Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19231 

H. Discussions. 

6. Improving ACL specifications and 

stock assessments. 

A. Overview of the ACL process and 

FY2012 specification. 

B. Report on the Council—NMFS ACL 

Revisited Workshop. 

C. Surplus production model using 

biomass, catch, and natural mortality 

estimates. 

D. Length-based estimation of fishing 

and natural mortality in Hawaii coral 

reef fishes. 

E. Kona crab stock assessment. 

F. Update on the kumu stock 

assessment. 

G. Use of fish trap CPUE as proxy for 

estimating stock abundance. 

H. Discussions. 

April 20, 2012—8:30 a.m.–5 p.m. 

7. Data collection and reporting 

issues. 

A. Report on the Non-Commercial 

Data Workshop. 

B. Report on the Pacific Island 

Regional Office data contracts. 

C. Report on the Division of Boating 

and Ocean Recreation boat registry 

survey. 

D. Discussion on potential 

improvements in the Hawaii data 

collection. 

E. Annual Archipelagic Fishery 

Ecosystem Reports. 

F. Discussions. 

8. Essential Fish Habitat/Habitat Area 

of Particular Concern. 

A. Hawaii coral reef EFH project. 

B. Hawaii EFH and HAPC for coral 

reef, pelagic and precious corals. 

C. Discussions. 

9. Protected species issues. 

A. List of fisheries 2012: Marine 

Mammal Protection Act issues. 

10. Developing Cooperative Research 

priorities. 

11. Discussions. 

12. Other Business. 

13. Public Comment. 

14. HI–PRIA PT recommendations. 

Special Accommodations 

These meetings are physically 

accessible to people with disabilities. 

Requests for sign language 

interpretation or other auxiliary aids 

should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, 

(808) 522–8220 (voice) or (808) 522– 

8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the 

meeting date. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: March 27, 2012. 

Tracey L. Thompson, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7660 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XB129 

New England Fishery Management 

Council; Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The New England Fishery 

Management Council (Council) is 

scheduling a public meeting of its 

Scientific and Statistical Committee 

(SSC) to consider actions affecting New 

England fisheries in the exclusive 

economic zone (EEZ). 

Recommendations from this group will 

be brought to the full Council for formal 

consideration and action, if appropriate. 

DATES: This meeting will be held on 

Monday, April 16, 2012 at 8 a.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the Hotel Providence, 137 Mathewson 

Street, Providence, RI 02903; telephone: 

(401) 861–8000; fax: (401) 861–8002. 

Council address: New England 

Fishery Management Council, 50 Water 

Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

J. Howard, Executive Director, New 

England Fishery Management Council; 

telephone: (978) 465–0492. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

NEFMC’s Scientific and Statistical 

Committee will: 

a. Complete development of fishing 

year 2013 and 2014 ABC 

recommendations for redfish, Georges 

Bank haddock, Gulf of Maine/Georges 

Bank windowpane flounder, Southern 

New England/Mid-Atlantic 

windowpane flounder, ocean pout, 

wolffish and halibut, for 

recommendations not completed from 

the March 28, 2012 SSC meeting. 

b. Review assessments and develop 

fishing year 2013 and 2014 ABC 

recommendations for Georges Bank cod, 

Gulf of Maine haddock, Cape Cod/Gulf 

of Maine yellowtail flounder, American 

plaice, witch flounder and Georges 

Bank/Gulf of Maine white hake. 

c. Other business may be discussed. 

The public is invited to participate in 

the SSC meeting via webinar. For online 

access to the meeting, please reserve 

your webinar seat now at https:// 

www3.gotomeeting.com/register/ 

309803270. 

Although non-emergency issues not 

contained in this agenda may come 

before this group for discussion, th ose 

issues may not be the subject of formal 

action during this meeting. Action will 

be restricted to those issues specifically 

listed in this notice and any issues 

arising after publication of this notice 

that require emergency action under 

section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act, provided the public has been 

notified of the Council’s intent to take 

final action to address the emergency. 

Special Accommodations 

This meeting is physically accessible 

to people with disabilities. Requests for 

sign language interpretation or other 

auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul 

J. Howard, Executive Director, at (978) 

465–0492, at least 5 days prior to the 

meeting date. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: March 27, 2012. 

Tracey L. Thompson, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7658 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XZ14 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Navy Training 

Conducted at the Silver Strand 

Training Complex, San Diego Bay 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; additional information 

for the proposed incidental harassment 

authorization; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS has received an 

application from the U.S. Navy (Navy) 

for an Incidental Harassment 

Authorization (IHA) to take marine 

mammals, by harassment, incidental to 

conducting training exercises at the 

Silver Strand Training Complex (SSTC) 

in the vicinity of San Diego Bay, 

California. Subsequently, additional 

information on marine mammals and 

proposed improvement on marine 

mammal monitoring and mitigation 

measures was received from the Navy. 

Pursuant to the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is 

requesting comments on its proposal to 

issue an IHA to the Navy to incidentally 

harass, by Level B Harassment only, 

eight species of marine mammals during 

the specified activity. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19232 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than April 30, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the 

application should be addressed to 

Tammy C. Adams, Acting Chief, Permits 

and Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, National Marine 

Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910– 

3225. The mailbox address for providing 

email comments is itp.guan@noaa.gov. 

NMFS is not responsible for email 

comments sent to addresses other than 

the one provided here. Comments sent 

via email, including all attachments, 

must not exceed a 10-megabyte file size. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http:// 

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

incidental.htm without change. All 

Personal Identifying Information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

A copy of the application containing 

a list of the references used in this 

document may be obtained by writing to 

the address specified above, telephoning 

the contact listed below (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or 

visiting the Internet at: http:// 

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

incidental.htm. Documents cited in this 

notice may also be viewed, by 

appointment, during regular business 

hours, at the aforementioned address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Shane Guan, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8418. 

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 (Secretary) 

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) 

if certain findings are made and 

regulations are issued or, if the taking is 

limited to harassment, notice of a 

proposed authorization is provided to 

the public for review. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

shall be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the species or stock(s), 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 taking 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 National Defense Authorization 

Act of 2004 (NDAA) (Public Law 108– 

136) removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and 

‘‘specified geographical region’’ 

limitations and amended the definition 

of ‘‘harassment’’ as it applies to a 

‘‘military readiness activity’’ to read as 

follows (Section 3(18)(B) of the MMPA): 

(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]. 

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

established an expedited process by 

which citizens of the United States can 

apply for an authorization to 

incidentally take small numbers of 

marine mammals by harassment. 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day 

time limit for NMFS review of an 

application followed by a 30-day public 

notice and comment period on any 

proposed authorizations for the 

incidental harassment of marine 

mammals. Within 45 days of the close 

of the comment period, NMFS must 

either issue or deny the authorization. 

Summary of Request 

NMFS received an application on 

March 3, 2010, and subsequently, a 

revised application on September 13, 

2010, from the Navy for the taking, by 

harassment, of marine mammals 

incidental to conducting training 

exercises at the Navy’s Silver Strand 

Training Complex (SSTC) in the vicinity 

of San Diego Bay, California. On 

October 19, 2010, NMFS published a 

Federal Register notice (75 FR 64276) 

requesting comments from the public 

concerning the Navy’s proposed training 

activities along with NMFS’ proposed 

IHA. However, on March 4, 2011, three 

long-beaked common dolphins were 

found dead following the Navy’s mine 

neutralization training exercise 

involving time-delayed firing devices 

(TDFDs) at SSTC, and were suspected to 

be killed by the detonation. In short, a 

TDFD device begins a countdown to a 

detonation event that cannot be 

stopped, for example, with a 10-min 

TDFD, once the detonation has been 

initiated, 10 minutes pass before the 

detonation occurs and the event cannot 

be cancelled during that 10 minutes. 

Subsequently, NMFS suspended the 

IHA process for SSTC and worked with 

the Navy to come up with more robust 

monitoring and mitigation measures to 

prevent such incidents. On July 22, 

2011, the Navy submitted an addendum 

to its IHA application which includes 

additional information and additional 

mitigation and monitoring measures for 

its proposed mine neutralization 

training exercises using TDFDs at SSTC 

to ensure that the potential for injury or 

mortality is minimized. 

Description of the Specific Activity 

A detailed description of the Navy’s 

proposed training activities at the SSTC 

is provided in the Federal Register 

notice for the proposed IHA (75 FR 

64276; October 19, 2010), Specifically, 

major training activities at SSTC include 

underwater detonation and elevated 

causeway system (ELCAS) training. 

There are no changes on the description 

of the ELCAS training from the original 

proposed IHA (75 FR 64276; October 19, 

2010), therefore, it is not repeated here. 

However, the Federal Register notice 

for the proposed IHA did not include a 

description of TDFDs, which are used to 

detonate the explosives in the majority 

of the proposed underwater detonation 

training related to mine neutralization 

instead of directly detonating the 

explosives using positive control (which 

was described)). A TDFD device begins 

a countdown to a detonation event with 

a time-delaying device. For example, 

with a 10-min TDFD, the actual 

detonation will be started 10 minutes 

after the device is set. In addition, there 

is no mechanism to stop (abort) the preset explosion once the device has been 

set. The following is a detailed 

description regarding the justification 

and procedures for underwater 

detonation using TDFDs. 

The Need for Underwater Detonation 

Using TDFDs 

The Navy uses both timed-delayed 

and positive control to initiate a 

particular underwater detonation 

depending on the training event in 

question and in particular, the training 

objectives applicable to that underwater 

detonation. TDFDs are the simplest, 

safest, most operationally sound method 

of initiating a demolition charge on a 

floating mine or mine at depth. TDFDs 

are used because of their light weight 

ease of employment and low magnetic 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19233 

signature in cases of mines sensitive to 

magnetic fields. In addition, TDFD are 

HERO safe (‘‘hazards of electromagnetic 

radiation to ordnance’’ safe), meaning 

there is reduced risk of accidental 

detonations from nearby radios or other 

electromagnetic radiation producing 

devices. The use of TDFD eliminates the 

need to re-deploy swimmers from a 

helicopter or boat to recover equipment 

used with positive control firing devices 

such as the RFD. The TDFD also allows 

sufficient time for EOD personnel to 

swim outside of the detonation plume 

radius and human safety buffer zone 

after the timer is set. 

Although other detonation initiation 

devices, such as an RFD (a type of 

positive control device) can be used to 

initiate an underwater detonation, it is 

not normally preferred as the primary 

firing device due to HERO (see above) 

concerns with electric detonators, 

Operational Risk Management (i.e., 

safety) considerations, and established 

Navy tactical procedures. Current Navy 

RFD uses a radio signal to remotely 

detonate a charge. By using electronic 

positive control devices such as the RFD 

as the only alternative to a TDFD, 

additional electronic signals, and metal 

from the receiver and wiring is 

unnecessarily introduced into an 

influence ordnance operating 

environment. It is not consistent with 

sound safety principles or good 

demolition practice to combine different 

firing circuits to a demolition charge. 

For instance, in a live mine field, Navy 

dive platoons expect there to be 

additional risks, such as unknown 

mines with different types of influence 

firing circuits (i.e., detonated by contact, 

magnetic field, or certain sounds) in 

close proximity to a mine they are trying 

to destroy. The use of a TDFD reduces 

these risks by limiting the possibility of 

unintentionally triggering detonation 

from unknown mine types. Underwater 

demolition needs to be kept as simple 

and streamlined as possible, especially 

when divers and influence ordnance are 

considered. In an open ocean 

environment, universal use of RFDs 

would greatly increase the risk of 

misfire due to component failure, and 

put unnecessary stress on all needed 

connections and devices (adding 600– 

1,000 feet of firing wire; 

building\deploying an improvised, 

bulky, floating system for the RFD 

receiver; adding another 180 feet of 

detonating cord plus 10 feet of 

additional material). 

While positive control devices do 

allow for instantaneous detonation of a 

charge and are used for some SSTC 

training events, exclusive use of RFD 

would introduce operationally unsound 

tactics, thereby increasing future risks to 

Navy dive teams. Therefore, it is 

essential that EOD and NSW platoons 

qualify annually with necessary timedelay certification, maintain 

proficiency, and train to face real-world 

scenarios requiring use of TDFDs. 

General Underwater Detonation 

Procedures 

Prior to getting underway, all 

Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) and 

Naval Special Warfare (NSW) units 

conduct a detailed safety and procedure 

briefing to familiarize everyone with the 

goals, objectives, and safety 

requirements (including mitigation 

zones) applicable to the particular 

training event. 

Underwater detonations only occur 

during daylight. 

Underwater detonations are only 

conducted in sea-states equal to or less 

than Beaufort 3 (presence of large 

wavelets, crests beginning to break, 

presence of glassy foam, and/or perhaps 

scattered whitecaps). 

Applicable mitigation zones are 

established and visual survey 

commences for 30 minutes before 

detonation. Divers enter the water to 

conduct the training objective which 

could include searching for a training 

object such as a simulated mine or 

mine-like shape. 

For the detonation part of the training, 

the explosive charge and associate 

charge initiating device are taken to the 

detonation point. The explosives Navy 

EOD and NSW use are military forms of 

C–4 explosives. In order to detonate C– 

4 explosives, a fusing and initiating 

device is required. The two main types 

of Navy charge initiating devices are 

discussed in a subsequent section. 

Following a particular underwater 

detonation, additional personnel in the 

support boats (or helicopter) keep watch 

within the mitigation zone for 30 

minutes. 

Other changes the Navy proposed 

since the previous proposed IHA was 

issued include the addition of a new 

point sub-area Training Area-Kilo (TA– 

K), which is designated 500 yards west 

of the SSTC–SOUTH boat lanes with a 

500 m radius (Table 1–1, Figure 1–1, of 

the Navy’s Addendum). The TA–K area 

would be used to conduct small charge 

weight (< 20 lbs) underwater 

detonations. 

Additional information concerning 

underwater detonations is also provided 

in the Navy’s Addendum, and is 

included below: 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of the Specified Activity 

Common marine mammal species 

occurring regularly in the vicinity of the 

SSTC training area include the 

California sea lion (Zalophus 

californianus), Pacific harbor seal 

(Phoca vitulina richardsii), California 

coastal stock of bottlenose dolphin 

(Tursiops truncatus), and more 

infrequently gray whale (Eschrichtius 

robustus). Detailed descriptions of these 

species are provided in the Federal 

Register notice for the proposed IHA (75 

FR 64276; October 19, 2010) and are not 

repeated here. 

In addition to these four common 

species, the additional four dolphin 

species listed below have been sighted 

in the vicinity of the SSTC training area, 

but much less frequently. None are 

listed as threatened or endangered 

under the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA). Further information on these 

species can also be found in the NMFS 

Stock Assessment Reports (SAR). The 

Pacific 2010 SAR is available at: http:// 

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

po2010.pdf. 

Long-Beaked Common Dolphin 

(Delphinus capensis), California Stock 

Long-beaked common dolphins 

(Delphis capensis) are found year-round 

in the waters off California (Carretta et 

al. 2000; Bearzi 2005; DoN 2009, 2010). 

The distribution and abundance of longbeaked common dolphins appears to be 

variable based on inter-annual and 

seasonal time scales (Dohl et al. 1986; 

Heyning and Perrin 1994; Barlow 1995; 

Forney et al. 1995; Forney and Barlow 

2007). As oceanographic conditions 

change, long-beaked common dolphins 

may move between Mexican and U.S. 

waters, and therefore a multi-year 

average abundance estimate is the most 

appropriate for management within the 

U.S. waters (Carretta et al. 2010). 

California waters represent the northern 

limit for this stock and animal’s likely 

movement between U.S. and Mexican 

waters. No information on trends in 

abundance is available for this stock 

because of high inter-annual variability 

in line-transect abundance estimates 

(Carretta et al. 2010). Heyning and 

Perrin (1994) detected changes in the 

proportion of short-beaked to longbeaked common dolphins stranding 

along the California coast, with the 

short-beaked common dolphin 

stranding more frequently prior to the 

1982–83 El Nin ̃o (which increased water 

temperatures off California), and the 

long-beaked common dolphin more 

frequently observed for several years 

afterwards. Thus, it appears that both 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19234 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

relative and absolute abundance of these 

species off California may change with 

varying oceanographic conditions 

(Carretta et al. 2010). Common dolphin 

distributions may be related to 

bathymetry (Hui 1979). Long-beaked 

common dolphins are usually found 

within 50 nautical miles (nm) (92.5 km) 

of shore with significantly more 

occurrence near canyons, escarpments, 

and slopes (Heyning and Perrin 1994; 

Barlow et al. 1997; Bearzi 2005, 2006). 

Group size ranges from less than a 

dozen to several thousand individuals 

(Barlow and Forney 2007; Barlow et al. 

2010). Sparse information is available 

on the life history of long-beaked 

common dolphins, however, some 

information is provided for short-beaked 

common dolphins which may also 

apply to long-beaked dolphins. North 

Pacific short-beaked common dolphin 

females and males reach sexual maturity 

at roughly 8 and 10 years, respectively 

(Ferrero and Walker 1995). Peak calving 

season for common dolphins in the 

eastern North Pacific may be spring and 

early summer (Forney 1994). Barlow 

(2010) reported average group size for 

long-beaked common dolphins within a 

Southern California-specific stratum as 

195 individuals from a 2008 survey 

along the U.S. West Coast. The 

geometric mean abundance estimate in 

NMFS’ annual stock assessment for the 

entire California stock of long-beaked 

common dolphins, based on two ship 

surveys conducted in 2005 and 2008, is 

27,046 (CV=0.59) (Forney 2007; Barlow 

2010; Carretta et al. 2010). Using a more 

stratified approach, Barlow et al. (2010) 

estimated abundance within a Southern 

California-specific strata of 16,480 

(CV=0.41) long-beaked common 

dolphins based on analysis of pooled 

sighting data from 1991–2008. 

Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 

(Lagenorhynchus obliquidens), 

California/Oregon/Washington Stock 

While Pacific white-sided dolphins 

could potentially occur year-round in 

Southern California, surveys suggest a 

seasonal north-south movement in the 

eastern North Pacific, with animals 

found primarily off California during 

the colder water months and shifting 

northward into Oregon and Washington 

as water temperatures increase during 

late spring and summer (Green et al. 

1992, 1993; Forney 1994; Forney and 

Barlow 2007; Barlow 2010). Salvadeo et 

al. (2010) propose that increased global 

warming may increase a northward shift 

in Pacific white-sided dolphins. The 

Pacific white-sided dolphin is most 

common in waters over the continental 

shelf and slope, however, sighting 

records and captures in pelagic driftnets 

indicate that this species also occurs in 

oceanic waters well beyond the shelf 

and slope (Leatherwood et al. 1984; 

DoN 2009, 2010). Soldevilla et al. 

(2010a) reported the possibility of two 

distinct eco-types of Pacific white-sided 

dolphins occurring in Southern 

California based on passive acoustic 

detection of two distinct echolocation 

click patterns. No population trends 

have been observed in California or 

adjacent waters. Barlow (2010) reported 

average group size for Pacific whitesided dolphins within a Southern 

California-specific stratum as 17 from a 

2008 survey along the U.S. West Coast. 

The size of the entire California/Oregon/ 

Washington Stock is estimated to be 

26,930 (CV=0.28) individuals (Forney 

2007, Barlow, 2010). Using a more 

stratified approach, Barlow et al. (2010) 

estimated abundance within a Southern 

California-specific strata of 1,914 

(CV=0.39) Pacific white-sided dolphins 

based on analysis of pooled sighting 

data from 1991–2008. 

Risso’s Dolphin (Grampus griseus), 

California/Oregon/Washington Stock 

Off the U.S. West coast, Risso’s 

dolphins are commonly seen on the 

shelf off Southern California and in 

slope and offshore waters of California, 

Oregon and Washington (Soldevilla et 

al. 2010b; Carretta et al. 2010). Animals 

found off California during the colder 

water months are thought to shift 

northward into Oregon and Washington 

as water temperatures increase in late 

spring and summer (Green et al. 1992). 

The southern end of this population’s 

range is not well documented, but 

previous surveys have shown a 

conspicuous 500 nm distributional gap 

between these animals and Risso’s 

dolphins sighted south of Baja 

California and in the Gulf of California 

(Mangels and Gerrodette 1994). Thus 

this population appears distinct from 

animals found in the eastern tropical 

Pacific and the Gulf of California 

(Carretta et al. 2010). As oceanographic 

conditions vary, Risso’s dolphins may 

spend time outside the U.S. Exclusive 

Economic Zone. Barlow (2010) reported 

average group size for Risso’s dolphins 

within a Southern California-specific 

stratum as 23 from a 2008 survey along 

the U.S. West Coast. The size of the 

California/Oregon/Washington Stock is 

estimated to be 6,272 (CV=0.30) 

individuals (Forney 2007; Barlow 2010; 

Carretta et al. 2010). Using a more 

stratified approach, Barlow et al. (2010) 

estimated abundance within a Southern 

California-specific strata of 3,974 

(CV=0.39) Risso’s dolphins based on 

analysis of pooled sighting data from 

1991–2008. 

Short-Beaked Common Dolphin 

(Delphinus delphis), California/Oregon/ 

Washington Stock 

Short-beaked common dolphins are 

the most abundant cetacean off 

California, and are widely distributed 

between the coast and at least 300 nm 

distance from shore (Dohl et al. 1981; 

Forney et al. 1995; Barlow 2010; 

Carretta et al. 2010). Along the U.S. 

West Coast, portions of the short-beaked 

common dolphins’ distribution overlap 

with that of the long-beaked common 

dolphin. The northward extent of shortbeaked common dolphin distribution 

appears to vary inter-annually and with 

changing oceanographic conditions 

(Forney and Barlow 1998). Barlow 

(2010) reported average group size for 

short-beaked common dolphins within a 

Southern California-specific stratum as 

122 from a 2008 survey along the U.S. 

West Coast. The size of the California/ 

Oregon/Washington Stock is estimated 

to be 411,211 (CV=0.21) individuals 

(Carretta et al. 2010). Using a more 

stratified approach, Barlow et al. (2010) 

estimated abundance within a Southern 

California-specific strata of 152,000 

(CV=0.17) Risso’s dolphins based on 

analysis of pooled sighting data from 

1991–2008. 

Potential Effects on Marine Mammals 

Anticipated impacts resulting from 

the Navy’s proposed SSTC training 

activities include disturbance from 

underwater detonation events and pile 

driving from the Elevated Causeway 

System (ELCAS) training events, if 

marine mammals are in the vicinity of 

these action areas. Detailed description 

and comprehensive analysis of the 

overall potential effects on marine 

mammals that could result from the 

Navy’s proposed exercises involving 

ELCAS training events at the SSTC 

action area are provided in the Federal 

Register notice for the original proposed 

IHA (75 FR 64276; October 19, 2010). 

The anticipated impacts from marine 

mammal exposure to explosive 

detonations and pile-driving remain 

unchanged, however, the nature of 

potential exposure has changed due to 

the inclusion of TDFDs and is described 

and analyzed below. 

As noted earlier, the use of TDFDs 

was not addressed in the original 

FEDERAL REGISTER notice regarding the 

proposed IHA (75 FR 64276; October 19, 

2010). 

As mentioned earlier, a TDFD begins 

a countdown to a detonation event with 

a time-delaying device, and there is no 

mechanism to stop (abort) the pre-set 

explosion once the device has been set. 

Therefore, in the absence of any 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19235 

additional mitigation, the potential 

danger exists in the scenario that during 

the brief period after the exclusion zone 

is cleared and before the charges are 

detonated, marine mammals could enter 

the exclusion zone and approach close 

enough to the explosive to be injured or 

killed upon detonation. Nevertheless, 

the anticipated level of impacts to 

marine mammals without any 

mitigation and monitoring measures, 

which is assessed solely based on the 

density and distribution of the animals 

within the vicinity of the action, 

remains the same as analyzed in the 

proposed IHA. 

To address, and ultimately reduce and 

minimize the risks from underwater 

detonations that involve TDFDs, the 

Navy and NMFS developed a set of 

robust monitoring and mitigation 

measures (such as increasing the size of 

exclusion zones to account for the 

distance that a marine mammal might 

travel during the TDFD delay and 

increased pre-exercise monitoring). 

With the implementation of these 

monitoring and mitigation measures, 

NMFS believes that the potential effects 

to marine mammals that would result 

from the proposed SSTC training 

activities will remain the same as 

analyzed in the Federal Register notice 

for the proposed IHA (75 FR 64276; 

October 19, 2010). These monitoring 

and mitigation measures are further 

discussed in detail below, as well as the 

estimated number of takes. 

Specific analysis on additional 

species with infrequent occurrence that 

could be affected is provided below, 

since they were not included in the 

initial proposed IHA (75 FR 64276; 

October 19, 2010). 

Long-Beaked Common Dolphins 

With the implementation of enhanced 

monitoring and mitigation measures 

(see below), there is no predicted 

mortality or Level A injury for longbeaked common dolphins. Modeling 

predicted there would potentially be 52 

Level B exposures from underwater 

explosions and 54 Level B exposures 

from ELCAS pile driving and removal. 

Of all the relatively rare species within 

SSTC, the long-beaked common dolphin 

is the most possible given its more nearshore coastal distribution (Bearzi 2005; 

Carretta et al. 2010). Given low site 

fidelity to areas without significant 

bathymetric relief such as the low slope 

sandy bottom under the SSTC boat lanes 

(Hui 1979; Heyning and Perrin 1994; 

Bearzi 2005; 2006), NMFS believes that 

pre-detonation mitigation would detect 

long-beaked common dolphins and 

avoid exposure to pressure or energy 

levels associated with injury or 

mortality. 

Pacific White-Side Dolphins 

With the implementation of enhanced 

monitoring and mitigation measures 

(see below), there is no predicted 

mortality or Level A injury for Pacific 

white-sided dolphins. Modeling 

predicted there would potentially be 13 

Level B exposures from underwater 

explosions and 12 Level B exposures 

from ELCAS pile driving and removal. 

There is limited empirical data available 

to confirm Pacific white-sided dolphin 

species occurrence in the near shore 

water adjacent to the SSTC boat lanes. 

Movement of Pacific white-side 

dolphins into the SSTC boat lanes 

would likely be rare to very infrequent 

and limited in duration. NMFS believes 

that pre-detonation mitigation would 

detect Pacific white-sided dolphins, if 

present at all, and avoid exposure to 

energy or pressure levels associated 

with injury or mortality. 

Risso’s Dolphins 

With the implementation of enhanced 

monitoring and mitigation measures 

(see below), there is no predicted 

mortality or Level A injury for Risso’s 

dolphins. Modeling predicted there 

would potentially be 32 Level B 

exposures from underwater explosions 

and 30 Level B exposures from ELCAS 

pile driving and removal. There is 

limited empirical data available to 

confirm Risso’s dolphin species 

occurrence in the near shore water 

adjacent to the SSTC boat lanes. More 

Risso’s dolphin sightings occur further 

offshore (DoN 2009; Barlow 2010; 

Carretta et al. 2010; DoN 2010a). 

Movement of Risso’s dolphins into the 

SSTC boat lanes would likely be rare to 

very infrequent and limited in duration. 

NMFS believes that pre-detonation 

mitigation would detect Risso’s 

dolphins, if present at all, and avoid 

exposure to energy or pressure levels 

associated with injury or mortality. 

Short-Beaked Common Dolphins 

With the implementation of enhanced 

monitoring and mitigation measures 

(see below), there is no predicted 

mortality or Level A injury for shortbeaked common dolphins. Modeling 

predicted there would potentially be 

448 Level B exposures from underwater 

explosions and 542 Level B exposures 

from ELCAS pile driving and removal. 

There is limited empirical data available 

to confirm short-beaked common 

dolphin species occurrence in the near 

shore water adjacent to the SSTC boat 

lanes. More short-beaked common 

dolphin sightings occur further offshore 

(Bearzi 2005; DoN 2009; Barlow 2010; 

Carretta et al. 2010; DoN 2010a). 

Movement of short-beaked common 

dolphins into the SSTC boat lanes 

would likely be rare to very infrequent 

and limited in duration. NMFS believes 

that pre-detonation mitigation would 

detect short-beaked common dolphins, 

if present at all, and avoid exposure to 

energy or pressure levels associated 

with injury or mortality. 

Anticipated Effects on Habitat 

Detailed description and 

comprehensive analysis of the overall 

potential effects on marine mammal 

habitat that could result from the Navy’s 

proposed training exercises at the SSTC 

action area are provided in the Federal 

Register notice for the proposed IHA (75 

FR 64276; October 19, 2010). There is 

no change to the original assessment of 

the overall potential environmental 

effects, therefore, they are not repeated 

here. 

Proposed Additional Mitigation 

Measures 

In order to issue an incidental take 

authorization under Section 101(a)(5)(D) 

of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the 

permissible methods of taking pursuant 

to such activity, and other means of 

effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact on such species or stock and its 

habitat, paying particular attention to 

rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of 

similar significance, and on the 

availability of such species or stock for 

taking for certain subsistence uses. 

For the Navy’s proposed SSTC 

training activities, the Navy worked 

with NMFS and proposed a set of 

monitoring and mitigation measures to 

reduce potential impacts to marine 

mammals. These initial monitoring and 

mitigation measures were published in 

the Federal Register notice for the 

proposed IHA published on October 19, 

2010 (75 FR 64276). Those monitoring 

and mitigation measures were based on 

the Navy’s training protocols for mine 

detonation that had been used over 

decades. As a consequence of the March 

4, 2011, incident, in which long-beaked 

common dolphins were killed during 

these exercises, NMFS suspended the 

processing of the proposed IHA and 

began to re-evaluate its marine mammal 

effects analysis and the monitoring and 

mitigation measures. NMFS worked 

with the Navy to develop monitoring 

and mitigation measures to address the 

use of TDFDs by accounting for dolphin 

swim speed with an enlarged safety 

zone and by increasing monitoring 

efforts. These revised monitoring and 

mitigation measures are proposed 

specifically for underwater mine 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19236 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

neutralization using TDFDs, in addition 

to overarching general monitoring and 

mitigation measures developed for the 

Navy’s general training activities at the 

SSTC study area, which were described 

in detail in the Federal Register notice 

for the proposed IHA (75 FR 64276; 

October 19, 2010). The derivation and 

description of the revised monitoring 

and mitigation measures are set forth 

below. 

Derivation of Timed Delayed Mitigation 

Zones 

To increase the effectiveness of the 

shallow water mitigation zone when 

using time-delayed detonations (i.e., 

TDFD), the existing Navy modeled zone 

of influence (ZOI) for a particular charge 

weight is enlarged to account for the 

distance an animal could swim during 

the time delay given known dolphin 

speed. 

In essence, this should allow sighting 

of marine mammals outside of a final 

mitigation zone swimming into the zone 

prior to starting a timed-delay 

detonation. 

Final TDFD mitigation zones are 

determined in a three step process: 

First, the distance that a dolphin 

could swim during the length of an 

individual time-delay is calculated 

based on swim speed. Onto this 

distance, another 200 yds is added as an 

additional buffer to account for varying 

individual swim speed. 

Second, the potential distance 

traveled during a time-delay is added to 

SSTC specific model results showing 

range distances to the applicable NMFS 

injury criteria for underwater 

detonations. 

Third, the Navy rounds the range 

distances calculated in Step 2 to 

appropriate mitigation ranges more 

likely to be practical in the field. 

A detailed discussion on each of these 

steps is provided below. 

(1) Swim Speed Estimation 

Using an average swim speed of 3 

knots (102 yd/min) for a delphinid, the 

Navy provided the approximate 

distance that an animal would typically 

travel within a given time-delay period 

(Table 1). 

To account for differences between 

species or faster swimming by 

individuals within a species, the Navy 

and NMFS also agreed to add still 

another 200 yds to the original 3 knot 

derived ranges to account for variation 

in individual swim speeds. Table 1 

shows both the initial 3 knot range plus 

the additional 200 yard buffer. 

TABLE 1—POTENTIAL DISTANCE TRAVELED BASED ON SWIM SPEED AND LENGTH OF TIME-DELAY AND ADDITIONAL 200 

YARDS BUFFER

Species group Swim speed Time-delay 

(min) 

Potential distance 

traveled 

(yd) 

Potential distance 

traveled with additional 

200 (yds) buffer 

(yd) 

Delphinid ................................. 102 yd/min .............................. 5 510 710 

6 612 812 

7 714 914 

8 816 1,016 

9 918 1,118 

10 1,020 1,220 

(2) ZOI and Swim Speed-Time-Buffer 

Addition 

Based on acoustic propagation 

modeling and anticipated zones of 

influences (ZOI) to NMFS injury criteria 

(13 psi-msec) by training event type and 

charge weight, potential dolphin travel 

distances by time at 3 knots plus buffer 

can be added to event specific ZOI to 

produce a matrix of charge weight, 

selected delay time, and applicable 

buffer zone (Table 2). 

As long as animals are not observed 

within a given time-delayed mitigation 

zone before the time-delay detonation is 

set, then the animals would be unlikely 

to swim into the injury zone from 

outside the zone within the time-delay 

window. 

TABLE 2—REVISED RADIUS FOR TIMED-DELAY FIRING DEVICES BASED ON CHARGE SIZE, LENGTH OF TIME DELAY, AND

ADDITIONAL BUFFER FROM TABLE 1 

Charge weight 

(NEW) 

Navy modeled 

ZOI to injury 

(13 psi-msec) 

Time-delay 

5 min 

(yd) 

6 min 

(yd) 

7 min 

(yd) 

8 min 

(yd) 

9 min 

(yd) 

10 min 

(yd) 

5 lb ................. 80 790 892 994 1,006 1,198 1,300 

10 lb ............... 160 870 972 1,074 1,176 1,278 1,380 

15–29 lb ......... 360 1,070 1,172 1,274 1,376 1,478 1,580 

(3) Final TDFD Detonation Mitigation 

Zones 

Table 3 shows the final mitigation 

zones and application for SSTC TDFD 

underwater detonations. This required 

in most cases rounding (mostly upward) 

the calculated ranges from Table 2 to the 

appropriate range category (1,000, 1,400, 

and 1,500 yds). As long as animals are 

not observed within the buffer zones 

before the time-delay detonation is set, 

then the animals would be unlikely to 

swim into the injury zone from outside 

the area within the time-delay window. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19237 

TABLE 3—UPDATED BUFFER ZONE RADIUS (YD) FOR TDFDS BASED ON SIZE OF CHARGE AND LENGTH OF TIME-DELAY, 

WITH ADDITIONAL BUFFER ADDED TO ACCOUNT FOR FASTER SWIM SPEEDS

Charge Size 

(lb NEW) 

Time-delay 

5 min 

(yd) 

6 min 

(yd) 

7 min 

(yd) 

8 min 

(yd) 

9 min 

(yd) 

10 min 

(yd) 

5 lb ............................................... 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,400 1,400 

10 lb ............................................. 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,400 1,400 1,400 

15–29 lb ....................................... 1,000 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,500 1,500 

1,000 yds: minimum of 2 observation boats. 

1,400/1,500 yds: minimum of 3 observation boats or 2 boats and 1 helicopter. 

Finally, to create a marine mammal 

mitigation regime that is more likely to 

achieve success in practical execution, 

Navy worked with NMFS and divided 

the span of training events associated 

with different charge weights (as 

derived in Table 2) into those requiring 

a 1,000 yard buffer zone (with 2 boats 

monitoring), and those requiring greater 

than a 1,400 yard buffer zone (3 boats 

monitoring, or 2 boats and 1 helicopter). 

Proposed monitoring measures that 

support these mitigation zones and 

monitoring protocols are described in 

detail in the following sections for 

different types of charges in different 

environments. 

While the buffer zones vary between 

the different types of underwater 

detonation, the Navy proposes three 

broad types of monitoring and 

mitigation protocols based on different 

types of training events and 

environments, and the practicability 

and effectiveness of monitoring and 

mitigation measures in different 

environmental settings. These 

monitoring and mitigation protocols are: 

• Very shallow water (VSW, <24 feet) 

underwater detonation monitoring and 

mitigation: 

• Shallow water (>24 feet) 

underwater detonation monitoring and 

mitigation; and 

• ELCAS pile driving and removal 

monitoring and mitigation. 

Although these mitigation protocols 

were discussed extensively in the 

Federal Register notice for the proposed 

IHA (75 FR 64276; October 19, 2010), 

except for the ELCAS pile driving and 

removal mitigation, there are significant 

revisions to the other two mitigation 

measure protocols to reduce and 

minimize the risks from underwater 

detonation events involving TDFDs, as 

discussed above. Therefore, the 

proposed revised monitoring and 

mitigation measures for VSW 

underwater detonation and shallow 

water underwater events are listed 

below in their entireties. 

Proposed Mitigation and Monitoring 

Measures for Underwater Detonations in 

Very Shallow Water (VSW, Water Depth 

<24 ft) 

(1) Mitigation and Monitoring Measures 

for VSW Underwater Detonations Using 

Positive Control 

1. Underwater detonations using 

positive control (remote firing devices) 

will only be conducted during daylight. 

2. Easily visible anchored floats will 

be positioned on 700 yard radius of a 

roughly semi-circular zone (the 

shoreward half being bounded by 

shoreline and immediate off-shore 

water) around the detonation location 

for small explosive exercises at the 

SSTC. These mark the outer limits of the 

mitigation zone. 

3. For each VSW underwater 

detonation event, a safety-boat with a 

minimum of one observer is launched 

30 or more minutes prior to detonation 

and moves through the area around the 

detonation site. The task of the safety 

observer is to exclude humans from 

coming into the area and to augment a 

shore observer’s visual search of the 

mitigation zone for marine mammals. 

The safety-boat observer is in constant 

radio communication with the exercise 

coordinator and shore observer 

discussed below. 

4. A shore-based observer will also be 

deployed for VSW detonations in 

addition to boat based observers. The 

shore observer will indicate that the 

area is clear of marine mammals after 10 

or more minutes of continuous 

observation with no marine mammals 

having been seen in the mitigation zone 

or moving toward it. 

5. At least 10 minutes prior to the 

planned initiation of the detonation 

event-sequence, the shore observer, on 

an elevated on-shore position, begins a 

continuous visual search with 

binoculars of the mitigation zone. At 

this time, the safety-boat observer 

informs the shore observer if any marine 

mammal has been seen in the zone and, 

together, both search the surface within 

and beyond the mitigation zone for 

marine mammals. 

6. The observers (boat and shore 

based) will indicate that the area is not 

clear any time a marine mammal is 

sighted in the mitigation zone or moving 

toward it and, subsequently, indicate 

that the area is clear of marine mammals 

when the animal is out and moving 

away and no other marine mammals 

have been sited. 

7. Initiation of the detonation 

sequence will only begin on final 

receipt of an indication from the shore 

observer that the area is clear of marine 

mammals and will be postponed on 

receipt of an indication from any 

observer that the area is not clear of 

marine mammals. 

8. Following the detonation, visual 

monitoring of the mitigation zone 

continues for 30 minutes for the 

appearance of any marine mammal in 

the zone. Any marine mammal 

appearing in the area will be observed 

for signs of possible injury. 

9. Any marine mammal observed after 

a VSW underwater detonation either 

injured or exhibiting signs of distress 

will be reported via operational chain of 

command to Navy environmental 

representatives from U.S. Pacific Fleet, 

Environmental Office, San Diego 

Detachment. Using Marine Mammal 

Stranding communication trees and 

contact procedures established for the 

Southern California Range Complex, the 

Navy will report these events to the 

Stranding Coordinator of NMFS’ 

Southwest Regional Office. These voice 

or email reports will contain the date 

and time of the sighting, location (or if 

precise latitude and longitude is not 

currently available, then the 

approximate location in reference to an 

established SSTC beach feature), species 

description (if known), and indication 

of the animal’s status. 

(2) Mitigation and Monitoring Measures 

for VSW Underwater Detonations Using 

Time-Delay (TDFD Only) 

1. Underwater detonations using 

timed delay devices will only be 

conducted during daylight. 

2. Time-delays longer than 10 minutes 

will not be used. The initiation of the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19238 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

device will not start until the mitigation 

area below is clear for a full 30 minutes 

prior to initiation of the timer. 

3. A mitigation zone will be 

established around each underwater 

detonation location as indicated in 

Table 3 (1,000 or 1,400 yards) based on 

charge weight and length of time delay 

used. 

4. VSW ranges 1,000 yds: 

• For each VSW underwater 

detonation event with a mitigation zone 

of 1,000 yds, a safety boat with a 

minimum of one observer is launched 

30 or more minutes prior to detonation 

and moves through the area around the 

detonation site at the seaward edge of 

the mitigation zone. The task of the boat 

is to exclude humans from coming into 

the area and to augment a shore 

observer’s visual search of the 

mitigation zone for marine mammals. 

The safety-boat observer is in constant 

radio communication with the exercise 

coordinator and shore observer 

discussed below. To the best extent 

practical, boats will try to maintain a 10 

knot search speed. 

• A shore-based observer will also be 

deployed for VSW detonations in 

addition to boat based observers. At 

least 10 minutes prior to the planned 

initiation of the detonation eventsequence, the shore observer, on an 

elevated on-shore position, begins a 

continuous visual search with 

binoculars of the mitigation zone. At 

this time, the safety-boat observer 

informs the shore observer if any marine 

mammal has been seen in the zone and, 

together, both search the surface within 

and beyond the mitigation zone for 

marine mammals. The shore observer 

will indicate that the area is clear of 

marine mammals after 10 or more 

minutes of continuous observation with 

no marine mammals having been seen 

in the mitigation zone or moving toward 

it. 

5. VSW ranges larger than 1,400 

yards: 

• A minimum of 2 boats will be used 

to survey for marine mammals at 

mitigation ranges larger than 1,400 

yards. 

• When conducting the surveys 

within a mitigation zone >1,400 yds, 

boats will position themselves near the 

mid-point of the mitigation zone radius 

(but always outside the detonation 

plume radius/human safety zone) and 

travel in a semi-circular pattern around 

the detonation location surveying both 

the inner (toward detonation site) and 

outer (away from detonation site) areas. 

When using 2 boats, each boat will be 

positioned on opposite sides of the 

detonation location, separated by 180 

degrees. If using more than 2 boats, each 

boat will be positioned equidistant from 

one another (120 degrees separation for 

3 boats, 90 degrees separation for 4 

boats, etc.). If available, aerial visual 

survey support from Navy helicopters 

can be utilized, so long as it will not 

jeopardize safety of flight. Helicopters 

will travel in a circular pattern around 

the detonation location. 

6. A mitigation zone will be surveyed 

from 30 minutes prior to the detonation 

and for 30 minutes after the detonation. 

7. Other personnel besides boat 

observers can also maintain situational 

awareness on the presence of marine 

mammals within the mitigation zone to 

the best extent practical given dive 

safety considerations. 

Divers placing the charges on mines 

will observe the immediate underwater 

area around a detonation site for marine 

mammals and report sightings to surface 

observers. 

8. If a marine mammal is sighted 

within an established mitigation zone or 

moving towards it, underwater 

detonation events will be suspended 

until the marine mammal has 

voluntarily left the area and the area is 

clear of marine mammals for at least 30 

minutes. 

9. Immediately following the 

detonation, visual monitoring for 

affected marine mammals within the 

mitigation zone will continue for 30 

minutes. 

10. Any marine mammal observed 

after an underwater detonation either 

injured or exhibiting signs of distress 

will be reported via Navy operational 

chain of command to Navy 

environmental representatives from U.S. 

Pacific Fleet, Environmental Office, San 

Diego Detachment. Using Marine 

Mammal Stranding communication 

trees and contact procedures established 

for the Southern California Range 

Complex, the Navy will report these 

events to the Stranding Coordinator of 

NMFS’ Southwest Regional Office. 

These voice or email reports will 

contain the date and time of the 

sighting, location (or if precise latitude 

and longitude is not currently available, 

then the approximate location in 

reference to an established SSTC beach 

feature), species description (if known), 

and indication of the animal’s status. 

Proposed Mitigation and Monitoring 

Measures for Underwater Detonations in 

Shallow Water (>24 Feet) 

(1) Mitigation and Monitoring Measures 

for Underwater Detonations Using 

Positive Control (Except SWAG and 

Timed Detonations) 

1. Underwater detonations using 

positive control devices will only be 

conducted during daylight. 

2. A mitigation zone of 700 yards will 

be established around each underwater 

detonation point. 

3. A minimum of two boats, including 

but not limited to small zodiacs and 7- 

m Rigid Hulled Inflatable Boats (RHIB) 

will be deployed. One boat will act as 

an observer platform, while the other 

boat is typically the diver support boat. 

4. Two observers with binoculars on 

one small craft/boat will survey the 

detonation area and the mitigation zone 

for marine mammals from at least 30 

minutes prior to commencement of the 

scheduled explosive event and until at 

least 30 minutes after detonation. 

5. In addition to the dedicated 

observers, all divers and boat operators 

engaged in detonation events can 

potentially monitor the area 

immediately surrounding the point of 

detonation for marine mammals. 

6. If a marine mammal is sighted 

within the 700 yard mitigation zone or 

moving towards it, underwater 

detonation events will be suspended 

until the marine mammal has 

voluntarily left the area and the area is 

clear of marine mammals for at least 30 

minutes. 

7. Immediately following the 

detonation, visual monitoring for 

marine mammals within the mitigation 

zone will continue for 30 minutes. Any 

marine mammal observed after an 

underwater detonation either injured or 

exhibiting signs of distress will be 

reported via Navy operational chain of 

command to Navy environmental 

representatives from U.S. Pacific Fleet, 

Environmental Office, San Diego 

Detachment. Using Marine Mammal 

Stranding communication trees and 

contact procedures established for the 

Southern California Range Complex, the 

Navy will report these events to the 

Stranding Coordinator of NMFS’ 

Southwest Regional Office. These voice 

or email reports will contain the date 

and time of the sighting, location (or if 

precise latitude and longitude is not 

currently available, then the 

approximate location in reference to an 

established SSTC beach feature), species 

description (if known), and indication 

of the animals status. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19239 

(2) Mitigation and Monitoring Measures 

for Underwater Detonations Using 

Time-Delay (TDFD Detonations Only) 

1. Underwater detonations using 

timed delay devices will only be 

conducted during daylight. 

2. Time-delays longer than 10 minutes 

will not be used. The initiation of the 

device will not start until the mitigation 

area below is clear for a full 30 minutes 

prior to initiation of the timer. 

3. A mitigation zone will be 

established around each underwater 

detonation location as indicated in 

Table 3 based on charge weight and 

length of time-delay used. When 

conducting the surveys within a 

mitigation zone (either 1,000 or 1,400 

yds), boats will position themselves 

near the mid-point of the mitigation 

zone radius (but always outside the 

detonation plume radius/human safety 

zone) and travel in a circular pattern 

around the detonation location 

surveying both the inner (toward 

detonation site) and outer (away from 

detonation site) areas. 

4. Shallow water TDFD detonations 

range 1,000 yds: 

• A minimum of 2 boats will be used 

to survey for marine mammals at 

mitigation ranges of 1,000 yds. 

• When using 2 boats, each boat will 

be positioned on opposite sides of the 

detonation location, separated by 180 

degrees. 

• Two observers in each of the boats 

will conduct continuous visual survey 

of the mitigation zone for the entire 

duration of a training event. 

• To the best extent practical, boats 

will try to maintain a 10 knot search 

speed. This search speed was added to 

ensure adequate coverage of the buffer 

zone during observation periods. While 

weather conditions and sea states may 

require slower speeds in some 

instances, 10 knots is a prudent, safe, 

and executable speed that will allow for 

adequate surveillance. For a 1,000 yd 

radius buffer zone a boat travelling at 10 

knots and 500 yds away from the 

detonation point would circle the 

detonation point 3.22 times during a 30 

minute survey period. By using 2 boats, 

6.44 circles around the detonation point 

would be completed in a 30 minute 

span. 

5. Shallow water TDFD detonations 

greater than 1,400 yds: 

• A minimum of 3 boats or 2 boats 

and 1 helicopter will be used to survey 

for marine mammals at mitigation 

ranges of 1,400 yds. 

• When using 3 (or more) boats, each 

boat will be positioned equidistant from 

one another (120 degrees separation for 

3 boats, 90 degrees separation for 4 

boats, etc.). 

• For a 1,400 yd radius mitigation 

zone, a 10 knot speed results in 2.3 

circles for each of the three boats, or 

nearly 7 circles around the detonation 

point over a 30 minute span. 

• If available, aerial visual survey 

support from Navy helicopters can be 

utilized, so long as it will not jeopardize 

safety of flight. 

• Helicopters, if available, can be 

used in lieu of one of the boat 

requirements. Navy helicopter pilots are 

trained to conduct searches for 

relatively small objects in the water, 

such as a missing person. A helicopter 

search pattern is dictated by standard 

Navy protocols and accounts for 

multiple variables, such as the size and 

shape of the search area, size of the 

object being searched for, and local 

environmental conditions, among 

others. 

6. A mitigation zone will be surveyed 

from 30 minutes prior to the detonation 

and for 30 minutes after the detonation. 

7. Other personnel besides boat 

observers can also maintain situational 

awareness on the presence of marine 

mammals within the mitigation zone to 

the best extent practical given dive 

safety considerations. 

Divers placing the charges on mines 

will observe the immediate underwater 

area around a detonation site for marine 

mammals and report sightings to surface 

observers. 

8. If a marine mammal is sighted 

within an established mitigation zone or 

moving towards it, underwater 

detonation events will be suspended 

until the marine mammal has 

voluntarily left the area and the area is 

clear of marine mammals for at least 30 

minutes. 

9. Immediately following the 

detonation, visual monitoring for 

affected marine mammals within the 

mitigation zone will continue for 30 

minutes. 

10. Any marine mammal observed 

after an underwater detonation either 

injured or exhibiting signs of distress 

will be reported via Navy operational 

chain of command to Navy 

environmental representatives from U.S. 

Pacific Fleet, Environmental Office, San 

Diego Detachment or Pearl Harbor. 

Using Marine Mammal Stranding 

protocols and communication trees 

established for the Southern California 

and Hawaii Range Complexes, the Navy 

will report these events to the Stranding 

Coordinator of NMFS’ Southwest or 

Pacific Islands Regional Office. These 

voice or email reports will contain the 

date and time of the sighting, location 

(or if precise latitude and longitude is 

not currently available, then the 

approximate location in reference to an 

established SSTC beach feature), species 

description (if known), and indication 

of the animal’s status. 

(3) Proposed Mitigation and Monitoring 

Measures for Underwater SWAG 

Detonations (SWAG Only) 

A modified set of mitigation measures 

would be implemented for SWAG 

detonations, which involve much 

smaller charges of 0.03 lbs NEW. 

1. Underwater detonations using 

SWAG will only be conducted during 

daylight. 

2. A mitigation zone of 60 yards will 

be established around each SWAG 

detonation site. 

3. A minimum of two boats, including 

but not limited to small zodiacs and 7- 

m Rigid Hulled Inflatable Boats (RHIB) 

will be deployed. One boat will act as 

an observer platform, while the other 

boat is typically the diver support boat. 

4. Two observers with binoculars on 

one small craft\boat will survey the 

detonation area and the mitigation zone 

for marine mammals for at least 10 

minutes prior to commencement of the 

scheduled explosive event and until at 

least 10 minutes after detonation. 

5. In addition to the dedicated 

observers, all divers and boat operators 

engaged in detonation events can 

potentially monitor the area 

immediately surrounding the point of 

detonation for marine mammals. 

6. Divers and personnel in support 

boats would monitor for marine 

mammals out to the 60 yard mitigation 

zone for 10 minutes prior to any 

detonation. 

7. After the detonation, visual 

monitoring for marine mammals would 

continue for 10 minutes. Any marine 

mammal observed after an underwater 

detonation either injured or exhibiting 

signs of distress will be reported via 

Navy operational chain of command to 

Navy environmental representatives 

from U.S. Pacific Fleet, Environmental 

Office, San Diego Detachment. Using 

Marine Mammal Stranding 

communication trees and contact 

procedures established for the Southern 

California Range Complex, the Navy 

will report these events to the Stranding 

Coordinator of NMFS’ Southwest 

Regional Office. These voice or email 

reports will contain the date and time of 

the sighting, location (or if precise 

latitude and longitude is not currently 

available, then the approximate location 

in reference to an established SSTC 

beach feature), species description (if 

known), and indication of the animal’s 

status. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19240 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

Estimated Take by Incidental 

Harassment 

There is no change for marine 

mammal take estimates for the four 

marine mammal species analyzed in the 

Federal Register for the proposed IHA 

(75 FR 64276; October 19, 2010) for 

underwater detonations and from 

ELCAS trainings at the SSTC Study 

Area. Take estimates were based on 

marine mammal densities and 

distribution data in the action areas, 

computed with modeled explosive 

sources and the sizes of the buffer 

zones. Without the inclusion of 

additional mitigation measures, the use 

of TDFDs could increase the likelihood 

that marine mammals are exposed to 

explosive detonations at injurious 

levels—however, with the enlarged 

exclusion zone to account for the 

distance that an animal might swim 

during the timed delay, this likelihood 

is minimized. 

The same methodology was used for 

calculating take estimates for the 

additional four dolphin species. The 

estimated takes are presented in Tables 

4 and 5 below. 

TABLE 4—SSTC MODELED ESTIMATES OF SPECIES EXPOSED TO UNDERWATER DETONATIONS WITHOUT IMPLEMENTATION

OF MITIGATION MEASURES

Species 

Annual marine mammal exposure (all sources) 

Level B behavior 

(multiple 

successive explosive events only) 

Level B TTS Level A Mortality 

177 dB re 1 μPa 

182 dB re 1 μPa2- 

s/23 psi 

205 dB re 1 μPa2- 

s/13.0 psi-ms 30.5 psi-ms 

Gray Whale: 

Warm ................................................................................ .............................. .............................. .............................. ..............................

Cold .................................................................................. 0 0 0 0 

Bottlenose Dolphin: 

Warm ................................................................................ 30 43 0 0 

Cold .................................................................................. 40 55 0 0 

California Sea Lion: 

Warm ................................................................................ 4 4 0 0 

Cold .................................................................................. 40 51 0 0 

Harbor Seal: 

Warm ................................................................................ 0 0 0 0 

Cold .................................................................................. 0 0 0 0 

Long-beaked common dolphin: 

Warm ................................................................................ 14 21 0 0 

Cold .................................................................................. 7 10 0 0 

Pacific white-sided dolphin: 

Warm ................................................................................ 2 3 0 0 

Cold .................................................................................. 3 4 0 0 

Risso’s dolphin: 

Warm ................................................................................ 3 4 0 0 

Cold .................................................................................. 11 15 0 0 

Short-beaked common dolphin: 

Warm ................................................................................ 123 177 0 0 

Cold .................................................................................. 62 86 0 0 

Total Annual Exposures ............................................ 453 626 0 0 

TABLE 5—EXPOSURE ESTIMATES FROM ELCAS PILE DRIVING AND REMOVAL PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION

MEASURES

Species 

Annual marine mammal exposure (all sources) 

Level B behavior 

(non-impulse) 

Level B behavior 

(impulse) 

Level A 

(cetacean) 

Level A 

(pinniped) 

120 dBrms re 1 μPa 120 dBrms re 1 μPa 120 dBrms re 1 μPa 120 dBrms re 1 μPa 

Gray Whale: 

Installation ................................. N/A 0 0 0 

Removal .................................... 6 N/A 0 0 

Bottlenose Dolphin: 

Installation ................................. N/A 40 0 0 

Removal .................................... 168 N/A 0 0 

California Sea Lion: 

Installation ................................. N/A 20 0 0 

Removal .................................... 102 N/A 0 0 

Harbor Seal: 

Installation ................................. N/A 0 0 0 

Removal .................................... 12 N/A 0 0 

Long-beaked common dolphin: 

Installation ................................. N/A 0 0 0 

Removal .................................... 54 N/A 0 0 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19241 

TABLE 5—EXPOSURE ESTIMATES FROM ELCAS PILE DRIVING AND REMOVAL PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION

MEASURES—Continued 

Species 

Annual marine mammal exposure (all sources) 

Level B behavior 

(non-impulse) 

Level B behavior 

(impulse) 

Level A 

(cetacean) 

Level A 

(pinniped) 

120 dBrms re 1 μPa 120 dBrms re 1 μPa 120 dBrms re 1 μPa 120 dBrms re 1 μPa 

Pacific white-sided dolphin: 

Installation ................................. N/A 0 0 0 

Removal .................................... 12 N/A 0 0 

Risso’s dolphin: 

Installation ................................. N/A 0 0 0 

Removal .................................... 30 N/A 0 0 

Short-beaked common dolphin: 

Installation ................................. N/A 80 0 0 

Removal .................................... 462 N/A 0 0 

Total Annual Exposures .... 846 140 0 0 

In summary, for all underwater 

detonations and ELCAS pile driving 

activities, the Navy’s impact model 

predicted that no mortality and/or Level 

A harassment (injury) would occur to 

marine mammal species and stocks 

within the proposed action area. 

For non-sequential (i.e., single 

detonation) training events, the Navy’s 

impact model predicted a total of 473 

annual exposures that could result in 

Level B harassment (TTS), which 

include 98, 55, 31, 7, 19, and 263 annual 

exposures to bottlenose dolphins, 

California sea lions, long-beaked 

common dolphins, Pacific white-sided 

dolphins, Risso’s dolphins, and shortbeaked common dolphins, respectively. 

For sequential (Multiple Successive 

Explosive events) training events, the 

Navy’s impact model predicted a total of 

339 annual exposures that could result 

in Level B behavioral harassment, 

which include 70, 44, 21, 5, 14, and 185 

annual exposures to bottlenose 

dolphins, California sea lions, longbeaked common dolphins, Pacific 

white-sided dolphins, Risso’s dolphins, 

and short-beaked common dolphins, 

respectively. 

Subsistence Harvest of Marine 

Mammals 

NMFS has preliminarily determined 

the Navy’s proposed training activities 

at the SSTC would not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the affected species or 

stocks for subsistence use since there 

are no such uses in the specified area. 

Negligible Impact and Small Numbers 

Analysis and Determination 

Pursuant to NMFS’ regulations 

implementing the MMPA, an applicant 

is required to estimate the number of 

animals that will be ‘‘taken’’ by the 

specified activities (i.e., takes by 

harassment only, or takes by 

harassment, injury, and/or death). This 

estimate informs the analysis that NMFS 

must perform to determine whether the 

activity will have a ‘‘negligible impact’’ 

on the species or stock. Level B 

(behavioral) harassment occurs at the 

level of the individual(s) and does not 

assume any resulting population-level 

consequences, though there are known 

avenues through which behavioral 

disturbance of individuals can result in 

population-level effects. 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 Level B harassment 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 behavioral 

harassment, NMFS must consider other 

factors, such as the likely nature of any 

responses (their intensity, duration, 

etc.), the context of any responses 

(critical reproductive time or location, 

migration, etc.), or any of the other 

variables mentioned in the first 

paragraph (if known), as well as the 

number and nature of estimated Level A 

takes, the number of estimated 

mortalities, and effects on habitat. 

A detailed description on the 

negligible impacts and small number 

analyses and determination was 

provided in the Federal Register for the 

proposed IHA (75 FR 64276; October 19, 

2010), and is not repeated here. This 

section provides additional analysis on 

the use of TDFD during the Navy’s 

underwater detonation training 

activities. 

The aforementioned additional 

mitigation and monitoring measures 

will increase the buffer zone to account 

for marine mammal movement during 

the delay time of the detonation by 

TDFDs and increase marine mammal 

visual monitoring efforts to ensure that 

no marine mammal would be in a zone 

where injury and/or mortality could 

occur as a result of time-delayed 

detonation. 

In addition, the estimated exposures 

are based on the probability of the 

animals occurring in the area when a 

training event is occurring, and this 

probability does not change based on 

the use of TDFDs or implementation of 

mitigation measures (i.e., the exposure 

model does not account for how the 

charge is initiated and assumes no 

mitigation is being implemented). Other 

potential effects to marine mammal 

species and stocks as a result of the 

proposed mine neutralization training 

activities remain the same as those 

analyzed in the proposed IHA (75 FR 

64276; October 19, 2010). 

Based on the analyses of the potential 

impacts from the proposed underwater 

detonation training exercises conducted 

within the Navy’s SSTC action area, 

including the consideration of TDFD 

use and the implementation of the 

improved marine mammal monitoring 

and mitigation measures, NMFS has 

preliminarily determined that the 

modification of the Navy’s proposed 

activities that include taking of marine 

mammals incidental to underwater 

detonation using TDFD within the SSTC 

action area will have a negligible impact 

on the marine mammal species and 

stocks, provided that additional 

mitigation and monitoring measures are 

implemented. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

No marine mammal species are listed 

as endangered or threatened under the 

ESA with confirmed or possible 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19242 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

occurrence in the study area. Therefore, 

section 7 consultation under the ESA for 

NMFS’s proposed issuance of an MMPA 

authorization is not warranted. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

The Navy has prepared a Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

for the proposed SSTC training 

activities. The FEIS was released in 

January 2011 and it is available at 

http://www.silverstrandtraining

complexeis.com/EIS.aspx/. NMFS is a 

cooperating agency (as defined by the 

Council on Environmental Quality (40 

CFR 1501.6)) in the preparation of the 

EIS. NMFS has subsequently adopted 

the FEIS for the SSTC training activities. 

Dated: March 20, 2012. 

James H. Lecky, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7593 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XB048 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Low-Energy 

Marine Geophysical Survey in the 

Central Pacific Ocean, May Through 

June, 2012 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; proposed Incidental 

Harassment Authorization; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS has received an 

application from Lamont-Doherty Earth 

Observatory (L-DEO), a part of Columbia 

University, for an Incidental Harassment 

Authorization (IHA) to take marine 

mammals, by harassment, incidental to 

conducting a low-energy marine 

geophysical survey in the central Pacific 

Ocean, May through June, 2012. 

Pursuant to the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is 

requesting comments on its proposal to 

issue an IHA to L-DEO to incidentally 

harass, by Level B harassment only, 16 

species of marine mammals during the 

specified activity. 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than April 28, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the 

application should be addressed to P. 

Michael Payne, Chief, Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, National Marine 

Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The 

mailbox address for providing email 

comments is ITP.Cody@noaa.gov. NMFS 

is not responsible for email comments 

sent to addresses other than the one 

provided here. Comments sent via 

email, including all attachments, must 

not exceed a 10-megabyte file size. 

All comments received are a part of 

the public record and will generally be 

posted to http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ 

permits/incidental.htm#applications 

without change. All Personal Identifying 

Information (for example, name, 

address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by 

the commenter may be publicly 

accessible. Do not submit confidential 

business information or otherwise 

sensitive or protected information. 

An electronic copy of the application 

containing a list of the references used 

in this document may be obtained by 

writing to the above address, 

telephoning the contact listed here (see 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or 

visiting the internet at: http:// 

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

incidental.htm#applications. 

The following associated documents 

are also available at the same internet 

address: The U.S. National Science 

Foundation’s (NSF) draft Environmental 

Assessment (EA) Pursuant To The 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) and Executive Order 12114. The 

draft EA incorporates an 

‘‘Environmental Assessment of a Marine 

Geophysical Survey by the R/V Marcus 

G. Langseth in the central Pacific Ocean, 

May 2012,’’ prepared by LGL Ltd., 

Environmental Research Associates 

(LGL), on behalf of NSF. 

Documents cited in this notice may be 

viewed, by appointment, during regular 

business hours, at the aforementioned 

address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeannine Cody, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, 301–427–8401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

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

Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as 

amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et 

seq.) directs the Secretary of Commerce 

(Secretary) to authorize, upon request, 

the incidental, but not intentional, 

taking of small numbers of marine 

mammals of a species or population 

stock, by United States citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) within a specified 

geographical region if certain findings 

are made and, if the taking is limited to 

harassment, NMFS provides a notice of 

a proposed authorization to the public 

for review. 

Authorization for the incidental 

taking of small numbers of marine 

mammals shall be granted if NMFS 

finds that the taking will have a 

negligible impact on the species or 

stock(s), and will not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

subsistence uses (where relevant). The 

authorization must set forth the 

permissible methods of taking, other 

means of effecting the least practicable 

adverse impact on the species or stock 

and its habitat, and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of such takings. NMFS 

has defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 

CFR 216.103 as ‘‘* * * an impact 

resulting from the specified activity that 

cannot be reasonably expected to, and is 

not reasonably likely to, adversely affect 

the species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’ 

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

established an expedited process by 

which citizens of the United States can 

apply for an authorization to 

incidentally take small numbers of 

marine mammals by harassment. 

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

establishes a 45-day time limit for 

NMFS’s review of an application 

followed by a 30-day public notice and 

comment period on any proposed 

authorizations for the incidental 

harassment of small numbers of marine 

mammals. Within 45 days of the close 

of the public comment period, NMFS 

must either issue or deny the 

authorization. NMFS must publish a 

notice in the Federal Register within 30 

days of its determination to issue or 

deny the authorization. 

Except with respect to certain 

activities not pertinent here, the MMPA 

defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: ‘‘* * * any act 

of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which 

(i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

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

the potential to disturb a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild by causing disruption of behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering [Level B 

harassment].’’ 

Summary of Request 

NMFS received an application on 

December 12, 2012, from L-DEO for the 

taking by harassment, of marine 

mammals, incidental to conducting a 

low-energy marine seismic survey in the 

central Pacific Ocean. Upon receipt of 

additional information, NMFS 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES