from the Ocean
Biodiversity Information System-Spatial Ecological Analysis of
Megavertebrate Populations (OBIS-SEAMAP; Halpin et al. 2009). The ICEX
Study Area was overlaid on the OBIS-SEAMAP ringed seal sightings map
that included sightings for years 2000 to 2007 and 2013. Sighting data
were only available for the mid-to-late summer and fall months. Due to
the paucity of winter and spring data, the average number of individual
ringed seals per year was assumed to be present in the ICEX Study Area
during ICEX24; therefore, it is assumed that three ringed seals would
be present in the ICEX Study Area.
Table 4 provides range to effects for active acoustic sources
proposed for ICEX24 to phocid pinniped-specific criteria. Phocids
within these ranges would be predicted to receive the associated
effect. Range to effects can be important information for predicting
acoustic impacts, but also in determining adequate mitigation ranges to
avoid higher level effects, especially physiological effects, to marine
mammals.
[[Page 8178]]
Table 4--Range to Behavioral Disturbance, TTS, and PTS in the ICEX24 Study Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range to effects (m)
--------------------------------------------------
Source/exercise Behavioral
disturbance TTS PTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine Exercise........................................... 10,000 \a\ 5,050 130 \b\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Empirical evidence has not shown responses to sonar that would constitute take beyond a few km from an
acoustic source, which is why NMFS and the Navy conservatively set a distance cutoff of 10 km. Regardless of
the source level at that distance, take is not estimated to occur beyond 10 km from the source.
\b\ The distance represents the range to effects for all ICEX24 activities.
Though likely conservative given the size of the ICEX Study Area in
comparison to the size of the anticipated Level B harassment zone
(10,000 m), Navy estimated that three ringed seals may be taken by
Level B harassment per day of activity within the ICEX Study Area. Navy
anticipates conducting active acoustic transmissions on 42 days, and
therefore requested 126 takes by Level B harassment of ringed seals (3
seals per day x 42 days = 126 takes by Level B harassment; table 5).
NMFS concurs and proposes to authorize 126 takes by Level B harassment.
Modeling for the three previous ICEXs (2018, 2020, and 2022), which
employed similar acoustic sources, did not result in any estimated
takes by PTS; therefore, particularly in consideration of the fact that
total takes were likely overestimated for those ICEX activities given
the density information used in the analyses (NMFS anticipates that the
density of ringed seals is actually much lower) and the relatively
small range to effects for PTS (130 m), the Navy did not request, and
NMFS has not authorized, take by Level A harassment of ringed seal.
Table 5--Quantitative Modeling Results of Potential Exposures for ICEX Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Level A
Species harassment harassment Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ringed seal.................................................. 126 0 126
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
During monitoring for the 2018 IHA covering similar military
readiness activities in the ICEX22 Study Area, the Navy did not
visually observe or acoustically detect any marine mammals (U.S. Navy,
2018). During monitoring for the 2020 IHA covering similar military
readiness activities in the ICEX22 Study Area, the Navy also did not
visually observe any marine mammals (U.S. Navy, 2020). Acoustic
monitoring associated with the 2020 IHA did not detect any discernible
marine mammal vocalizations (Henderson et al. 2021). The monitoring
report states that ``there were a few very faint sounds that could have
been (ringed seal) barks or yelps.'' However, these were likely not
from ringed seals, given that ringed seal vocalizations are generally
produced in series (Jones et al. 2014). Henderson et al. (2021) expect
that these sounds were likely ice-associated or perhaps anthropogenic.
While the distance at which ringed seals could be acoustically detected
is not definitive, Henderson et al. (2021) states that Expendable
Mobile ASW Training Targets (EMATTs) ``traveled a distance of 10 nmi
(18.5 km) away and were detected the duration of the recordings;
although ringed seal vocalization source levels are likely far lower
than the sounds emitted by the EMATTs, this gives some idea of the
potential detection radius for the cryophone. The periods when the
surface anthropogenic activity is occurring in close proximity to the
cryophone are dominated by those broadband noises due to the shallow
hydrophone placement in ice (only 10 centimeters (cm) down), and any
ringed seal vocalizations that were underwater could have been
masked.'' During monitoring for the 2022 IHA covering similar military
readiness activities in the ICEX24 Study Area, the Navy also did not
visually observe any marine mammals (U.S. Navy, 2022). With the
exception of passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) conducted during
activities for mitigation purposes (no detections), PAM did not occur
in 2022 because the ice camp ice flow broke up, and therefore, Navy had
to relocate camp. Given the lost time, multiple research projects were
canceled, including the under-ice PAM that the Naval Postgraduate
School was planning to conduct.
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to the
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of the species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses. NMFS regulations require applicants for incidental
take authorizations to include information about the availability and
feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and
manner of conducting the activity or other means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks, and
their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)). The 2004 NDAA amended the MMPA
as it relates to military readiness activities and the incidental take
authorization process such that ``least practicable impact'' shall
include consideration of personnel safety, practicality of
implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the military
readiness activity.
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, NMFS
considers two primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat, as
well as subsistence uses. This considers the nature of the potential
adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further
considers the
[[Page 8179]]
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability
implemented as planned); and
(2) The practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
The IHA requires that appropriate personnel (including civilian
personnel) involved in mitigation and training or testing activity
reporting under the specified activities must complete Arctic
Environmental and Safety Awareness Training. Modules include: Arctic
Species Awareness and Mitigations, Environmental Considerations,
Hazardous Materials Management, and General Safety.
Further, the following general mitigation measures are required to
prevent incidental take of ringed seals on the ice floe associated with
the ice camp (further explanation of certain mitigation measures is
provided in parentheses following the measure):
<bullet> The ice camp and runway must be established on first-year
and multi-year ice without pressure ridges. (This will minimize
physical impacts to subnivean lairs and impacts to sea ice habitat
suitable for lairs);
<bullet> Ice camp deployment must begin no later than mid-February
2024, and be gradual, with activity increasing over the first 5 days.
Camp deployment must be completed by March 15, 2024. (Given that
mitigation measures require that the ice camp and runway be established
on first-year or multi-year ice without pressure ridges, as well as the
average ringed seal lair density in the area, and the relative
footprint of the Navy's planned ice camp (2 km\2\ 0.8 mi\2\), it is
extremely unlikely that a ringed seal would build a lair in the
vicinity of the ice camp. Additionally, based on the best available
science, Arctic ringed seal whelping is not expected to occur prior to
mid-March, and therefore, construction of the ice camp will be
completed prior to whelping in the area of ICEX24. Further, as noted
above, ringed seal lairs are not expected to occur in the ice camp
study area, and therefore, NMFS does not expect ringed seals to
relocate pups due to human disturbance from ice camp activities,
including construction);
<bullet> Personnel on all on-ice vehicles must observe for marine
and terrestrial animals;
<bullet> Snowmobiles must follow established routes, when
available. On-ice vehicles must not be used to follow any animal, with
the exception of actively deterring polar bears in accordance with U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service requirements or guidance if the situation
requires;
<bullet> Personnel on foot and operating on-ice vehicles must avoid
areas of deep (>0.5 m) snowdrifts and pressure ridges by 0.8 km. (These
areas are preferred areas for subnivean lair development);
<bullet> Personnel must maintain a 100 m (328 ft) avoidance
distance from all observed marine mammals; and
<bullet> All material (e.g., tents, unused food, excess fuel) and
wastes (e.g., solid waste, hazardous waste) must be removed from the
ice floe upon completion of ICEX24 activities.
The following mitigation measures are required for activities
involving acoustic transmissions (further explanation of certain
mitigation measures is provided in parentheses following the measure):
<bullet> Personnel must begin PAM for vocalizing marine mammals 15
minutes prior to the start of activities involving active acoustic
transmissions from submarines. (This PAM would be conducted for the
area around the submarine in real time by technicians on board the
submarine.);
<bullet> Personnel must delay active acoustic transmissions if a
marine mammal is detected during pre-activity PAM and must shutdown
active acoustic transmissions if a marine mammal is detected during
acoustic transmissions; and
<bullet> Personnel must not restart acoustic transmissions until 15
minutes have passed with no marine mammal detections.
Ramp up procedures for acoustic transmissions are not required as
the Navy determined, and NMFS concurs, that they would result in
impacts on military readiness and on the realism of training that would
be impracticable.
The following mitigation measures are required for aircraft
activities to prevent incidental take of marine mammals due to the
presence of aircraft and associated noise.
<bullet> Fixed wing aircraft must operate at the highest altitudes
practicable taking into account safety of personnel, meteorological
conditions, and need to support safe operations of a drifting ice camp.
Aircraft must not reduce altitude if a seal is observed on the ice. In
general, cruising elevation must be 457 m (1,500 ft) or higher;
<bullet> Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) must maintain a minimum
altitude of at least 15.2 m (50 ft) above the ice. They must not be
used to track or follow marine mammals;
<bullet> Helicopter flights must use prescribed transit corridors
when traveling to or from Prudhoe Bay and the ice camp. Helicopters
must not hover or circle above marine mammals or within 457 m (1,500
ft) of marine mammals;
<bullet> Aircraft must maintain a minimum separation distance of
1.6 km (1 mi) from groups of 5 or more seals; and
<bullet> Aircraft must not land on ice within 800 m (0.5 mi) of
hauled-out seals.
Based on our evaluation of the required measures, as well as other
measures considered by NMFS as described above, NMFS has determined
that the mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least
practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat,
paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present while
conducting the activities. Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
<bullet> Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density);
<bullet> Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the activity; or (4) biological or
behavioral
[[Page 8180]]
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 Navy has coordinated with NMFS to develop an overarching
program, the Integrated Comprehensive Monitoring Program (ICMP),
intended to coordinate marine species monitoring efforts across all
regions and to allocate the most appropriate level and type of effort
for each range complex based on a set of standardized objectives, and
in acknowledgement of regional expertise and resource availability. The
ICMP was created in direct response to Navy requirements established in
various MMPA regulations and ESA consultations. As a framework
document, the ICMP applies by regulation to those activities on ranges
and operating areas for which the Navy is seeking or has sought
incidental take authorizations.
The ICMP is focused on Navy training and testing ranges where the
majority of Navy activities occur regularly, as those areas have the
greatest potential for being impacted by the Navy's activities. In
comparison, ICEX is a short duration exercise that occurs approximately
every other year. Due to the location and expeditionary nature of the
ice camp, the number of personnel on site is extremely limited and is
constrained by the requirement to be able to evacuate all personnel in
a single day with small planes. As such, the Navy asserts that a
dedicated ICMP monitoring project is not feasible as it would require
additional personnel and equipment, and NMFS concurs. However, the Navy
is exploring the potential of implementing an environmental DNA (eDNA)
study on ice seals.
Nonetheless, the Navy must conduct the following monitoring and
reporting under the IHA. Ice camp personnel must generally monitor for
marine mammals in the vicinity of the ice camp and record all
observations of marine mammals, regardless of distance from the ice
camp, as well as the additional data indicated below. Additionally,
Navy personnel must conduct PAM during all active sonar use. Ice camp
personnel must also maintain an awareness of the surrounding
environment and document any observed marine mammals. When traveling
away from camp, each snow machine must have a dedicated observer (not
the vehicle operator) or each expeditionary team must have at least one
observer. Observers must be capable of observing and recording marine
mammal presence and behaviors, and accurately and completely record
data. When traveling, observers will have no other primary duty than to
watch for and report observations related to marine mammals and human/
seal interactions. Dedicated observers can also serve as the
communicator between the field party and camp.
In addition, the Navy is required to provide NMFS with a draft
exercise monitoring report within 90 days of the conclusion of the
specified activity. A final report must be prepared and submitted
within 30 calendar days following receipt of any NMFS comments on the
draft report. If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 calendar
days of receipt of the draft report, the report shall be considered
final. The report, at minimum, must include:
<bullet> Marine mammal monitoring effort including date, time,
duration of observation efforts;
<bullet> The minimum distance between human activities and seals or
seal lairs;
<bullet> Duration of time during which seals or seal lairs were
known to be present within 150 m of human activities, and the behaviors
exhibited by the seals during those observation periods;
<bullet> Account of the status of seal lairs located within 150 m
of camps or ice trails through time;
<bullet> Ice camp activities occurring during each monitoring
period (e.g., construction, demobilization, safety watch, field
parties);
<bullet> Number of marine mammals detected;
<bullet> Upon observation of a marine mammal, record the following
information:
[cir] Environmental conditions when animal was observed, including
relevant weather conditions such as cloud cover, snow, sun glare, and
overall visibility, and estimated observable distance;
[cir] Lookout location and ice camp activity at time of sighting
(or location and activity of personnel who made observation, if
observed outside of designated monitoring periods);
[cir] Time and approximate location of sighting;
[cir] Identification of the animal(s) (e.g., seal, or
unidentified), also noting any identifying features;
[cir] Distance and location of each observed marine mammal relative
to the ice camp location for each sighting;
[cir] Estimated number of animals (min/max/best estimate); and
[cir] Description of any marine mammal behavioral observations
(e.g., observed behaviors such as traveling), including an assessment
of behavioral responses thought to have resulted from the activity
(e.g., no response or changes in behavioral state such as ceasing
feeding, changing direction, flushing).
Also, all sonar usage will be collected via the Navy's Sonar
Positional Reporting System database. The Navy is required to provide
data regarding sonar use and the number of shutdowns during ICEX24
activities in the Atlantic Fleet Training and Testing (AFTT) Letter of
Authorization 2025 annual classified report. The Navy is also required
to analyze any declassified underwater recordings collected during
ICEX24 for marine mammal vocalizations and report that information to
NMFS, including the types and nature of sounds heard (e.g., clicks,
whistles, creaks, burst pulses, continuous, sporadic, strength of
signal) and the species or taxonomic group (if determinable). This
information will also be submitted to NMFS with the 2025 annual AFTT
declassified monitoring report.
Finally, in the event that personnel discover an injured or dead
marine mammal, personnel must report the incident to OPR, NMFS and to
the Alaska regional stranding network as soon as feasible. The report
must include the following information:
<bullet> Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
<bullet> Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
<bullet> Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if
the animal is dead);
<bullet> Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
<bullet> If available, photographs or video footage of the
animal(s); and
<bullet> General circumstances under which the animal(s) was
discovered (e.g., during submarine activities, observed on ice floe, or
by transiting aircraft).
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
[[Page 8181]]
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).
Underwater acoustic transmissions associated with ICEX24, as
outlined previously, have the potential to result in Level B harassment
of ringed seals in the form of behavioral disturbance and TTS. Given
the nature of the activity, no take by Level A harassment, serious
injury, or mortality are anticipated to result from this activity even
absent mitigation, and no such takes are authorized. Further, at close
ranges and high sound levels approaching those that could cause PTS,
seals would likely avoid the area immediately around the sound source.
NMFS anticipates that take of ringed seals by TTS could occur from
the submarine activities. TTS is a temporary impairment of hearing and
can last from minutes or hours to days (in cases of strong TTS) and
which can result in disruptions to behavioral patterns from missing
acoustic cues associated with, for example, conspecific communication
or prey detection. In many cases, however, hearing sensitivity recovers
rapidly after exposure to the sound ends. This activity has the
potential to result in only minor levels of TTS, and hearing
sensitivity of affected animals would be expected to recover quickly.
Though TTS may occur as indicated, the overall fitness of the impacted
individuals is unlikely to be affected given the temporary nature of
TTS and the minor levels of TTS expected from these activities.
Negative impacts on the reproduction or survival of affected ringed
seals as well as impacts on the stock are not anticipated.
Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment by
behavioral disturbance could include alteration of dive behavior,
alteration of foraging behavior, effects to breathing, interference
with or alteration of vocalization, avoidance, and flight. More severe
behavioral responses are not anticipated due to the localized,
intermittent use of active acoustic sources and mitigation using PAM,
which would limit exposure to active acoustic sources. Most likely,
individuals would be temporarily displaced by moving away from the
sound source. As described previously in the Acoustic Impacts section,
seals exposed to non-impulsive sources with a received sound pressure
level within the range of calculated exposures, (142-193 dB re 1
[mu]Pa), have been shown to change their behavior by modifying diving
activity and avoidance of the sound source (G[ouml]tz et al. 2010,
Kvadsheim et al. 2010). Although a minor change to a behavior may occur
as a result of exposure to the sound sources associated with the
proposed specified activity, these changes would be within the normal
range of behaviors for the animal (e.g., the use of a breathing hole
further from the source, rather than one closer to the source).
Further, given the limited number of total instances of takes and the
unlikelihood that any single individuals would be taken repeatedly,
multiple times over sequential days, these takes are unlikely to impact
the reproduction or survival of any individuals.
The Navy's activities are localized and of relatively short
duration. While the total ICEX24 Study Area is large, the Navy expects
that most activities would occur within the Ice Camp Study Area in
relatively close proximity to the ice camp. The larger Navy Activity
Study Area depicts the range where submarines may maneuver during the
exercise. The ice camp would be in existence for up to 6 weeks with
acoustic transmission occurring intermittently over approximately 4
weeks.
The project is not expected to have significant adverse effects on
marine mammal habitat. The project activities are limited in time and
would not modify physical marine mammal habitat. While the activities
may cause some fish to leave a specific area ensonified by acoustic
transmissions, temporarily impacting marine mammals' foraging
opportunities, these fish would likely return to the affected area. As
such, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause
significant or long-term negative consequences.
For on-ice activity, Level A harassment, Level B harassment,
serious injury, and mortality are not anticipated, given the nature of
the activities, the lack of previous ringed seal observations, and the
mitigation measures NMFS has required in the IHA. The ringed seal
pupping season on the ice lasts for 5 to 9 weeks during late winter and
spring. As stated in the Potential Effects of Specified Activities on
Marine Mammals and Their Habitat section, March 1 is generally expected
to be the onset of ice seal lairing season. The ice camp and runway
would be established on first-year ice or multi-year ice without
pressure ridges, as ringed seals tend to build their lairs near
pressure ridges. Ice camp deployment will begin no later than mid-
February, and be gradual, with activity increasing over the first 5
days. Ice camp deployment will be completed by March 15, before the
pupping season. Displacement of seal lair construction or relocation to
existing lairs outside of the ice camp area is unlikely, given the low
average density of lairs (the average ringed seal lair density in the
vicinity of Prudhoe Bay, Alaska is 1.58 lairs per km\2\), the relative
footprint of the Navy's planned ice camp (2 km\2\; 0.77 mi\2\), the
lack of previous ringed seal observations on the ice during ICEX
activities, and mitigation requirements that require the Navy to
construct the ice camp and runway on first-year or multi-year ice
without pressure ridges and require personnel to avoid areas of deep
snow drift or pressure ridges.
Given that mitigation measures require that the ice camp and runway
be established on first-year or multi-year ice without pressure ridges,
where ringed seals tend to build their lairs, it is extremely unlikely
that a ringed seal would build a lair in the vicinity of the ice camp.
This measure, together with the other mitigation measures required for
operation of the ice camp, are expected to avoid impacts to the
construction and use of ringed seal subnivean lairs, particularly given
the already low average density of lairs, as described above. Given
that ringed seal lairs are not expected to occur in the ice camp study
area, NMFS does not expect ringed seals to relocate pups due to human
disturbance from ice camp activities.
[[Page 8182]]
Additional mitigation measures are also expected to prevent damage
to and disturbance of ringed seals and their lairs that could otherwise
result from on-ice activities. Personnel on on-ice vehicles are
required to observe for marine mammals, and must follow established
routes when available, to avoid potential damage to or disturbance of
lairs. Personnel on foot and operating on-ice vehicles must avoid deep
(>0.5 m) snow drifts and pressure ridges by 0.8 km, also to avoid
potential damage to or disturbance of lairs. Further, personnel must
maintain a 100 m (328 ft) distance from all observed marine mammals to
avoid disturbing the animals due to the personnel's presence.
Implementation of these measures will prevent ringed seal lairs from
being crushed or damaged during ICEX24 activities.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity
are not expected to adversely affect any of the species or stocks
through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
<bullet> No Level A harassment (injury), serious injury, or
mortality is anticipated or authorized;
<bullet> Impacts would be limited to Level B harassment, primarily
in the form of behavioral disturbance that results in minor changes in
behavior;
<bullet> TTS is expected to affect only a limited number of animals
and is expected to be minor and short term;
<bullet> The number of takes authorized are low relative to the
estimated abundances of the affected stock, even given the extent to
which abundance is significantly underestimated;
<bullet> Submarine training and testing activities will occur over
only 4 weeks of the total 6-week activity period;
<bullet> There will be no loss or modification of ringed seal
habitat and minimal, temporary impacts on prey;
<bullet> Physical impacts to ringed seal subnivean lairs will be
avoided; and
<bullet> Mitigation requirements for ice camp activities are
expected to prevent impacts to ringed seals during the pupping season.
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 required monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from
the planned activity will have a negligible impact on all affected
marine mammal species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must find that the specified
activity will not have an ``unmitigable adverse impact'' on the
subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal species or stocks by
Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined ``unmitigable adverse impact'' in 50
CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity: (1)
That is likely to reduce the availability of the species to a level
insufficient for a harvest to meet subsistence needs by: (i) Causing
the marine mammals to abandon or avoid hunting areas; (ii) Directly
displacing subsistence users; or (iii) Placing physical barriers
between the marine mammals and the subsistence hunters; and (2) That
cannot be sufficiently mitigated by other measures to increase the
availability of marine mammals to allow subsistence needs to be met.
Impacts to marine mammals from the specified activity would mostly
include limited, temporary direct behavioral disturbances of ringed
seals; however, some TTS is also anticipated. No Level A harassment
(injury), serious injury, or mortality of marine mammals is expected or
authorized, and the activities are not expected to have any impacts on
reproductive or survival rates of any marine mammal species.
The specified activity and associated harassment of ringed seals
would not be expected to impact marine mammals in numbers or locations
sufficient to reduce their availability for subsistence harvest given
the short-term, temporary nature of the activities, and the distance
offshore from known subsistence hunting areas. The specified activity
would occur for a brief period of time outside of the primary
subsistence hunting season, and though seals are harvested for
subsistence uses off the North Slope of Alaska, the ICEX24 Study Area
is seaward of known subsistence hunting areas. (The Study Area boundary
is approximately 50 km from shore at the closest point, though
exercises will occur farther offshore.)
The Navy will provide advance public notice to local residents and
other users of the Prudhoe Bay region of Navy activities and measures
used to reduce impacts on resources. This includes notification to
local Alaska Natives who hunt marine mammals for subsistence. If any
Alaska Natives express concerns regarding project impacts to
subsistence hunting of marine mammals, the Navy would further
communicate with the concerned individuals or community. The Navy would
provide project information and clarification of the mitigation
measures that will reduce impacts to marine mammals.
Based on the description of the specified activity, the measures
described to minimize adverse effects on the availability of marine
mammals for subsistence purposes, and the required mitigation and
monitoring measures, NMFS has determined that there will not be an
unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence uses from the Navy's proposed
activities.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes,
funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To
ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults
internally whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or
threatened species, in this case with NMFS' Alaska Regional Office
(AKRO).
The NMFS Office of Protected Resources is authorizing take of
ringed seals, which are listed under the ESA. The NMFS AKRO Protected
Resources Division issued a Biological Opinion on January 11, 2024,
which concluded that the Navy's activities and NMFS' issuance of an IHA
are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Arctic
stock of ringed seals, and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify
their critical habitat.
National Environmental Policy Act
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as implemented by the regulations published
by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), the
Navy prepared a Supplemental Environmental Assessment/Overseas
Environmental Assessment (SEA/OEA) to consider the direct, indirect and
cumulative effects to the human environment resulting from ICEX24,
focusing on changes between ICEX24, and ICEX22 (e.g., no torpedo
training exercises in ICEX24 and new available science). This SEA/OEA
supplements an EA/OEA published in 2022 for ICEX22 that was finalized
in February 2022. NMFS adopted that EA/OEA and signed a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) on February 4, 2022.
The Navy's SEA/OEA was made available for public comment at <a href="https://www.nepa.navy.mil/icex/">https://www.nepa.navy.mil/icex/</a> from September 29, 2023 to October 13, 2023.
In the notice of proposed IHA (88 FR
[[Page 8183]]
85244, December 7, 2023), NMFS described its plan to adopt the Navy's
SEA/OEA, provided our independent evaluation of the document found that
it includes adequate information analyzing the effects on the human
environment of issuing the IHA. In compliance with NEPA and the CEQ
regulations, as well as NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, NMFS has
reviewed the Navy's SEA/OEA, determined it to be sufficient, and
adopted that SEA/OEA and signed a FONSI on January 31, 2024.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to the Navy for the potential harassment of
ringed seals incidental to ICEX24 in the Arctic Ocean that includes the
previously explained mitigation, monitoring and reporting requirements.
Dated: February 1, 2024.
Catherine Marzin,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-02383 Filed 2-5-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on February 6, 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.