31372 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 129 / Thursday, July 5, 2018 / Notices 

SVWID study is to assess fish passage 

barriers, habitat conditions, water 

quality, and fish presence/absence. This 

research would benefit the affected 

species by better informing plans to 

improve drainage, minimize flooding, 

and restore salmon habitat. Further, this 

research would benefit listed species by 

providing data about the status of these 

species in agricultural drainage ditches 

and small streams that may not 

otherwise be studied. The SVWID 

proposes to capture fish using seine 

nets, minnow traps, and backpack 

electrofishing equipment. Captured fish 

would be held in aerated buckets, 

identified to species, measured to 

length, and released. The researchers do 

not intend to kill any listed fish, but 

some may die as an inadvertent result 

of the research. 

Permit 22127 

The FWS is seeking a five-year 

research permit to annually take 

juvenile and adult PS Chinook salmon 

and PS steelhead throughout the 

Puyallup River watershed (Pierce and 

King Counties, Washington state). The 

purpose of the FWS study is to research 

ESA-listed bull trout life history 

diversity and gather information about 

their temporal and spatial use of the 

watershed at multiple life stages. Other 

target species include brook trout 

(Salvelinus fontinalis), cutthroat trout 

(O. clarkii), and non-migratory sculpin 

species (Shorthead, Torrent, and Riffle). 

PS Chinook salmon and PS steelhead 

would be incidentally during this study 

because their ranges overlap the target 

species. This research would benefit the 

listed species by providing fine scale 

information about their movement 

timing and upstream residency. Those 

data, in turn, would be used to inform 

management and recovery actions. The 

FWS proposes to capture fish using 

electro-fykes, backpack electrofishing 

equipment, gill nets, hook-and-line, and 

minnow traps. Bull trout would be 

anesthetized, PIT tagged, weighed, 

measured for length, tissue sampled (fin 

rays), and released. Other target species 

would be euthanized for otolith and fin 

ray analysis. All PS steelhead and PS 

Chinook salmon would be captured, 

handled, and immediately released. The 

researchers do not propose to kill any of 

the listed fish, but some may die as an 

unintended result of the activities. 

This notice is provided pursuant to 

section 10(c) of the ESA. NMFS will 

evaluate the applications, associated 

documents, and comments submitted to 

determine whether the applications 

meet the requirements of section 10(a) 

of the ESA and Federal regulations. The 

final permit decisions will not be made 

until after the end of the 30-day 

comment period. NMFS will publish 

notice of its final action in the Federal 

Register. 

Dated: June 28, 2018. 

Angela Somma, 

Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office 

of Protected Resources, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–14341 Filed 7–3–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XG066 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Seabird 

Research Activities in Central 

California 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; Issuance of an Incidental 

Harassment Authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

regulations implementing the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as 

amended, notification is hereby given 

that NMFS has issued an incidental 

harassment authorization (IHA) to Point 

Blue Conservation Science (Point Blue) 

to incidentally harass, by Level B 

harassment only, marine mammals 

during seabird research activities in 

central California. 

DATES: This Authorization is effective 

from July 7, 2018 through July 6, 2019. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob 

Pauline, Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, (301) 427–8401. Electronic 

copies of the application and supporting 

documents, as well as a list of the 

references cited in this document, may 

be obtained online at: https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/incidentaltake-authorizations-research-and-otheractivities. In case of problems accessing 

these documents, please call the contact 

listed above. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the 

MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct 

the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated 

to NMFS) to allow, upon request, the 

incidental, but not intentional, taking of 

small numbers of marine mammals by 

U.S. citizens who engage in a specified 

activity (other than commercial fishing) 

within a specified geographical region if 

certain findings are made and either 

regulations are issued or, if the taking is 

limited to harassment, a notice of a 

proposed authorization is provided to 

the public for review. 

An authorization for incidental 

takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 

that the taking will have a negligible 

impact on the species or stock(s), will 

not have an unmitigable adverse impact 

on the availability of the species or 

stock(s) for subsistence uses (where 

relevant), and if the permissible 

methods of taking and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of such takings are set 

forth. 

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. 

The MMPA states that the term ‘‘take’’ 

means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or 

attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill 

any marine mammal. 

Except with respect to certain 

activities not pertinent here, the MMPA 

defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act of 

pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) 

has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has 

the potential to disturb a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild by causing disruption of behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering (Level B 

harassment). 

Summary of Request 

On January 4, 2018, NMFS received a 

request from Point Blue for an IHA to 

take marine mammals incidental to 

seabird research monitoring conducted 

at three locations in central California. 

Point Blue’s request is for take of 

California sea lions (Zalophus 

californianus), harbor seals (Phoca 

vitulina), northern elephant seals 

(Mirounga angustirostris), and Steller 

sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) by Level 

B harassment only. Neither Point Blue 

nor NMFS expect serious injury or 

mortality to result from this activity 

and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. 

NMFS previously issued eight IHAs to 

Point Blue for similar work from 2006 

through 2017 (72 FR 71121; December 

14, 2007, 73 FR 77011; December 18, 

2008, 75 FR 8677; February 19, 2010, 77 

FR 73989; December 7, 2012, 78 FR 

66686; November 6, 2013, 80 FR 80321; 

December 24, 2015, 81 FR 34978; June 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 129 / Thursday, July 5, 2018 / Notices 31373 

1, 2016, 82 FR 31759; July 7, 2017). 

Point Blue complied with all the 

requirements (e.g., mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting) of the 

previous IHAs and information 

regarding their monitoring results may 

be found in the Estimated Take section. 

The planned seabird research activities 

will occur on Southeast Farallon Island 

(SEFI), An ̃ o Nuevo Island (ANI), and 

Point Reyes National Seashore (PRNS). 

Point Blue, along with partners Oikonos 

Ecosystem Knowledge and PRNS, plan 

to conduct research activities that have 

been ongoing for thirty years. These 

partners are conducting this research 

under cooperative agreements with the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 

in consultation with the Gulf of the 

Farallones National Marine Sanctuary. 

We considered the IHA request for 

2018–2019 activities as adequate and 

complete on February 28, 2018. 

Description of Activity 

Point Blue plans to monitor and 

census seabird colonies; observe seabird 

nesting habitat; restore nesting burrows; 

and resupply a field station annually in 

central California (i.e., SEFI, ANI, and 

PRNS). The purpose of the seabird 

research is to continue a 30-year 

monitoring program of the region’s 

seabird populations. Take by Level B 

harassment may occur due to incidental 

disturbance of pinnipeds by researchers 

during monitoring activities. A detailed 

description of the planned research 

project is provided in the Federal 

Register notice for the proposed IHA (83 

FR 20045; May 7, 2018). Since that time, 

no changes have been made to the 

planned research activities. Therefore, a 

detailed description is not provided 

here. Please refer to that Federal 

Register notice for the description of the 

specific activity. 

Comments and Responses 

A notice of NMFS’s proposal to issue 

an IHA to the Point Blue was published 

in the Federal Register on May 7, 2018 

(83 FR 20045). That notice described, in 

detail, Point Blue’s activities, the marine 

mammal species that may be affected, 

and the anticipated effects on marine 

mammals. During the 30-day public 

comment period, the Marine Mammal 

Commission (Commission) provided 

comments as described below and 

concurred with NMFS’s findings and 

recommended the issuance of an IHA, 

subject to the inclusion of the 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

measures. 

Comment: The Commission requested 

clarification of certain issues associated 

with NMFS’s notice that one-year 

renewals could be issued in certain 

limited circumstances and expressed 

concern that the process would bypass 

the public notice and comment 

requirements. The Commission also 

suggested that NMFS should discuss the 

possibility of renewals through a more 

general route, such as a rulemaking, 

instead of notice in a specific 

authorization. The Commission further 

recommended that if NMFS did not 

pursue a more general route, that the 

agency provide the Commission and the 

public with a legal analysis supporting 

our conclusion that this process is 

consistent with the requirements of 

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

Response: The process of issuing a 

renewal IHA does not bypass the public 

notice and comment requirements of the 

MMPA. The notice of the proposed IHA 

expressly notifies the public that under 

certain, limited conditions an applicant 

could seek a renewal IHA for an 

additional year. The notice describes the 

conditions under which such a renewal 

request could be considered and 

expressly seeks public comment in the 

event such a renewal is sought. 

Importantly, such renewals would be 

limited to where the activities are 

identical or nearly identical to those 

analyzed in the proposed IHA, 

monitoring does not indicate impacts 

that were not previously analyzed and 

authorized, and the mitigation and 

monitoring requirements remain the 

same, all of which allow the public to 

comment on the appropriateness and 

effects of a renewal at the same time the 

public provides comments on the initial 

IHA. NMFS has, however, modified the 

language for future proposed IHAs to 

clarify that all IHAs, including renewal 

IHAs, are valid for no more than one 

year and that the agency would consider 

only one renewal for a project at this 

time. In addition, notice of issuance or 

denial of a renewal IHA would be 

published in the Federal Register, as are 

all IHAs. Last, NMFS will publish on 

our website a description of the renewal 

process before any renewal is issued 

utilizing the new process. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of Specified Activities 

A detailed description of the species 

likely to be affected by the research and 

monitoring project, including brief 

introductions to the species and 

relevant stocks as well as available 

information regarding population trends 

and threats, and information regarding 

local occurrence, were provided in the 

Federal Register notice for the proposed 

IHA (83 FR 20045; May 7, 2018). Since 

that time, we are not aware of any 

changes in the status of these species 

and stocks; therefore, detailed 

descriptions are not provided here. 

Please refer to that Federal Register 

notice for these descriptions as well as 

to NMFS’s website (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/ 

population-assessments/marinemammals) for generalized species 

accounts. All species that could 

potentially occur in the planned survey 

areas are included in Table 1. Note that 

Northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) 

and Guadalupe fur seals (Arctocephalus 

townsendi) have been known to occur at 

some seabird research sites. However, 

their occurrence is extremely rare. 

Therefore, Point Blue did not request 

take of these species. 

TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE VICINITY OF STUDY AREAS

Species Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

strategic 

(Y/N) 1

Stock abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent 

abundance survey) 2

PBR Annual 

M/SI 3

Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia 

Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) 

California sea lion ..................... Zalophus californianus ........ U.S. ...................................... –; N 296,750 (n/a; 153,337; 

2011).

9,200 389 

Steller sea lion .......................... Eumetopias jubatus ............. Eastern U.S. ........................ D; Y 41,638 (n/a; 41,638; 2015) .. 2,498 108 

Family Phocidae (earless seals) 

Harbor seal ............................... Phoca vitulina richardii ........ California ............................. –; N 30,968 (0.157; 27,348; 

2012).

1,641 43 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
31374 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 129 / Thursday, July 5, 2018 / Notices 

TABLE 1—MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE VICINITY OF STUDY AREAS—Continued 

Species Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

strategic 

(Y/N) 1

Stock abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent 

abundance survey) 2

PBR Annual 

M/SI 3

Northern elephant seal ............. Mirounga angustirostris ....... California breeding stock ..... –; N 179,000 (n/a; 81,368; 2010) 4,882 8.8 

1Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (–) indicates that the species is not listed under the 

ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or 

which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically 

designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock 

abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For certain stocks of pinnipeds, abundance estimates are based upon observations of animals (often pups) ashore 

multiplied by some correction factor derived from knowledge of the species’ (or similar species’) life history to arrive at a best abundance estimate; therefore, there is 

no associated CV. In these cases, the minimum abundance may represent actual counts of all animals ashore. 3These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated 

mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases. 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

The effects of seabird researchers at 

the specified locations have the 

potential to result in harassment of 

marine mammals in the vicinity of the 

action area. The Federal Register notice 

for the proposed IHA (83 FR 20045; May 

7, 2018) included a discussion of the 

effects of Level B harassment on marine 

mammals. Therefore, that information is 

not repeated here; please refer to the 

Federal Register notice for that 

information. No instances of serious 

injury or mortality are expected as a 

result of the specified activities. 

Estimated Take 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes 

authorized through this IHA, which will 

inform both NMFS’s consideration of 

‘‘small numbers’’ and the negligible 

impact determination. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to certain activities 

not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the 

MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which 

(i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has 

the potential to disturb a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild by causing disruption of behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering (Level B 

harassment). 

Authorized takes are by Level B 

harassment only, in the form of 

disruption of behavioral patterns for 

individual marine mammals resulting 

from exposure to pedestrian researchers. 

Based on the nature of the activity, 

Level A harassment is neither 

anticipated nor authorized. 

As described previously, no mortality 

is anticipated or authorized for this 

activity. Below we describe how the 

take is estimated. NMFS bases these 

take estimates on historical data from 

five previous monitoring reports of the 

same activity to generate 95 percent 

confidence interval maximums 

(assuming normal distribution) using 

STATA, a general-purpose statistical 

computer software package. Results are 

shown in Table 2. Takes recorded in all 

previous monitoring reports were based 

on occurrences that are consistent with 

Levels 2 and 3 of the three-point-scale 

(See Table 4). For California sea lions 

and harbor seals, NMFS elected to use 

the values projected as shown in Table 

2. However, since the projected take 

numbers for northern elephant seals and 

Steller sea lions were very close to 

recorded takes in 2017–2018, NMFS 

increased the take numbers for these 

species by 20 percent over the actual 

2017–2018 take numbers shown in 

Table 2. This provides a buffer so Point 

Blue can continue their work if recorded 

takes for those two species exceeded 

take numbers generated by the STATA 

program. Authorized take numbers are 

shown in Table 3. 

TABLE 2—PAST REPORTED TAKE OBSERVATIONS AND ESTIMATED TAKE AUTHORIZED FOR 2018–2019 POINT BLUE

ACTIVITIES ACCORDING TO STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Species 

Reported take observations from past seasons 1 Authorized 

take 

2018–2019 

IHA 

IHA 

(2013–2014) 

IHA 

(2014–2015) 

IHA 

(2015–2016) 

IHA 

(2016) 

IHA 

(2017) 

California Sea Lions ................................. 3,610 2,254 4,646 1 36,397 22,612 32,623 

Northern Elephant Seals .......................... 67 30 97 169 198 239 

Harbor Seals ............................................ 109 141 259 292 234 304 

Steller Sea Lions (E–DPS) ...................... 4 12 6 31 35 43 

1 Large increase in California sea lions likely due to El Nin ̃o event. 

TABLE 3—POPULATION ABUNDANCE ESTIMATES, TOTAL LEVEL B TAKE, AND PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION THAT MAY BE

TAKEN

Species Stock Stock 

abundance 

Total level B 

take 

Percentage of 

stock or 

population 

California sea lion ........................................... U.S ................................................................. 296,750 32,623 10.9 

Northern elephant seal ................................... California breeding stock ............................... 179,000 239 0.13 

Harbor seal ..................................................... California ........................................................ 30,968 304 0.98 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 129 / Thursday, July 5, 2018 / Notices 31375 

TABLE 3—POPULATION ABUNDANCE ESTIMATES, TOTAL LEVEL B TAKE, AND PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION THAT MAY BE

TAKEN—Continued 

Species Stock Stock 

abundance 

Total level B 

take 

Percentage of 

stock or 

population 

Steller sea lion ................................................ Eastern U.S .................................................... 41,638 43 0.10 

Mitigation Measures 

In order to issue an IHA under section 

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

set forth the permissible methods of 

taking pursuant to such activity, and 

other means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on such species or 

stock and its habitat, paying particular 

attention to rookeries, mating grounds, 

and areas of similar significance, and on 

the availability of such species or stock 

for taking for certain subsistence uses 

(latter not applicable for this action). 

NMFS regulations require applicants for 

incidental take authorizations to include 

information about the availability and 

feasibility (economic and technological) 

of equipment, methods, and manner of 

conducting such activity or other means 

of effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact upon the affected species or 

stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 

216.104(a)(11)). 

In evaluating how mitigation may or 

may not be appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses where 

applicable, we carefully consider two 

primary factors: 

(1) the manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure(s) is 

expected to reduce impacts to marine 

mammals, marine mammal species or 

stocks, and their habitat. This considers 

the nature of the potential adverse 

impact being mitigated (likelihood, 

scope, range). It further considers the 

likelihood that the measure will be 

effective if implemented (probability of 

accomplishing the mitigating result if 

implemented as planned) the likelihood 

of effective implementation (probability 

implemented as planned); and 

(2) the practicability of the measures 

for applicant implementation, which 

may consider such things as cost, 

impact on operations,. 

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and 

Their Habitat 

Point Blue has based the mitigation 

measures, which they will employ 

during the research, on the 

implementation of protocols used 

during previous Point Blue research 

activities under previous authorizations 

for these activities. Note that Point Blue 

and NMFS have refined mitigation 

requirements over the years in an effort 

to reduce behavioral disturbance 

impacts to marine mammals. 

To reduce the potential for 

disturbance from acoustic and visual 

stimuli associated with survey activities 

Point Blue will implement the following 

mitigation measures for marine 

mammals: 

(1) Slow approach to beaches for boat 

landings to avoid stampede, provide 

animals opportunity to enter water, and 

avoid vessel strikes; 

(2) Observe a site from a distance, 

using binoculars if necessary, to detect 

any marine mammals prior to approach 

to determine if mitigation is required 

(i.e., site surveys will not be conducted 

if fur seals are present; if other 

pinnipeds are present, researchers will 

approach with caution, walking slowly, 

quietly, and close to the ground to avoid 

surprising any hauled-out individuals 

and to reduce flushing/stampeding of 

individuals); 

(3) Avoid pinnipeds along access 

ways to sites by locating and taking a 

different access way. Researchers will 

keep a safe distance from and not 

approach any marine mammal while 

conducting research, unless it is 

absolutely necessary to flush a marine 

mammal in order to continue 

conducting research (i.e., if a site cannot 

be accessed or sampled due to the 

presence of pinnipeds); 

(4) Cease or delay visits if the number 

of takes that have been granted are met, 

if a species for which takes were not 

granted is observed (e.g., northern fur 

seals and Guadalupe fur seals), or if 

pups are present 

(5) Monitor for offshore predators and 

do not approach hauled out pinnipeds 

if great white sharks (Carcharodon 

carcharias) or killer whales (Orcinus 

orca) are present. If Point Blue and/or 

its designees see pinniped predators in 

the area, they must not disturb the 

pinnipeds until the area is free of 

predators; 

(6) Keep voices hushed and bodies 

low to the ground in the visual presence 

of pinnipeds; 

(7) Conduct seabird observations at 

North Landing on SEFI in an 

observation blind, shielded from the 

view of hauled out pinnipeds; 

(8) Crawl slowly to access seabird nest 

boxes on ANI if pinnipeds are within 

view; 

(9) Coordinate research visits to 

intertidal areas of SEFI (to reduce 

potential take) and coordinate research 

goals for ANI to minimize the number 

of trips to the island; and 

(10) Require beach landings on ANI 

only occur after any pinnipeds that 

might be present on the landing beach 

have entered the water. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s measures, as well as other 

measures considered by NMFS, NMFS 

has determined that the prescribed 

mitigation measures provide the means 

effecting the least practicable impact on 

the affected species or stocks and their 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance. 

Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an IHA for an 

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

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, 

requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking. 

The MMPA implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that 

requests for authorizations must include 

the suggested means of accomplishing 

the necessary monitoring and reporting 

that will result in increased knowledge 

of the species and of the level of taking 

or impacts on populations of marine 

mammals that are expected to be 

present in the planned action area. 

Effective reporting is critical both to 

compliance as well as ensuring that the 

most value is obtained from the required 

monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• Occurrence of marine mammal 

species or stocks in the area in which 

take is anticipated (e.g., presence, 

abundance, distribution, density); 

• Nature, scope, or context of likely 

marine mammal exposure to potential 

stressors/impacts (individual or 

cumulative, acute or chronic), through 

better understanding of: (1) Action or 

environment (e.g., source 

characterization, propagation, ambient 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
31376 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 129 / Thursday, July 5, 2018 / Notices 

noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life 

history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence 

of marine mammal species with the 

action; or (4) biological or behavioral 

context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or 

feeding areas); 

• Individual marine mammal 

responses (behavioral or physiological) 

to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or 

cumulative), other stressors, or 

cumulative impacts from multiple 

stressors; 

• How anticipated responses to 

stressors impact either: (1) Long-term 

fitness and survival of individual 

marine mammals; or (2) populations, 

species, or stocks; 

• Effects on marine mammal habitat 

(e.g., marine mammal prey species, 

acoustic habitat, or other important 

physical components of marine 

mammal habitat); and 

• Mitigation and monitoring 

effectiveness. 

Point Blue will contribute to the 

knowledge of pinnipeds in California by 

noting observations of: (1) Unusual 

behaviors, numbers, or distributions of 

pinnipeds, such that any potential 

follow-up research can be conducted by 

the appropriate personnel; (2) tagbearing pinnipeds or carcasses, allowing 

transmittal of the information to 

appropriate agencies and personnel; and 

(3) rare or unusual species of marine 

mammals for agency follow-up. 

Required monitoring protocols for 

Point Blue will include the following: 

(1) Record of date, time, and location 

(or closest point of ingress) of each visit 

to the research site; 

(2) Composition of the marine 

mammals sighted, such as species, 

gender and life history stage (e.g., adult, 

sub-adult, pup); 

(3) Information on the numbers (by 

species) of marine mammals observed 

during the activities; 

(4) Estimated number of marine 

mammals (by species) that may have 

been harassed during the activities; 

(5) Behavioral responses or 

modifications of behaviors that may be 

attributed to the specific activities and 

a description of the specific activities 

occurring during that time (e.g., 

pedestrian approach, vessel approach); 

and 

(6) Information on the weather, 

including the tidal state and horizontal 

visibility. 

Note that the lead biologist should 

serve as an observer to record incidental 

take. For consistency, any reactions by 

pinnipeds to researchers will be 

recorded according to a three-point 

scale shown in Table 4. Note that only 

observations of disturbance noted in 

Levels 2 and 3 should be recorded as 

takes. 

TABLE 4—LEVELS OF PINNIPED BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE

Level Type of response Definition 

1 ........... Alert .............................................................. Seal head orientation or brief movement in response to disturbance, which may include 

turning head towards the disturbance, craning head and neck while holding the body 

rigid in a u-shaped position, changing from a lying to a sitting position, or brief movement of less than twice the animal’s body length. 

2 * ......... Movement .................................................... Movements in response to the source of disturbance, ranging from short withdrawals at 

least twice the animal’s body length to longer retreats over the beach, or if already 

moving a change of direction of greater than 90 degrees. 

2 ** ........ Flush ............................................................ All retreats (flushes) to the water. 

* Only observations of disturbance Levels 2 and 3 are recorded as takes. 

This information will be incorporated 

into a monitoring report for NMFS. The 

monitoring report will cover the period 

from January 1, 2018 through December 

31, 2018. NMFS has requested that 

Point Blue submit annual monitoring 

report data on a calendar year schedule, 

regardless of the current IHA’s initiation 

or expiration dates. This will ensure 

that data from all consecutive months 

will be collected and, therefore, can be 

analyzed to estimate authorized take for 

future IHA’s regardless of the existing 

IHA’s issuance date. Point Blue will 

submit a draft monitoring report to 

NMFS Office of Protected Resources by 

April 1, 2019. A final report will be 

prepared and submitted within 30 days 

following resolution of any comments 

on the draft report from NMFS. If no 

comments are received from NMFS, the 

draft final report will be considered to 

be the final report. This report must 

contain the informational elements 

described above, at minimum. 

Point Blue must also report 

observations of unusual pinniped 

behaviors, numbers, or distributions and 

tag-bearing carcasses to the NMFS West 

Coast Regional Office. 

If at any time the specified activity 

clearly causes the take of a marine 

mammal in a manner prohibited by this 

IHA, such as an injury (Level A 

harassment), serious injury, or 

mortality, Point Blue will immediately 

cease the specified activities and report 

the incident to the Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast 

Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS. 

The report must include the following 

information: 

(1) Time and date of the incident; 

(2) Description of the incident; 

(3) Environmental conditions (e.g., 

wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea 

state, cloud cover, and visibility); 

(4) Description of all marine mammal 

observations in the 24 hours preceding 

the incident; 

(5) Species identification or 

description of the animal(s) involved; 

(6) Fate of the animal(s); and 

(7) Photographs or video footage of 

the animal(s). 

Activities will not resume until NMFS 

is able to review the circumstances of 

the prohibited take. NMFS will work 

with Point Blue to determine what 

measures are necessary to minimize the 

likelihood of further prohibited take and 

ensure MMPA compliance. Point Blue 

may not resume the activities until 

notified by NMFS. 

In the event that an injured or dead 

marine mammal is discovered and it is 

determined that the cause of the injury 

or death is unknown and the death is 

relatively recent (e.g., in less than a 

moderate state of decomposition), Point 

Blue will immediately report the 

incident to the Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast 

Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS. 

The report must include the same 

information identified in the paragraph 

above. Activities may continue while 

NMFS reviews the circumstances of the 

incident. NMFS will work with Point 

Blue to determine whether additional 

mitigation measures or modifications to 

the activities are appropriate. 

In the event that an injured or dead 

marine mammal is discovered and it is 

determined that the injury or death is 

not associated with or related to the 

activities authorized in the IHA (e.g., 

previously wounded animal, carcass 

with moderate to advanced 

decomposition, or scavenger damage), 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 129 / Thursday, July 5, 2018 / Notices 31377 

Point Blue will report the incident to 

the Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, and the West Coast Regional 

Stranding Coordinator, NMFS, within 

24 hours of the discovery. Point Blue 

will provide photographs or video 

footage or other documentation of the 

stranded animal sighting to NMFS. 

Activities may continue while NMFS 

reviews the circumstances of the 

incident. 

Negligible Impact Analysis and 

Determination 

NMFS has defined negligible impact 

as an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival 

(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact 

finding is based on the lack of likely 

adverse effects on annual rates of 

recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number 

of takes alone is not enough information 

on which to base an impact 

determination. In addition to 

considering estimates of the number of 

marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ 

through harassment, NMFS considers 

other factors, such as the likely nature 

of any responses (e.g., intensity, 

duration), the context of any responses 

(e.g., critical reproductive time or 

location, migration), as well as effects 

on habitat, and the likely effectiveness 

of the mitigation. We also assess the 

number, intensity, and context of 

estimated takes by evaluating this 

information relative to population 

status. Consistent with the 1989 

preamble for NMFS’s implementing 

regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 

1989), the impacts from other past and 

ongoing anthropogenic activities are 

incorporated into this analysis via their 

impacts on the environmental baseline 

(e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status 

of the species, population size and 

growth rate where known, ongoing 

sources of human-caused mortality, or 

ambient noise levels). 

For reasons stated previously in this 

document and based on the following 

factors, NMFS does not expect Point 

Blue’s specified activities to cause longterm behavioral disturbance that would 

negatively impact an individual 

animal’s fitness, or result in injury, 

serious injury, or mortality. Although 

Point Blue’s survey activities may 

disturb marine mammals, NMFS 

expects those impacts to occur to 

localized groups of animals at or near 

survey sites. Behavioral disturbance 

would be limited to short-term startle 

responses and localized behavioral 

changes due to the short duration 

(ranging from <15 minutes for visits at 

most locations up to 2–5 hours from 

April–August at SEFI) of the research 

activities. At some locations, where 

resupply activities occur, visits will 

occur once every two weeks. Minor and 

brief responses including short-duration 

startle reactions, are not likely to 

constitute disruption of behavioral 

patterns, such as migration, nursing, 

breeding, feeding, or sheltering (though 

the potential exists). These short 

duration disturbances (in many cases 

animals will return in 30 minutes or 

less) will generally allow marine 

mammals to reoccupy haulouts 

relatively quickly; therefore, these 

disturbances would not be anticipated 

to result in long-term disruption of 

important behaviors. No surveys will 

occur at or near rookeries as researchers 

will have limited access to SEFI, ANI, 

and PRNS during the pupping season 

and will not approach sites should pups 

be observed. Furthermore, breeding 

animals tend to be concentrated in areas 

that researchers generally do not visit. 

Therefore, NMFS does not expect 

mother and pup separation or crushing 

of pups during stampedes. 

Level B behavioral harassment of 

pinnipeds may occur during the 

operation of small motorboats. However, 

exposure to boats and associated engine 

noise would be brief and would not 

occur on a frequent basis. Results from 

studies demonstrate that pinnipeds 

generally return to their sites and do not 

permanently abandon haul-out sites 

after exposure to motorboats. The 

chance of a vessel strike is very low due 

to small boat size and slow transit 

speeds. Researchers will delay ingress 

into the landing areas until after the 

pinnipeds enter the water and will 

cautiously operate vessels at slow 

speeds. 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors primarily support 

our determination that the impacts 

resulting from this activity are not 

expected to adversely affect the species 

or stock through effects on annual rates 

of recruitment or survival: 

• No serious injury or mortality is 

anticipated or authorized. 

• Only limited behavioral disturbance 

in the form of short-duration startle 

reactions is expected while mitigation 

requirements employed by researchers 

(e.g. move slowly, use hushed voices) 

should further decrease disturbance 

levels. 

• There is no activity near rookeries 

and researchers will avoid pups. 

• There is likely to be limited impact 

from boats due to their small size, 

maneuverability and the requirement to 

delay ingress until after hauled out 

pinnipeds have entered the water. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the likely effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

and their habitat, and taking into 

consideration the implementation of the 

required monitoring and mitigation 

measures, NMFS finds that the total 

marine mammal take from the planned 

activity will have a negligible impact on 

all affected marine mammal species or 

stocks. 

Small Numbers 

As noted above, only small numbers 

of incidental take may be authorized 

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

for specified activities other than 

military readiness activities. The MMPA 

does not define small numbers and so, 

in practice, where estimated numbers 

are available, NMFS compares the 

number of individuals taken to the most 

appropriate estimation of abundance of 

the relevant species or stock in our 

determination of whether an 

authorization is limited to small 

numbers of marine mammals. 

Additionally, other qualitative factors 

may be considered in the analysis, such 

as the temporal or spatial scale of the 

activities. 

As mentioned previously, NMFS 

estimates that four marine mammal 

stocks could potentially be affected by 

Level B harassment under the 

authorization. For each stock, these 

numbers are small relative to the 

population size. As shown previously in 

Table 3, these incidental harassment 

numbers represent approximately 10.9 

percent of the U.S. stock of California 

sea lion, 0.98 percent of the California 

stock of Pacific harbor seal, 0.13 percent 

of the California breeding stock of 

northern elephant seal, and 0.10 percent 

of the eastern distinct population 

segment of Steller sea lion. Note that the 

number of individual marine mammals 

taken is assumed to be less than the take 

estimate (number of exposures) since we 

assume that the same animals may be 

behaviorally harassed over multiple 

days. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the planned activity (including 

mitigation and monitoring measures) 

and the anticipated take of marine 

mammals, NMFS finds that small 

numbers of marine mammals will be 

taken relative to the population size of 

the affected species or stocks. 

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis 

and Determination 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of the affected marine mammal stocks or 

species implicated by this action. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
31378 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 129 / Thursday, July 5, 2018 / Notices 

Therefore, NMFS has determined that 

the total taking of affected species or 

stocks would not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of 

such species or stocks for taking for 

subsistence purposes. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

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

NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 

216–6A, NMFS must review our 

proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an 

IHA) with respect to potential impacts 

on the human environment. 

This action is consistent with 

categories of activities identified in 

Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no 

anticipated serious injury or mortality) 

of the Companion Manual for NOAA 

Administrative Order 216–6A, which do 

not individually or cumulatively have 

the potential for significant impacts on 

the quality of the human environment 

and for which we have not identified 

any extraordinary circumstances that 

would preclude this categorical 

exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has 

determined that the issuance of the IHA 

qualifies to be categorically excluded 

from further NEPA review. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

No incidental take of ESA-listed 

species is authorized or expected to 

result from this activity. Therefore, 

NMFS has determined that formal 

consultation under section 7 of the ESA 

is not required for this action. 

Authorization 

As a result of these determinations, 

NMFS has issued an IHA to Point Blue 

for the potential harassment of small 

numbers of marine mammals incidental 

to seabird research activities in central 

California, provided the previously 

mentioned mitigation, monitoring and 

reporting requirements are incorporated. 

Dated: June 29, 2018. 

Donna S. Wieting, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–14440 Filed 7–3–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Patent and Trademark Office 

USPTO Websites Customer 

Satisfaction Surveys 

ACTION: Proposed collection; comment 

request. 

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and 

Trademark Office (USPTO), as required 

by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995, invites comments on a proposed 

new information collection. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before September 4, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

• Email: InformationCollection@

uspto.gov. Include ‘‘0651—New: 

Generic Clearance comment’’ in the 

subject line of the message. 

• Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. 

• Mail: Marcie Lovett, Director, 

Records and Information Governance 

Division, Office of the Chief Information 

Officer, United States Patent and 

Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, 

Alexandria, VA 22313–1450. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information 

should be directed to Marcie Lovett, 

Director, Records and Information 

Governance Division, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer, United States 

Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 

1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450; by 

telephone at 571–272–8123; or by email 

to Marcie.Lovett@uspto.gov with 

‘‘Generic Clearance’’ in the subject line. 

Additional information about this 

collection can be found at http://

www.reginfo.gov under ‘‘Information 

Collection Review.’’ 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

This proposed information collection 

covers information gathered on the 

USPTO Websites Customer Satisfaction 

Surveys. These surveys provide a means 

to consistently assess, benchmark, and 

improve customer satisfaction with 

USPTO websites. The agency has 

partnered with ForeSee Results, Inc. to 

conduct this information collection. 

ForeSee Results’ methodology 

(Customer Experience Analytics or 

CXA) is a derivative of the widely used 

American Customer Satisfaction Index 

(ACSI). This methodology combines 

survey data and a patented econometric 

model to precisely measure the 

customer satisfaction of website users, 

identify specific areas for improvement, 

and determine the impact of those 

improvements on customer satisfaction. 

The ultimate purpose of the surveys 

covered in this collection is to improve 

the quality of goods and services 

available to customers of the USPTO. 

The USPTO Websites Customer 

Satisfaction Surveys will be completed 

subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, 

Public Law 93–579, December 31, 1974 

(5 U.S.C. 522a). The agency information 

collection will be used solely for the 

purpose of the surveys. The contractor 

will not be authorized to release any 

USPTO information obtained through 

surveys without first obtaining 

permission from USPTO. In no case will 

any new system of records containing 

privacy information be developed by the 

USPTO or the contractor collecting the 

data. In addition, USPTO provides 

ForeSee only information sufficient to 

randomly select website visitors as 

potential survey respondents. 

The information collected in the 

surveys will enable USPTO to 

determine customer satisfaction metrics 

among various visitor sub-groups. This 

information collection will assist 

USPTO in improving customer service 

and addressing areas of concern in a 

targeted manner. This survey does not 

ask any questions of a sensitive nature 

or regarding sensitive topics. There is no 

other agency or organization able to 

provide the information that is 

accessible through the surveying 

approach used in this information 

collection. 

II. Method of Collection 

Customers will respond to the surveys 

electronically, as hosted on USPTO 

websites. 

III. Data 

OMB Number: 0651—New. 

IC Instruments and Forms: The 

individual instruments in this 

collection, as well as their associated 

forms, are listed in the table below. 

Type of Review: New collection. 

Affected Public: Individuals and 

households; businesses or other forprofits; and not-for-profit institutions. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

100,000 responses per year. 

Estimated Time per Response: 

Approximately 8 minutes (0.133 hours) 

per response. 

Estimated Total Annual Respondent 

Burden Hours: 13,333.33 hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Respondent 

(Hourly) Cost Burden: $2,716,133.33. 

The USPTO expects that attorneys, 

paralegals and pro se applicants will 

complete these applications. The 

professional hourly rate for attorneys is 

$438, and the hourly rates for paralegals 

and pro se applicants are $145 and 

$28.14, respectively. The combination 

of these respondent types brings the 

average respondent rate to $203.71. The 

sources for these rates are the 2017 

Report of the Economic Survey of the 

American Intellectual Property 

Association (AIPLA), the 2016 National 

Utilization and Compensation Survey 

Report of the National Association of 

the Legal Assistants (NALA), and the 

mean rate for office and administrative 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1