Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 20325 

ridley, loggerhead, and hawksbill sea 

turtles had been submitted by the abovenamed individual. The requested permit 

has been issued under the authority of 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) 

and the regulations governing the 

taking, importing, and exporting of 

endangered and threatened species (50 

CFR parts 222–226). 

Dr. Landry was issued a 5 year permit 

to: (1) Examine green sea turtle 

assemblages in sea grass habitats off of 

Texas; (2) determine trends in seasonal 

abundance and movement of green, 

Kemp’s ridley, and loggerhead sea 

turtles in Texas and Louisiana estuaries; 

(3) characterize environmental estrogen 

uptake in green and Kemp’s ridley sea 

turtles at a Texas Superfund site; and (4) 

document impacts of the Deepwater 

Horizon oil spill on sea turtle 

assemblages in the western Gulf of 

Mexico. Researchers may capture by 

entanglement or cast net, transport, 

photograph, measure, weigh, flipper tag, 

passive integrated transponder tag, 

blood, fecal, epiphyte and tissue 

sample, attach satellite transmitters to 

and release sea turtles. 

Issuance of this permit, as required by 

the ESA, was based on a finding that 

such permit (1) was applied for in good 

faith, (2) will not operate to the 

disadvantage of such endangered or 

threatened species, and (3) is consistent 

with the purposes and policies set forth 

in section 2 of the ESA. 

Dated: April 4, 2011. 

P. Michael Payne, 

Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education 

Division, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8593 Filed 4–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XA314 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Marine 

Geophysical Survey in the Pacific 

Ocean off Costa Rica, April Through 

June, 2011 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental 

take authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA) regulations, notification is 

hereby given that NMFS has issued an 

Incidental Harassment Authorization 

(IHA) to Lamont-Doherty Earth 

Observatory (L–DEO), a part of 

Columbia University, to take small 

numbers of marine mammals, by Level 

B harassment, incidental to conducting 

a marine geophysical survey in the 

eastern tropical Pacific (ETP) Ocean off 

Costa Rica, April through June, 2011. 

DATES: Effective April 7 through June 6, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of the IHA and 

application are available by writing to 

P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, 

Conservation and Education Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, National 

Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 

or by telephoning the contacts listed 

here. A copy of the application 

containing a list of the references used 

in this document may be obtained by 

writing to the above address, 

telephoning the contact listed here (see 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or 

visiting the Internet at: http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/

incidental.htm#applications. The 

following associated documents are also 

available at the same internet address: 

Environmental Assessment (EA) 

prepared by NMFS, and the finding of 

no significant impact (FONSI). The 

NMFS Biological Opinion will be 

available online at: http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/consultation/

opinions.htm. Documents cited in this 

notice may be viewed, by appointment, 

during regular business hours, at the 

aforementioned address. Documents 

cited in this notice may be viewed, by 

appointment, during regular business 

hours, at the aforementioned address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeannine Cody, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 713–2289, ext. 

113. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA (16 

U.S.C. 1371 (a)(5)(D)) directs the 

Secretary of Commerce to authorize, 

upon request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of small numbers of 

marine mammals of a species or 

population stock, by United States 

citizens who engage in a specified 

activity (other than commercial fishing) 

within a specified geographical region if 

certain findings are made and, if the 

taking is limited to harassment, a notice 

of a proposed authorization is provided 

to the public for review. 

Authorization for the incidental 

taking of small numbers of marine 

mammals shall be granted if NMFS 

finds that the taking will have a 

negligible impact on the species or 

stock(s), and will not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

subsistence uses (where relevant). The 

authorization must set forth the 

permissible methods of taking, other 

means of effecting the least practicable 

adverse impact on the species or stock 

and its habitat, and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of such takings. NMFS 

has defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 

CFR 216.103 as ‘‘* * * an impact 

resulting from the specified activity that 

cannot be reasonably expected to, and is 

not reasonably likely to, adversely affect 

the species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’ 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

established an expedited process by 

which citizens of the United States can 

apply for an authorization to 

incidentally take small numbers of 

marine mammals by harassment. 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

establishes a 45-day time limit for 

NMFS’ review of an application 

followed by a 30-day public notice and 

comment period on any proposed 

authorizations for the incidental 

harassment of small numbers of marine 

mammals. Within 45 days of the close 

of the public comment period, NMFS 

must either issue or deny the 

authorization. NMFS must publish a 

notice in the Federal Register within 30 

days of its determination to issue or 

deny the authorization. 

Except with respect to certain 

activities not pertinent here, the MMPA 

defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: 

any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance 

which (i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 

[Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential 

to disturb a marine mammal or marine 

mammal stock in the wild by causing 

disruption of behavioral patterns, including, 

but not limited to, migration, breathing, 

nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

[Level B harassment]. 

Summary of Request 

NMFS received an application on 

November 12, 2010, from L–DEO for the 

taking by harassment, of marine 

mammals, incidental to conducting a 

marine geophysical survey in the 

eastern tropical Pacific Ocean within 

the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of 

Costa Rica. L–DEO, with research 

funding from the U.S. National Science 

Foundation (NSF), plans to conduct the 

seismic survey from April 7, 2011, 

through May 9, 2011. Upon receipt of 

additional information, NMFS 

determined the application complete 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
20326 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 

and adequate on January 4, 2011. On 

February 4, 2011 NMFS published a 

notice in the Federal Register (76 FR 

6430) disclosing the effects on marine 

mammals, making preliminary 

determinations and including a 

proposed IHA. The notice initiated a 30- 

day public comment period. 

L–DEO plans to use one source vessel, 

the R/V Marcus G. Langseth (Langseth) 

and a seismic airgun array to image the 

structures along a major plate-boundary 

fault off in the ETP off Costa Rica using 

three-dimensional (3–D) seismic 

reflection techniques. L–DEO will use 

the 3–D seismic reflection data to 

determine the fault structure and the 

properties of the rocks that lie along the 

fault zone. In addition to the proposed 

operations of the seismic airgun array, 

L–DEO intends to operate a multibeam 

echosounder (MBES) and a sub-bottom 

profiler (SBP) continuously throughout 

the survey. 

Acoustic stimuli (i.e., increased 

underwater sound) generated during the 

operation of the seismic airgun array, 

has the potential to cause a short-term 

behavioral disturbance for marine 

mammals in the survey area. This is the 

only anticipated means of marine 

mammal taking associated with these 

specified activities. L–DEO has 

requested and NMFS has authorized the 

incidental take of 19 species marine 

mammals by Level B harassment. Take 

is not expected to result from the use of 

the MBES or SBP, for reasons discussed 

in this notice. While ship-strike is the 

cause of take of marine mammals, 

NMFS believes the possibility of take 

from collision with the vessel is so 

remote as to be discountable because it 

is a single vessel moving at a relatively 

slow speed during seismic acquisition 

within the survey for approximately 32 

days. It is likely that any marine 

mammal would be able to avoid the 

vessel. 

Description of the Specified Activity 

L–DEO’s planned seismic survey in 

the ETP off Costa Rica is scheduled to 

commence on April 7, 2011 and 

continue for approximately 32 days 

ending on May 9, 2011. L–DEO will 

operate the Langseth to deploy a seismic 

airgun array and hydrophone streamers 

to complete the survey. The Langseth 

will depart from Caldera, Costa Rica on 

April 7, 2011 and transit to the survey 

area offshore from Costa Rica. Some 

minor deviation from these dates is 

possible, depending on logistics, 

weather conditions, and the need to 

repeat some lines if data quality is 

substandard. Therefore, NMFS plans to 

issue an authorization that extends to 

June 6, 2011. 

Geophysical survey activities will 

involve 3–D seismic methodologies to 

determine the fault structure and the 

properties of the rocks that lie along the 

fault zone and to assess the property 

changes along the fault and determine 

where the large stress accumulations 

that lead to large earthquakes occur 

along the fault zone. 

To obtain 3–D images of the fault zone 

which lies two to nine kilometers (km) 

below the seafloor, the Langseth will 

deploy a two-string subarray of nine 

airguns each as an energy source. The 

identical subarrays will fire alternately, 

so that no more than 18 airguns will fire 

at any time during the survey. The 

receiving system will consist of four 6- 

km-long hydrophone streamers. As the 

airgun subarrays are towed along the 

survey lines, the hydrophone streamers 

will receive the returning acoustic 

signals and transfer the data to the onboard processing system. L–DEO also 

plans to use two or three small fishing 

vessels around the Langseth to ensure 

that other vessels do not entangle the 

streamers. 

The study (e.g., equipment testing, 

startup, line changes, repeat coverage of 

any areas, and equipment recovery) will 

take place in the EEZ of Costa Rica in 

water depths ranging from less than 100 

meters (m) (328 feet (ft)) to greater than 

2,500 m (1.55 miles (mi)). The survey 

will require approximately 32 days (d) 

to complete approximately 19 transects 

in a racetrack configuration that will 

cover an area of approximately 57 x 12 

km (35.4 x 7.5 mi). In all, the survey 

will complete approximately 2,145 km 

(1,333 mi) of survey lines with an 

additional 365 km (227 mi) of turns. 

Data acquisition will include 

approximately 672 hours (hr) of airgun 

operation (28 d x 24 hr). 

The scientific team consists of Drs. 

Nathan Bangs, Kirk McIntosh (Institute 

for Geophysics, University of Texas) and 

Eli Silver (University of California at 

Santa Cruz). 

NMFS outlined the purpose of the 

program in a previous notice for the 

proposed IHA (76 FR 6430, February 4, 

2011). The activities to be conducted 

have not changed between the proposed 

IHA notice and this final notice 

announcing the issuance of the IHA. For 

a more detailed description of the 

authorized action, including vessel and 

acoustic source specifications, the 

reader should refer to the proposed IHA 

notice (76 FR 6430, February 4, 2011), 

the application and associated 

documents referenced above this 

section. 

Comments and Responses 

A notice of receipt of the L–DEO 

application and proposed IHA was 

published in the Federal Register on 

February 4, 2011 (76 FR 6430). During 

the 30-day public comment period, 

NMFS received comments from the 

Marine Mammal Commission 

(Commission) only. The Commission’s 

comments are online at: http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/

incidental.htm. Following are their 

comments and NMFS’ responses. 

Comment 1: The Commission 

recommends that NMFS require 

Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory to: 

(1) Provide a full description of the 

Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory 

model as it is used to estimate safety 

and buffer zones; and (2) rerun the 

model using site-specific information to 

determine safety and buffer zones and 

associated takes. 

Response: The NSF and L–DEO have 

revised Appendix A in the draft 

Environmental Analysis to include 

information from the calibration study 

conducted on the Langseth in 2007 and 

2008. This information is now available 

in the final Environmental Analysis on 

NSF’s Web site at http://www.nsf.gov/

geo/oce/envcomp/index.jsp. The revised 

Appendix A describes the L–DEO 

modeling process and compares the 

model results with empirical results of 

the 2007–2008 Langseth calibration 

experiment in shallow, deep and 

intermediate water. The conclusions– 

identified in Appendix A–show that the 

model represents the actual produced 

levels, particularly within the first few 

kilometers, where the predicted safety 

radii lie. At greater distances, local 

oceanographic variations begin to take 

effect, and the model tends to over 

predict. Further, since the modeling 

matches the observed measurement 

data, the authors have concluded that 

the models can continue to be used for 

defining exclusion zones, including for 

predicting mitigation radii for various 

tow depths. The data results from the 

studies were peer reviewed and the 

calibration results, viewed as 

conservative, were used to determine 

the cruise-specific exclusion zones. 

At present, the L–DEO model does not 

account for site-specific environmental 

conditions. The calibration study of the 

L–DEO model predicted that using sitespecific information may actually 

provide less conservative safety radii at 

greater distances. As the Commission 

noted, the Draft Programmatic 

Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Overseas Environmental Impact 

Statement (draft PEIS) for Marine 

Seismic Research Funded by the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 20327 

National Science Foundation or 

Conducted by the U.S. Geological 

Survey (draft PEIS) prepared pursuant 

to the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) did 

incorporate various site-specific 

environmental conditions in the 

modeling of the Detailed Analysis 

Areas. The NEPA process associated 

with the draft PEIS is still ongoing and 

the NSF has not yet issued a Record of 

Decision. Once the NEPA process for 

the PEIS has concluded, NSF will look 

at upcoming cruises on a site-specific 

basis for any impacts not already 

considered in the draft PEIS. 

The IHA issued to L–DEO, under 

section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 

provides mitigation and monitoring 

requirements that will protect marine 

mammals from any injury or mortality. 

L–DEO is required to comply with the 

IHA’s requirements. These analyses are 

supported by extensive scientific 

research and data. NMFS is confident in 

the peer-reviewed results of the L–DEO 

seismic equipment calibration studies 

which, although viewed as conservative, 

are used to determine cruise-specific 

exclusion zones and which factor into 

exposure estimates. NMFS has 

determined that these reviews are the 

best scientific data available for review 

of the IHA application and to support 

the necessary analyses and 

determinations under the MMPA, 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA; 

16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and NEPA. 

Based on NMFS’ analysis of the likely 

effects of the specified activity on 

marine mammals and their habitat, and 

taking into consideration the 

implementation of the mitigation and 

monitoring measures, NMFS has 

determined that the exclusion zones 

identified in the IHA are appropriate for 

the survey and that additional field 

measurement is not necessary at this 

time. While exposures of marine 

mammals to acoustic stimuli are 

difficult to estimate, NMFS is confident 

that the levels of take authorized herein 

are estimated based upon the best 

available scientific information and 

estimation methodology. The exclusion 

zones used to estimate exposure are 

appropriate and sufficient for purposes 

of supporting NMFS’s analyses and 

determinations required under section 

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA and its 

implementing regulations. 

Comment 2: The Commission 

recommends that before issuing the 

requested IHA, NMFS provide 

additional justification for its 

preliminary determination that the 

planned monitoring program will be 

sufficient to detect with a high level of 

confidence, all marine mammals within 

or entering the identified exclusion 

zones. 

Response: NMFS believes that the 

planned monitoring program will be 

sufficient to detect (using visual 

detection and passive acoustic 

monitoring (PAM)), with reasonable 

certainty, marine mammals within or 

entering identified exclusion zones. 

This monitoring, along with the 

required mitigation measures, will 

result in the least practicable adverse 

impact on the affected species or stocks 

and will result in a negligible impact on 

the affected species or stocks. 

At present, NMFS views the 

combination of visual and passive 

acoustic monitoring as the most 

effective mitigation techniques available 

for detecting marine mammals within or 

entering the exclusion zone. The final 

monitoring and mitigation measures are 

the most effective feasible measures and 

NMFS is not aware of any additional 

measures which could meaningfully 

increase the likelihood of detecting 

marine mammals in and around the 

exclusion zone. Further, public 

comment has not revealed any 

additional mitigation or monitoring 

measures that could be feasibly 

implemented to increase the 

effectiveness of detection. 

L–DEO and NSF (the federal funding 

agency) are receptive to incorporating 

proven technologies and techniques to 

enhance the current monitoring and 

mitigation program. Until proven 

technological advances are made, 

nighttime mitigation measures during 

operations include combinations of the 

use of protected species visual observers 

(PSVOs) for ramp ups, PAM, night 

vision devices, and continuous shooting 

of a mitigation gun. Should the airgun 

array be powered-down, the operation 

of a single airgun would continue to 

serve as a sound source deterrent to 

marine mammals. In the event of a 

complete airgun array shut down at 

night for mitigation or repairs, L–DEO 

suspends the data collection until one 

half hour after civil dawn (when PSVO’s 

are able to clear the safety zone). L–DEO 

will not activate the airguns until the 

entire safety radius is visible for at least 

30 minutes. 

In cooperation with NMFS, L–DEO 

will be conducting efficacy experiments 

of night vision devices (NVD) during a 

future Langseth cruise. In addition, in 

response to a recommendation from 

NMFS, L–DEO is evaluating the use of 

handheld thermal imaging cameras to 

supplement nighttime mitigation 

practices. Another federal agency has 

successfully used these devices while 

conducting nighttime seismic 

operations. 

Comment 3: The Commission 

recommends that NMFS propose to L– 

DEO that it revise its survey design to 

add pre- and post-seismic survey 

assessments as a way to assess marine 

mammal abundance in an area before, 

during, and after the seismic survey to 

determine how those numbers differ 

and to obtain more realistic baseline 

abundance estimates of marine 

mammals. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges the 

Commission’s concerns and will 

forward the recommendation to the NSF 

and L–DEO. Because the cruise’s 

primary focus is marine geophysical 

research, extending or altering the 

cruise is not practicable from either an 

operational or research standpoint for 

the applicant. Due to the remote 

location of the survey and the length of 

time needed to conduct the requested 

research, there may be little time left for 

the vessel to operate without the need 

for refueling and servicing. Second, at 

sea data collection and analyses to 

estimate marine mammal abundance are 

time and resource intensive endeavors— 

even more so if the intent is to assess 

abundance in-situ, before, during, and 

after the seismic survey. 

Numerous studies have reported on 

the distribution of cetaceans inhabiting 

the ETP and L–DEO has incorporated 

this data into their analyses. For 

example, Ferguson and Barlow (2001, 

2003) calculated cetacean densities in 

the ETP based on summer/fall research 

surveys in 1986–1996; Gerrodette et al. 

(2008) calculated dolphin abundance in 

the ETP based on summer/fall research 

surveys in 1986–1990, 1998–2000, 2003, 

and 2006; and Jackson et al., (2008) 

described cetacean sightings data 

collected in a survey area that overlaps 

with the seismic survey area. NMFS 

believes that L–DEO’s current approach 

for estimating abundance in the survey 

area is believed to be the best available 

approach. 

To conclude, there will be significant 

amounts of transit time during the 

cruise, which PSVOs will be on watch 

prior to and after the seismic portions of 

the survey. The collection of this 

observational data by PSVOs may 

provide meaningful baseline data on 

marine mammals, but it is unlikely that 

the information would result in any 

statistically robust conclusions for this 

particular seismic survey. 

Comment 4: The Commission 

recommends that NMFS require the 

applicant: (1) To report on the number 

of marine mammals that were 

acoustically detected for which a powerdown or shutdown of the airguns was 

initiated; (2) specify if the animals also 

were visually detected; and (3) compare 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
20328 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 

the results from the two methods (visual 

versus acoustic) to help identify their 

respective weaknesses. 

Response: L–DEO reports on the 

number of acoustic detections made by 

the PAM system within the post-cruise 

monitoring reports as required by the 

IHA. The report also includes a 

description of any acoustic detections 

that were concurrent with visual 

sightings, which allows for a 

comparison of acoustic and visual 

detection methods for each cruise. 

The post-cruise monitoring reports 

also include on the following 

information: the total operational effort 

in daylight (hours); the total operation 

effort at night (hours); the total number 

of hours of visual observations 

conducted, the total number of 

sightings, and the total number of hours 

of acoustic detections conducted. 

LGL Ltd., Environmental Research 

Associates (LGL), a contractor for L– 

DEO, has processed sighting and density 

and data, and their publications can be 

viewed online at: http://www.lgl.com/

index.php?option=com_content

&view=article&id=69&Itemid=162&

lang=en. Post-cruise monitoring reports 

are currently available on the NMFS’ 

MMPA Incidental Take Program website 

and future reports will also be available 

on the NSF website should there be 

interest in further analysis of this data 

by the public. 

Comment 5: The Commission 

recommends that NMFS condition the 

authorization to prohibit an eightminute pause before ramping up after 

either a power-down or shutdown of the 

airguns, based on the presence of a 

marine mammal in the exclusion zone 

and the Langseth’s movement. The 

Commission believes that this limit is 

inappropriate because it fails to account 

for the position, swim speed and 

heading of the observed marine 

mammal. If a marine mammal sighted in 

the exclusion zone is moving in the 

same direction as the Langseth, or if it 

is moving in a different direction but 

changes its heading, it may remain in 

the exclusion zone for periods longer 

than eight minutes. 

Response: To clarify, in the instance 

of a power-down or shutdown based on 

the presence of a marine mammal in the 

exclusion zone, L–DEO will restart the 

airguns to the full operating source level 

(i.e., 3,300 cubic inches (in3)) only if the 

PSVO visually observes the marine 

mammal exiting the exclusion zone for 

the full source level within an eightminute period of the shut-down or 

power down. The eight-minute period is 

based on the 180–dB radius for the 18- 

airgun subarray towed at a depth of 

seven m (23 ft) in relation to the 

minimum planned speed of the 

Langseth while shooting (8.5 km/h; 5.3 

mph; 4.6 kts). In the event that a marine 

mammal would re-enter the exclusion 

zone after reactivating the airguns, L– 

DEO would reinitiate a shut-down or 

power down as required by the IHA. 

Should the airguns be inactive or 

powered down for more than 8 minutes, 

and the PSVO does not observe the 

marine mammal leaving the exclusion 

zone, then L–DEO must wait 15 minutes 

(for small odontocetes or pinnipeds) or 

30 minutes (for mysticetes and large 

odontocetes) after the last sighting 

before L–DEO can initiate ramp-up 

procedures. However, ramp up will not 

occur as long as a marine mammal is 

detected within the exclusion zone, 

which provides more time for animals 

to leave the exclusion zone, and 

accounts for the position, swim speed 

and heading of marine mammals within 

the exclusion zone. 

Finally, L–DEO may need to 

temporarily perform a shut-down due to 

equipment failure or maintenance. In 

this instance, L–DEO will restart the 

airguns to the full source level within an 

8-minute period of the shut-down only 

if the PSVOs do not observe marine 

mammals within exclusion zone for the 

full source level. If the airguns are 

inactive or powered down for more than 

eight minutes, then L–DEO would 

follow the ramp-up procedures required 

by the IHA. L–DEO would restart the 

airguns beginning with the smallest 

airgun in the array and add airguns in 

a sequence such that the source level of 

the array does not exceed 6 decibels 

(dB) per 5-minute period over a total 

duration of approximately 30 minutes. 

Again, the PSVOs would monitor the 

exclusion zones for marine mammals 

during this time and would initiate a 

power-down or a shutdown, as required 

by the IHA. 

Comment 6: Extend the monitoring 

period to at least one hour before 

initiation of seismic activities and at 

least one hour before the resumption of 

airgun activities after a shutdown 

because of a marine mammal sighting 

within an exclusion zone. 

Response: As the Commission points 

out, several species of deep-diving 

cetaceans are capable of remaining 

underwater for more than 30 minutes; 

however, for the following reasons 

NMFS believes that 30 minutes is an 

adequate length for the monitoring 

period prior to the start-up of airguns: 

(1) Because the Langseth is required 

to monitor before ramp-up of the airgun 

array, the time of monitoring prior to 

start-up of any but the smallest array is 

effectively longer than 30 minutes 

(ramp-up will begin with the smallest 

airgun in the array and airguns will be 

added in sequence such that the source 

level of the array will increase in steps 

not exceeding approximately 6 dB per 5- 

minute period over a total duration of 

20 to 30 minutes); 

(2) In many cases PSVOs are 

observing during times when L–DEO is 

not operating the seismic airguns and 

would actually observe the area prior to 

the 30-minute observation period 

anyway; 

(3) The majority of the species that 

may be exposed do not stay underwater 

more than 30 minutes; and 

(4) All else being equal and if deepdiving individuals happened to be in 

the area in the short time immediately 

prior to the pre-start-up monitoring, if 

an animal’s maximum underwater dive 

time is 45 minutes, then there is only a 

one in three chance that the last random 

surfacing would occur prior to the 

beginning of the required 30-minute 

monitoring period and that the animal 

would not be seen during that 30- 

minute period. 

Also, seismic vessels are moving 

continuously (because of the long, 

towed array) and NMFS believes that 

unless the animal submerges and 

follows at the speed of the vessel (highly 

unlikely, especially when considering 

that a significant part of their 

movements is vertical [deep-diving]), 

the vessel will be far beyond the length 

of the exclusion zone radii within 30 

minutes, and therefore it will be safe to 

start the airguns again. 

The effectiveness of monitoring is 

science-based and the requirement that 

mitigation measures be ‘‘practicable.’’ 

NMFS believes that the framework for 

visual monitoring will: (1) Be effective 

at spotting almost all species for which 

take is requested; and (2) that imposing 

additional requirements, such as those 

suggested by the Commission, would 

not meaningfully increase the 

effectiveness of observing marine 

mammals approaching or entering the 

EZs and thus further minimize the 

potential for take. 

Comment 7: The Commission 

recommends that, before issuing the 

requested IHA, NMFS require that 

observers collect and analyze data on 

the effectiveness of ramp-up as a 

mitigation measures during all such 

procedures. 

Response: The IHA requires that 

PSVOs on the Langseth make 

observations for 30 minutes prior to 

ramp-up, during all ramp-ups, and 

during all daytime seismic operations 

and record the following information 

when a marine mammal is sighted: 

(i) Species, group size, age/size/sex 

categories (if determinable), behavior 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 20329 

when first sighted and after initial 

sighting, heading (if consistent), bearing 

and distance from seismic vessel, 

sighting cue, apparent reaction to the 

airguns or vessel (e.g., none, avoidance, 

approach, paralleling, etc., and 

including responses to ramp-up), and 

behavioral pace; and 

(ii) Time, location, heading, speed, 

activity of the vessel (including number 

of airguns operating and whether in 

state of ramp-up or power-down), 

Beaufort wind force sea state, visibility, 

and sun glare. 

One of the primary purposes of 

monitoring is to result in ‘‘increased 

knowledge of the species’’ and the 

effectiveness of monitoring and 

mitigation measures; the effectiveness of 

marine mammals reaction to ramp-up 

would be useful information in this 

regard. NMFS has asked NSF and L– 

DEO to gather all data that could 

potentially provide information 

regarding the effectiveness of ramp-ups 

as a mitigation measure. However, 

considering the low numbers of marine 

mammal sightings and low numbers of 

ramp-ups, it is unlikely that the 

information will result in any 

statistically robust conclusions for this 

particular seismic survey. Over the long 

term, these requirements may provide 

information regarding the effectiveness 

of ramp-up as a mitigation measure, 

provided animals are detected during 

ramp-up. 

Description of the Marine Mammals in 

the Area of the Specified Activity 

Twenty-eight marine mammal species 

may seasonally occur in the survey area, 

including 20 odontocetes (toothed 

cetaceans), 6 mysticetes (baleen whales) 

and two pinnipeds. Of these, 19 

cetacean species are likely to occur in 

the survey area in the ETP during April 

through June. Five of these species are 

listed as endangered under the ESA, 

including the humpback (Megaptera 

novaeangliae), sei (Balaenoptera 

borealis), fin (Balaenoptera physalus), 

blue (Balaenoptera musculus), and 

sperm (Physeter macrocephalus) whale. 

The species of marine mammals 

expected to be most common in the 

survey area (all delphinids) include the 

short-beaked common dolphin 

(Delphinus delphis), spinner dolphin 

(Stenella longirostris), pantropical 

spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata), 

striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba), 

melon-headed whale (Peponocephala 

electra), and bottlenose dolphin 

(Tursiops truncatus). 

Two pinnipeds, the California sea lion 

(Zalophus californianus) and the 

Gala ́pagos sea lion (Zalophus 

wollebaeki), have the potential to transit 

in the vicinity of the seismic survey, 

although any occurrence would be rare 

as they are vagrants to the area. 

Accordingly, the IHA only addresses 

requested take authorizations for 

mysticetes and odontocetes. 

NMFS has presented a more detailed 

discussion of the status of these stocks 

and their occurrence in the northeastern 

Pacific Ocean, as well as other marine 

mammal species that occur in area 

offshore Costa Rica in the notice of the 

proposed IHA (76 FR 6430, February 4, 

2011). 

Potential Effects on Marine Mammals 

Acoustic stimuli generated by the 

operation of the airguns, which 

introduce sound into the marine 

environment, may have the potential to 

cause Level B harassment of marine 

mammals in the survey area. The effects 

of sounds from airgun operations might 

include one of the following: tolerance, 

masking of natural sounds, behavioral 

disturbance, temporary or permanent 

impairment, or non-auditory physical or 

physiological effects (Richardson et al., 

1995; Gordon et al., 2004; Nowacek et 

al., 2007; Southall et al., 2007). 

Permanent hearing impairment, in the 

unlikely event that it occurred, would 

constitute injury, but temporary 

threshold shift (TTS) is not an injury 

(Southall et al., 2007). Although the 

possibility cannot be entirely excluded, 

it is unlikely that the project would 

result in any cases of temporary or 

permanent hearing impairment, or any 

significant non-auditory physical or 

physiological effects. Based on the 

available data and studies described 

here, some behavioral disturbance is 

expected, but NMFS expects the 

disturbance to be localized and shortterm. 

The notice of the proposed IHA (76 

FR 6430, February 4, 2011) included a 

discussion of the effects of sounds from 

airguns on mysticetes and odontocetes 

including tolerance, masking, 

behavioral disturbance, hearing 

impairment, and other non-auditory 

physical effects. NMFS refers the reader 

to L–DEO’s application, environmental 

analysis and NMFS’ EA for additional 

information on the behavioral reactions 

(or lack thereof) by all types of marine 

mammals to seismic vessels. 

Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal 

Habitat, Fish and Invertebrates 

NMFS included a detailed discussion 

of the potential effects of this action on 

marine mammal habitat, including 

physiological and behavioral effects on 

marine fish and invertebrates in the 

notice of the proposed IHA (76 FR 6430, 

February 4, 2011). While NMFS 

anticipates that the specified activity 

may result in marine mammals avoiding 

certain areas due to temporary 

ensonification, this impact to habitat is 

temporary and reversible which NMFS 

considered in further detail in the notice 

of the proposed IHA (76 FR 6430, 

February 4, 2011) as behavioral 

modification. The main impact 

associated with the activity would be 

temporarily elevated noise levels and 

the associated direct effects on marine 

mammals. 

Mitigation 

In order to issue an incidental take 

authorization (ITA) under section 

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must 

set forth the permissible methods of 

taking pursuant to such activity, and 

other means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact on such 

species or stock and its habitat, paying 

particular attention to rookeries, mating 

grounds, and areas of similar 

significance, and the availability of such 

species or stock for taking for certain 

subsistence uses. 

L–DEO has based the mitigation 

measures described herein, to be 

implemented for the seismic survey, on 

the following: 

(1) Protocols used during previous L– 

DEO seismic research cruises as 

approved by NMFS; 

(2) Previous IHA applications and 

IHAs approved and authorized by 

NMFS; and 

(3) Recommended best practices in 

Richardson et al. (1995), Pierson et al. 

(1998), and Weir and Dolman, (2007). 

To reduce the potential for 

disturbance from acoustic stimuli 

associated with the activities, L–DEO 

and/or its designees would implement 

the following mitigation measures for 

marine mammals: 

(1) Exclusion zones; 

(2) Power-down procedures; 

(3) Shutdown procedures; and 

(4) Ramp-up procedures. 

Exclusion Zones—L–DEO uses safety 

radii to designate exclusion zones (EZ) 

and to estimate take for marine 

mammals. Table 1 shows the distances 

at which two sound levels (160- and 

180-dB) are expected to be received 

from the 18-airgun subarray and a single 

airgun. NMFS (1995, 2000) concluded 

that cetaceans should not be exposed to 

pulsed underwater noise at received 

levels exceeding 180 dB re: 1 μPa. 

NMFS believes that to avoid the 

potential for permanent physiological 

damage (Level A harassment), cetaceans 

should not be exposed to pulsed 

underwater noise at received levels 

exceeding 180 dB re: 1 μPa. The 180-dB 

level is a shutdown criterion applicable 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
20330 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 

to cetaceans, as specified by NMFS 

(2000). NMFS also assumes that 

cetaceans exposed to levels exceeding 

160 dB re: 1 μPa (rms) may experience 

Level B harassment. L–DEO used these 

levels to establish the EZ. 

If the protected species visual 

observer (PSVO) detects marine 

mammal(s) within or about to enter the 

appropriate exclusion zone, the 

Langseth crew will immediately power 

down the airgun subarrays, or perform 

a shut down if necessary (see Shutdown Procedures). 

TABLE 1—PREDICTED DISTANCES TO WHICH SOUND LEVELS ≥, 180, AND 160 dB RE: 1 μParms COULD BE RECEIVED

DURING THE SURVEY USING A 18-AIRGUN SUBARRAY, AS WELL AS A SINGLE AIRGUN TOWED AT A DEPTH OF 7 M IN

THE ETP DURING APRIL–MAY, 2011 

[Distances are based on model results provided by L–DEO.] 

Source and volume Water depth 

Predicted RMS distances (m) 

180 dB 160 dB 

Single Bolt airgun (40 in3) ........................................ Shallow < 100 m ....................................................... 296 1,050 

Intermediate 100–1,000 m ....................................... 60 578 

Deep > 1,000 m ........................................................ 40 385 

18-Airgun subarray (3,300 in3) ................................. Shallow < 100 m ....................................................... 1,030 * 19,500 

Intermediate 100–1,000 m ....................................... 675 5,700 

Deep > 1,000 m ........................................................ 450 3,800 

* This is likely an overestimate, as the measured distance for the 36-airgun array operating in shallow waters of the northern Gulf of Mexico 

was 17,500 m (17.5 km). 

Power-down Procedures—A powerdown involves decreasing the number of 

airguns in use such that the radius of 

the 180-dB zone is decreased to the 

extent that marine mammals are no 

longer in or about to enter the EZ. A 

power down of the airgun subarray can 

also occur when the vessel is moving 

from one seismic line to another. During 

a power-down for mitigation, L–DEO 

will operate one airgun. The continued 

operation of one airgun is intended to 

alert marine mammals to the presence of 

the seismic vessel in the area. In 

contrast, a shut down occurs when the 

Langseth suspends all airgun activity. 

If the PSVO detects a marine mammal 

outside the EZ, but it is likely to enter 

the EZ, L–DEO will power down the 

airguns before the animal is within the 

EZ. Likewise, if a mammal is already 

within the EZ, when first detected L– 

DEO will power down the airguns 

immediately. During a power down of 

the airgun array, L–DEO will also 

operate the 40-in3 airgun. If a marine 

mammal is detected within or near the 

smaller EZ around that single airgun 

(Table 1), L–DEO will shut down the 

airgun (see next section). 

Following a power-down, L–DEO will 

not resume airgun activity until the 

marine mammal has cleared the safety 

zone. L–DEO will consider the animal to 

have cleared the EZ if 

• A PSVO has visually observed the 

animal leave the EZ, or 

• A PSVO has not sighted the animal 

within the EZ for 15 min for small 

odontocetes, or 30 min for mysticetes 

and large odontocetes, including sperm, 

pygmy sperm, dwarf sperm, and beaked 

whales. 

During airgun operations following a 

power-down (or shut-down) whose 

duration has exceeded the time limits 

specified previously, L–DEO will rampup the airgun array gradually (see Shutdown Procedures). 

Shut-down Procedures—L–DEO will 

shut down the operating airgun(s) if a 

marine mammal is seen within or 

approaching the EZ for the single 

airgun. L–DEO will implement a shutdown: 

(1) If an animal enters the EZ of the 

single airgun after L–DEO has initiated 

a power down, or (2) If a an animal is 

initially seen within the EZ of the single 

airgun when more than one airgun 

(typically the full airgun array) is 

operating. 

L–DEO will not resume airgun 

activity until the marine mammal has 

cleared the EZ, or until the PSVO is 

confident that the animal has left the 

vicinity of the vessel. Criteria for 

judging that the animal has cleared the 

EZ will be as described in the preceding 

section. 

Ramp-up Procedures—L–DEO will 

follow a ramp-up procedure when the 

airgun subarrays begin operating after a 

specified period without airgun 

operations or when a power down has 

exceeded that period. L–DEO proposes 

that, for the present cruise, this period 

would be approximately eight minutes. 

This period is based on the 180-dB 

radius for the 18-airgun subarray towed 

at a depth of seven m (23 ft) in relation 

to the minimum planned speed of the 

Langseth while shooting (8.5 km/h; 5.3 

mph; 4.6 knots). L–DEO has used 

similar periods (8–10 min) during 

previous L–DEO surveys. 

Ramp-up will begin with the smallest 

airgun in the array (40-in3). Airguns will 

be added in a sequence such that the 

source level of the array will increase in 

steps not exceeding six dB per fiveminute period over a total duration of 

approximately 30 min. During ramp-up, 

the PSVOs will monitor the EZ, and if 

marine mammals are sighted, L–DEO 

will implement a power down or shut 

down as though the full airgun array 

were operational. 

If the complete EZ has not been 

visible for at least 30 minutes prior to 

the start of operations in either daylight 

or nighttime, L–DEO will not commence 

the ramp-up unless at least one airgun 

(40-in3 or similar) has been operating 

during the interruption of seismic 

survey operations. Given these 

provisions, it is likely that the airgun 

array will not be ramped up from a 

complete shut-down at night or in thick 

fog, because the outer part of the safety 

zone for that array will not be visible 

during those conditions. If one airgun 

has operated during a power-down 

period, ramp-up to full power will be 

permissible at night or in poor visibility, 

on the assumption that marine 

mammals will be alerted to the 

approaching seismic vessel by the 

sounds from the single airgun and could 

move away. L–DEO will not initiate a 

ramp-up of the airguns if a marine 

mammal is sighted within or near the 

applicable EZs during the day or close 

to the vessel at night. 

NMFS has carefully evaluated the 

applicant’s proposed mitigation 

measures and has considered a range of 

other measures in the context of 

ensuring that NMFS prescribes the 

means of effecting the least practicable 

adverse impact on the affected marine 

mammal species and stocks and their 

habitat. Our evaluation of potential 

measures included consideration of the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 20331 

following factors in relation to one 

another: (1) The manner in which, and 

the degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure is 

expected to minimize adverse impacts 

to marine mammals; (2) the proven or 

likely efficacy of the specific measure to 

minimize adverse impacts as planned; 

and (3) the practicability of the measure 

for applicant implementation. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s proposed measures, as well 

as other measures considered by NMFS 

or recommended by the public, NMFS 

has determined that the mitigation 

measures provide the means of effecting 

the least practicable adverse impacts on 

marine mammals 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 IHAs must 

include the suggested means of 

accomplishing the necessary monitoring 

and reporting that will result in 

increased knowledge of the species and 

of the level of taking or impacts on 

populations of marine mammals that are 

expected to be present in the action 

area. 

Monitoring 

L–DEO would sponsor marine 

mammal monitoring during the present 

project, in order to implement the 

mitigation measures that require realtime monitoring, and to satisfy the 

anticipated monitoring requirements of 

the IHA. L–DEO’s Monitoring Plan is 

described below this section. The 

monitoring work described here has 

been planned as a self-contained project 

independent of any other related 

monitoring projects that may be 

occurring simultaneously in the same 

regions. L–DEO is prepared to discuss 

coordination of its monitoring program 

with any related work that might be 

done by other groups insofar as this is 

practical and desirable. 

Vessel-based Visual Monitoring 

L–DEO’s PSVOs will be based aboard 

the seismic source vessel and will watch 

for marine mammals near the vessel 

during daytime airgun operations and 

during any start-ups at night. PSVOs 

will also watch for marine mammals 

near the seismic vessel for at least 30 

min prior to the start of airgun 

operations after an extended shut down. 

PSVOs will conduct observations 

during daytime periods when the 

seismic system is not operating for 

comparison of sighting rates and 

behavior with and without airgun 

operations and between acquisition 

periods. Based on PSVO observations, 

the airguns will be powered down or 

shut down when marine mammals are 

observed within or about to enter a 

designated EZ. 

During seismic operations off Costa 

Rica, at least three PSVOs will be based 

aboard the Langseth. L–DEO will 

appoint the PSVOs with NMFS’ 

concurrence. During all daytime 

periods, two PSVOs will be on duty 

from the observation tower to monitor 

and PSVOs will be on duty in shifts of 

duration no longer than four hours. 

During mealtimes it is sometimes 

difficult to have two PSVOs on effort, 

but at least one PSVO will be on watch 

during bathroom breaks and mealtimes. 

Use of two simultaneous observers 

increases the effectiveness of detecting 

animals near the source vessel. 

However, during meal times, only one 

PSVO may be on duty. 

Two PSVOs will also be on visual 

watch during all nighttime start-ups of 

the seismic airguns. A third PSVO will 

monitor the PAM equipment 24 hours a 

day to detect vocalizing marine 

mammals present in the action area. In 

summary, a typical daytime cruise 

would have scheduled two PSVOs on 

duty from the observation tower, and a 

third PSVO on PAM. 

L–DEO will also instruct other crew to 

assist in detecting marine mammals and 

implementing mitigation requirements 

(if practical). Before the start of the 

seismic survey, L–DEO will give the 

crew additional instruction regarding 

how to accomplish this task. 

The Langseth is a suitable platform for 

marine mammal observations. When 

stationed on the observation platform, 

the eye level will be approximately 21.5 

m (70.5 ft) above sea level, and the 

observer will have a good view around 

the entire vessel. During daytime, the 

PSVOs will scan the area around the 

vessel systematically with reticle 

binoculars (e.g., 7 × 50 Fujinon), Big-eye 

binoculars (25 × 150), and with the 

naked eye. During darkness, night 

vision devices (NVDs) will be available 

(ITT F500 Series Generation 3 

binocular-image intensifier or 

equivalent), when required. Laser rangefinding binoculars (Leica LRF 1200 laser 

rangefinder or equivalent) will be 

available to assist with distance 

estimation. Those are useful in training 

observers to estimate distances visually, 

but are generally not useful in 

measuring distances to animals directly; 

that is done primarily with the reticles 

in the binoculars. 

Passive Acoustic Monitoring 

Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) 

will complement the visual monitoring 

program, when practicable. Visual 

monitoring typically is not effective 

during periods of poor visibility or at 

night, and even with good visibility, is 

unable to detect marine mammals when 

they are below the surface or beyond 

visual range. 

Besides the three PSVOs, an 

additional acoustic Protected Species 

Observer (PSO) with primary 

responsibility for PAM will also be 

aboard the vessel. L–DEO can use 

acoustical monitoring in addition to 

visual observations to improve 

detection, identification, and 

localization of cetaceans. The acoustic 

monitoring will serve to alert visual 

observers (if on duty) when vocalizing 

cetaceans are detected. It is only useful 

when marine mammals call, but it can 

be effective either by day or by night, 

and does not depend on good visibility. 

It will be monitored in real time so that 

the visual observers can be advised 

when cetaceans are detected. When 

bearings (primary and mirror-image) to 

calling cetacean(s) are determined, the 

bearings will be relayed to the visual 

observer to help him/her sight the 

calling animal(s). 

The PAM system consists of hardware 

(i.e., hydrophones) and software. The 

‘‘wet end’’ of the system consists of a 

towed hydrophone array that is 

connected to the vessel by a cable. The 

lead in from the hydrophone array is 

approximately 400 m (1,312 ft) long, the 

active section of the array is 

approximately 56 m (184 ft) long, and 

the hydrophone array is typically towed 

at depths of less than 20 m (66 ft). 

The deck cable is connected from the 

array to a computer in the laboratory 

where signal conditioning and 

processing takes place. The digitized 

signal is then sent to the main 

laboratory, where the acoustic PSO 

monitors the system. 

The acoustic PSO will monitor the 

towed hydrophones 24 h per day during 

airgun operations and during most 

periods when the Langseth is underway 

while the airguns are not operating. 

However, PAM may not be possible if 

damage occurs to both the primary and 

back-up hydrophone the arrays during 

operations. The primary PAM streamer 

on the Langseth is a digital hydrophone 

streamer. Should the digital streamer 

fail, back-up systems should include an 

analog spare streamer and a hullVerDate Mar<15>2010 18:00 Apr 11, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\12APN1.SGM 12APN1

srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
20332 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 

mounted hydrophone. Every effort 

would be made to have a working PAM 

system during the cruise. In the unlikely 

event that all three of these systems 

were to fail, L–DEO would continue 

science acquisition with the visualbased observer program. The PAM 

system is a supplementary enhancement 

to the visual monitoring program. If 

weather conditions were to prevent the 

use of PAM then conditions would also 

likely prevent the use of the airgun 

array. 

One acoustic PSO will monitor the 

acoustic detection system at any one 

time, by listening to the signals from 

two channels via headphones and/or 

speakers and watching the real-time 

spectrographic display for frequency 

ranges produced by cetaceans. Acoustic 

PSOs monitoring the acoustical data 

will be on shift for one to six hours at 

a time. Besides the PSVO, an additional 

acoustic PSO with primary 

responsibility for PAM will also be 

aboard the source vessel. All PSVOs are 

expected to rotate through the PAM 

position, although the most experienced 

with acoustics will be on PAM duty 

more frequently. 

When a vocalization is detected while 

visual observations are in progress, the 

acoustic PSO will contact the visual 

PSVO immediately, to alert him/her to 

the presence of cetaceans (if they have 

not already been seen), and to allow a 

power down or shut down to be 

initiated, if required. The information 

regarding the call will be entered into a 

database. Data entry will include an 

acoustic encounter identification 

number, whether it was linked with a 

visual sighting, date, time when first 

and last heard and whenever any 

additional information was recorded, 

position and water depth when first 

detected, bearing if determinable, 

species or species group (e.g., 

unidentified dolphin, sperm whale), 

types and nature of sounds heard (e.g., 

clicks, continuous, sporadic, whistles, 

creaks, burst pulses, strength of signal, 

etc.), and any other notable information. 

The acoustic detection can also be 

recorded for further analysis. 

PSVO Data and Documentation 

PSVOs will record data to estimate 

the numbers of marine mammals 

exposed to various received sound 

levels and to document apparent 

disturbance reactions or lack thereof. 

Data will be used to estimate numbers 

of animals potentially ‘taken’ by 

harassment (as defined in the MMPA). 

They will also provide information 

needed to order a power down or shut 

down of the airguns when a marine 

mammal is within or near the EZ. 

When a sighting is made, the 

following information about the sighting 

will be recorded: 

1. Species, group size, age/size/sex 

categories (if determinable), behavior 

when first sighted and after initial 

sighting, heading (if consistent), bearing 

and distance from seismic vessel, 

sighting cue, apparent reaction to the 

airguns or vessel (e.g., none, avoidance, 

approach, paralleling, etc.), and 

behavioral pace. 

2. Time, location, heading, speed, 

activity of the vessel, sea state, 

visibility, and sun glare. 

The data listed under (2) will also be 

recorded at the start and end of each 

observation watch, and during a watch 

whenever there is a change in one or 

more of the variables. 

All observations and power downs or 

shut downs will be recorded in a 

standardized format. Data will be 

entered into an electronic database. The 

accuracy of the data entry will be 

verified by computerized data validity 

checks as the data are entered and by 

subsequent manual checking of the 

database. These procedures will allow 

initial summaries of data to be prepared 

during and shortly after the field 

program, and will facilitate transfer of 

the data to statistical, graphical, and 

other programs for further processing 

and archiving. 

Results from the vessel-based 

observations will provide: 

1. The basis for real-time mitigation 

(airgun power down or shut down). 

2. Information needed to estimate the 

number of marine mammals potentially 

taken by harassment, which must be 

reported to NMFS. 

3. Data on the occurrence, 

distribution, and activities of marine 

mammals and turtles in the area where 

the seismic study is conducted. 

4. Information to compare the 

distance and distribution of marine 

mammals and turtles relative to the 

source vessel at times with and without 

seismic activity. 

5. Data on the behavior and 

movement patterns of marine mammals 

seen at times with and without seismic 

activity. 

L–DEO will submit a report to NMFS 

and NSF within 90 days after the end of 

the cruise. The report will describe the 

operations that were conducted and 

sightings of marine mammals and 

turtles near the operations. The report 

will provide full documentation of 

methods, results, and interpretation 

pertaining to all monitoring. The 90-day 

report will summarize the dates and 

locations of seismic operations, and all 

marine mammal sightings (dates, times, 

locations, activities, associated seismic 

survey activities). The report will also 

include estimates of the number and 

nature of exposures that could result in 

‘‘takes’’ of marine mammals by 

harassment or in other ways. 

L–DEO will report all injured or dead 

marine mammals (regardless of cause) to 

NMFS as soon as practicable. The report 

should include the species or 

description of the animal, the condition 

of the animal, location, time first found, 

observed behaviors (if alive) and photo 

or video, if available. 

Estimated Take by Incidental 

Harassment 

Except with respect to certain 

activities not pertinent here, the MMPA 

defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: 

any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance 

which (i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 

[Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential 

to disturb a marine mammal or marine 

mammal stock in the wild by causing 

disruption of behavioral patterns, including, 

but not limited to, migration, breathing, 

nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

[Level B harassment]. 

Only take by Level B harassment is 

anticipated and authorized as a result of 

the marine geophysical survey off Costa 

Rica. Acoustic stimuli (i.e., increased 

underwater sound) generated during the 

operation of the seismic airgun array, 

may have the potential to cause marine 

mammals in the survey area to be 

exposed to sounds at or greater than 160 

decibels (dB) or cause temporary, shortterm changes in behavior. There is no 

evidence that the planned activities are 

likely to result in injury, serious injury 

or mortality to marine mammals within 

the specified geographic area for which 

NMFS has issued the IHA. Take by 

injury, serious injury or mortality is 

thus neither anticipated nor authorized. 

NMFS has determined that the he 

required mitigation and monitoring 

measures will minimize any potential 

risk for injury, serious injury or 

mortality. 

NMFS included an in-depth 

discussion of the methods used to 

calculate the densities of the marine 

mammals in the area of the seismic 

survey in a previous notice for the 

proposed IHA (76 FR 6430, February 4, 

2011). A summary is included here. 

L–DEO’s estimates are based on a 

consideration of the number of marine 

mammals that could be disturbed 

appreciably by operations with the 18- 

airgun subarray to be used during 

approximately 2,145 km (1,333 mi) of 

survey lines with an additional 365 km 

(227 mi) of turns offshore Costa Rica. 

Density data on the marine mammal 

species in the proposed survey area are 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 20333 

available from extensive ship-based 

surveys for marine mammals in the ETP 

conducted by NMFS’ Southwest 

Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC). L– 

DEO used densities from two sources: 

(1) The SWFSC’s habitat models that 

predict density for 15 cetacean species 

in the ETP; and (2) densities from the 

surveys conducted during summer and 

fall 1986–1996, as summarized by 

Ferguson and Barlow (2001, 2003) for 

species sighted in SWFSC surveys 

whose sample sizes were too small to 

model density. 

For the predictive models, the SWFSC 

developed habitat modeling as a method 

to estimate cetacean densities on a finer 

spatial scale compared to traditional 

line-transect analyses by using a 

continuous function of habitat variables, 

e.g., sea surface temperature, depth, 

distance from shore, and prey density 

(Barlow et al., 2009). The SWFSC 

incorporated the models into a webbased Geographic Information System 

(GIS) developed by Duke University’s 

Department of Defense Strategic 

Environmental Research and 

Development Program (SERDP) team 

and L–DEO used the GIS to obtain mean 

and maximum densities for 11 cetacean 

species in the model in the proposed 

survey area. 

L–DEO also used the densities 

calculated from Ferguson and Barlow 

(2003) for 5° x 5° blocks that include the 

proposed survey area (Block 138) and 

blocks adjacent to 138 that include 

coastal waters: Blocks 119, 137, 138, 

139, 158, and 159. Those blocks 

included 18,385 km (11,423 mi) of 

survey effort in Beaufort sea states 0–5, 

and 3,899 square kilometers (km2) 

(1,505 square miles (mi2)) of survey 

effort in Beaufort sea states 0–2. L–DEO 

also obtained densities for an additional 

seven species that were sighted in one 

or more of those blocks. 

For two endangered species for which 

there are only unconfirmed sightings in 

the region, the sei and fin whales, L– 

DEO assigned low density values (equal 

to the density of the species with the 

lowest calculated density). The false 

killer whale has been sighted near the 

survey area but not in the seven blocks 

of Ferguson and Barlow (2003), so it was 

also assigned the same low density 

value. 

Oceanographic conditions, including 

occasional El Nin ̃ o and La Nin ̃ a events, 

influence the distribution and numbers 

of marine mammals present in the ETP, 

resulting in considerable year-to-year 

variation in the distribution and 

abundance of many marine mammal 

species (e.g., Escorza-Trevino, 2009). 

Thus, for some species the densities 

derived from recent surveys may not be 

representative of the densities that will 

be encountered during the proposed 

seismic survey. 

L–DEO’s estimates of exposures to 

various sound levels assume that the 

proposed surveys will be completed. As 

is typical during offshore ship surveys, 

inclement weather and equipment 

malfunctions are likely to cause delays 

and may limit the number of useful linekilometers of seismic operations that 

can be undertaken. L–DEO has included 

an additional 25 percent of line 

transects to account for mission 

uncertainty and follow a precautionary 

approach. Furthermore, any marine 

mammal sightings within or near the 

designated exclusion zones will result 

in the power down or shut down of 

seismic operations as a mitigation 

measure. Thus, the following estimates 

of the numbers of marine mammals 

potentially exposed to sound levels of 

160 dB re: 1 μPa are precautionary and 

probably overestimate the actual 

numbers of marine mammals that might 

be involved. These estimates also 

assume that there will be no weather, 

equipment, or mitigation delays, which 

is highly unlikely. 

L–DEO estimated the number of 

different individuals that may be 

exposed to airgun sounds with received 

levels greater than or equal to 160 dB re: 

1 μPa on one or more occasions by 

considering the total marine area that 

would be within the 160-dB radius 

around the operating airgun array on at 

least one occasion and the expected 

density of marine mammals. The 

number of possible exposures 

(including repeated exposures of the 

same individuals) can be estimated by 

considering the total marine area that 

would be within the 160-dB radius 

around the operating airguns, including 

areas of overlap. In the planned survey, 

the seismic lines are parallel and in 

close proximity; thus individuals could 

be exposed on two or more occasions. 

The area including overlap is 31.9 times 

the area excluding overlap. Thus a 

marine mammal that stayed in the 

survey area during the entire survey 

could be exposed 32 times (14 times), 

on average. Given the pattern of the 

seismic lines, the interval between 

exposures of a stationary animal would 

be approximately 18 hours. Moreover, it 

is unlikely that a particular animal 

would stay in the area during the entire 

survey. The number of different 

individuals potentially exposed to 

received levels greater than or equal to 

160 re: 1 μPa was calculated by 

multiplying: 

(1) The expected species density, 

either ‘‘mean’’ (i.e., best estimate) or 

‘‘maximum’’, times 

(2) The anticipated area to be 

ensonified to that level during airgun 

operations excluding overlap, which is 

approximately 3,225 km2 (2,003 mi2). 

The area expected to be ensonified 

was determined by entering the planned 

survey lines into a MapInfo Geographic 

Information System (GIS), using the GIS 

to identify the relevant areas by 

‘‘drawing’’ the applicable 160-dB buffer 

(see Table 1) around each seismic line, 

and then calculating the total area 

within the buffers. Areas of overlap 

were included only once when 

estimating the number of individuals 

exposed. Applying this approach, 

approximately 3,225 km2 (1,245 mi2) 

would be within the 160-dB isopleth on 

one or more occasions during the 

survey. Because this approach does not 

allow for turnover in the mammal 

populations in the study area during the 

course of the survey, the actual number 

of individuals exposed could be 

underestimated. However, the approach 

assumes that no cetaceans will move 

away from or toward the trackline as the 

Langseth approaches in response to 

increasing sound levels prior to the time 

the levels reach 160 dB, which will 

result in overestimates for those species 

known to avoid seismic vessels. 

The total ‘maximum estimate’ of the 

number of individual cetaceans that 

could be exposed to seismic sounds 

with received levels greater than or 

equal to 160 dB re: 1 μPa during the 

proposed survey is 7,078 (see Table 2). 

That total includes 38 species of baleen 

whales, four of which are endangered 

including: 18 humpback whales or 1.2 

percent of the regional population; one 

sei whale, one fin whale (less than 0.01 

percent); and eight blue whales (0.6 

percent). In addition, 40 sperm whales 

(also listed as endangered under the 

ESA) or 0.15 percent of the regional 

population could be exposed during the 

survey, and 19 beaked whales. Most (97 

percent) of the cetaceans that could be 

potentially exposed are delphinids (e.g., 

short-beaked common, striped, 

pantropical spotted, striped and spinner 

dolphins) with maximum estimates 

ranging from two to 3,077 exposed to 

levels greater than or equal to 160 dB re: 

1 μPa. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
20334 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 

TABLE 2—ESTIMATES OF THE POSSIBLE NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO DIFFERENT SOUND LEVELS

DURING L–DEO’S SEISMIC SURVEY IN THE ETP DURING APRIL–JUNE, 2011 

Species 

Estimated number 

of individuals exposed to sound 

levels 

≥ 160 dB re: 1 

μPa 

(maximum) 

Approximate 

percent of 

regional population 

(maximum) 

Authorized take 

Humpback whale ................................................................................................. 18 1.29% ........................ 18 

Bryde’s whale ...................................................................................................... 10 0.08% ........................ 10 

Sei whale ............................................................................................................. 0 Not Available ............. 0 

Fin whale ............................................................................................................. 0 0.04% ........................ 0 

Blue whale ........................................................................................................... 8 0.57% ........................ 8 

Sperm whale ........................................................................................................ 40 0.15% ........................ 40 

Pygmy/Dwarf sperm whale .................................................................................. 0 0.00% ........................ 0 

Cuvier’s beaked whale ........................................................................................ 15 0.08% ........................ 15 

Mesoplodon spp. ................................................................................................. 4 0.01% ........................ 4 

Rough-toothed dolphin ........................................................................................ 45 0.04% ........................ 45 

Bottlenose dolphin ............................................................................................... 366 0.11% ........................ 366 

Pantropical spotted dolphin ................................................................................. 954 0.06% ........................ 954 

Spinner dolphin .................................................................................................... 1,468 0.08% ........................ 1,468 

Striped dolphin ..................................................................................................... 622 0.06% ........................ 622 

Short-beaked common dolphin ............................................................................ 3,077 0.10% ........................ 3,077 

Risso’s dolphin ..................................................................................................... 91 0.08% ........................ 91 

Melon-headed whale ........................................................................................... 233 0.57% ........................ 2 258 

Pygmy killer whale ............................................................................................... 9 0.08% ........................ 2 30 

False killer whale ................................................................................................. 0 0.00% ........................ 0 

Killer whale .......................................................................................................... 2 0.06% ........................ 52 

Short-finned pilot whale ....................................................................................... 114 0.02% ........................ 114 

1 Maximum estimates are based on densities from Table 3 in L–DEO’s application. Takes are not anticipated for the minke whale and Fraser’s 

dolphin. 2 Requested Take Authorization increased to mean group size in the ETP for baleen whales (Jackson et al. 2008) and delphinids (Ferguson et 

al. 2006). 

Negligible Impact and Small Numbers 

Analysis and Determination 

NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ 

in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘* * * an impact 

resulting from the specified activity that 

cannot be reasonably expected to, and is 

not reasonably likely to, adversely affect 

the species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’ 

In making a negligible impact 

determination, NMFS considers: 

(1) The number of anticipated 

mortalities; 

(2) The number and nature of 

anticipated injuries; 

(3) The number, nature, and intensity, 

and duration of Level B harassment; and 

(4) The context in which the takes 

occur. 

For reasons stated previously in this 

document, and in the proposed notice of 

an IHA (76 FR 6430, February 4, 2011), 

the specified activities associated with 

the survey are not likely to cause 

temporary threshold shift, permanent 

threshold shift, or other non-auditory 

injury, serious injury, or death to 

affected marine mammals because: 

(1) The likelihood that, given 

sufficient notice through relatively slow 

ship speed, marine mammals are 

expected to move away from a noise 

source that is annoying prior to its 

becoming potentially injurious; 

(2) The potential for temporary or 

permanent hearing impairment is very 

low and would likely be avoided 

through the incorporation of the 

proposed monitoring and mitigation 

measures; 

(3) The fact that cetaceans would have 

to be closer than 450 m (1,476 ft) in 

deep water when the 18-airgun subarray 

is in use at a 7 m (23 ft)) tow depth from 

the vessel to be exposed to levels of 

sound believed to have even a minimal 

chance of causing permanent threshold 

shift; 

(4) The fact that marine mammals 

would have to be closer than 3,800 m 

(2.4 mi) in deep water when the full 

array is in use at a 7 m (23 ft) tow depth 

from the vessel to be exposed to levels 

of sound (160 dB) believed to have even 

a minimal chance at causing hearing 

impairment; and 

(5) The likelihood that marine 

mammal detection ability by trained 

observers is high at close proximity 

from the vessel. 

No injuries, serious injuries or 

mortalities are anticipated to occur as a 

result of the L–DEO’s planned marine 

geophysical survey, and none are 

authorized. Only short-term behavioral 

disturbance is anticipated to occur due 

to the brief and sporadic duration of the 

survey activities. Since no injury, 

serious injury or mortality is expected to 

occur, and due to the limited nature, 

degree, and context of behavioral 

harassment anticipated, the activity is 

not expected to impact rates of 

recruitment or survival for any affected 

stock or species. 

While the number of marine 

mammals potentially incidentally 

harassed would depend on the 

distribution and abundance of marine 

mammals in the vicinity of the survey 

activity, the number of potential Level 

B incidental harassment takings (see 

Table 2) is estimated to be small, less 

than two percent of any of the estimated 

population sizes based on the data 

disclosed in Table 2 of this notice. 

Based on the analysis contained in 

this notice of the likely effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

and their habitat, and taking into 

consideration the implementation of the 

mitigation and monitoring measures, 

NMFS finds that the total amount of 

take by Level B harassment authorized 

by the IHA issued for L–DEO’s seismic 

survey activities described in this notice 

within the ETP off Costa Rica will have 

a negligible impact on the affected 

species or stocks of marine mammals; 

and that impacts to affected species or 

stocks of marine mammals have been 

mitigated to the lowest level practicable. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 12, 2011 / Notices 20335 

Impact on Availability of Affected 

Species or Stock for Taking for 

Subsistence Uses 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of marine mammals in the survey area. 

Thus, the provision requiring that the 

activity not have an unmitigable impact 

on the availability of the affected 

species or stock of marine mammals for 

subsistence uses is not implicated for 

this specified activity. 

Endangered Species Act 

Of the species of marine mammals 

that may occur in the proposed survey 

area, five are listed as endangered under 

the ESA, including the humpback, sei, 

fin, blue, and sperm whales. Under 

section 7 of the ESA, NSF had initiated 

formal consultation with the NMFS, 

Office of Protected Resources, 

Endangered Species Division, on this 

seismic survey. NMFS’ Office of 

Protected Resources, Permits, 

Conservation and Education Division, 

also initiated formal consultation under 

section 7 of the ESA with NMFS’ Office 

of Protected Resources, Endangered 

Species Division, to obtain a Biological 

Opinion (BiOp) evaluating the effects of 

issuing the IHA on threatened and 

endangered marine mammals and, if 

appropriate, authorizing incidental take. 

April, 2011, NMFS issued a BiOp and 

concluded that the action and issuance 

of the IHA are not likely to jeopardize 

the continued existence of the 

humpback, sei, fin, blue, and sperm 

whales and leatherback (Dermochelys 

coriacea), green (Chelonia mydas), 

loggerhead (Caretta caretta), hawksbill 

(Eretmochelys imbricata), and olive 

ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) sea 

turtles. The BiOp also concluded that 

designated critical habitat for these 

species does not occur in the action area 

and would not be affected by the survey. 

L–DEO must comply with the Relevant 

Terms and Conditions of the Incidental 

Take Statement corresponding to NMFS’ 

BiOp issued to both NSF and NMFS’ 

Office of Protected Resources. L–DEO 

must also comply with the mitigation 

and monitoring requirements included 

in the IHA in order to be exempt under 

the Incidental Take Statement (ITS) in 

the BiOp from the prohibition on take 

of listed endangered marine mammals 

species otherwise prohibited by Section 

9 of the ESA. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

To meet NMFS’ NEPA requirements 

for the issuance of an IHA to L–DEO, 

NMFS has prepared an Environmental 

Assessment (EA) titled ‘‘Issuance of an 

Incidental Harassment Authorization to 

the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory 

to Take Marine Mammals by 

Harassment Incidental to a Marine 

Geophysical Survey on the Shatsky Rise 

in the Northwest Pacific Ocean, JulySeptember 2010.’’ This EA incorporates 

the NSF’s Environmental Analysis 

Pursuant To Executive Order 12114 

(NSF, 2010) and an associated report 

(Report) prepared by LGL Limited 

Environmental Research Associates 

(LGL) for NSF, titled, ‘‘Environmental 

Assessment of a Marine Geophysical 

Survey by the R/V Marcus G. Langseth 

on the Shatsky Rise in the Northwest 

Pacific Ocean, July—September, 2010, 

(LGL, 2010)’’ by reference pursuant to 40 

CFR 1502.21 and NOAA Administrative 

Order (NAO) 216–6 § 5.09(d). NMFS 

provided relevant environmental 

information to the public through the 

notice published on February 4, 2011, 

and has considered public comments 

received in response prior to finalizing 

its EA and deciding whether or not to 

issue a Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI). NMFS’ EA evaluated the 

impacts on the human environment of 

NMFS’ authorization of incidental Level 

B harassment resulting from the 

specified activity in the specified 

geographic region. NMFS has concluded 

that issuance of an IHA would not 

significantly affect the quality of the 

human environment and has issued a 

FONSI. Because the NMFS has made a 

FONSI, it is not necessary to prepare an 

environmental impact statement for the 

issuance of an IHA to L–DEO for this 

activity. The EA and FONSI for this 

activity are available upon request (see 

ADDRESSES). 

Authorization 

NMFS has issued an IHA to L–DEO 

for the take by Level B harassment of 

small numbers of marine incidental to 

conducting a marine geophysical survey 

in the eastern tropical Pacific (ETP) 

Ocean off Costa Rica, April through 

June, 2011, provided the previously 

mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and 

reporting requirements are incorporated. 

Dated: April 6, 2011. 

James H. Lecky, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8734 Filed 4–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

Cancellation Notice for the Advisory 

Council on Dependents’ Education 

Meeting 

AGENCY: Department of Defense 

Education Activity (DoDEA), DoD. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The meeting of the 

Department of Defense Advisory 

Council on Dependents’ Education 

announced on March 1, 2011 (76 FR 

11211) under the provisions of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act of 

1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), 

and scheduled to occur on Friday, April 

22, 2011, 7 a.m. to 12 p.m. Japan 

Standard Time has been cancelled. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Steve Schrankel at (703) 588–3109 or 

Steve.Schrankel@hq.dodea.edu. 

Dated: April 6, 2011. 

Morgan F. Park, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8634 Filed 4–11–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

Meeting of the Strategic Environmental 

Research and Development Program, 

Scientific Advisory Board 

AGENCY: Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This Notice is published in 

accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. 

L. 92–463). The topic of the meeting on 

June 16, 2011 is to review continuing 

research and development projects 

requesting Strategic Environmental 

Research and Development Program 

funds in excess of $1M. This meeting is 

open to the public. Any interested 

person may attend, appear before, or file 

statements with the Scientific Advisory 

Board at the time and in the manner 

permitted by the Board. 

DATES: Thursday, June 16, 2011 from 8 

a.m. to 2:30 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: SpringHill Suites by 

Marriott, Pamlico Room, 300 Hotel 

Drive, New Bern, NC 28562. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Jonathan Bunger, SERDP Office, 901 

North Stuart Street, Suite 303, 

Arlington, VA or by telephone at (703) 

696–2126. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES