37404 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 216 

[Docket No. 070703226–7226–01; I.D. 

062206A] 

RIN 0648–AT80 

Taking and Importing Marine 

Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals 

Incidental to the U.S. Navy Operations 

of Surveillance Towed Array Sensor 

System Low Frequency Active Sonar 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request 

from the U.S. Navy for an authorization 

under the Marine Mammal Protection 

Act (MMPA) to take marine mammals, 

by harassment, incidental to conducting 

operations of Surveillance Towed Array 

Sensor System (SURTASS) Low 

Frequency Active (LFA) sonar from 

August 16, 2007, through August 15, 

2012. By this document, NMFS is 

proposing regulations to govern that 

take. In order to issue Letters of 

Authorization (LOAs) and final 

regulations governing the take, NMFS 

must determine that the taking will have 

a negligible impact on the affected 

species or stocks of marine mammals. 

NMFS regulations must set forth the 

permissible methods of take and other 

means of effecting the least practicable 

adverse impact on the affected species 

or stocks of marine mammals and their 

habitat. NMFS invites comment on the 

proposed regulations and findings. 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received by July 24, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the application and proposed rule, 

using the identifier 062206A, by any of 

the following methods: 

• E-mail: PR1.062306A@noaa.gov. 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

• Hand-delivery or mailing of paper, 

disk, or CD-ROM comments should be 

addressed to: P. Michael Payne, Chief, 

Permits, Conservation and Education 

Division, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 

East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 

20910–3225. 

A copy of the application, containing 

a list of references used in this 

document, and other documents cited 

herein, may be obtained by writing to 

the above address, by telephoning one 

of the contacts listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT, or at: http:// 

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

incidental.htm. 

A copy of the Navy’s Final 

Supplemental Environmental Impact 

Statement (Final SEIS) and the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (Final 

EIS) can be downloaded at: http:// 

www.surtass-lfa-eis.com. Documents 

cited in this proposed rule may also be 

viewed, by appointment, during regular 

business hours at this address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kenneth Hollingshead, NMFS, at 301– 

713–2289, ext 128. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361 

et seq.) (MMPA) directs the Secretary of 

Commerce (Secretary) to allow, upon 

request, the incidental, but not 

intentional taking of marine mammals 

by U.S. citizens who engage in a 

military readiness activity if certain 

findings are made and regulations are 

issued. 

An authorization may be granted for 

periods of 5 years or less if the Secretary 

finds that the total taking will have a 

negligible impact on the affected species 

or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of the 

species or stock(s) for certain 

subsistence uses. The Secretary must 

also issue regulations setting forth the 

permissible methods of taking and other 

means of effecting the least practicable 

adverse impact, including a 

consideration of personnel safety, the 

practicality of implementation of any 

mitigation, and the impact on the 

effectiveness of the subject military 

readiness activity, and the requirements 

pertaining to the monitoring and 

reporting of such taking. NMFS 

authorizes the incidental take through 

‘‘letters of authorization’’ (LOAs) (50 

CFR 216.106) 

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.’’ For the 

purposes of ‘‘military readiness 

activities’’ harassment is defined 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 such behavioral 

patterns are abandoned or significantly 

altered [Level B harassment]. 

The term ‘‘military readiness activity’’ 

is defined in Public Law 107–314 (16 

U.S.C. 703 note) to include all training 

and operations of the Armed Forces that 

relate to combat; and the adequate and 

realistic testing of military equipment, 

vehicles, weapons and sensors for 

proper operation and suitability for 

combat use. The term expressly does not 

include the routine operation of 

installation operating support functions, 

such as military offices, military 

exchanges, commissaries, water 

treatment facilities, storage facilities, 

schools, housing, motor pools, 

laundries, morale, welfare and 

recreation activities, shops, and mess 

halls; the operation of industrial 

activities; or the construction or 

demolition of facilities used for a 

military readiness activity. 

Summary of Request 

On May 12, 2006, NMFS received an 

application from the U.S. Navy 

requesting an authorization under 

section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA for 

the taking of marine mammals 

incidental to deploying the SURTASS 

LFA sonar system for military readiness 

activities to include training, testing and 

routine military operations within the 

world’s oceans (except for Arctic and 

Antarctic waters, coastal regions as 

specified in this proposed rule, and 

offshore biologically important areas 

(OBIAs)) for a period of time not to 

exceed 5 years. According to the Navy 

application, SURTASS LFA sonar 

would operate a maximum of 4 ship 

systems in areas of the Pacific, Atlantic, 

and Indian oceans and the 

Mediterranean Sea in which SURTASS 

LFA sonar could potentially operate. 

The purpose of SURTASS LFA sonar 

is to provide the Navy with a reliable 

and dependable system for long-range 

detection of quieter, harder-to-find 

submarines. Low-frequency (LF) sound 

travels in seawater for greater distances 

than higher frequency sound used by 

most other active sonars. According to 

the Navy, the SURTASS LFA sonar 

system would meet the Navy’s need for 

improved detection and tracking of 

new-generation submarines at a longer 

range. This would maximize the 

opportunity for U.S. armed forces to 

safely react to, and defend against, 

potential submarine threats while 

remaining a safe distance beyond a 

submarine’s effective weapons range. 

NMFS and the Navy have determined 

that the Navy’s SURTASS LFA sonar 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 37405 

testing and training operations 

constitute a military readiness activity 

because those activities constitute 

‘‘training and operations of the Armed 

Forces that relate to combat’’ and 

constitute ‘‘adequate and realistic 

testing of military equipment, vehicles, 

weapons and sensors for proper 

operation and suitability for combat 

use.’’

NMFS’ current regulations governing 

takings incidental to SURTASS LFA 

sonar activities and the current LOA 

expire on August 16, 2007. 

On September 28, 2006 (71 FR 56965), 

NMFS published a Notice of Receipt of 

Application on the U.S. Navy 

application and invited interested 

persons to submit comments, 

information, and suggestions concerning 

the application and the structure and 

contents of regulations. These 

comments were considered in the 

development of this proposed rule. 

Prior Litigation, Involving LFA Sonar 

On August 7, 2002, the Natural 

Resources Defense Council, the U.S. 

Humane Society and four other 

plaintiffs filed suit against the Navy and 

NMFS over SURTASS LFA sonar use 

and permitting. The U.S. District Court 

for the Northern District of California 

(Court) issued its Opinion and Order on 

the parties’ motions for summary 

judgment in the SURTASS LFA 

litigation on August 26, 2003. The Court 

found deficiencies in Navy and NMFS 

compliance with the MMPA, 

Endangered Species Act (ESA), and 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA). The Court determined that an 

injunction was warranted but did not 

order a complete ban on the use of 

SURTASS LFA sonar. Specifically, the 

Court found that a total ban on the 

employment of SURTASS LFA would 

interfere with the Navy’s ability to 

ensure military readiness and to protect 

those serving in the military against the 

threat posed by hostile submarines. The 

Court directed the parties to meet and 

confer on the scope of a tailored 

permanent injunction, which would 

allow for continued operation of the 

system with additional mitigation 

measures. This mediation session 

occurred on September 25, 2003 in San 

Francisco. On October 14, 2003, the 

Court issued a Stipulation Regarding 

Permanent Injunction for the operations 

of SURTASS LFA sonar from both R/V 

Cory Chouest and USNS IMPECCABLE 

(T-AGOS 23) in stipulated portions of 

the Northwest Pacific/Philippine Sea, 

Sea of Japan, East China Sea, and South 

China Sea with certain year-round and 

seasonal restrictions. On July 7, 2005, 

the Court amended the injunction at 

Navy’s request to expand the potential 

areas of operation based on real-world 

contingencies. The Navy’s Final SEIS 

was prepared in response to the Court’s 

ruling on the motion for preliminary 

injunction, addressing the concerns 

identified by the Court, to provide 

additional information regarding the 

environment that could potentially be 

affected by the SURTASS LFA sonar 

systems, and to provide additional 

information related to mitigation. 

A detailed description of the 

operations is contained in the Navy’s 

application (DON, 2006) and the Final 

SEIS (DON, 2007) which are available 

upon request (see ADDRESSES). 

Description of the Activity 

The SURTASS LFA sonar system is a 

long-range, LF sonar (between 100 and 

500 Hertz (Hz)) that has both active and 

passive components. It does not have to 

rely on detection of noise generated by 

the target. The active component of the 

system is a set of up to 18 LF acoustic 

transmitting source elements (called 

projectors) suspended from a cable 

underneath a ship. The projectors are 

devices that transform electrical energy 

to mechanical energy by setting up 

vibrations, or pressure disturbances, 

with the water to produce the pulse or 

ping. The SURTASS LFA sonar acoustic 

transmission is an omnidirectional (full 

360 degrees) beam in the horizontal. A 

narrow vertical beamwidth can be 

steered above or below the horizontal. 

The source level (SL) of an individual 

projector in the SURTASS LFA sonar 

array is approximately 215 decibels 

(dB), and because of the physics 

involved in beam forming and 

transmission loss processes, the array 

can never have a sound pressure level 

(SPL) higher than the SPL of an 

individual projector. The expected 

water depth at the center of the array is 

400 ft (122 m) and the expected 

minimum water depth at which the 

SURTASS LFA vessel will operate is 

200 m (656.2 ft). 

The typical SURTASS LFA sonar 

signal is not a constant tone, but rather 

a transmission of various signal types 

that vary in frequency and duration 

(including continuous wave (CW) and 

frequency-modulated (FM) signals). A 

complete sequence of sound 

transmissions is referred to by the Navy 

as a ‘‘ping’’ and can last as short as 6 

seconds (sec) to as long as 100 sec, 

normally with no more than 10 sec at 

any single frequency. The time between 

pings is typically from 6 to 15 minutes. 

Average duty cycle (ratio of sound ‘‘on’’

time to total time) is less than 20 

percent; however, the duty cycle, based 

on historical operating parameters, is 

normally 7.5 percent. 

The passive, or listening, component 

of the system is SURTASS, which 

detects returning echoes from 

submerged objects, such as submarines, 

through the use of hydrophones. The 

hydrophones are mounted on a 

horizontal array that is towed behind 

the ship. The SURTASS LFA sonar ship 

maintains a minimum speed of 3.0 

knots (5.6 km/hr; 3.4 mi/hr) in order to 

keep the array deployed. 

Because of uncertainties in the 

world’s political climate, a detailed 

account of future operating locations 

and conditions cannot be predicted. 

However, for analytical purposes, a 

nominal annual deployment schedule 

and operational concept have been 

developed, based on current LFA 

operations since January 2003 and 

projected Fleet requirements. The Navy 

anticipates that a normal SURTASS LFA 

sonar deployment schedule for a single 

vessel would involve about 294 days/ 

year at sea. A normal at-sea mission 

would occur over a 49–day period, with 

40 days of operations and 9 days transit. 

Based on a 7.5–percent duty cycle, the 

system would actually be transmitting 

for a maximum of 72 hours per 49–day 

mission and 432 hours per year for each 

SURTASS LFA sonar system in 

operation. (In actuality however, the 

combined number of transmission hours 

for LFA sonar did not exceed 174 hours 

between August 16, 2002, and August 

15, 2006 (Table 4 in the Navy’s 

Comprehensive Report)). 

Annually, each vessel will be 

expected to spend approximately 54 

days in transit and 240 days performing 

active operations. Between missions, an 

estimated 71 days will be spent in port 

for upkeep and repair. The nominal 

SURTASS LFA Sonar annual and 49–

day deployment schedule for a single 

ship can be seen in Table 2–1 of the 

Final SEIS. 

The two existing operational LFA 

systems are installed on two SURTASS 

vessels: R/V Cory Chouest and USNS 

IMPECCABLE (T-AGOS 23). To meet 

future undersea warfare requirements, 

the Navy is working to develop and 

introduce a compact active system 

deployable from existing, smaller 

SURTASS Swath-P ships. This smaller 

system is known as Compact LFA, or 

CLFA. CLFA consists of smaller, lighterweight source elements than the current 

LFA system, and will be compact 

enough to be installed on the existing 

SURTASS platforms, VICTORIOUS 

Class (T-AGOS 19) vessels. The Navy 

indicates that the operational 

characteristics of the compact system 

are comparable to the existing LFA 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
37406 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

systems as presented in Subchapter 2.1 

of the Final EIS and Final SEIS. 

Consequently, the potential impacts 

from CLFA will be similar to the effects 

from the existing SURTASS LFA 

systems. Three additional CLFA systems 

are planned for installation on T-AGOS 

20, 21, and 22. With the R/V Cory 

Chouest retiring in FY 2008, the Navy 

estimates that there will be two systems 

in FY 2008 and FY 2009, 3 in FY 2010 

and 4 systems in FY 2011 and FY 

20012. At no point are there expected to 

be more than four systems in use, and 

thus this proposed rule analyzes the 

impacts on marine mammals due to the 

deployment of up to three LFA sonar 

systems through FY 2010 and four 

systems in FY 2011 and FY 2012. 

The SURTASS LFA sonar vessel will 

operate independently of, or in 

conjunction with, other naval air, 

surface or submarine assets. The vessel 

will generally travel in straight lines or 

racetrack patterns depending on the 

operational scenario. 

Description of Acoustic Propagation 

The following is a very basic and 

generic description of the propagation of 

LFA sonar signals in the ocean and is 

provided to facilitate understanding of 

this action. However, because the actual 

physics governing the propagation of 

SURTASS LFA sound signals is 

extremely complex and dependent on 

numerous in-situ environmental factors, 

the following is for illustrative purposes 

only. 

In actual SURTASS LFA sonar 

operations, the crew of the SURTASS 

LFA sonar platform will measure 

oceanic conditions (such as sea water 

temperature and salinity versus depth) 

prior to and during transmissions and at 

least every 12 hours, but more 

frequently when meteorological or 

oceanographic conditions change. These 

technicians will then use U.S. Navy 

sonar propagation models to predict 

and/or update sound propagation 

characteristics. The short time periods 

between actual environmental 

observations and the subsequent model 

runs further enhance the accuracy of 

these predictions. Fundamentally, these 

models are used to determine what path 

the LF signal will take as it travels 

through the ocean and how strong the 

sound signal will be at given ranges 

along a particular transmission path. 

Accurately determining the speed at 

which sound travels through the water 

is critical to predicting the path that 

sound will take. The speed of sound in 

seawater varies directly with depth, 

temperature, and salinity. Thus, an 

increase in depth or temperature or, to 

a lesser degree, salinity, will increase 

the speed of sound in seawater. 

However, the oceans are not 

homogeneous, and the contribution of 

each of these individual factors is 

extremely complex and interrelated. 

The physical characteristics that 

determine sound speed change with 

depth, and in the case of temperature 

and salinity, season, geographic 

location, and locally, with time of day. 

After accurately measuring these factors, 

mathematical formulas or models can be 

used to generate a plot of sound speed 

versus water depth. This type of plot is 

generally referred to as a sound speed 

profile (SSP). 

Near the surface (variable within the 

top 1000 ft (305 m)), ocean near-surface 

water mixing results in a fairly constant 

temperature and salinity. Below the 

mixed layer, sea temperature drops 

rapidly in an area referred to as the 

thermocline. In this region, temperature 

influences the SSP, and speed decreases 

with depth because of the large decrease 

in temperature (sound speed decreases 

with decreasing temperature). Finally, 

beneath the thermocline, the 

temperature becomes fairly uniform and 

increasing pressure causes the SSP to 

increase with depth. 

One way to envision sound traveling 

though the sea is to think of the sound 

as ‘‘rays.’’ As these rays travel though 

the sea, their direction of travel changes 

as a result of speed changes, bending, or 

refracting, toward areas of lower speed 

and away from areas of higher speed. 

Depending on environmental 

conditions, refraction can either be 

toward or away from the surface. 

Additionally, the rays can be reflected 

or absorbed when they encounter the 

surface or the bottom. For example, 

under certain environmental conditions, 

near-surface sound rays can repeatedly 

be refracted upward and reflected off 

the surface and thus become trapped in 

a duct. 

Some of the more prevalent acoustic 

propagation paths in the ocean include: 

acoustic ducting; convergence zone 

(CZ); bottom interaction; and shallowwater propagation. 

Acoustic Ducting 

There are two types of acoustic 

ducting: surface ducts and sound 

channels. 

Surface Ducts 

As previously discussed, the top layer 

of the ocean is normally well mixed and 

has relatively constant temperature and 

salinity. Because of the effect of depth 

(pressure), surface layers exhibit a 

slightly positive sound speed gradient 

(that is, sound speed increases with 

depth). Thus, sound transmitted within 

this layer is refracted upward toward 

the surface. If sufficient energy is 

subsequently reflected downward from 

the surface, the sound can become 

‘‘trapped’’ by a series of repeated 

upward refractions and downward 

reflections. Under these conditions, a 

surface duct, or surface channel, is said 

to exist. Sound trapped in a surface duct 

can travel for relatively long distances 

with its maximum range of propagation 

dependent on the specifics of the SSP, 

the frequency of the sound, and the 

reflective characteristics of the surface. 

As a general rule, surface duct 

propagation will improve as the 

temperature uniformity and depth of the 

layer increase. For example, 

transmission is improved when cloudy, 

windy conditions create a well-mixed 

surface layer or in high-latitude 

midwinter conditions where the mixed 

layer extends to several hundred feet 

deep. 

Sound Channels 

Variation of sound speed, or velocity, 

with depth causes sound to travel in 

curved paths. A sound channel is a 

region in the water column where sound 

speed first decreases with depth to a 

minimum value, and then increases. 

Above the depth of minimum value, 

sound is refracted downward; below the 

depth of minimum value, sound is 

refracted upward. Thus, much of the 

sound starting in the channel is trapped, 

and any sound entering the channel 

from outside its boundaries is also 

trapped. This mode of propagation is 

called sound channel propagation. This 

propagation mode experiences the least 

transmission loss along the path, thus 

resulting in long-range transmission. 

At low and middle latitudes, the deep 

sound channel axis varies from 1,970 to 

3,940 ft (600 to 1,200 m) below the 

surface. It is deepest in the subtropics 

and comes to the surface in the high 

latitudes, where sound propagates in the 

surface layer. Because propagating 

sound waves do not interact with either 

the sea surface or seafloor, sound 

propagation in sound channels does not 

attenuate as rapidly as bottom- or 

surface-interacting paths. The most 

common sound channels used by 

SURTASS LFA sonar are convergence 

zones (CZs). 

Convergence Zones 

CZs are special cases of the soundchannel effect. When the surface layer is 

narrow or when sound rays are refracted 

downward, regions are created at or 

near the ocean surface where sound rays 

are focused, resulting in concentrated 

levels of high sounds. The existence of 

CZs depends on the SSP and the depth 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 37407 

of the water. Due to downward 

refraction at shorter ranges, sound rays 

leaving the near-surface region are 

refracted back to the surface because of 

the positive sound speed gradient 

produced by the greater pressure at deep 

ocean depths. These deep-refracted rays 

often become concentrated at or near the 

surface at some distance from the sound 

source through the combined effects of 

downward and upward refraction, thus 

causing a CZ. CZs may exist whenever 

the sound speed at the ocean bottom, or 

at a specific depth, exceeds the sound 

speed at the source depth. Depth excess, 

also called sound speed excess, is the 

difference between the bottom depth 

and the limiting, or critical depth. 

CZs vary in range from approximately 

18 to 36 nautical miles (nm) (33 to 67 

km), depending upon the SSP. The 

width of the CZ is a result of complex 

interrelationships and cannot be 

correlated with any specific factor. In 

practice, however, the width of the CZ 

is usually on the order of 5 to 10 percent 

of the range. For optimum tactical 

performance, CZ propagation of 

SURTASS LFA signals is desired and 

expected in deep open ocean 

conditions. 

Bottom Interaction 

Reflections from the ocean bottom 

and refraction within the bottom can 

extend propagation ranges. For mid- to 

high-level frequency sonars (greater 

than 1,000 Hz), only minimal energy 

enters into the bottom; thus reflection is 

the predominant mechanism for energy 

return. However, at low frequencies, 

such as those used by the SURTASS 

LFA sonar source, significant sound 

energy can penetrate the ocean floor, 

and refraction within the seafloor, not 

reflection, dominates the energy return. 

Regardless of the actual transmission 

mode (reflection from the bottom or 

refraction within the bottom), this 

interaction is generally referred to as 

‘‘bottom-bounce’’ transmission. 

Major factors affecting bottom-bounce 

transmission include the sound 

frequency, water depth, angle of 

incidence, bottom composition, and 

bottom roughness. A flat ocean bottom 

produces the greatest accuracy in 

estimating range and bearing in the 

bottom-bounce mode. 

For SURTASS LFA sonar 

transmissions between 100 and 500 Hz, 

bottom interaction would generally 

occur in areas of the ocean where 

depths are between approximately 200 

m (660 ft) (average minimum water 

depth for SURTASS LFA sonar 

deployment) and 2,000 m (6,600 ft). 

Shallow Water Propagation 

In shallow water, propagation is 

usually characterized by multiple 

reflection paths off the sea floor and sea 

surface. Thus, most of the water column 

tends to become ensonified by these 

overlapping reflection paths. As LFA 

signals approach the shoreline, they will 

be affected by shoaling, experiencing 

high transmission losses through bottom 

and surface interactions. Therefore, LFA 

sonar would be less effective in shallow, 

coastal waters. 

In summary, for the SURTASS LFA 

sonar signal in low- and mid-latitudes, 

the dominant propagation paths for LFA 

signals are CZ and bottom interaction (at 

depths <2000 m (6,600 ft)). In highlatitudes, surface ducting provides the 

best propagation. In most open ocean 

water, CZ propagation will be most 

prominent. The SURTASS LFA sonar 

signals will interact with the bottom, 

but due to high bottom and surface 

losses, SURTASS LFA sonar signals will 

not penetrate coastal waters with 

appreciable signal strengths. 

Affected Marine Mammal Species 

In its Final SEIS and Final EIS and 

application, the Navy excluded from 

incidental take consideration marine 

mammal species that do not inhabit the 

areas in which SURTASS LFA sonar 

would operate. Where data were not 

available or were insufficient for one 

species, comparable data for a related 

species were used. Because all species 

of baleen whales produce LF sounds, 

and anatomical evidence strongly 

suggests their inner ears are well 

adapted for LF hearing, all 

balaenopterid species are considered 

sensitive to LF sound and, therefore, at 

risk of harassment or injury from 

exposure to LF sounds. The twelve 

species of baleen whales that may be 

affected by SURTASS LFA sonar are 

blue, fin, minke, Bryde’s, sei, 

humpback, North Atlantic right, North 

Pacific right, southern right, pygmy 

right, bowhead, and gray whales. 

The odontocetes (toothed whales) that 

may be affected because they inhabit the 

deeper, offshore waters where 

SURTASS LFA sonar might operate 

include both the pelagic (oceanic) 

whales and dolphins and those coastal 

species that also occur in deep water 

including harbor porpoise, spectacled 

porpoise, beluga, Stenella spp., Risso’s 

dolphin, rough-toothed dolphin, 

Fraser’s dolphin, northern right-whale 

dolphin, southern right whale dolphin, 

short-beaked common dolphin, longbeaked common dolphin, very longbeaked common dolphin, 

Lagenorhynchus spp., Cephalorhynchus 

spp., bottlenose dolphin, Dall’s 

porpoise, melon-headed whale, beaked 

whales (Berardius spp., Hyperoodon 

spp., Mesoplodon spp., Cuvier’s beaked 

whale, Shepard’s beaked whale, 

Longman’s beaked whale), killer whale, 

false killer whale, pygmy killer whale , 

sperm whale, dwarf and pygmy sperm 

whales, and short-finned and longfinned pilot whales. 

Potentially affected pinnipeds include 

hooded seal, harbor seal, spotted seal, 

ribbon seal, gray seal, elephant seal, 

Hawaiian monk seal, Mediterranean 

monk seal, northern fur seal, southern 

fur seal (Arctocephalus spp.), harp seal, 

Galapagos sea lion, Japanese sea lion, 

Steller sea lion, California sea lion, 

Australian sea lion, New Zealand sea 

lion, and South American sea lion. 

A description of affected marine 

mammal species, their biology, and the 

criteria used to determine those species 

that have the potential for being taken 

by incidental harassment are provided 

and explained in detail in the Navy 

application and Final SEIS and, 

although not repeated here, are 

considered part of the NMFS’

administrative record for this action. 

Additional information is available at 

the following URL: http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. Please 

refer to these documents for specific 

information on marine mammal species. 

Effects on Marine Mammals 

To understand the effects of LF noise 

on marine mammals, one must 

understand the fundamentals of 

underwater sound and how the 

SURTASS LFA sonar operates in the 

marine environment. This description 

was provided earlier in this document 

and also by the Navy in Appendix B to 

the Final EIS. 

The effects of underwater noise on 

marine mammals are highly variable, 

and have been categorized by 

Richardson et al. (1995) as follows: (1) 

The noise may be too weak to be heard 

at the location of the animal (i.e. lower 

than the prevailing ambient noise level, 

the hearing threshold of the animal at 

relevant frequencies, or both); (2) the 

noise may be audible but not strong 

enough to elicit any overt behavioral 

response; (3) the noise may elicit 

behavioral reactions of variable 

conspicuousness and variable relevance 

to the well-being of the animal; these 

can range from subtle effects on 

respiration or other behaviors 

(detectable only by statistical analysis) 

to active avoidance reactions; (4) upon 

repeated exposure, animals may exhibit 

diminishing responsiveness (called 

habituation), or disturbance effects may 

persist (most likely with sounds that are 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
37408 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

highly variable in characteristics, 

unpredictable in occurrence, and 

associated with situations that the 

animal perceives as a threat); (5) any 

human-made noise that is strong enough 

to be heard has the potential to reduce 

(mask) the ability of marine mammals to 

hear natural sounds at similar 

frequencies, including calls from 

conspecifics, echolocation sounds of 

odontocetes, and environmental sounds 

such as surf noise; and (6) very strong 

sounds have the potential to cause 

temporary or permanent reduction in 

hearing sensitivity, also known as 

threshold shift. In terrestrial mammals, 

and presumably marine mammals, 

received sound levels must far exceed 

the animal’s hearing threshold for there 

to be any temporary threshold shift 

(TTS) in its hearing ability. For transient 

sounds, the sound level necessary to 

cause TTS is inversely related to the 

duration of the sound. As described 

later in this document, received sound 

levels must be even higher for there to 

be risk of permanent hearing 

impairment, or permanent threshold 

shift (PTS). Finally, intense acoustic or 

explosive events (not relevant for this 

activity) may cause trauma to tissues 

associated with organs vital for hearing, 

sound production, respiration and other 

functions. This trauma may include 

minor to severe hemorrhage. Severe 

hemorrhage could lead to death. 

The original analysis of potential 

impacts on marine mammals from 

SURTASS LFA sonar was developed by 

the Navy based on the results of a 

literature review; the Navy’s Low 

Frequency Sound Scientific Research 

Program (LFS SRP) (described later in 

this document); and a complex, 

comprehensive program of underwater 

acoustical modeling. 

To assess the potential impacts on 

marine mammals by the SURTASS LFA 

sonar source operating at a given site, it 

was necessary for the Navy to predict 

the sound field that a given marine 

mammal species could be exposed to 

over time. This is a multi-part process 

involving (1) the ability to measure or 

estimate an animal’s location in space 

and time, (2) the ability to measure or 

estimate the three-dimensional sound 

field at these times and locations, (3) the 

integration of these two data sets into 

the Acoustic Integration Model (AIM) to 

estimate the total acoustic exposure for 

each animal in the modeled population, 

(4) beginning the post-AIM analysis, 

converting the resultant cumulative 

exposures for a modeled population into 

an estimate of the risk from a significant 

disturbance of a biologically important 

behavior, and (5) using a risk continuum 

to convert these estimates of behavioral 

risk into an assessment of risk in terms 

of the level of potential biological 

removal. 

In the post-AIM analysis, as 

mentioned in numbers (4) and (5) above, 

a relationship was developed for 

converting the resultant cumulative 

exposures for a modeled population into 

an estimate of the risk to the entire 

population of a significant disruption of 

a biologically important behavior and of 

injury. This process assessed risk in 

relation to received level (RL) and 

repeated exposure. The resultant risk 

continuum is based on the assumption 

that the threshold of risk is variable and 

occurs over a range of conditions rather 

than at a single threshold. Taken 

together, the LFS SRP results, the 

acoustic propagation modeling, and the 

risk assessment provide an estimate of 

potential environmental impacts to 

marine mammals. The results of 4 years 

of monitoring (2002–2006) onboard the 

two SURTASS LFA sonar vessels 

support the use of this methodology. 

The acoustic propagation modeling 

was accomplished using the Navy’s 

standard acoustical performance 

prediction transmission loss modelParabolic Equation (PE) version 3.4. The 

results of this model are the primary 

input to the AIM. AIM was used to 

estimate marine mammal sound 

exposures. It integrates simulated 

movements (including dive patterns) of 

marine mammals, a schedule of 

SURTASS LFA sonar transmissions, and 

the predicted sound field for each 

transmission to estimate acoustic 

exposure during a hypothetical 

SURTASS LFA sonar operation. 

Description of the PE and AIM models, 

including AIM input parameters for 

animal movement, diving behavior, and 

marine mammal distribution, 

abundance, and density, are described 

in detail in the original Navy 

application and the Final EIS (see box, 

page 4.2–11) and are not discussed 

further in this document. 

The same analytical methodology 

utilized in the application for the first 

5–year rule and LOAs was utilized to 

provide reasonable and realistic 

estimates of the potential effects to 

marine mammals specific to the 

potential mission areas as presented in 

the application. Information on how the 

density and stock/abundance estimates 

are derived for the selected mission sites 

is in the Navy’s application. These data 

are derived from current, published 

source documentation, and provide 

general area information for each 

mission area with species-specific 

information on the animals that could 

occur in that area, including estimates 

for their stock abundance and density. 

Although this proposed rule uses the 

same analysis that was used for the 

2002–2007 rule, AIM is continuously 

updated with new marine mammal 

biological data (behavior, distribution, 

abundance and density) whenever new 

information becomes available. It was 

recently independently reviewed by a 

panel of experts in mathematics, 

modeling, acoustics, and marine 

mammalogy convened by NMFS’ Center 

for Independent Experts (CIE). The task 

of the Panel was to evaluate whether 

AIM correctly implements the models 

and data on which it is based; whether 

animal movements are correctly 

implemented; and whether AIM meets 

the Council for Regulatory 

Environmental Monitoring (CREM) 

guidelines. As stated in their Report on 

AIM, the CIE Panel agreed that: (1) AIM 

appears to be correctly implemented; (2) 

the animal movement appears to be 

appropriately modeled; and (3) the 

principles of credible science had been 

addressed during the development of 

AIM and that AIM is a useful and 

credible tool for developing application 

models. A copy of the CIE report is 

available (see ADDRESSES). 

During the analytical process in the 

Final EIS, the Navy developed 31 

acoustic modeling scenarios for the 

major ocean regions. Locations were 

selected by the Navy to represent the 

greatest potential effects for each of the 

three major ocean acoustic regimes 

where SURTASS LFA sonar could 

potentially be used. These acoustic 

regimes were: (1) deep-water 

convergence zone propagation, (2) near 

surface duct propagation, and (3) 

shallow water bottom interaction 

propagation. These sites were selected 

to model the greatest potential for 

effects from the use of SURTASS LFA 

sonar incorporating the following 

factors: (1) closest plausible proximity 

to land (from SURTASS LFA sonar 

operations standpoint), and/or offshore 

biologically important areas (OBIAs) 

where biological densities are higher, 

particularly for animals most likely to 

be affected; (2) acoustic propagation 

conditions that allow minimum 

propagation loss, or transmission loss 

(TL) (i.e., longest acoustic transmission 

ranges); and (3) time of year selected for 

maximum animal abundance. These 

sites represent the upper bound of 

impacts (both in terms of possible 

acoustic propagation conditions, and in 

terms of marine mammal population 

and density) that can be expected from 

operation of the SURTASS LFA sonar 

system. Thus, if SURTASS LFA sonar 

operations are conducted in an area that 

was not acoustically modeled in the 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 37409 

Final EIS, the potential effects would 

most likely be less than those analyzed 

for the most similar site in the analyses. 

The assumptions of the Final EIS are 

still valid and there are no new data to 

contradict the conclusions made in the 

Potential Impacts on Marine Mammals 

(Chapter 4) in the Final EIS. The chapter 

on impacts to marine mammals was 

incorporated by reference into the 

Navy’s Final SEIS. 

LFS SRP 

The goal of the 1997–1998 LFS SRP 

was to demonstrate the avoidance 

reaction of sensitive marine mammal 

species during critical biologically 

important behavior to the low frequency 

underwater sound produced by the LFA 

system. Testing was conducted in three 

phases as summarized here from Clark 

et al. (1999). 

Phase I was conducted in September 

through October 1997. The objective of 

Phase I was to determine whether 

exposure to low frequency sounds 

elicited disturbance reactions from 

feeding blue and fin whales. The goal 

was to characterize how whale reactions 

to the sounds vary, depending on: (1) 

the received level of the sound; (2) 

changes in the received level; and (3) 

whether the system was operating at a 

relatively constant distance or 

approaching the whale. Full and 

reduced LFA source power 

transmissions were used. The highest 

received levels at the animals were 

estimated to be 148 to 155 dB. In 19 

focal animal observations (4 blue and 15 

fin whales), no overt behavioral 

responses were observed. No changes in 

whale distribution could be related to 

LFA sonar operations, and whale the 

distributions correlated with the 

distribution of food. 

Phase II was conducted in January 

1998. The objectives were to quantify 

responses of migrating gray whales to 

low frequency sound signals, compare 

whale responses to different RLs, 

determine whether whales respond 

more strongly to RL, sound gradient, or 

distance from the source, and to 

compare whale avoidance responses to 

an LF source in the center of the 

migration corridor versus in the offshore 

portion of the migration corridor. A 

single source was used to broadcast LFA 

sonar sounds up to 200 dB. Whales 

showed some avoidance responses 

when the source was moored 1 mi (1.8 

km) offshore, in the migration path, but 

returned to their migration path when 

they were a few kilometers from the 

source. When the source was moored 2 

mi (3.7 km) offshore, responses were 

much less, even when the source level 

was increased to 200 dB, to achieve the 

same RL for most whales in the middle 

of the migration corridor. Also, offshore 

whales did not seem to avoid the louder 

offshore source. 

Phase III was conducted from 

February to March 1998. The objectives 

were to assess the potential effects of 

LFA sonar signals on behavior, 

vocalization and movement of 

humpback whales off the Kona coast in 

Hawaii. The maximum exposure levels 

in this phase were as high as 152 dB. 

Approximately half of the whales 

observed visually ceased their song 

during the transmissions, but many of 

them did so while joining a group of 

whales, which is the time that singing 

whales usually stop their songs 

naturally. All singers who interrupted 

their songs were observed to resume 

singing within tens of minutes. The 

analysis of one data set showed that 

whales increased their song lengths 

during LFA sonar transmissions, but a 

second analysis indicated that song 

length changes were more complicated 

and depended on the portion of the song 

that was overlapped by LFA 

transmissions. Overall patterns of singer 

and cow-calf abundance were the same 

throughout the experiments as they had 

been during several years of prior study. 

Risk Analysis 

To determine the potential impacts 

that exposure to LF sound from 

SURTASS LFA sonar operations could 

have on marine mammals, biological 

risk standards were defined by the Navy 

with associated measurement 

parameters. Based on the MMPA, the 

potential for biological risk was defined 

as the probability for injury (Level A) or 

behavioral (Level B) harassment of 

marine mammals. In this analysis, 

behavioral (Level B) harassment is 

defined as a significant disturbance in a 

biologically important behavior (also 

referred to as a biologically significant 

response). NMFS believes that this is 

equivalent to the MMPA definition of 

Level B harassment for military 

readiness activities. The potential for 

biological risk is a function of an 

animal’s exposure to a sound that would 

potentially cause hearing, behavioral, 

psychological or physiological effects. 

The measurement parameters for 

determining exposure were RLs in dB, 

the pulse repetition interval (time 

between pings), and the number of 

pings received. 

Before the biological risk standards 

could be applied to realistic SURTASS 

LFA sonar operational scenarios, two 

factors had to be considered by the 

Navy: (1) how does risk vary with 

repeated sound exposure? and (2) how 

does risk vary with RL? The Navy 

addressed these questions by 

developing a function that translates the 

history of repeated exposures (as 

calculated in the AIM) into an 

equivalent RL for a single exposure with 

a comparable risk. This dual-question 

method is similar to those adopted by 

previous studies of risk to human 

hearing (Richardson et al., 1995; 

Crocker, 1997). 

It is intuitive to assume that effects on 

marine mammals would be greater with 

repeated exposures than for a single 

ping. However, no published data on 

repeated exposures of LF sound on 

marine mammals exist. Based on 

discussions in Richardson et al. (1995) 

and consistent with Crocker (1997), the 

Navy determined that the best scientific 

information available is based on the 

potential for effects of repeated 

exposure on human models. 

The formula L + 5 log10(N) (where L 

= ping level in dB and N is the number 

of pings) defines the single ping 

equivalent (SPE). This formula is 

considered appropriate for assessing the 

risk to a marine mammal of a significant 

disturbance of a biologically important 

behavior from LF sound like SURTASS 

LFA sonar transmissions. 

Behavioral Harassment 

For reasons explained in detail in the 

Final EIS (Section 4.2.5), the Navy 

interpreted the results of the LFS SRP 

support use of unlimited exposure to 

119 dB during an LFA sonar mission as 

the lowest value for risk. Below this 

level, the risk of a biologically 

significant behavioral response from 

marine mammals approaches zero. It is 

important to note that risk varies with 

both received level and number of 

exposures. 

Because the LFS SRP did not 

document a biologically significant 

response at maximum RLs up to 150 dB, 

the Navy determined there was a 2.5–

percent risk of an animal incurring a 

disruption of biologically important 

behavior at a SPL of 150 dB, a 50–

percent risk at 165 dB, and a 95–percent 

risk at 180 dB. For more detailed 

information, see Chapter 4.2.5 of the 

Final EIS and Navy’s Technical Report 

#1 (Navy, 2001). The Navy used this risk 

continuum analysis as an alternative to 

an all-or-nothing use of standard 

thresholds for the onset of behavioral 

change or injury. NMFS has reviewed 

and agrees with this approach. The 

subsequent discussion of risk function 

emphasizes the advantages of using a 

smoothly varying model of biological 

risk in relation to sound exposure. 

These results are analogous to doseresponse curves that are accepted as the 

best practice in disciplines such as 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
37410 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

epidemiology, toxicology, and 

pharmacology. 

Changes in Hearing Sensitivity 

In the previous (2002–2007) rule, 

NMFS and the Navy based their 

estimate of take by injury or the 

significant potential for such take (Level 

A harassment) based on the criterion of 

180 dB. NMFS continues to believe this 

is a scientifically supportable value for 

preventing auditory injury or the 

significant potential for such injury 

(Level A harassment) as it represents a 

value less than where the potential 

onset of a minor TTS in hearing might 

occur based on Schlundt et al. (2000) 

research (see Navy Final Comprehensive 

Report Tables 5 through 8). Also, an SPL 

of 180 dB is considered a scientifically 

supportable level for preventing 

auditory injury because there is general 

scientific agreement with NMFS’

position that TTS is not an injury (i.e., 

does not result in tissue damage), but is 

temporary impairment to hearing (i.e., 

results in an increased elevation or 

decreased sensitivity in hearing) that 

may last for a few minutes to a few days, 

depending upon the level and duration 

of exposure. In addition, there is no 

evidence that TTS would occur in 

marine mammals at an SPL of 180 dB. 

In fact, Schlundt et al. (2000) indicates 

that onset TTS for at least some species 

occurs at significantly higher SPLs. 

Schlundt et al.’s (2000) measurement 

with bottlenose dolphins and belugas at 

1–second signal duration implies that 

the TTS threshold for a 100–second 

signal would be approximately 184 dB 

(Table 1–4, Final EIS). For the 400–Hz 

signal, Schlundt et al. found no TTS at 

193 dB, the highest level of exposure. 

Therefore, NMFS believes that 

establishing onset TTS as the upper 

bound of Level B harassment, but using 

180 dB as the beginning of the zone for 

establishing mitigation measures to 

prevent auditory injury, is warranted by 

the science. 

With three levels of mitigation 

monitoring for detecting marine 

mammals (described later in this 

document), NMFS and the Navy believe 

it is unlikely that any marine mammal 

would be exposed to received levels of 

180 dB before being detected and the 

SURTASS LFA sonar shut down. 

However, because the probability is not 

zero, the Navy has included Level A 

harassment in its authorization request. 

Unlike with behavioral responses, an 

‘‘injury continuum’’ is not necessary 

because of the very low numbers of 

individual marine mammals that could 

potentially experience high received 

sound levels, and the high level of 

effectiveness of the monitoring and 

shutdown protocols. For this action, all 

marine mammals exposed to an SPL of 

180 dB or above are considered to be 

injured even though, the best scientific 

data available indicate a marine 

mammal would need to receive an SPL 

significantly higher than 180 dB to be 

injured. 

When SURTASS LFA sonar transmits, 

there is a boundary that encloses a 

volume of water where received levels 

equal or exceed 180 dB, and a volume 

of water outside this boundary where 

received levels are below 180 dB. In this 

analysis, the 180–dB SPL boundary is 

emphasized because it represents a 

single-ping RL that is a scientifically 

supportable estimate for the potential 

onset of injury. Therefore, the level of 

risk for marine mammals depends on 

their location in relation to SURTASS 

LFA sonar and under this proposed 

rule, a marine mammal would have to 

receive one ping greater than or equal to 

180 dB to be considered to have been 

injured or have the potential to incur an 

injury. 

Although TTS is not considered Level 

A harassment, PTS is considered Level 

A harassment. The onset of PTS for 

marine mammals may be 15–20 dB 

above TTS levels. However, mitigation 

measures, such as mitigation zones and 

shutdown protocols, are proposed 

where there is the potential for a marine 

mammal to incur TTS so as to prevent 

an animal from incurring a PTS. 

Potential for Non-Auditory Injury 

Since the release of the Final EIS, an 

investigation by Cudahy and Ellison 

(2002) hypothesized that the threshold 

for in vivo tissue damage (including 

lung damage and hemorrhaging) from 

LF sound can be on the order of 180 to 

190 dB. Balance and equilibrium could 

be affected, but may not result in injury. 

These effects are based on studies of 

humans. Vestibular (balance and 

equilibrium) function was investigated 

by the Navy during the Diver’s Study 

and the results reported in LFS SRP 

Technical Report 3. Measurable 

performance decrements in vestibular 

function were observed for guinea pigs 

using 160 dB SPL signals at lung 

resonance and 190 dB SPL signals at 

500 Hz. Because guinea pigs are not 

aquatic species, like humans, they are 

not as robust to pressure changes as 

marine mammals and, therefore, are 

likely more susceptible to injury at 

lower SPLs than marine mammals. 

Presently, there is controversy among 

researchers over whether marine 

mammals can suffer from 

decompression sickness. It is theorized 

that this may be caused by diving and 

then surfacing too quickly, forcing 

nitrogen bubbles to form in the 

bloodstream and tissues. Cox et al. 

(2006) stated that gas-bubble disease, 

induced in supersaturated tissues by a 

behavioral response to acoustic 

exposure, is a plausible pathologic 

mechanism for the morbidity and 

mortality seen in cetaceans associated 

with sonar exposure. The authors also 

stated that it is premature to judge 

acoustically mediated bubble growth as 

a potential mechanism and 

recommended further studies to 

investigate the possibility. 

As stated in Crum and Mao (1996) 

and as discussed in the Final EIS (page 

10–137) and the Final SEIS (page 4–31), 

researchers hypothesized that RLs 

would have to exceed 190 dB for there 

to be the possibility of non-auditory 

trauma due to supersaturation of gases 

in the blood. Such non-auditory traumas 

are not expected to occur from sound 

exposure below SPLs of 180 dB. 

In light of the high detection rate of 

the proposed high-frequency marine 

mammal monitoring (HF/M3) sonar, 

ensuring required SURTASS LFA sonar 

shutdown when any marine mammal 

approaches or enters the 180–dB 

isopleth from LFA sonar, the risks of 

these traumas to a marine mammal 

approach zero. 

Additional research published in a 

peer-reviewed journal (Ultrasound in 

Medicine and Biology), supports the 

180–dB criterion for injury as being a 

scientifically supportable level for 

assessing potential non-auditory injury 

to marine mammals. Laurer et al. (2002) 

from the Department of Neurosurgery, 

University of Pennsylvania School of 

Medicine, exposed rats to 5 minutes of 

continuous high intensity, low 

frequency (underwater) sound (HI-LFS) 

either at 180 dB SPL re 1 μPa at 150 Hz 

or 194 dB SPL re 1 μPa at 250 Hz, and 

found no overt histological damage in 

brains of any group. Also, blood gases, 

heart rate, and main arterial blood 

pressure were not significantly 

influenced by HI-LFS, suggesting that 

there was no pulmonary dysfunction 

due to exposure. This published paper 

was based on work performed in 

support of Technical Report #3 of the 

SURTASS LFA Sonar Final EIS. 

Strandings 

Marine mammal strandings are not a 

rare occurrence in nature. The Cetacean 

Stranding Database (http:// 

www.strandings.net) registered over one 

hundred strandings worldwide in 2004. 

However, mass strandings, particularly 

multi-species mass strandings, are 

relatively rare. Acoustic systems are 

becoming increasingly implicated in 

marine mammal strandings. In 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 37411 

particular, a number of mass strandings 

have been linked to mid-frequency 

sonars (see, e.g. Joint Interim Report on 

the Bahamas Marine Mammal Stranding 

Event of 15–16 March 2000, DOC and 

DON, 2001). Many theories exist as to 

why noise may be a factor in marine 

mammal strandings. It is theorized that 

marine mammals become disoriented, 

or that the sound forces them to surface 

too quickly, which may cause symptoms 

similar to decompression sickness, or 

that they are physically injured by the 

sound pressure. The biological 

mechanisms for effects that lead to 

strandings must be determined through 

scientific research. 

There is no record of SURTASS LFA 

sonar ever being implicated in any 

stranding event since LFA sonar 

prototype systems were first operated in 

the late 1980s. Moreover, the system 

acoustic characteristics differ between 

LF and mid-frequency (MF) sonars: LFA 

sonars use frequencies generally below 

1,000 Hz, with relatively long signals 

(pulses) on the order of 60 sec; while 

MF sonars use frequencies greater than 

1,000 Hz, with relatively short signals 

on the order of 1 sec. Cox et al. (2006) 

provided a summary of common 

features shared by the strandings events 

in Greece (1996), Bahamas (2000), and 

Canary Islands (2002). These included 

deep water close to land (such as 

offshore canyons), presence of an 

acoustic waveguide (surface duct 

conditions), and periodic sequences of 

transient pulses (i.e., rapid onset and 

decay times) generated at depths less 

than 10 m (32.8 ft) by sound sources 

moving at speeds of 2.6 m/s (5.1 knots) 

or more during sonar operations 

(D’Spain et al., 2006). These features do 

not relate to LFA operations. First, the 

SURTASS LFA vessel operates with a 

horizontal line array of 1,500 m (4,921 

ft) length at depths below 150 m (492 ft) 

and a vertical line array (LFA sonar 

source) at depths greater than 100 m 

(328 ft). Second, operations are limited 

by mitigation protocols to at least 22 km 

(12 nm) offshore. For these reasons, 

SURTASS LFA sonar cannot be 

operated in deep water that is close to 

land. Also, the LFA sonar signal is 

transmitted at depths well below 10 m 

(32.8 ft), and the vessel has a slow speed 

of advance of 1.5 m/s (3 knots). 

While there was a LF component in 

the Greek stranding in 1996, only midfrequency components were present in 

the strandings in the Bahamas in 2000, 

Madeira 2000, and Canaries in 2002. 

This supports the conclusion that the LF 

component in the Greek stranding was 

not causative (ICES, 2005; Cox et al., 

2006). In its discussion of the Bahamas 

stranding, Cox et al. (2006) stated: ‘‘The 

event raised the question of whether the 

mid-frequency component of the sonar 

in Greece in 1996 was implicated in the 

stranding, rather than the low-frequency 

component proposed by Frantzis 

(1998).’’ The ICES in its ‘‘Report of the 

Ad-Hoc Group on the Impacts of Sonar 

on Cetaceans and Fish’’ raised the same 

issues as Cox et al., stating that the 

consistent association of MF sonar in 

the Bahamas, Madeira, and Canary 

Islands strandings suggest that it was 

the MF component, not the LF 

component, in the NATO sonar that 

triggered the Greek stranding of 1996 

(ICES, 2005). The ICES (2005) report 

concluded that no strandings, injury, or 

major behavioral change have been 

associated with the exclusive use of LF 

sonar. 

Beaked whales have been the subject 

of particular concern in connection with 

strandings. Like most odontocetes, they 

have relatively sharply deceasing 

hearing sensitivity below 2 kHz (Cook et 

al. (2006), Richardson et al. (1995) and 

Finneran et al. (2002)). The SURTASS 

LFA sonar source frequency is below 

500 Hz. If a cetacean cannot hear a 

sound or hears it poorly, the sound is 

unlikely to have a significant behavioral 

impact (Ketten, 2001). Therefore, it is 

unlikely that LF transmissions from 

LFA sonar would induce behavioral 

reactions from animals that have poor 

LF hearing. Though highly unlikely, the 

sounds could damage tissues even if the 

animal does not hear the sound, but this 

would have to be within 1,000 m (3.280 

ft) of the array, where detection would 

be very likely, triggering shutdown. 

Estimates of Potential Effects on Marine 

Mammals 

The effects on marine mammals from 

operation of SURTASS LFA sonar will 

not be the lethal removal of animals. In 

addition, while possible, Level A 

harassment, if it occurs at all, is 

expected to be so minimal as to have no 

effect on rates of reproduction and 

survival of affected marine mammal 

species. Based on AIM modeling results, 

the primary effects would be the 

potential for Level B harassment. The 

Final SEIS Subchapter 4.4 provides the 

risk assessment methodology applied to 

SURTASS LFA sonar operations for the 

annual LOA applications for proposed 

operational areas. 

Tables 4.4–2 through 4.4–10 in the 

Final SEIS provide, through a case study 

based on the results of the Navy’s 4th 

LOA, estimates of the percentage of 

stocks potentially affected for SURTASS 

LFA sonar operations and are based on 

reasonable and realistic estimates of the 

potential effects to marine mammals 

stocks specific to the potential mission 

areas. Also, Tables 5 through 8 in the 

Navy’s Final Comprehensive Report for 

the 2002–2007 rule provides annual 

total estimates of percentages of marine 

mammal stocks potentially affected 

annually during the four years of LFA 

sonar operations, based on actual 

operations during the period of the 

LOAs. 

The scenarios chosen by the Navy are 

not the only possible combinations of 

areas where the SURTASS LFA sonar 

will operate. The potential effects from 

other scenarios can be estimated by 

making a best prediction of the areas in 

which the Navy would conduct 

SURTASS LFA sonar operations 

annually in each oceanic basin area, 

determining from Tables 4.4–2 through 

4.4–10 in the Final SEIS the percentage 

of each stock that may potentially be 

affected, and adding those percentages 

together for each affected stock. Tables 

5–8 in the Navy’s Comprehensive 

Report indicate that annually Level B 

harassment may affect 0–6 percent for 

most marine mammal stocks, rising to 

just over 11 percent annually for other 

species (e.g., common dolphins (6.4 

percent), Risso’s dolphins (6–8 percent), 

short-finned pilot whales (6–9 percent), 

false killer whales (5–10 percent), 

Pacific white-sided dolphins (6–11 

percent) and melon-headed whales (11.2 

percent)). 

Also, using updated modeling where 

appropriate, the Navy will rerun AIM 

when planning missions and, if 

necessary, modify annual LOA requests 

with an analysis of take estimates prior 

to any mission in a new/different area. 

For this proposed rule, NMFS is 

preliminarily adopting the Navy 

estimates shown in Final SEIS (Tables 

4.4–2 through 4.4–10) as the best 

scientific information currently 

available. 

Proposed Mitigation for Marine 

Mammals 

NMFS proposes to require the same 

visual, passive acoustic, and active 

acoustic monitoring of the area 

surrounding the SURTASS LFA sonar 

array, as required for the current 2002–

2007 rule and LOAs, to prevent the 

incidental injury of marine mammals 

that might enter the 180–dB isopleth 

from the SURTASS LFA sonar. These 

three monitoring systems are described 

in the next section of this document. 

NMFS also proposes the same protocols 

as in the 2002–2007 rule. Prior to each 

active sonar exercise, the distance from 

the SURTASS LFA sonar source to the 

180–dB isopleth will be determined. If, 

through monitoring, a marine mammal 

is detected within the 180–dB isopleth, 

the Navy proposes to shut down or 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
37412 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

immediately suspend SURTASS LFA 

sonar transmissions. Transmissions may 

commence/resume 15 minutes after the 

marine mammal has left the area of the 

180–dB isopleth or there is no further 

detection of the animal within the 180–

dB isopleth. The protocol established by 

the Navy for implementing this 

temporary shut-down is described in the 

application. As an added safety 

measure, NMFS again proposes to 

require a ‘‘buffer zone’’ extending an 

additional 1 km (0.54 nm) beyond the 

180–dB isopleth. This coincides with 

the detection range of the HF/M3 sonar. 

This 180- dB plus 1 km (0.54 nm) 

distance will be the established 

mitigation zone for that exercise. 

Therefore, if a marine mammal is 

detected by the HF/M3 sonar, the 

SURTASS LFA sonar will be either 

turned off or not turned on. This is a 

effective mitigation measure since 

testing of the HF/M3 sonar indicates 

effective levels of detection up to 2 km 

(1.1 nm). At 2 km (1.1 nm), the SPL 

from the SURTASS LFA sonar will be 

approximately 173 dB, significantly 

below the 180 dB threshold for 

estimating onset of injury. SURTASS 

LFA sonar operators would be required 

to estimate SPLs before and during each 

operation to provide the information 

necessary to modify the operation, 

including delay or suspension of 

transmissions, so as not to exceed the 

mitigation sound field criteria. 

In addition to establishing a 

mitigation zone at 180 dB plus 1 km 

(0.54 nm) to protect marine mammals, 

the Navy has established a mitigation 

zone for human divers at 145 dB re 1 

microPa(rms) around all known human 

commercial and recreational diving 

sites. Although this geographic 

restriction is intended to protect human 

divers, it will also reduce the LF sound 

levels received by marine mammals 

located in the vicinity of known dive 

sites. 

The Navy also recommended 

establishing OBIAs for marine mammal 

protection in its Final EIS and SEIS. The 

Navy evaluated nine sites in its Final 

EIS and SEIS and concluded that marine 

animals of concern (marine animals 

listed under the ESA and other marine 

mammals) congregate in these areas to 

carry out biologically important 

activities. 

Based on the Navy’s evaluation, 

NMFS proposes to designate these nine 

sites as OBIAs for LFA sonar. The nine 

areas are: (1) the North American East 

Coast between 28° N. and 50° N. from 

west of 40° W. to the 200–m (656–ft) 

isobath year-round; (2) the Antarctic 

Convergence Zone, from 30° E. to 80° E. 

to 45° S., from 80° E. to 150° E. to 55° 

S., from 150° E. to 50° W. to 60° S., from 

50° W to 30° E. to 55° S. from October 

through March; (3) the Costa Rica Dome, 

centered at 9° N. and 88° W., yearround; (4) Hawaiian Islands Humpback 

Whale National Marine SanctuaryPenguin Bank, centered at 21° N. and 

157° 30′ W. from November 1 through 

May 1; (5) Cordell Bank National Marine 

Sanctuary, boundaries in accordance 15 

CFR 922.110 year-round; (6) Gulf of the 

Farallones National Marine Sanctuary, 

boundaries in accordance 15 CFR 

922.80 year-round; (7) Monterey Bay 

National Marine Sanctuary, boundaries 

in accordance with 15 CFR 922.30 yearround; (8) Olympic Coast National 

Marine Sanctuary, boundaries within 23 

nm of the coast from 47°07′ N. to 48°30′ 

N. latitude in December, January, 

March, and May; and (9) Flower Garden 

Banks National Marine Sanctuary, 

boundaries in accordance with 15 CFR 

922.120 year-round. 

NMFS also proposes to designate an 

additional OBIA that was recommended 

by several commenters on the Draft 

SEIS: The Gully with boundaries at 44° 

13′ N., 59° 06′ W. to 43° 47′ N., 58° 35′ 

W. to 43° 35′ N., 58° 35′ W. to 43° 35′ 

N., 59° 08′ W. to 44° 06′ N., 59° 20′ W., 

year round. NMFS believes this area is 

biologically important for marine 

mammals, based on its importance as 

habitat for several species of marine 

mammals, particularly the northern 

bottlenose whale, and its designation as 

a Canadian marine protected area. 

NMFS is also evaluating whether to 

designate certain areas in the 

Northwestern Hawaiian Islands as 

OBIAs and solicits public comments 

and information on marine mammal 

distribution, densities, and the specific 

biologically important activities that 

take place in these areas. Any additional 

OBIA designations would be made 

through a separate rulemaking process. 

NMFS proposes to continue the system 

established in the 2002–2007 rule for 

expanding the number of OBIAs, as 

described later in this document. While 

retaining the requirement to provide 

notice and an opportunity to comment, 

the current proposal would eliminate 

the specific length of time for public 

comment on proposed OBIAs. 

OBIAs are not intended to apply to 

other Navy activities and sonar 

operations, but rather as a mitigation 

measure to reduce incidental takings by 

SURTASS LFA sonar. The regulations 

propose, as in the 2002–2007 rule, that 

the holder of a LOA would not operate 

the SURTASS LFA sonar within any 

OBIA such that the SURTASS LFA 

sonar field exceeds 180 dB (re 1 

microPa(rms)). 

Proposed Marine Mammal Monitoring 

In order to minimize risks to marine 

mammals that may be present in waters 

surrounding SURTASS LFA sonar, the 

Navy will: (1) conduct visual 

monitoring from the ship’s bridge 

during daylight hours, (2) use passive 

SURTASS sonar to listen for vocalizing 

marine mammals; and (3) use high 

frequency active sonar (i.e., similar to a 

commercial fish finder) to monitor/ 

locate/track marine mammals in relation 

to the SURTASS LFA sonar vessel and 

the sound field produced by the 

SURTASS LFA sonar source array. 

Through observation, acoustic 

tracking and implementation of shutdown criteria, the Navy will ensure, to 

the greatest extent practicable, that no 

marine mammals approach the 

SURTASS LFA sonar source close 

enough to be subjected to potentially 

injurious sound levels (inside the 180–

dB sound field; approximately 1 km 

(0.54 nm) from the source). In the 

Navy’s Final EIS, as reanalyzed in the 

Final Comprehensive Report for 

SURTASS LFA sonar, the Navy assessed 

mitigation effectiveness. The overall 

effectiveness of detecting a marine 

mammal approaching the 180–dB sound 

field of the source array by at least one 

of these monitoring methods is above 95 

percent. This value is supported by 

analyses of field data in a sampling of 

6 missions between June 2004 and 

February 2006 (see the Navy’s 

Comprehensive Report for LFA sonar). 

The results of the visual, passive, and 

active monitoring for each LOA are 

discussed in the Annual Reports (most 

recently, Annual Report 5, 2007, 

Chapter 4). Mitigation effectiveness is 

described in Chapter 4 for the Final 

Comprehensive Report (2007) and in the 

Annual Reports. 

Visual monitoring consists of daylight 

observations for marine mammals from 

the vessel. Daylight is defined as 30 

minutes before sunrise until 30 minutes 

after sunset. Visual monitoring would 

begin 30 minutes before sunrise or 30 

minutes before the SURTASS LFA sonar 

is deployed. Monitoring would continue 

until 30 minutes after sunset or until the 

SURTASS LFA sonar is recovered. 

Observations will be made by personnel 

trained in detecting and identifying 

marine mammals. Marine mammal 

biologists qualified in conducting at-sea 

marine mammal visual monitoring from 

surface vessels train and qualify 

designated ship personnel to conduct atsea visual monitoring. The objective of 

these observations is to maintain a track 

of marine mammals observed and to 

ensure that none approach the source 

close enough to enter the LFA sonar 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 37413 

mitigation zone (including the buffer 

zone). 

These personnel would maintain a 

topside watch and marine mammal 

observation log during operations that 

employ SURTASS LFA sonar in the 

active mode. The numbers and 

identification of marine mammals 

sighted, as well as any unusual 

behavior, will be entered into the log. A 

designated ship’s officer will monitor 

the conduct of the visual watches and 

periodically review the log entries. 

There are two potential visual 

monitoring scenarios. 

First, if a marine mammal is sighted 

outside of the LFA sonar mitigation 

zone, the observer will notify the 

Officer-in-Charge (OIC). The OIC then 

notifies the HF/M3 sonar operator to 

determine the range and projected track 

of the animal. If it is determined the 

animal will enter the LFA sonar 

mitigation zone, the OIC will order the 

delay or suspension of SURTASS LFA 

sonar transmissions when the animal 

enters the LFA sonar mitigation zone. If 

the animal is visually observed within 

the mitigation zone, the OIC will order 

the immediate delay or suspension of 

SURTASS LFA sonar transmissions. 

The observer will continue visual 

monitoring/recording until the animal is 

no longer seen. 

Second, if the animal is sighted 

anywhere within the LFA mitigation 

zone, the observer will notify the OIC 

who will promptly order the immediate 

delay or suspension of SURTASS LFA 

sonar transmissions. 

Passive acoustic monitoring is 

conducted when SURTASS is deployed, 

using the SURTASS towed horizontal 

line array to listen for vocalizing marine 

mammals as an indicator of their 

presence. If the sound is estimated to be 

from a marine mammal that may be in 

the SURTASS LFA sonar mitigation 

zone, the technician will notify the OIC 

who will alert the HF/M3 sonar operator 

and visual observers. If a marine 

mammal is detected within or 

approaching the mitigation zone prior to 

or during transmissions, the OIC will 

order the delay or suspension of 

SURTASS LFA sonar transmissions. 

HF-active acoustic monitoring uses 

the HF/M3 sonar to detect, locate, and 

track marine mammals that could pass 

close enough to the SURTASS LFA 

sonar array to enter the LFA mitigation 

zone. HF acoustic monitoring will begin 

30 minutes before the first SURTASS 

LFA sonar transmission of a given 

mission is scheduled to commence and 

continue until transmissions are 

terminated. Prior to full-power 

operations, the HF/M3 sonar power 

level is ramped up over a period of 5 

min from 180 dB SL in 10–dB 

increments until full power (if required) 

is attained to ensure that there are no 

inadvertent exposures of local animals 

to RLs ≤ 180 dB from the HF/M3 sonar. 

There are two potential scenarios for 

mitigation via active acoustic 

monitoring. 

First, if a ‘‘contact’’ is detected 

outside the LFA mitigation zone, the 

HF/M3 sonar operator determines the 

range and projected track of the animal. 

If it is determined that the animal will 

enter the LFA mitigation zone, the sonar 

operator notifies the OIC. The OIC then 

orders the delay or suspension of 

transmissions when the animal is 

predicted to enter the LFA mitigation 

zone. If a contact is detected by the HF/ 

M3 sonar within the LFA mitigation 

zone, the observer notifies the OIC who 

promptly orders the immediate delay or 

suspension of transmissions. 

All contacts will be recorded in the 

log and provided as part of the LongTerm Monitoring (LTM) Program to 

monitor for potential long-term 

environmental effects. 

Research 

The Navy spends approximately $10–

14 million annually on marine mammal 

research programs. These research 

programs provide a means of learning 

about potential effects of anthropogenic 

underwater sound on marine mammals 

(including long-term) and ways to 

mitigate potential effects. As a result, 

the Navy is well positioned to have the 

most current scientific data on how 

marine mammals are affected by Navy 

sonar. During the first 4 years of LFA 

sonar operations, the Navy conducted 

research on several of these research 

areas. Table 9 in the Navy’s 

Comprehensive Report for SURTASS 

LFA sonar provides the status of the 

research that is planned or underway. 

NMFS proposes to require that the 

Navy continue researching the impacts 

of LF sounds on marine mammals to 

supplement its monitoring and increase 

knowledge of the species, and 

coordinate with others on additional 

research opportunities and activities. 

This would include cumulative impact 

analyses of the annual takes of marine 

mammals over the next 5 years and the 

continuation of scientific data collection 

during SURTASS LFA sonar operations. 

NMFS recommends that the Navy 

conduct, or continue to conduct, the 

following research regarding SURTASS 

LFA sonar over the second 5–year 

authorization period: 

1. Systematically observe SURTASS 

LFA sonar training exercises for injured 

or disabled marine mammals. Past 

correlations between military operations 

and the stranding of beaked whales call 

for closer observation of all sonar 

operations. 

2. Compare the effectiveness of the 

three forms of mitigation (visual, 

passive acoustic, HF/M3 sonar). 

3. Conduct research on the responses 

of deep-diving odontocete whales to LFsonar signals. These species are believed 

to be less sensitive to LF-sonar sounds 

than the species studied prior to the LFS 

SRP. However, enough questions exist 

that these species should be studied 

further. The Navy has applied for a 

Scientific Research Permit under section 

104 of the MMPA to conduct a 

behavioral response study on deepdiving cetacean species exposed to 

natural and artificial underwater sounds 

and quantify exposure conditions 

associated with various effects (72 FR 

19181, April 17, 2007). 

4. Conduct research on the habitat 

preferences of beaked whales. 

5. Conduct passive acoustic 

monitoring using bottom-mounted 

hydrophones before, during, and after 

LF sonar operations for the possible 

silencing of calls of large whales. 

6. Continue to evaluate the HF/M3 

mitigation sonar. This is the primary 

means of mitigation, and its efficacy 

must continue to be demonstrated. 

7. Continue to evaluate improvements 

in passive sonar capabilities. 

Proposed Reporting 

During routine operations of 

SURTASS LFA sonar, technical and 

environmental data would be collected 

and recorded, which, along with 

research, are part of the Navy’s LTM 

Program. These would include data 

from visual and acoustic monitoring, 

ocean environmental measurements, 

and technical operational inputs. 

First, a mission report would be 

provided to NMFS on a quarterly basis 

with the report including all activemode missions completed 30 days or 

more prior to the date of the deadline 

for the report. Second, the Navy would 

submit an annual report no later than 45 

days after expiration of an LOA. Third, 

the Navy would submit a 

Comprehensive Report at least 240 days 

prior to expiration of these regulations. 

These reports are summarized here. 

Quarterly Report – On a quarterly 

basis, the Navy would provide NMFS 

with a classified report that includes all 

active-mode missions completed 30 

days or more prior to the date of the 

deadline for the report. Specifically, 

these reports will include dates/times of 

exercises, location of vessel, LOA 

province (as set forth in Longhurst 

(1998)), location of the mitigation zone 

in relation to the LFA sonar array, 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
37414 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

marine mammal observations, and 

records of any delays or suspensions of 

operations. Marine mammal 

observations would include animal type 

and/or species, number of animals 

sighted by species, date and time of 

observations, type of detection (visual, 

passive acoustic, HF/M3 sonar), the 

animal’s bearing and range from vessel, 

behavior, and remarks/narrative (as 

necessary). The report would include 

the Navy’s analysis of whether any 

Level A and/or Level B taking occurred 

within the SURTASS LFA sonar 

mitigation zone and, if so, estimates of 

the percentage of marine mammal 

stocks affected (both for the quarter and 

cumulatively (to date) for the year 

covered by the LOA) by SURTASS LFA 

sonar operations. This analysis would 

include estimates for both within and 

outside the mitigation zone, using 

predictive modeling based on operating 

locations, dates/times of operations, 

system characteristics, oceanographic 

environmental conditions, and animal 

demographics. In the event that no 

SURTASS LFA missions are completed 

during a quarter, a report of negative 

activity would be provided. 

Annual Report – The annual report 

would provide NMFS with an 

unclassified summary of the year’s 

quarterly reports and will include the 

Navy’s analysis of whether any Level A 

and/or Level B taking occurred within 

the SURTASS LFA mitigation zones 

and, if so, estimates of the percentage of 

marine mammal stocks affected by 

SURTASS LFA sonar operations. This 

analysis would include estimates for 

both within and outside the mitigation 

zone, using predictive modeling based 

on operating locations, dates/times of 

operations, system characteristics, 

oceanographic environmental 

conditions, and animal demographics. 

The annual report would also include: 

(1) analysis of the effectiveness of the 

mitigation measures with 

recommendations for improvements 

where applicable; (2) assessment of any 

long-term effects from SURTASS LFA 

sonar operations; and (3) any 

discernible or estimated cumulative 

impacts from SURTASS LFA sonar 

operations. 

Comprehensive Report – NMFS 

proposes to require the Navy to provide 

NMFS and the public with a final 

comprehensive report analyzing the 

impacts of SURTASS LFA sonar on 

marine mammal species and stocks. 

This report, which is due at least 240 

days prior to expiration of these 

regulations, would include an in-depth 

analysis of all monitoring and Navyfunded research pertinent to SURTASS 

LFA sonar conducted during the 5–year 

period of these regulations, a scientific 

assessment of cumulative impacts on 

marine mammal stocks, and an analysis 

on the advancement of alternative 

(passive) technologies as a replacement 

for LFA sonar. This report would be a 

key document for NMFS’ review and 

assessment of impacts for any future 

rulemaking. 

Annual reports and the 

Comprehensive Report would be posted 

on the NMFS homepage (see 

ADDRESSES). 

Modification to Mitigation Measures 

Any substantial modifications to 

NMFS’ mitigation, monitoring, and 

reporting requirements will be proposed 

in the Federal Register with an 

opportunity for public comment prior to 

implementation (unless an emergency 

exists and modifications are necessary 

for the protection of marine mammals). 

Designation of Offshore Biologically 

Important Areas for Marine Mammals 

In addition to NMFS designating 

OBIAs independently, this proposed 

rule would continue a system for 

members of the public to petition NMFS 

to consider adding an area to the list of 

OBIAs for marine mammals. To qualify 

for designation, an area must be of 

particular importance for marine 

mammals as an area for feeding, 

breeding, calving, or migration, and not 

simply an area occupied by marine 

mammals. The proposed area should 

also not be within a previously 

designated OBIA or other 180–dB 

exclusion area. In order for NMFS to 

begin a rulemaking process for 

designating areas of biological 

importance for marine mammals, 

proponents must petition NMFS and 

submit the information described in 50 

CFR 216.191(a). If NMFS makes a 

preliminary determination that the area 

is biologically important for marine 

mammals, NMFS will publish a Federal 

Register document proposing to add the 

recommended area as an OBIA. After 

review of public comments and 

information, NMFS will make a final 

decision on whether to designate the 

area as an OBIA and publish a Federal 

Register document of its decision. 

Proposals for designation of areas will 

not affect the status of LOAs while the 

rulemaking is in process. 

Preliminary Determinations 

Based on the scientific analyses 

detailed in the Navy application and 

further supported by information and 

data contained in the Navy’s Final SEIS 

and Final EIS for SURTASS LFA sonar 

operations and summarized in this 

proposed rule, NMFS has preliminarily 

determined that the incidental taking of 

marine mammals resulting from 

SURTASS LFA sonar operations would 

have a negligible impact on the affected 

marine mammal species or stocks over 

the 5–year period of LFA sonar 

operations covered by these proposed 

regulations. That assessment is based on 

a number of factors: (1) the best 

information available indicates that 

effects from SPLs less than 180 dB will 

be limited to short-term Level B 

behavioral harassment averaging less 

than 10 percent annually for most 

affected species; (2) the proposed 

mitigation and monitoring is highly 

effective in preventing exposures of 180 

dB or greater; (3) the results of 

monitoring as described in the Navy’s 

Comprehensive Report supports the 

conclusion that takings will be limited 

to Level B harassment and not have 

more than a negligible impact on 

affected species or stocks of marine 

mammals; (4) the small number of 

SURTASS LFA sonar systems (two 

systems in FY 2008 and FY 2009 

(totaling 864 hours of operation 

annually), 3 in FY 2010 (totaling 1296 

hours of operation annually), and 4 

systems in FY 2011 and FY 20012 

(totaling 1728 hours of operation 

annually)) that would be operating 

world-wide; (5) that the LFA sonar 

vessel must be underway while 

transmitting (in order to keep the 

receiver array deployed), limiting the 

duration of exposure for marine 

mammals to those few minutes when 

the SURTASS LFA sound energy is 

moving through that part of the water 

column inhabited by marine mammals; 

(6) for convergence zone (CZ) 

propagation, the characteristics of the 

acoustic sound path, which deflect the 

sound below the water depth inhabited 

by marine mammals for much of the 

sound propagation (see illustration 67 

FR page 46715 (July 16, 2002); (7) the 

findings of the SRP on LF sounds on 

marine mammals indicated no 

significant change in biologically 

important behavior from exposure to 

sound levels up to 155 dB; and (8) 

during the 40 LFA sonar missions 

between 2002 and 2006, there were only 

three visual observations of marine 

mammals and only 71 detections by the 

HF/M3 sonar, which all resulted in 

mitigation protocol suspensions in 

operations. These measures all indicate 

that while marine mammals will 

potentially be affected by the SURTASS 

LFA sonar sounds, these impacts will be 

short-term behavioral effects and are not 

likely to adversely affect marine 

mammal species or stocks through 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 37415 

effects on annual rates of reproduction 

or survival. 

Finally, because SURTASS LFA sonar 

operations will not take place in Arctic 

waters, it would not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of marine mammals for 

subsistence uses identified in MMPA 

section 101(a)(5)(A)(i), 16 USC 1371(a) 

(5)(A)(i). 

NEPA 

On November 10, 2005 (70 FR 68443), 

the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) announced receipt of a Draft SEIS 

from the U.S. Navy on the deployment 

of SURTASS LFA sonar. This Final SEIS 

incorporated by reference the Navy’s 

Final EIS on SURTASS LFA sonar 

deployment. The public comment 

period on the Draft SEIS ended on 

February 10, 2006. On May 4, 2007 (72 

FR 25302), EPA announced receipt of a 

Final SEIS from the U.S. Navy on the 

deployment of SURTASS LFA sonar. 

NMFS is a cooperating agency, as 

defined by the Council on 

Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1501.6), 

in the preparation of these documents. 

NMFS is currently reviewing the Navy’s 

Final SEIS and will either adopt it or 

prepare its own NEPA document before 

making a determination on the issuance 

of a final rule and LOAs thereunder. 

The Navy’s Final SEIS is available at: 

http://www.surtass-lfa-eis.com 

ESA 

On October 4, 1999, the Navy 

submitted a Biological Assessment to 

NMFS to initiate consultation under 

section 7 of the ESA for its SURTASS 

LFA sonar activities. NMFS concluded 

consultation with the Navy on this 

action on May 30, 2002. The conclusion 

of that consultation was that operation 

of the SURTASS LFA sonar system for 

testing, training and military operations 

and the issuance by NMFS of incidental 

take authorizations for this activity are 

not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered or 

threatened species under the 

jurisdiction of NMFS. Additional 

consultations were conducted prior to 

issuance of annual LOAs. 

On June 9, 2006, the Navy submitted 

a Biological Assessment to NMFS to 

initiate consultation under section 7 of 

the ESA for the 2007–2012 SURTASS 

LFA sonar activities. The consultation, 

which will also include this proposed 

rule, will be concluded prior to issuance 

of a final rule. 

Classification 

This action has been determined to be 

significant for purposes of Executive 

Order 12866. 

The Chief Counsel for Regulation of 

the Department of Commerce has 

certified to the Chief Counsel for 

Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration that this action would 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

within the meaning of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. If implemented, this 

proposed rule would affect only the U.S. 

Navy which, by definition, is not a 

small business. Because of this 

certification, a regulatory flexibility 

analysis is not required. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 216 

Exports, Fish, Imports, Indians, 

Labeling, Marine mammals, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Seafood, Transportation. 

Dated: July 5, 2007. 

John Oliver, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Operations, National Marine Fisheries 

Service. 

For reasons set forth in the preamble, 

50 CFR part 216 is proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

PART 216—REGULATIONS 

GOVERNING THE TAKING AND 

IMPORTING OF MARINE MAMMALS 

1. The authority citation for part 216 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq., unless 

otherwise noted. 

2. Subpart Q is added to part 216 to 

read as follows: 

Subpart Q—Taking of Marine Mammals 

Incidental to Navy Operations of 

Surveillance Towed Array Sensor 

System Low Frequency Active 

(SURTASS LFA) Sonar 

Sec. 

216.180 Specified activity. 

216.181 Effective dates. 

216.182 Permissible methods of taking. 

216.183 Prohibitions. 

216.184 Mitigation. 

216.185 Requirements for monitoring. 

216.186 Requirements for reporting. 

216.187 Applications for Letters of 

Authorization. 

216.188 Letters of Authorization. 

216.189 Renewal of Letters of 

Authorization. 

216.190 Modifications to Letters of 

Authorization. 

216.191 Designation of Biologically 

Important Marine Mammal Areas. 

Subpart Q—Taking of Marine Mammals 

Incidental to Navy Operations of 

Surveillance Towed Array Sensor 

System Low Frequency Active 

(SURTASS LFA) Sonar 

§ 216.180 Specified activity. 

Regulations in this subpart apply only 

to the incidental taking of those marine 

mammal species specified in paragraph 

(b) of this section by the U.S. Navy, 

Department of Defense, while engaged 

in the operation of no more than four 

SURTASS LFA sonar systems 

conducting active sonar operations, in 

areas specified in paragraph (a) of this 

section. The authorized activities, as 

specified in a Letter of Authorization 

issued under §§ 216.106 and 216.188, 

include the transmission of low 

frequency sounds from the SURTASS 

LFA sonar and the transmission of high 

frequency sounds from the mitigation 

sonar described in § 216.185 during 

training, testing, and routine military 

operations of SURTASS LFA sonar. 

(a) With the exception of those areas 

specified in § 216.183(d), the incidental 

taking by harassment may be authorized 

in the areas (biomes, provinces, and 

subprovinces) described in Longhurst 

(1998), as specified in a Letter of 

Authorization. 

(b) The incidental take, by Level A 

and Level B harassment, of marine 

mammals from the activity identified in 

this section is limited to the following 

species and species groups: 

(1) Mysticete whales—blue 

(Balaenoptera musculus), fin 

(Balaenoptera physalus), minke 

(Balaenoptera acutorostrata), Bryde’s 

(Balaenoptera edeni), sei (Balaenoptera 

borealis), humpback (Megaptera 

novaeangliae), North Atlantic right 

(Eubalaena glacialis), North Pacific right 

(Eubalena japonica) southern right 

(Eubalaena australis), pygmy right 

(Capera marginata), bowhead (Balaena 

mysticetus), and gray (Eschrichtius 

robustus) whales. 

(2) Odontocete whales—harbor 

porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), 

spectacled porpoise (Phocoena 

dioptrica), beluga (Dephinapterus 

leucas), Stenella spp., Risso’s dolphin 

(Grampus griseus), rough-toothed 

dolphin (Steno bredanensis), Fraser’s 

dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei), northern 

right-whale dolphin (Lissodelphis 

borealis), southern right whale dolphin 

(Lissodelphis peronii), short-beaked 

common dolphin (Delphius delphis), 

long-beaked common dolphin 

(Delphinus capensis), very long-beaked 

common dolphin (Delphinus tropicalis), 

Lagenorhynchus spp., Cephalorhynchus 

spp., bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops 

truncatus), Dall’s porpoise 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
37416 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

(Phocoenoides dalli), melon-headed 

whale (Peponocephala spp.), beaked 

whales (Berardius spp., Hyperoodon 

spp., Mesoplodon spp., Cuvier’s beaked 

whale (Ziphius cavirostris), Shepard’s 

beaked whale (Tasmacetus shepherdi), 

Longman’s beaked whale (Indopacetus 

pacificus), killer whale (Orcinus orca), 

false killer whale (Pseudorca 

crassidens), pygmy killer whale (Feresa 

attenuata), sperm whale (Physeter 

macrocephalus), dwarf and pygmy 

sperm whales (Kogia simus and K. 

breviceps), and short-finned and longfinned pilot whales (Globicephala 

macrorhynchus and G. melas). 

(3) Pinnipeds—hooded seal 

(Cystophora cristata), harbor seal (Phoca 

vitulina), spotted seal (P. largha), ribbon 

seal (P. fasciata), gray seal (Halichoerus 

grypus), elephant seal (Mirounga 

angustirostris and M. leonina), 

Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus 

schauinslandi), Mediterranean monk 

seal (Monachus monachus), northern 

fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus), southern 

fur seal (Arctocephalus spp.), harp seal 

(Phoca groenlandica), Galapagos sea 

lion (Zalophus californianus 

wollebaeki), Japanese sea lion (Zalophus 

californianus japonicus), Steller sea lion 

(Eumetopias jubatus), California sea 

lion (Zalophus californianus), 

Australian sea lion (Neophoca cinerea), 

New Zealand sea lion (Phocarctos 

hookeri), and South American sea lion 

(Otaria flavescens). 

§ 216.181 Effective dates. 

Regulations in this subpart are 

effective from August 16, 2007 through 

August 15, 2012. 

§ 216.182 Permissible methods of taking. 

(a) Under Letters of Authorization 

issued pursuant to §§ 216.106 and 

216.188, the Holder of the Letter of 

Authorization may incidentally, but not 

intentionally, take marine mammals by 

Level A and Level B harassment within 

the areas described in § 216.180(a), 

provided the activity is in compliance 

with all terms, conditions, and 

requirements of these regulations and 

the appropriate Letter of Authorization. 

(b) The activities identified in 

§ 216.180 must be conducted in a 

manner that minimizes, to the greatest 

extent practicable, any adverse impacts 

on marine mammals and their habitat. 

§ 216.183 Prohibitions. 

No person in connection with the 

activities described in § 216.180 shall: 

(a) Take any marine mammal not 

specified in § 216.180(b); 

(b) Take any marine mammal 

specified in § 216.180(b) other than by 

incidental, unintentional Level A and 

Level B harassment; 

(c) Take a marine mammal specified 

in § 216.180(b) if such taking results in 

more than a negligible impact on the 

species or stocks of such marine 

mammal; or 

(d) Violate, or fail to comply with, the 

terms, conditions, and requirements of 

the regulations in this subpart or any 

Letter of Authorization issued under 

§§ 216.106 and 216.188. 

§ 216.184 Mitigation. 

The activity identified in § 216.180(a) 

must be conducted in a manner that 

minimizes, to the greatest extent 

practicable, adverse impacts on marine 

mammals and their habitats. When 

conducting operations identified in 

§ 216.180, the mitigation measures 

described in this section and in any 

Letter of Authorization issued under 

§§ 216.106 and 216.188 must be 

implemented. 

(a) Through monitoring described 

under § 216.185, the Holder of a Letter 

of Authorization must act to ensure, to 

the greatest extent practicable, that no 

marine mammal is subjected to a sound 

pressure level of 180 dB or greater. 

(b) If a marine mammal is detected 

within or about to enter the mitigation 

zone (the area subjected to sound 

pressure levels of 180 dB or greater plus 

the 1 km (0.5 nm) buffer zone extending 

beyond the 180–dB zone), SURTASS 

LFA sonar transmissions will be 

immediately delayed or suspended. 

Transmissions will not resume earlier 

than 15 minutes after: 

(1) All marine mammals have left the 

area of the mitigation and buffer zones; 

and 

(2) There is no further detection of 

any marine mammal within the 

mitigation and buffer zones as 

determined by the visual and/or passive 

or active acoustic monitoring described 

in § 216.185. 

(c) The high-frequency marine 

mammal monitoring sonar (HF/M3) 

described in § 216.185 will be rampedup slowly to operating levels over a 

period of no less than 5 minutes: 

(1) At least 30 minutes prior to any 

SURTASS LFA sonar transmissions; 

(2) Prior to any SURTASS LFA sonar 

calibrations or testings that are not part 

of regular SURTASS LFA sonar 

transmissions described in paragraph 

(c)(1) of this section; and 

(3) Anytime after the HF/M3 source 

has been powered down for more than 

2 minutes. 

(d) The HF/M3 sound pressure level 

will not be increased once a marine 

mammal is detected; ramp-up may 

resume once marine mammals are no 

longer detected. 

(e) The Holder of a Letter of 

Authorization will not operate the 

SURTASS LFA sonar, such that the 

SURTASS LFA sonar sound field 

exceeds 180 dB (re 1 microPa(rms)): 

(1) At a distance less than 12 nautical 

miles (nm) (22 kilometers (km)) from 

any coastline, including offshore 

islands; 

(2) Within any offshore area that has 

been designated as biologically 

important for marine mammals under 

§ 216.185(f), during the biologically 

important season for that particular 

area. 

(f) The following areas have been 

designated by NMFS as Offshore 

Biologically Important Areas (OBIAs) 

for marine mammals (by season if 

appropriate): 

Name of Area Location of Area Months of Importance 

(1) 200-m isobath North American East Coast From 28° N. to 50° N., west of 40° W. Year round 

(2) Antarctic Convergence Zone 30° E. to 80° E. to 45°; 80° E. to 150° E. to 

55°; S.150° E. to 50° W. to 60° S.; 50° W. 

to 30° E. to 50° S. 

October 1-March 31 

(3) Costa Rica Dome Centered at 9° N. and 88° W. Year round 

(4) Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National 

Marine Sanctuary Penguin Bank 

Centered at 21° N. and 157° 30’ W. November 1 through May 1 

(5) Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary Boundaries in accordance with 15 CFR 

922.110 

Year-round 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 37417 

Name of Area Location of Area Months of Importance 

(6) Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Boundaries in accordance with 15 CFR 

922.80 

Year-round 

(7) Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Boundaries in accordance with 15 CFR 

922.30 

Year-round 

(8) Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Boundaries within 23 nm of the coast from 

47°07’ N. to 48°30’ N. latitude 

December, January, March and May 

(9) Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary Boundaries in accordance with 15 CFR 

922.120 

Year-round 

(10) The Gully 44° 13’ N., 59° 06’ W. to 43° 47’ N.; 58° 35’

W. to 43° 35’ N.; 58° 35’ W. to 43° 35’ N.; 

59° 08’ W. to 44° 06’ N.; 59° 20’ W 

Year-round 

§ 216.185 Requirements for monitoring. 

(a) In order to mitigate the taking of 

marine mammals by SURTASS LFA 

sonar to the greatest extent practicable, 

the Holder of a Letter of Authorization 

issued pursuant to §§ 216.106 and 

216.188 must: 

(1) Conduct visual monitoring from 

the ship’s bridge during all daylight 

hours (30 minutes before sunrise until 

30 minutes after sunset); 

(2) Use low frequency passive 

SURTASS sonar to listen for vocalizing 

marine mammals; and 

(3) Use the HF/M3 (high frequency) 

sonar developed to locate and track 

marine mammals in relation to the 

SURTASS LFA sonar vessel and the 

sound field produced by the SURTASS 

LFA sonar source array. 

(b) Monitoring under paragraph (a) of 

this section must: 

(1) Commence at least 30 minutes 

before the first SURTASS LFA sonar 

transmission; 

(2) Continue between transmission 

pings; and 

(3) Continue either for at least 15 

minutes after completion of the 

SURTASS LFA sonar transmission 

exercise, or, if marine mammals are 

exhibiting unusual changes in 

behavioral patterns, for a period of time 

until behavior patterns return to normal 

or conditions prevent continued 

observations; 

(c) Holders of Letters of Authorization 

for activities described in § 216.180 are 

required to cooperate with the National 

Marine Fisheries Service and any other 

federal agency for monitoring the 

impacts of the activity on marine 

mammals. 

(d) Holders of Letters of Authorization 

must designate qualified on-site 

individuals to conduct the mitigation, 

monitoring and reporting activities 

specified in the Letter of Authorization. 

(e) Holders of Letters of Authorization 

must conduct all monitoring required 

under the Letter of Authorization. 

§ 216.186 Requirements for reporting. 

(a) The Holder of the Letter of 

Authorization must submit quarterly 

mission reports to the Director, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS, no later 

than 30 days after the end of each 

quarter beginning on the date of 

effectiveness of a Letter of Authorization 

or as specified in the appropriate Letter 

of Authorization. Each quarterly 

mission report will include all activemode missions completed during that 

quarter. At a minimum, each classified 

mission report must contain the 

following information: 

(1) Dates, times, and location of each 

vessel during each mission; 

(2) Information on sonar 

transmissions during each mission; 

(3) Results of the marine mammal 

monitoring program specified in the 

Letter of Authorization; and 

(4) Estimates of the percentages of 

marine mammal species and stocks 

affected (both for the quarter and 

cumulatively for the year) covered by 

the Letter of Authorization. 

(b) The Holder of a Letter of 

Authorization must submit an annual 

report to the Director, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS, no later 

than 45 days after the expiration of a 

Letter of Authorization. This report 

must contain all the information 

required by the Letter of Authorization. 

(c) A final comprehensive report must 

be submitted to the Director, Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS at least 240 

days prior to expiration of these 

regulations. In addition to containing all 

the information required by any final 

year Letter of Authorization, this report 

must contain an unclassified analysis of 

new passive sonar technologies and an 

assessment of whether such a system is 

feasible as an alternative to SURTASS 

LFA sonar. 

§ 216.187 Applications for Letters of 

Authorization. 

(a) To incidentally take marine 

mammals pursuant to these regulations, 

the U.S. Navy authority conducting the 

activity identified in § 216.180 must 

apply for and obtain a Letter of 

Authorization in accordance with 

§ 216.106. 

(b) The application for a Letter of 

Authorization must be submitted to the 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, at least 60 days before the date 

that either the vessel is scheduled to 

begin conducting SURTASS LFA sonar 

operations or the previous Letter of 

Authorization is scheduled to expire. 

(c) All applications for a Letter of 

Authorization must include the 

following information: 

(1) The date(s), duration, and the 

area(s) where the vessel’s activity will 

occur; 

(2) The species and/or stock(s) of 

marine mammals likely to be found 

within each area; 

(3) The type of incidental taking 

authorization requested (i.e., take by 

Level A and/or Level B harassment); 

(4) The estimated percentage of 

marine mammal species/stocks 

potentially affected in each area for the 

12–month period of effectiveness of the 

Letter of Authorization; and 

(5) The means of accomplishing the 

necessary monitoring and reporting that 

will result in increased knowledge of 

the species and the level of taking or 

impacts on marine mammal 

populations. 

(d) The National Marine Fisheries 

Service will review an application for a 

Letter of Authorization in accordance 

with § 216.104(b) and, if adequate and 

complete, issue a Letter of 

Authorization. 

§ 216.188 Letters of Authorization. 

(a) A Letter of Authorization, unless 

suspended or revoked will be valid for 

a period of time not to exceed one year, 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4
37418 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 130 / Monday, July 9, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

but may be renewed annually subject to 

annual renewal conditions in § 216.189. 

(b) Each Letter of Authorization will 

set forth: 

(1) Permissible methods of incidental 

taking; 

(2) Authorized geographic areas for 

incidental takings; 

(3) Means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact on the 

species of marine mammals authorized 

for taking, their habitat, and the 

availability of the species for 

subsistence uses; and 

(4) Requirements for monitoring and 

reporting incidental takes. 

(c) Issuance of each Letter of 

Authorization will be based on a 

determination that the total number of 

marine mammals taken by the activity 

specified in § 216.180 as a whole will 

have no more than a negligible impact 

on the species or stocks of affected 

marine mammal(s), and that the total 

taking will not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

species or stocks of marine mammals for 

taking for subsistence uses. 

(d) Notice of issuance or denial of an 

application for a Letter of Authorization 

will be published in the Federal 

Register within 30 days of a 

determination. 

§ 216.189 Renewal of Letters of 

Authorization. 

(a) A Letter of Authorization issued 

for the activity identified in § 216.180 

may be renewed annually upon: 

(1) Notification to NMFS that the 

activity described in the application 

submitted under § 216.187 will be 

undertaken and that there will not be a 

substantial modification to the 

described activity, mitigation or 

monitoring undertaken during the 

upcoming season; 

(2) Notification to NMFS of the 

information identified in § 216.187(c), 

including the planned geographic 

area(s), and anticipated duration of each 

SURTASS LFA sonar operation; 

(3) Timely receipt of the monitoring 

reports required under § 216.185, which 

have been reviewed by NMFS and 

determined to be acceptable; 

(4) A determination by NMFS that the 

mitigation, monitoring and reporting 

measures required under §§ 216.184 and 

216.185 and the previous Letter of 

Authorization were undertaken and will 

be undertaken during the upcoming 

annual period of validity of a renewed 

Letter of Authorization; and 

(5) A determination by NMFS that the 

number of marine mammals taken by 

the activity as a whole will have no 

more than a negligible impact on the 

species or stock of affected marine 

mammal(s), and that the total taking 

will not have an unmitigable adverse 

impact on the availability of species or 

stocks of marine mammals for taking for 

subsistence uses. 

(b) If a request for a renewal of a 

Letter of Authorization indicates that a 

substantial modification to the 

described work, mitigation or 

monitoring will occur, or if NMFS 

proposes a substantial modification to 

the Letter of Authorization, NMFS will 

provide a period of 30 days for public 

review and comment on the proposed 

modification. Amending the areas for 

upcoming SURTASS LFA sonar 

operations is not considered a 

substantial modification to the Letter of 

Authorization. 

(c) A notice of issuance or denial of 

a renewal of a Letter of Authorization 

will be published in the Federal 

Register within 30 days of a 

determination. 

§ 216.190 Modifications to Letters of 

Authorization. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section, no substantial 

modification (including withdrawal or 

suspension) to a Letter of Authorization 

subject to the provisions of this subpart 

shall be made by NMFS until after 

notification and an opportunity for 

public comment has been provided. For 

purposes of this paragraph, a renewal of 

a Letter of Authorization, without 

modification, except for the period of 

validity and a listing of planned 

operating areas, or for moving the 

authorized SURTASS LFA sonar system 

from one ship to another, is not 

considered a substantial modification. 

(b) If the National Marine Fisheries 

Service determines that an emergency 

exists that poses a significant risk to the 

well-being of the species or stocks of 

marine mammals specified in 

§ 216.180(b), a Letter of Authorization 

may be substantially modified without 

prior notice and opportunity for public 

comment. Notification will be published 

in the Federal Register within 30 days 

of the action. 

§ 216.191 Designation of Offshore 

Biologically Important Marine Mammal 

Areas. 

(a) Offshore biologically important 

areas for marine mammals may be 

nominated under this paragraph by the 

National Marine Fisheries Service or by 

members of the public. 

(b) Proponents must petition NMFS 

by requesting an area be added to the 

list of offshore biologically important 

areas in § 216.184(f) and submitting the 

following information: 

(1) Geographic region proposed for 

consideration (including geographic 

boundaries); 

(2) A list of marine mammal species 

or stocks within the proposed 

geographic region; 

(3) Whether the proposal is for yearround designation or seasonal, and if 

seasonal, months of years for proposed 

designation; 

(4) Detailed information on the 

biology of marine mammals within the 

area, including estimated population 

size, distribution, density, status, and 

the principal biological activity during 

the proposed period of designation 

sufficient for NMFS to make a 

preliminary determination that the area 

is biologically important for marine 

mammals; and 

(5) Detailed information on the area 

with regard to its importance for 

feeding, breeding, or migration for those 

species of marine mammals that have 

the potential to be affected by low 

frequency sounds; 

(c) Areas within 12 nm (22 km) of any 

coastline, including offshore islands, or 

within non-operating areas for 

SURTASS LFA sonar are not eligible for 

consideration. 

(d) If a petition does not contain 

sufficient information for the National 

Marine Fisheries Service to proceed, 

NMFS will determine whether the 

nominated area warrants further study. 

If so, NMFS will begin a scientific 

review of the area. 

(e)(1) If through a petition or 

independently, NMFS makes a 

preliminary determination that an 

offshore area is biologically important 

for marine mammals and is not located 

within a previously designated area, 

NMFS will publish a Federal Register 

notice proposing to add the area to 

§ 216.184(f) and solicit public comment. 

(2) The National Marine Fisheries 

Service will publish its final 

determination in the Federal Register. 

[FR Doc. 07–3329 Filed 7–5–07; 12:44 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS4