Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5451 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(146) USxxx In the bands 24.25–24.45 

GHz and 24.75–27.5 GHz, the total 

radiated power (TRP) of emissions from 

stations in the mobile service in any 200 

MHz of the band 23.6–24 GHz shall not 

exceed ¥33 dBW/200 MHz for base 

stations and ¥29 dBW/200 MHz for 

mobile stations, and for stations brought 

into use after September 1, 2027, TRP 

shall not exceed ¥39 dBW/200 MHz for 

base stations and ¥35 dBW/200 MHz 

for mobile stations. 

* * * * * 

PART 30—UPPER MICROWAVE 

FLEXIBLE USE SERVICE 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 30 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 

301, 303, 304, 307, 309, 310, 316, 332, 1302, 

unless otherwise noted. 

■ 4. Amend § 30.203 by adding 

paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 30.203 Emission Limits. 

* * * * * 

(d)(1) In addition to the limits noted 

above, for licensees operating mobile 

equipment in the 24.25–24.45 GHz or 

24.75–25.25 GHz bands, the total 

radiated power of emissions in any 200 

MHz of the 23.6¥24.0 GHz band shall 

not exceed ¥33 dBW (for base stations) 

or ¥29 dBW (for mobile stations). 

(2) For mobile equipment placed in 

service after September 1, 2027, the total 

radiated power of emissions in any 200 

MHz of the 23.6–24.0 GHz band shall 

not exceed ¥39 dBW (for base stations) 

or ¥35 dBW (for mobile stations). 

[FR Doc. 2024–01681 Filed 1–26–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–C 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 54 

[WC Docket Nos. 21–341; Report No. 3208; 

FR ID 198690] 

Petitions for Reconsideration of Action 

in Rulemaking Proceeding 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Petition for Reconsideration. 

SUMMARY: Petition for Reconsideration 

(Petitions) have been filed in the 

Commission’s proceeding Thomas C. 

Power, on behalf of CTIA. 

DATES: Oppositions to the Petitions 

must be filed on or before February 13, 

2024. Replies to oppositions must be 

filed on or before February 8, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 45 L Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information on this 

proceeding, contact Stephen Wang of 

the Wireline Competition Bureau, 

Telecommunications Access Policy 

Division, at (202) 418–7400 or 

Stephen.Wang@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s 

document, Report No. 3208, released 

January 22, 2024. The full text of the 

Petitions can be accessed online via the 

Commission’s Electronic Comment 

Filing System at: http://apps.fcc.gov/ 

ecfs/. The Commission will not send a 

Congressional Review Act (CRA) 

submission to Congress or the 

Government Accountability Office 

pursuant to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A), because no rules are being 

adopted by the Commission. 

Subject: Connect America Fund: A 

National Broadband Plan for Our Future 

High-Cost Universal Service Support 

(WC Docket Nos. 10–90, 14–58, 09–197, 

and 16–271; RM–11868). 

Number of Petitions Filed: 1. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene Dortch, 

Secretary, Office of the Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2024–01632 Filed 1–26–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 217 

[240118–0018] 

RIN 0648–BM48 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to U.S. Space 

Force Launches and Supporting 

Activities at Vandenberg Space Force 

Base, Vandenberg, California 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule, Request for 

Comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request 

from the U.S. Space Force (USSF) for 

authorization to take marine mammals 

incidental to launches and supporting 

activities at Vandenberg Space Force 

Base (VSFB) in Vandenberg, California 

from April, 2024 to April, 2029. 

Pursuant to the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is 

requesting comments on its proposal to 

issue regulations governing the 

incidental taking of marine mammals 

incidental to the specified activities. 

NMFS is proposing regulations to 

govern that take, and requests comments 

on the proposed regulations. NMFS will 

consider public comments prior to 

making any final decision on the 

issuance of the requested MMPA 

authorization and agency responses will 

be summarized in the final notice of our 

decision. Missile launches conducted at 

VSFB, which comprise a smaller portion 

of the activities, are considered military 

readiness activities pursuant to the 

MMPA, as amended by the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2004 (2004 NDAA). 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than February 28, 

2024. 

ADDRESSES: Submit all electronic public 

comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking 

Portal. Go to https://

www.regulations.gov and type NOAA– 

NMFS–2024–0008 in the Search box 

(note: copying and pasting the FDMS 

Docket Number directly from this 

document may not yield search results). 

Click on the ‘‘Comment’’ icon, complete 

the required fields, and enter or attach 

your comments. 

Instructions: Comments sent by any 

other method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered by NMFS. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted for public 

viewing on https://www.regulations.gov 

without change. All personal identifying 

information (e.g., name, address, etc.), 

confidential business information, or 

otherwise sensitive information 

submitted voluntarily by the sender will 

be publicly accessible. NMFS will 

accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/ 

A’’ in the required fields if you wish to 

remain anonymous). Attachments to 

electronic comments will be accepted in 

Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF 

file formats only. 

A copy of the USSF’s application and 

other supporting documents and 

documents cited herein may be obtained 

online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

national/marine-mammal-protection/ 

incidental-take-authorizations-militaryreadiness-activities. In case of problems 

accessing these documents, please use 

the contact listed here (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Leah Davis, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5452 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Regulatory 

Action 

This proposed rule, if promulgated, 

would establish a framework under the 

authority of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 

et seq.) for NMFS to authorize the take 

of marine mammals incidental to space 

vehicle (rocket) launches, missile 

launches, and aircraft operations at 

VSFB. 

We received an application from the 

USSF requesting 5-year regulations and 

an associated letter of authorization to 

incidentally take marine mammals. 

Take is expected to occur by Level B 

harassment incidental to launch noise 

and sonic booms. Please see 

‘‘Background’’ below for definitions of 

harassment. 

Legal Authority for the Proposed Action 

The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of 

marine mammals, with certain 

exceptions. Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and 

(D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et 

seq.) generally 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, regulations are 

promulgated (when applicable), and 

public notice and an opportunity for 

public comment are provided. 

Authorization for incidental takings 

shall be granted if NMFS finds that the 

taking will have a negligible impact on 

the species or stock(s) and will not have 

an unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

taking for subsistence uses (where 

relevant). If such findings are made, 

NMFS must prescribe the permissible 

methods of taking; ‘‘other means of 

effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact’’ on the affected species or 

stocks and their habitat, paying 

particular attention to rookeries, mating 

grounds, and areas of similar 

significance, and on the availability of 

the species or stocks for taking for 

certain subsistence uses (referred to as 

‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements 

pertaining to the monitoring and 

reporting of such takings. 

Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA and 

the implementing regulations at 50 CFR 

part 216, subpart I provide the legal 

basis for proposing and, if appropriate, 

issuing regulations and an associated 

letters of authorization, or LOA(s). This 

proposed rule describes permissible 

methods of taking and mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting requirements 

for USSF’s proposed activities. 

The National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (2004 NDAA, 

Pub. L. 108–136) amended the MMPA to 

remove the ‘‘small numbers’’ and 

‘‘specified geographical region’’ 

limitations indicated above and 

amended the definition of ‘‘harassment’’ 

as applied to a ‘‘military readiness 

activity.’’ Missile launches conducted at 

VSFB, which comprise a small portion 

of the activities, are considered military 

readiness activities pursuant to the 

MMPA, as amended by the 2004 NDAA. 

A subset of the activities described 

here and for which incidental take of 

marine mammals is being requested 

(specifically, missile launches) qualifies 

as a military readiness activity. 

Summary of Major Provisions Within 

the Rule 

Following is a summary of the major 

provisions of the regulations regarding 

USSF rocket and missile launches and 

supporting activities. These measures 

include: 

• Scheduling launches to avoid 

lowest tides during harbor seal and 

California sea lion pupping seasons, 

when practicable; 

• Required flight paths for aircraft 

takeoffs and landings and minimum 

altitude requirements to reduce 

disturbance to haul out areas; 

• Required minimum altitudes for 

unscrewed aerial systems (UAS); 

• Required acoustic and biological 

monitoring during a subset of launches 

to record the presence of marine 

mammals and document marine 

mammal responses to the launches; and 

• Required semi-monthly surveys of 

marine mammal haulouts at VSFB and 

NCI. 

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 evaluate our 

proposed action (i.e., the promulgation 

of regulations and subsequent issuance 

of incidental take authorization) and 

alternatives with respect to potential 

impacts on the human environment. 

This action is consistent with 

categories of activities identified in 

Categorical Exclusion B4 of the 

Companion Manual for NAO 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 preliminarily determined 

that the proposed action qualifies to be 

categorically excluded from further 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) review. 

Information in the USSF application 

and this notice collectively provide the 

environmental information related to 

proposed issuance of these regulations 

and subsequent incidental take 

authorization for public review and 

comment. We will review all comments 

submitted in response to this notice 

prior to concluding our NEPA process 

or making a final decision on the 

request for incidental take 

authorization. 

Summary of Request 

On November 2, 2022, NMFS received 

a request from USSF requesting 

authorization for the take of marine 

mammals incidental to rocket and 

missile launch activities and aircraft 

operations at VSFB in Vandenberg, 

California. Following NMFS’ review of 

the materials provided, USSF submitted 

a revised application on May 25, 2023. 

The application was deemed adequate 

and complete on May 26, 2023. USSF’s 

request for authorization pertains to 

incidental take of 6 species of marine 

mammals, by Level B harassment only. 

On June 15, 2023, we published a 

notice of receipt of the USSF’s 

application in the Federal Register (88 

FR 39231), requesting comments and 

information related to the USSF request 

for 30 days. We received no responsive 

comments. 

The take of marine mammals 

incidental to rocket and missile 

launches and aircraft operations at 

VSFB is currently authorized by NMFS 

via an LOA issued under current 

incidental take regulations, which are 

effective from April 10, 2019 through 

April 10, 2024 (84 FR 14314; April 10, 

2019). To date, NMFS has promulgated 

incidental take regulations under the 

MMPA for substantially similar 

activities at the site four times. 

Responsibility for activities at the site 

were transferred from the U.S. Air Force 

(USAF) to the USSF in May, 2021 and 

both entities complied with the 

requirements (e.g., mitigation, 

monitoring, and reporting) of the 

current LOA. Information regarding the 

monitoring results may be found in the 

Effects of the Specified Activity on 

Marine Mammals and their Habitat. 

Description of Proposed Activity 

Overview 

USSF operations include launch 

activities for commercial entities, as 

well as the Department of Defense, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5453 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration. VSFB is the primary 

west coast launch facility for placing 

commercial, government and military 

satellites into polar orbit on uncrewed 

rockets. A subset of rocket launches 

include a ‘‘boost-back’’ maneuver, 

wherein the first stage booster returns to 

land at VSFB or at a barge located 

offshore, for recovery and future re-use. 

VSFB is also the site of launches for 

testing and evaluation of 

intercontinental ballistic missiles 

(ICBMs) and sub-orbital target and 

interceptor missiles. The missile 

activities, which represent a small 

subset of the activities, are considered 

Military Readiness Activities. 

Rocket and missile launch activities 

create noise (launch noise and/or sonic 

booms (overpressure of high-energy 

impulsive sound)) and visual stimulus 

that can take pinnipeds hauled out on 

shore along the periphery of VSFB by 

Level B harassment. In addition, a 

subset of rocket launches can create 

noise that affects pinniped haul outs 

along the shoreline of the Northern 

Channel Islands (NCI), particularly San 

Miguel and Santa Rosa islands. 

The USSF anticipates incremental 

increases in launch activity each year 

with a peak in activity of no more than 

110 rocket launches and 15 missile 

launches occurring in any one year 

(table 1). 

TABLE 1—ANTICIPATED NUMBER OF LAUNCHES AND UAS OPERATIONS, BY YEAR

Year Rocket launches Missile launches UAS operations 

2024 ........................................................................................................................... 40 15 100 

2025 ........................................................................................................................... 55 15 100 

2026 ........................................................................................................................... 75 15 100 

2027 ........................................................................................................................... 100 15 100 

2028 ........................................................................................................................... 110 15 100 

In addition to rocket and missile 

launch activities at VSFB, aircraft 

conduct flight operations to support 

activities at VSFB. Here, ‘‘aircraft’’ 

includes crewed fixed wing airplanes 

and rotary wing helicopters, and 

different types of UAS. Slightly more 

than 600 aircraft flights occur each year, 

and approximately 100 of those flights 

are UAS. These flight operations 

address mission needs including 

emergency response, search-and-rescue, 

delivery of rocket components, launch 

mission support, security 

reconnaissance, and training. VSFB no 

longer has aircraft stationed on site, but 

‘‘transient’’ aircraft may be stationed at 

the site on a temporary basis several 

times per year for periods of two or 

more weeks per operation. Take of 

hauled out pinnipeds from crewed 

fixed-wing airplanes and helicopter 

operations are not anticipated because 

these aircraft adhere to flight paths, 

minimum altitude requirements, and a 

buffer zone established to avoid 

haulouts when possible. In addition, 

pinnipeds that customarily haul out at 

sites near the airfield may be acclimated 

to aircraft and helicopter overflights. 

However, there is a limited potential for 

take to result from UAS operations. UAS 

are categorized by size into five classes, 

0–5. While harassment of hauled out 

pinnipeds from UAS classes 0–2 is 

unlikely to occur at altitudes of 200 feet 

(ft) and above (Erbe et al., 2017; 

Pomeroy et al., 2015; Sweeney et al., 

2016; Sweeney and Gelatt, 2017), given 

that classes 0–3 fly at lower altitudes, 

USSF anticipates that these classes 

could cause take of hauled out marine 

mammals due to visual disturbance, and 

NMFS concurs. Larger UAS (classes 4 

and 5) that utilize the airfield for take 

offs and landings, must adhere to 

minimum altitude criteria and buffer 

zones around haul-out areas, as 

described in the Proposed Mitigation 

section. While pinnipeds at nearby 

haulouts may show brief reactions 

during takeoffs and landings of classes 

4 and 5, animals near these haulouts are 

generally habituated to these activities 

and are not expected to have behavioral 

reactions that would rise to the level of 

take by Level B harassment. 

Dates and Duration 

The activities proposed by USSF 

would occur for 5 years, from April 

2024 through April 2029. Activities 

would occur year-round and could 

occur at any time of day, during any or 

all days of the week. As annual launch 

numbers increase, more than one launch 

could occur on some days. 

Specified Geographical Region 

VSFB occupies approximately 99,100 

acres of land and approximately 68 

kilometers (km) of coastline in central 

Santa Barbara County, California (Figure 

1). The Santa Ynez River and State 

Highway 246 divide the base into two 

distinct parts, North Base and South 

Base. 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5454 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 

Pinnipeds making use of haul-out 

sites along the coastline of VSFB are 

affected by launch noise. In addition to 

these effects at VSFB, some of the rocket 

launches and first-stage recoveries 

originating at VSFB may result in sonic 

booms that impact portions of the NCI, 

and as such NCI is also considered part 

of the project area. The NCI comprises 

four islands (San Miguel, Santa Rosa, 

Santa Cruz, and Anacapa) located 

approximately 50 km south of Point 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1EP29JA24.026</GPH>

. . . . ~ . . . 

. Space Foree Base,< ·a 1. . . 

R.egl()l'li!ilt:ocattoi'l 

• Hmih~d~ model deiM!d irom20043'iootet • • : . i.i'OAR (ligl\i ~clii,n & Ranging) !:anopf . Reltlm Oigi!al Eievatlon ModeJ(OEM); 

o· H .3 6 .. • •·· -=--•Kilomete~· 

00'51 .. 2 :3 ... k 5;_ 6 .. -. -

w MM -- --.Miles 

Figure 1 - Vandenberg Space Force Base and Vicinity 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5455 

Conception, which is located on the 

mainland approximately 6.5 km south 

of VSFB. The most proximate launch 

facility on the base and the nearest 

landmark on the NCI (Harris Point on 

San Miguel Island) are separated by 

more than 55 km. 

Rocket and missile flights originate 

from several different launch locations 

on VSFB, distributed across both North 

Base and South Base. Currently, there 

are nine active missile launch sites and 

seven active space launch facilities. In 

addition, two new launch sites and one 

former site on the base are expected to 

become operational in the future. The 

two largest classes of UAS use the VSFB 

airfield, three smaller classes of UAS 

can be launched from any location that 

is in keeping with buffers to pinniped 

haulout and rookery sites. The 

proximity of the launch sites in relation 

to specific pinniped haul-out and 

rookery areas at VSFB is shown in table 

2. LF–09 is the closest active missile 

launch facility to a haul-out area, 

located about 0.5 km from Little Sal, 

and LF–10 is the most remote facility 

from any haul-out area, located about 

2.7 km from Lion’s Head (see figure 2 

in USSF’s application). 

While rocket and missile launches do 

not occur in National Marine Sanctuary 

waters, depending on the direction of a 

given launch, rockets and missiles may 

cross over the Channel Islands National 

Marine Sanctuary. 

TABLE 2—REPRESENTATIVE ROCKET LAUNCH ACTIVITIES AND DISTANCE TO NEAREST HAUL-OUT SITE

Rocket 

Rocket 

diameter 

(ft) 

Rocket height 

(ft) Launch facility Nearest pinniped haul-out 

Distance to 

haul-out 

(km) 

Current (and recent) launch programs 

Atlas V .............................................. 12.5 191 SLC–3E ......... North Rocky Point ............................ 9.9 

Firefly ................................................ 6 95 SLC–2W ........ Purisima Point .................................. 2.3 

Delta IV ............................................. 16 236 SLC–6 ............ North Rocky Point ............................ 2.3 

Falcon 9 ............................................ 12 230 SLC–4E ......... North Rocky Point ............................ 8.2 

Minotaur ............................................ 8 81 SLC–8 ............ North Rocky Point ............................ 1.6 

Minotaur/Taurus ................................ 8 91 LF–576E ........ South Spur Road ............................. 0.8 

Minotaur/Buzzard .............................. 6 63 TP–01 ............ Purisima Point .................................. 7.1 

Future launch programs 

Vector ................................................ 4 40 SLC–8 ............ North Rocky Point ............................ 1.6 

Daytona ............................................. 5 62 SLC–5 ............ Point Arguello ................................... 3.9 

New Glenn ........................................ 23 200 SLC–9 ............ Point Arguello ................................... 10.2 

Vulcan ............................................... 17.7 >220 SLC–3E ......... Point Arguello ................................... 8.75 

Terran ............................................... 7.5 126 SLC–11 .......... North Rocky Point ............................ 1.2 

Abbreviations: SLC = Space Launch Complex; LF = Launch Facility; E = East; W = West; TBD: To be determined. 

Detailed Description of the Specified 

Activity 

VSFB is the primary west coast 

launch facility for placing commercial, 

government, and military satellites into 

polar orbit on uncrewed launch 

vehicles, and for the testing and 

evaluation of ICBMs and sub-orbital 

target and interceptor missiles by the 

Missile Defense Agency (MDA). Below, 

we discuss in detail, USSF’s proposed 

rocket launches and recoveries, missile 

launches, and aircraft operations 

including UAS. 

Rocket Launches 

Table 1 shows estimates of the 

numbers proposed rocket launches, 

missile launches, and UAS activities for 

each year. Reporting years would span 

one year from date of LOA issuance and 

each successive year thereafter, in 

accordance with the reporting 

requirements described in the Proposed 

Monitoring and Reporting section, 

below. The anticipated maximum 

number of launches in one year shown 

in table 1 is similar to the maximum 

number of launches in one year 

analyzed in the 2019 rulemaking (84 FR 

14314; April 10, 2019), with a small 

increase. For this rulemaking, USSF 

anticipates that the total number of 

launches would increase from the 500 

analyzed for the 2019 rulemaking to 550 

over the effective period of this rule. 

Similarly, the estimated number of 

launches that may cause a sonic boom 

that affect haulouts at NCI are proposed 

to increase from 88 to 104 over the 

effective period of this rulemaking. 

A large percentage of this anticipated 

increase is expected to consist of 

smaller launch payloads moved by 

smaller rockets than previously utilized 

at VSFB. Accordingly, USSF is 

developing a new Small Launch 

Vehicles program (SLV) for the South 

Base launch sites at VSFB. This program 

is expected to require as many as 100 

launches annually (included in the 

basewide 110 rocket launch/year total) 

and may involve two launches per day 

on some days. We note that ‘‘small’’ 

rockets (generally those less than 100 ft 

tall) are less likely to generate sonic 

booms that could disturb animals at 

haul outs. 

Whether or not sonic booms from 

launches originating at VSFB affect the 

NCI depends on the trajectory of the 

launch, the size of the rocket, and other 

factors such as environmental 

conditions. In any given year of this 

proposed rule, it is expected that fewer 

than 10 percent of small rockets, 25 

percent of medium rockets and 33 

percent of large rockets would ‘‘boom’’ 

the NCI. When these sonic booms events 

do occur, they tend to disturb animals 

at haulouts on San Miguel and 

(occasionally) Santa Rosa Islands. Santa 

Cruz and Anacapa Islands are not 

expected to be impacted by sonic booms 

in excess of 1 pound per square foot 

(psf). Further, based on several years of 

onsite behavioral observations and 

monitoring data, VSFB maintains and 

NMFS concurs that harassment of 

marine mammals is unlikely to occur 

when the intensity of a sonic boom is 

below 2(psf). Although exact numbers 

are uncertain, launches that generate a 

sonic boom at NCI higher than 2 psf are 

expected to occur no more than 5 times 

in authorization year 2024, 12 times in 

2025, 24 times in 2026, 30 times in 2027 

and 33 times in 2028. 

Some rocket launches include ‘‘boost 

back’’ and landing of a rocket 

component at a launch site on the base 

or on a floating offsite recovery barge. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5456 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

These activities include the use of 

parachutes and parafoils to control the 

descent of components to the barge. 

These are usually recovered, but on 

occasion, parachutes or parafoils are 

abandoned, and they sink to the ocean 

floor. The parachutes would sink to a 

depth of 1,000 ft within 46 minutes and 

the parafoil (if it is not recovered) would 

reach the same depth in one to two 

hours. Therefore, given the short 

duration that an unrecovered parachute 

or parafoil would remain in the water 

column for a given launch, NMFS does 

not anticipate that they would take 

marine mammals, and the likelihood is 

further reduced by the relative 

infrequency of instances where 

parachutes or parafoils are used but not 

recovered. 

Missiles 

A variety of small missiles are 

launched from various Launch Facilities 

(LFs) on north VSFB including 

Minuteman III, an ICBM which is 

launched from underground silos. USSF 

is currently modifying several existing 

silos for testing of the new Ground 

Based Strategic Defense (GBSD) 

program, which is expected to replace 

the Minuteman III as early as 2026. 

Several types of interceptor and target 

vehicles are also launched for the MDA. 

The MDA develops various systems 

including the Ballistic Missile Defense 

System (BMDS). The MDA estimates 

that no more than three missile tests per 

quarter will be conducted each year 

over the next 5 years, and none of the 

missiles would be significantly larger 

than the Minuteman III currently in use. 

This limitation (three missiles per 

quarter and none being larger than the 

Minuteman III) represents the 

anticipated extent of missile testing at 

VSFB over the next 5 years. No more 

than 15 missiles would be launched per 

year (table 1). 

The trajectories of all missile launches 

are generally westward and USSF 

indicates that they do not cause sonic 

boom impacts on the California 

mainland or the NCI. Missiles also 

transition to nearly horizontal flight 

within seconds of launch and do not 

create extended noise impacts to the 

coastline or result in a high degree of 

response from hauled-out pinnipeds. 

For these reasons, take on the NCI 

arising from missile launch operations 

is not anticipated or requested. All take 

associated with missile launch 

operations would occur on VSFB. 

Aircraft Operations 

The VSFB airfield, located on north 

VSFB, supports various aircraft 

operations. Aircraft operations include 

fixed wing airplanes, rotary wing 

helicopters and UAS. Of these, only 

UAS is expected to result in take, as 

discussed below. 

Over the past 5 years, an average of 

slightly more than 600 flights has 

occurred each year, approximately 100 

of which have been UAS, and USSF 

anticipates 100 UAS flights per year 

during the effective period of this 

proposed rule (table 1). Fixed-wing 

aircraft use VSFB for various purposes, 

including delivering rocket or missile 

components and training exercises. 

Helicopter (or, rotary wing) operations 

also occasionally occur at VSFB 

including transits through the area, 

exercises and mission support. 

Emergency helicopter operations, 

including but not limited to search-andrescue and wildfire containment 

actions, also occur occasionally. 

Three approved flight paths for 

airfield access have been configured in 

order to avoid disturbances from aircraft 

at established pinniped haul out sites. 

As a result of these routing measures 

and minimum altitude criteria, and 

given that pinnipeds that haul out at 

VSFB are acclimatized to aircraft and 

helicopter overflights, USSF does not 

anticipate take of hauled out pinnipeds 

from fixed-wing and helicopter 

operations using the airfield, and NMFS 

concurs. In addition, no pinniped 

responses to fixed or rotary wing aircraft 

have ever been reported and none are 

anticipated (MMCG and SAIC 2012a). 

UAS operations at VSFB may include 

either rotary or fixed wing uncrewed 

aircraft. These are typically divided into 

as many as six classes, which graduate 

in size from class 0 (which are often 

smaller than 5 inches in diameter and 

always weigh less than one pound) to 

class 5 (which can be as large as a small 

piloted aircraft). UAS classes 03 can be 

used in almost any location, while 

classes 4 and 5 typically require a 

runway and for that reason would only 

be operated from the VSFB airfield. The 

launch frequency and class of UAS 

conducting the flights is not possible to 

predict. As stated above, there is a 

limited potential for take to result from 

UAS operations. While harassment of 

hauled out pinnipeds from class 02 is 

unlikely to occur at altitudes of 200 ft 

and above (Erbe et al., 2017; Pomeroy et 

al., 2015; Sweeney et al., 2016; Sweeney 

and Gelatt, 2017), given that classes 0– 

3 fly at lower altitudes, USSF 

anticipates that these classes could 

cause take of hauled out marine 

mammals due to visual disturbance, and 

NMFS concurs. 

Other Activities 

In addition to the activities described 

above, USSF operates a small harbor on 

the south coast, immediately adjacent to 

a haulout area. Operation of the harbor 

currently entails a maximum of two 

large vessel visits per year and one 

dredging operation typically conducted 

every other year. In addition, VSFB 

estimates that SpaceX conducts 

approximately 30 2-day operations per 

year using smaller vessels. NMFS does 

not anticipate take of marine mammals 

due to these activities for the reasons 

described herein, and they are not 

discussed further beyond the brief 

explanation provided here. While 

marine mammals may behaviorally 

respond in some small degree to the 

noise generated by dredging operations, 

given the slow, predictable movements 

of these vessels, and absent any other 

contextual features that would cause 

enhanced concern, NMFS does not 

expect the proposed dredging to result 

in the take of marine mammals. Further, 

routine harbor operations are not 

anticipated to result in take of marine 

mammals. 

Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and 

reporting measures are described in 

detail later in this document (see 

Proposed Mitigation and Proposed 

Monitoring and Reporting). 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of Specified Activities 

Sections 3 and 4 of the application 

summarize available information 

regarding status and trends, distribution 

and habitat preferences, and relevant 

behavior and life history of the 

potentially affected species. NMFS fully 

considered all of this information, and 

we refer the reader to these descriptions 

and to additional information regarding 

population trends and threats that may 

be found in NMFS’ Stock Assessment 

Reports (SARs); https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments). More 

general information about these species 

(e.g., physical and behavioral 

descriptions) may be found on NMFS’ 

website (https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species). 

Table 3 lists all species or stocks for 

which take is expected and proposed to 

be authorized for this activity, and 

summarizes information related to the 

population or stock, including 

regulatory status under the MMPA and 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) and 

potential biological removal (PBR), 

where known. PBR is defined by the 

MMPA as the maximum number of 

animals, not including natural 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5457 

mortalities, that may be removed from a 

marine mammal stock while allowing 

that stock to reach or maintain its 

optimum sustainable population (as 

described in NMFS’ SARs). While no 

serious injury or mortality is anticipated 

or proposed to be authorized here, PBR 

and annual serious injury and mortality 

from anthropogenic sources are 

included here as gross indicators of the 

status of the species or stocks and other 

threats. 

Marine mammal abundance estimates 

presented in this document represent 

the total number of individuals that 

make up a given stock or the total 

number estimated within a particular 

study or survey area. NMFS’ stock 

abundance estimates for most species 

represent the total estimate of 

individuals within the geographic area, 

if known, that comprises that stock. We 

also refer to studies and onsite 

monitoring to inform abundance and 

distribution trends within the project 

area. For some species, such as the 

Guadalupe fur seal, this geographic area 

may extend beyond U.S. waters. All 

managed stocks in this region are 

assessed in NMFS’ SARs. All values 

presented in table 3 are the most recent 

available at the time of publication and 

are available online at: https://

ww.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marinemammal-protection/marine-mammalstock-assessments. 

TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES 1 LIKELY IMPACTED BY THE SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES

Common name Scientific name Stock 

ESA/ 

MMPA 

status; 

strategic 

(Y/N) 2

Stock abundance 

(CV, Nmin, most recent 

abundance survey) 3

PBR Annual 

M/SI 4

Order Carnivora—Pinnipedia 

Family Otariidae (eared seals 

and sea lions): 

California Sea Lion .................. Zalophus californianus ........... United States .......................... -, -, N 257,606 (N/A, 233,515, 2014) 14,011 >321 

Guadalupe Fur Seal ................ Arctocephalus townsendi ....... Mexico .................................... T, D, Y 34,187 (N/A, 31,019, 2013) ... 1,062 ≥3.8 

Northern Fur Seal .................... Callorhinus ursinus ................. California ................................ -, D, N 14,050 (N/A, 7,524, 2013) ..... 451 1.8 

Steller Sea Lion ....................... Eumetopias jubatus ................ Eastern ................................... -, -, N 43,201 (N/A, 43,201, 2017) ... 2,592 112 

Family Phocidae (earless 

seals): 

Harbor Seal ............................. Phoca vitulina ......................... California ................................ -, -, N 30,968 (N/A, 27,348, 2012) ... 1,641 43 

Northern Elephant Seal ........... Mirounga angustirostris .......... California Breeding ................. -, -, N 187,386 (N/A, 85,369, 2013) 5,122 13.7 

1 Information on the classification of marine mammal species can be found on the web page for The Society for Marine Mammalogy’s Committee on Taxonomy 

(https://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/; Committee on Taxonomy (2022)). 2Endangered 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. 3 NMFS marine mammal SARss online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region. CV 

is the coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. 4These 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. 

As indicated above, all six species 

(with six managed stocks) temporally 

and spatially co-occur with the 

specified activity to the degree that take 

is reasonably likely to occur. In addition 

to the 6 species of pinniped expected to 

be affected by the specified activities, an 

additional 28 species of cetaceans are 

expected to occur or could occur in the 

waters near the project area. However, 

we have determined that the potential 

stressors associated with the specified 

activities that could result in take of 

marine mammals (i.e., launch noise, 

sonic booms and disturbance from 

aircraft operations) only have the 

potential to result in harassment of 

marine mammals that are hauled out of 

the water. Noise from the specified 

activities is unlikely to ensonify 

subsurface waters to an extent that 

could result in take of cetaceans. 

Therefore, we have concluded that the 

likelihood of the proposed activities 

resulting in the harassment of any 

cetacean to be so low as to be 

discountable. Accordingly, cetaceans 

are not considered further in this 

proposed rule. Further, only one live 

northern fur seal has been reported at 

VSFB in the past 25 years (SBMMC 

2012), at least two deceased fur seals 

have been found on VSFB. Guadalupe 

fur seals have yet to be reported at 

VSFB. Therefore, it is extremely 

unlikely that any fur seals will be taken 

at that site. However as discussed 

below, NMFS anticipates that both 

species could be taken at NCI. Steller 

sea lions are not anticipated to occur at 

NCI, and therefore, are not expected to 

be taken at that site, but are likely to be 

taken at VSFB. Harbor seal, northern 

elephant seal, and California sea lion are 

likely to be taken at both NCI and VSFB. 

California sea otters (Enhydra lutris 

nereis) may also be found in waters off 

of VSFB, which is near the southern 

extent of their range. However, 

California sea otters are managed by the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and are 

not considered further in this proposed 

rule. 

Pacific Harbor Seal (California Stock) 

Harbor seals haul out on intertidal 

sandbars, rocky shores and beaches 

along the California coast and islands 

including VSFB and, to a lesser extent, 

NCI. Coastwide, from 400 to 600 haulout sites exist (Carretta et al., 2011; 

Caretta et al., 2012) and few to several 

hundred animals may occupy each site 

when conditions are favorable. Harbor 

seals generally haul out in greatest 

numbers during the afternoon but at 

some sites the beach profile and tidal 

inundation results in limited or no 

suitable haul out area. This is the case 

in some areas around VSFB, where 

shifting of coastal landforms including 

beaches, banks and bluffs affect 

availability of suitable haul out area. 

Considerable haul out area is 

consistently available at NCI, 

irrespective of tidal influence. 

Harbor seals generally forage locally 

but individuals, particularly juveniles, 

may travel up to 500 km either to find 

food or suitable breeding areas. The 

greatest numbers haul out during the 

molting season, from May into August 

throughout California (Carretta et al., 

2011; Caretta et al., 2012). In the vicinity 

of the project area, the pupping season 

peaks from mid-February through April; 

and at VSFB, it extends from March 

through June. Molting season follows, 

sometimes overlapping the pupping 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

I I I I 
5458 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

season. Harbor seal numbers at VSFB 

haul out areas usually peak in June, but 

there is some variability (in some years 

the highest counts occurred in the fall 

or winter months). Harbor seal pupping 

also occurs on NCI from March to June. 

Harbor seals regularly use haulouts 

along the shoreline at VSFB. Haulout 

sites on VSFB can be found on both 

south VSFB and north VSFB, including 

Lion’s Head and Little Sal. 

California Sea Lion (U.S. Stock) 

The California sea lion occurs in the 

eastern north Pacific from Puerto 

Vallarta, Mexico, through the Gulf of 

California and north along the west 

coast of North America to the Gulf of 

Alaska (Barlow et al., 2008; DeLong et 

al., 2017b; Jefferson et al., 2008). 

Typically, during the summer, 

California sea lions congregate near 

rookery islands and specific open-water 

areas, including NCI where one of the 

largest rookeries is found. The primary 

rookeries off the coast of the United 

States are on San Nicolas (SNI), San 

Miguel, Santa Barbara, and San 

Clemente Islands (Le Boeuf & Bonnell 

1980; Lowry et al., 1992; Carretta et al., 

2000; Lowry & Forney 2005; Lowry et 

al., 2017). About 50 percent of the births 

on San Miguel Island occur in the Point 

Bennett area, during a pupping season 

that runs from May to August. 

In the nonbreeding season, beginning 

in late summer, adult and subadult 

males migrate northward along the coast 

of California to more northerly states, 

and are largely absent from the southern 

breeding areas until the following spring 

(Laake, 2017; Lowry & Forney, 2005). 

Females and juveniles also disperse to 

areas north and west of NCI, but tend to 

stay in the Southern California area. 

(Lowry & Forney, 2005; Melin & 

DeLong, 2000; Thomas et al., 2010). 

California sea lions also occur in open 

ocean and coastal waters (Barlow et al., 

2008; Jefferson et al., 2008). Animals 

usually occur in waters over the 

continental shelf and slope; however, 

they are also known to occupy locations 

far offshore in deep, oceanic waters, 

such as Guadalupe Island and Alijos 

Rocks off Baja California (Jefferson et 

al., 2008; Melin et al., 2008; Urrutia & 

Dziendzielewski, 2012; Zavala-Gonzalez 

& Mellink, 2000). California sea lions 

are the most frequently sighted 

pinnipeds offshore of Southern 

California during the spring, and peak 

abundance is during the May through 

August breeding season (Green et al., 

1992; Keiper et al., 2005; Lowry et al., 

2017). 

California sea lions haul out at sites 

in the southern portion of VSFB and 

have not been observed at any northern 

VSFB haulout locations, except for rare 

individuals affected by domoic acid 

poisoning (USAF 2020; Evans, 2020). 

There is no known successful breeding 

of this species on VSFB. 

In 2019 a significant die-off of 

California sea lions, presumed to be 

caused by domoic acid toxicity 

associated with red tide algal blooms, 

was noted. This event included most of 

Southern and Central California and 

included more than 80 deceased 

California sea lions on VSFB beaches 

(USAF 2020; Evans, 2020). 

California sea lion pupping season 

begins in late May, peaking on or 

around the third week of June. Female 

sea lions nurse their pups for 1 to 2 

days, before embarking on progressively 

longer spans of time away from the 

haulout site to forage. Typically, the 

adult female spends 2 to 5 days feeding, 

before returning to nurse the pup. 

Females continue a pattern of going to 

sea for several days and nursing ashore 

for several days until pups are weaned. 

The weaning period continues for about 

8 to 12 months (Carretta et al., 2011; 

Caretta et al., 2012). 

Females usually range from the 

Mexican border to as far north as San 

Francisco. If prey is scarce, particularly 

during El Nin ̃o years, they have been 

known to extend their range into 

Oregon. Adult males claim their 

breeding territories in late May, usually 

leaving by August, with most animals 

moving north. Adult males may venture 

as far north as British Columbia or 

southeast Alaska. 

Northern Elephant Seal (California 

Breeding Stock) 

The California breeding stock of the 

Northern elephant seal extends from the 

Channel Islands to the southeast 

Farallon Islands (Carretta et al., 201; 

Caretta et al., 2012). There are two 

distinct populations of northern 

elephant seals: one that breeds in Baja 

California, Mexico; and a population 

that breeds in California (Garcia-Aguilar 

et al. 2018). The northern elephant seals 

in the VSFB Project Area are from the 

California Breeding stock, although 

elephant seals from Baja Mexico migrate 

through the Project Area (AuriolesGamboa & Camacho-Rios 2007; Carretta 

et al., 2017; Carretta et al., 2020). 

Females and juveniles feed from 

California into Washington, while males 

travel as far as Alaska and the Aleutians. 

Males and females return between 

March and August to molt. 

Northern elephant seals spend little 

time nearshore and migrate four times a 

year, traveling to and from breeding/ 

pupping and molting areas and 

spending more than 80 percent of their 

annual cycle at sea (Robinson et al., 

2012; Lowry et al., 2014; Lowry et al., 

2017; Carretta et al., 2020). Peak 

abundance in California is during the 

January–February breeding season and 

when adults return to molt from April 

to July (Lowry et al. 2014; Lowry et al., 

2017). 

Although northern elephant seals 

haul out at south VSFB locations, they 

were not observed at north VSFB haul 

outs in 2019 or in 2020. Breeding has 

been observed on south VSFB since 

2017 (Evans, 2020), and pupping at 

VSFB was first documented in January 

2017. Additional pupping has been 

observed every year since 2017, 

increasing each year, with a maximum 

of approximately 40 pups in 2022. 

Pupping occurs from January through 

March, with peak breeding in midFebruary. Pups are weaned at 3 to 4 

weeks of age, then abandoned and 

undergo their first molt, which can take 

several weeks. They then return to sea 

and customary offshore waters at the 

end of the molting cycle. Currently, the 

Amphitheatre Cove haul out at VSFB is 

the primary site used by elephant seals 

for breeding and pupping, however 

another location, Boathouse Beach, was 

the site for two successful pups each 

year in 2021 and 2022. All age classes 

and sexes haul out on VSFB, at different 

times of the year, to rest, undergo 

molting and to reproduce or 

occasionally to rest at other times of 

year. On NCI, pupping activity occurs 

from December through March. While 

some animals disperse after the weaning 

period, elephant seals also haul out 

onshore during the seasonal molting 

period from March to August. 

Steller Sea Lion (Eastern U.S. Stock) 

The eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea 

lions ranges from Cape Suckling, 

Alaska, to California (Cape Suckling is 

almost at the northernmost part of the 

Gulf of Alaska, at long. 140° W). An ̃ o 

Nuevo Island, in central California, is 

now the southernmost known breeding 

colony for Steller sea lions (Carretta et 

al., 2011; Caretta et al., 2012), although 

they did breed at San Miguel Island 

until the 1982–1983 El Nin ̃ o. Sightings 

were rare after that. From 2010 to 2012, 

individual Steller sea lions have shown 

up along the mainland coast of the 

Southern California Bight, often hauled 

out on navigation buoys. At VSFB, 

Steller sea lions have been observed in 

generally low numbers since 

approximately 2012, but no breeding or 

pupping behavior has been 

documented. 

Steller sea lions range along the north 

Pacific from northern Japan to California 

(Perrin et al., 2009), with centers of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5459 

abundance and distribution in the Gulf 

of Alaska and Aleutian Islands (Muto et 

al., 2020). There have also been reports 

of Steller sea lions in waters off Mexico 

as far south as the various islands off the 

port of Manzanillo in Colima, Mexico 

(Gallo-Reynoso et al., 2020). The eastern 

U.S. stock (or DPS) of Steller sea lion is 

defined as the population occurring east 

of long. 144° W. The locations and 

distribution of the eastern population’s 

breeding sites along the U.S. Pacific 

coast have shifted northward, with 

fewer breeding sites in southern 

California and more sites established in 

Washington and southeast Alaska 

(Pitcher et al., 2007; Wiles, 2015). 

Steller sea lions pups were known to be 

born at San Miguel Island up until 1981 

(Pitcher et al., 2007; National Marine 

Fisheries Service 2008; Muto et al., 

2020), and as the population continues 

to increase, Steller sea lions may reestablish a breeding colony on San 

Miguel Island. However, currently no 

pupping occurs on NCI. 

Despite the species’ general absence 

from the area, some Steller sea lions 

(one to two individuals at a time) have 

been sighted in the Channel Islands and 

vicinity. Individual adult and subadult 

male Steller sea lions have been seen 

hauled out at San Miguel Island during 

the fall and winter, and adult and 

subadult males have occasionally been 

seen on rocks north of Northwest Point 

at San Miguel Island in the summer 

(Delong, 2019). Aerial surveys for 

pinnipeds in the Channel Islands from 

2011 to 2015 encountered a single 

Steller sea lion at SNI in 2013 (Lowry 

et al., 2017). Additional sightings have 

included a single male that was seen 

hauled out on an oil production 

structure off Long Beach during the 

winter of 2015 and 2016, a Steller 

observed in 2018 hauled out on a buoy 

outside Ventura Harbor, and a lone 

adult female that gave birth to and 

reared a pup on San Miguel Island in 

the summer of 2017 (Delong 2019). 

In April and May 2012 Steller sea 

lions were observed at VSFB marking 

the first time this species had been 

reported at VSFB over the prior two 

decades. Since 2012, Steller sea lions 

have been observed occasionally in 

routine monthly surveys, with a peak of 

16 individuals recorded. In 2019, up to 

four Steller sea lions were observed on 

south VSFB during monthly marine 

mammal counts, and none were 

observed during monthly counts in the 

years that followed. While flying to 

VSFB from Santa Maria for an unrelated 

project, contract biologists observed and 

photographed three Steller sea lions at 

Lion Rock (Point Sal) in October 2017 

(Ball, 2017). This offshore haulout site 

can be exposed to in-air noise levels 

from missile launches and is included 

in the take estimates provided below. 

Northern Fur Seal (San Miguel Island 

Stock) 

Northern fur seals range from 

southern California to the Bering Sea 

and west to the Okhotsk Sea and Japan. 

About 74 percent of the breeding 

population occurs far north of the 

project area, on the Pribilof Islands of 

the southern Bering Sea. The San 

Miguel Island stock comprises less than 

one percent of the population. In 

general, Northern fur seals are highly 

pelagic, and adult northern fur seals 

spend more than 300 days per year 

(about 80 percent of their time) at sea, 

generally well offshore. While at sea, 

northern fur seals range throughout the 

North Pacific (Carretta et al., 2011; 

Caretta et al., 2012). Migrating seals and 

those along the U.S. west coast are 

typically found over the edge of the 

continental shelf and slope (Kenyon & 

Wilke 1953; Sterling & Ream 2004; 

Gentry 2009; Adams et al. 2014). 

Northern fur seals have not been 

observed at any VSFB haulout location 

(NMFS, 2020b) and are not expected to 

be subject to noise levels at the base that 

may cause behavioral effects. 

Adult males stay on or near haul-outs 

on NCI from May through August, with 

some non-breeding individuals 

remaining until November. Beginning in 

May, male seals start returning to the 

breeding islands. Upon arrival males 

seek to occupy and defend optimal 

breeding territories before the females 

arrive. Because males do not leave the 

breeding territory to feed, their ability to 

fast is critical. Males remain on their 

territory an average of 46 days. Adult 

females generally stay on or near haulouts beginning in June and extending to 

fall, sometimes to as late as November. 

Peak pupping is in early July. Females 

nurse their newborn pups for 5 to 6 days 

and then go to sea to forage for 3.5 to 

9.8 days. Females continue to cycle 

between land and sea for the remainder 

of the nursing period. Their time on 

land declines to less than 2 days and 

their time at sea generally increases. 

Pups are nursed until weaned (about 4 

months) and leave the breeding site 

before their mothers to forage 

independently. Some juveniles are 

present year-round, but most juveniles 

and adults head for the open ocean and 

a pelagic existence until the following 

year. Pupping occurs at NCI (San Miguel 

Island) from June through August. 

Pupping does not occur at VSFB. 

Guadalupe Fur Seal (Mexico) 

Satellite tracking data from 

Guadalupe fur seals tagged at 

Guadalupe Island in Mexico, have 

shown that the seals transit through 

offshore waters between 50 and 300 km 

from the U.S. west coast (Norris et al. 

2015; Norris, 2017b; Norris, 2017a; 

Norris & Elorriaga-Verplancken, 2020). 

Based on that data, the seals could occur 

in ocean and coastal waters within or 

adjacent to the VSFB Project Area. 

However, Guadalupe fur seals have not 

been observed at any VSFB haulout 

locations (USAF 2020; Evans, 2020) and 

are not expected to be subject to in-air 

noise levels at VSFB that may cause 

behavioral disturbance. Guadalupe fur 

seals are only rarely observed on San 

Miguel and San Nicolas Islands, 

typically at Point Bennett, and are 

almost always sighted as a lone 

individual. Lone adult males twice 

established territories on San Nicolas 

Island which lasted a few years each 

time, but no females arrived (Carretta et 

al., 2011; Caretta et al., 2012). As such, 

there is no pupping activity within the 

project area. 

Potential Effects of Specified Activities 

on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat 

This section provides a discussion of 

the ways in which components of the 

specified activity may impact marine 

mammals and their habitat. The 

Estimated Take of Marine Mammals 

section later in this document includes 

a quantitative analysis of the number of 

individuals that are expected to be taken 

by this activity. The Negligible Impact 

Analysis and Determination section 

considers the content of this section, the 

Estimated Take of Marine Mammals 

section, and the Proposed Mitigation 

section, to draw conclusions regarding 

the likely impacts of these activities on 

the reproductive success or survivorship 

of individuals and whether those 

impacts are reasonably expected to, or 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival. 

In-air acoustic effects resulting from 

rocket launches and recoveries, missile 

launches and UAS operations may affect 

hauled out marine mammals. The 

effects of noise from the USSF’s 

proposed activities have the potential to 

result in Level B harassment of marine 

mammals in the action area. 

Description of Sound Sources 

This section contains a brief technical 

background on sound, the 

characteristics of certain sound types, 

and on metrics used in this proposal 

inasmuch as the information is relevant 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5460 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

to the specified activity and to a 

discussion of the potential effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

found later in this document. 

Sound travels in waves, the basic 

components of which are frequency, 

wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. 

Frequency is the number of pressure 

waves that pass by a reference point per 

unit of time and is measured in hertz 

(Hz) or cycles per second. Wavelength is 

the distance between two peaks or 

corresponding points of a sound wave 

(length of one cycle). Higher frequency 

sounds have shorter wavelengths than 

lower frequency sounds, and typically 

attenuate (decrease) more rapidly, 

except in certain cases in shallower 

water. Amplitude is the height of the 

sound pressure wave or the ‘‘loudness’’ 

of a sound and is typically described 

using the relative unit of the dB. A 

sound pressure level (SPL) in dB is 

described as the ratio between a 

measured pressure and a reference 

pressure and is a logarithmic unit that 

accounts for large variations in 

amplitude; therefore, a relatively small 

change in dB corresponds to large 

changes in sound pressure. The source 

level (SL) represents the SPL referenced 

at a distance of 1 m from the source 

while the received level is the SPL at 

the listener’s position. Note that all 

airborne sound levels in this document 

are referenced to a pressure of 20 mPa. 

Root mean square (rms) is the 

quadratic mean sound pressure over the 

duration of an impulse. Root mean 

square is calculated by squaring all of 

the sound amplitudes, averaging the 

squares, and then taking the square root 

of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean 

square accounts for both positive and 

negative values; squaring the pressures 

makes all values positive so that they 

may be accounted for in the summation 

of pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 

2005). This measurement is often used 

in the context of discussing behavioral 

effects, in part because behavioral 

effects, which often result from auditory 

cues, may be better expressed through 

averaged units than by peak pressures. 

Sound exposure level (SEL; 

represented as dB re 1 mPa2-s) represents 

the total energy contained within a 

pulse and considers both intensity and 

duration of exposure. Peak sound 

pressure (also referred to as zero-to-peak 

sound pressure or 0-p) is the maximum 

instantaneous sound pressure 

measurable in the water at a specified 

distance from the source and is 

represented in the same units as the rms 

sound pressure. Another common 

metric is peak-to-peak sound pressure 

(pk-pk), which is the algebraic 

difference between the peak positive 

and peak negative sound pressures. 

Peak-to-peak pressure is typically 

approximately 6 dB higher than peak 

pressure (Southall et al., 2007). 

A-weighting is applied to instrumentmeasured sound levels in an effort to 

account for the relative loudness 

perceived by the human ear, as the ear 

is less sensitive to low audio 

frequencies, and is commonly used in 

measuring airborne noise. The relative 

sensitivity of pinnipeds listening in air 

to different frequencies is more-or-less 

similar to that of humans (Richardson et 

al., 1995), so A-weighting may, as a first 

approximation, be relevant to pinnipeds 

listening to moderate-level sounds. 

The sum of the various natural and 

anthropogenic sound sources at any 

given location and time—which 

comprise ‘‘ambient’’ or ‘‘background’’ 

sound—depends not only on the source 

levels (as determined by current 

weather conditions and levels of 

biological and human activity) but also 

on the ability of sound to propagate 

through the environment. In turn, sound 

propagation is dependent on the 

spatially and temporally varying 

properties of the water column and sea 

floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a 

result of the dependence on a large 

number of varying factors, ambient 

sound levels can be expected to vary 

widely over both coarse and fine spatial 

and temporal scales. Sound levels at a 

given frequency and location can vary 

by 10–20 dB from day to day 

(Richardson et al., 1995). The result is 

that, depending on the source type and 

its intensity, sound from a given activity 

may be a negligible addition to the local 

environment or could form a distinctive 

signal that may affect marine mammals. 

Details of source types are described in 

the following text. 

Sounds are often considered to fall 

into one of two general types: Pulsed 

and non-pulsed (defined in the 

following). The distinction between 

these two sound types is important 

because they have differing potential to 

cause physical effects, particularly with 

regard to hearing (e.g., Ward, 1997 in 

Southall et al., 2007). Please see 

Southall et al. (2007) for an in-depth 

discussion of these concepts. 

Pulsed sound sources (e.g., airguns, 

explosions, gunshots, sonic booms, 

impact pile driving) produce signals 

that are brief (typically considered to be 

less than one second), broadband, atonal 

transients (ANSI, 1986; ANSI, 2005; 

Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 1998; ISO, 2003) 

and occur either as isolated events or 

repeated in some succession. Pulsed 

sounds are all characterized by a 

relatively rapid rise from ambient 

pressure to a maximal pressure value 

followed by a rapid decay period that 

may include a period of diminishing, 

oscillating maximal and minimal 

pressures, and generally have an 

increased capacity to induce physical 

injury as compared with sounds that 

lack these features. 

Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, 

narrowband, or broadband, brief or 

prolonged, and may be either 

continuous or non-continuous (ANSI, 

1995; NIOSH, 1998). Some of these nonpulsed sounds can be transient signals 

of short duration but without the 

essential properties of pulses (e.g., rapid 

rise time). Examples of non-pulsed 

sounds include those produced by 

vessels, aircraft, machinery operations 

such as drilling or dredging, vibratory 

pile driving, and active sonar systems 

(such as those used by the U.S. Navy). 

The duration of such sounds, as 

received at a distance, can be greatly 

extended in a highly reverberant 

environment. 

The effects of sounds on marine 

mammals are dependent on several 

factors, including the species, size, and 

behavior (feeding, nursing, resting, etc.) 

of the animal; the intensity and duration 

of the sound; and the sound propagation 

properties of the environment. Impacts 

to marine species can result from 

physiological and behavioral responses 

to both the type and strength of the 

acoustic signature (Viada et al., 2008). 

The type and severity of behavioral 

impacts are more difficult to define due 

to limited studies addressing the 

behavioral effects of sounds on marine 

mammals. Potential effects from 

impulsive sound sources can range in 

severity from effects such as behavioral 

disturbance or tactile perception to 

physical discomfort, slight injury of the 

internal organs and the auditory system, 

or mortality (Yelverton et al., 1973). 

The effects of sounds from the 

proposed activities are expected to 

result in behavioral disturbance of 

marine mammals. Due to the expected 

sound levels of the activities proposed 

and the distance of the activity from 

marine mammal habitat, the effects of 

sounds from the proposed activities are 

not expected to result in temporary or 

permanent hearing impairment (TTS 

and PTS, respectively), non-auditory 

physical or physiological effects, or 

masking in marine mammals. Data from 

monitoring reports associated with 

authorizations issued by NMFS 

previously for similar activities in the 

same location as the planned activities 

(described further below) provides 

further support for the assertion that 

TTS, PTS, non-auditory physical or 

physiological effects, and masking are 

not likely to occur (USAF, 2013b; SAIC, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5461 

2012). Therefore, TTS, PTS, nonauditory physical or physiological 

effects, and masking are not discussed 

further in this section. 

Disturbance Reactions 

Disturbance includes a variety of 

effects, including subtle changes in 

behavior, more conspicuous changes in 

activities, and displacement. Though 

significantly driven by received level, 

the onset of behavioral disturbance from 

anthropogenic noise exposure is also 

informed to varying degrees by other 

factors related to the source or exposure 

context (e.g., frequency, predictability, 

duty cycle, duration of the exposure, 

signal-to-noise ratio, distance to the 

source, ambient noise, and the receiving 

animal’s hearing, motivation, 

experience, demography, behavior at 

time of exposure, life stage, depth) and 

can be difficult to predict (e.g., Southall, 

et al., 2007, Southall et al., 2021; Ellison 

et al., 2012). 

Habituation can occur when an 

animal’s response to a stimulus wanes 

with repeated exposure, usually in the 

absence of unpleasant associated events 

(Wartzok et al., 2003). Animals are most 

likely to habituate to sounds that are 

predictable and unvarying. The opposite 

process is sensitization, when an 

unpleasant experience leads to 

subsequent responses, often in the form 

of avoidance, at a lower level of 

exposure. Behavioral state may affect 

the type of response as well. For 

example, animals that are resting may 

show greater behavioral change in 

response to disturbing sound levels than 

animals that are highly motivated to 

remain in an area for feeding 

(Richardson et al., 1995; NRC, 2003; 

Wartzok et al., 2003). 

Controlled experiments with captive 

marine mammals have shown 

pronounced behavioral reactions, 

including avoidance of loud underwater 

sound sources (Ridgway et al., 1997; 

Finneran et al., 2003). These may be of 

limited relevance to the proposed 

activities given that airborne sound, and 

not underwater sound, may result in 

harassment of marine mammals as a 

result of the proposed activities; 

however we present this information as 

background on the potential impacts of 

sound on marine mammals. Observed 

responses of wild marine mammals to 

loud pulsed sound sources (typically 

seismic guns or acoustic harassment 

devices) have been varied but often 

consist of avoidance behavior or other 

behavioral changes suggesting 

discomfort (Morton and Symonds, 2002; 

Thorson and Reyff, 2006; Gordon et al., 

2004; Wartzok et al., 2003; Nowacek et 

al., 2007). 

The onset of noise can result in 

temporary, short term changes in an 

animal’s typical behavior and/or 

avoidance of the affected area. These 

behavioral changes may include: 

reduced/increased vocal activities; 

changing/cessation of certain behavioral 

activities (such as socializing or 

feeding); visible startle response or 

aggressive behavior; avoidance of areas 

where sound sources are located; and/ 

or flight responses (Richardson et al., 

1995). Not all behavioral responses are 

indicative of a take. For further 

discussion of behavioral responses as 

they relate to take, see table 5. 

The biological significance of many of 

these behavioral disturbances is difficult 

to predict, especially if the detected 

disturbances appear minor. However, 

the consequences of behavioral 

modification could potentially be 

biologically significant if the change 

affects growth, survival, or 

reproduction. The onset of behavioral 

disturbance from anthropogenic sound 

is dependent upon a number of 

contextual factors including, but not 

limited to, sound source frequencies, 

whether the sound source is moving 

towards the animal, hearing ranges of 

marine mammals, behavioral state at 

time of exposure, status of individual 

exposed (e.g., reproductive status, age 

class, health) and an individual’s 

experience with similar sound sources. 

Southall et al., (2021), Ellison et al. 

(2012) and Moore and Barlow (2013), 

among others, emphasize the 

importance of context (e.g., behavioral 

state of the animals, distance from the 

sound source) in evaluating behavioral 

responses of marine mammals to 

acoustic sources. 

Marine mammals that occur in the 

project area could be exposed to in-air 

sound that has the potential to result in 

behavioral harassment of pinnipeds that 

are hauled out. Airborne sound at 

certain levels is expected to result in 

behavioral responses similar to those 

discussed above in relation to 

underwater sound. For instance, 

anthropogenic sound could cause 

hauled out pinnipeds to exhibit changes 

in their normal behavior such as a 

change from resting state to an ‘alert’ 

posture or to flush from a haulout site 

into the water. 

The results from studies of pinniped 

response to acoustic disturbance arising 

from launches and associated sonic 

booms at VSFB and NCI are highly 

variable (Holst et al., 2005; Ugoretz and 

Greene Jr. 2012). Pinniped responses to 

rocket launches at the sites have been 

monitored for well over two decades. 

Monitoring data have consistently 

shown that the degree of pinniped 

reactions to sonic booms varies among 

species (table 4), with harbor seals 

typically showing the highest levels of 

disturbance, followed by California sea 

lions, and with northern elephant seals 

generally being much less responsive. 

Steller sea lions are only rarely observed 

in the project area and react to launch 

noise infrequently. Types of responses 

range from no response to heads-up 

alerts, from startle responses to some 

movements on land, and from some 

movements into the water to one 

instance of stampede. 

TABLE 4—REPRESENTATIVE PINNIPED RESPONSES TO SONIC BOOMS AT SAN MIGUEL ISLAND, DOCUMENTED IN U.S. AIR

FORCE LAUNCH MONITORING REPORTS

Launch event 

Sonic 

boom 

level 

(psf) 

Monitoring location Species observed and responses 

Athena II (April 27, 1999) .......... 1 Adams Cove ............................. California sea lion: 866 alerted; 232 (27 percent) flushed into 

water. 

Northern elephant seal: alerted but did not flush. 

Northern fur seal: alerted but did not flush. 

Athena II (September 24, 1999) 0.95 Point Bennett ............................ California sea lion: 12 of 600 (2 percent) flushed into water. 

Northern elephant seal: alerted but did not flush. 

Northern fur seal: alerted but did not flush. 

Delta II 20 (November 20, 2000) 0.4 Point Bennett ............................ California sea lion: 60 pups flushed into water; no reaction from 

focal group. 

Northern elephant seal: no reaction. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5462 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 4—REPRESENTATIVE PINNIPED RESPONSES TO SONIC BOOMS AT SAN MIGUEL ISLAND, DOCUMENTED IN U.S. AIR

FORCE LAUNCH MONITORING REPORTS—Continued 

Launch event 

Sonic 

boom 

level 

(psf) 

Monitoring location Species observed and responses 

Atlas II (September 8, 2001) ..... 0.75 Cardwell Point .......................... California sea lion (Group 1): no reaction (1,200 animals). 

California sea lion (Group 2): no reaction (247 animals). 

Northern elephant seal: no reaction. 

Harbor seal: 2 of 4 flushed into water. 

Delta II (February 11, 2002) ...... 0.64 Point Bennett ............................ California sea lions and northern fur seals: no reaction among 

485 animals in 3 groups. 

Northern elephant seal: no reaction among 424 animals in 2 

groups. 

Atlas II (December 2, 2003) ...... 0.88 Point Bennett ............................ California sea lion: approximately 40 percent alerted; several 

flushed to water (number unknown—night launch). 

Northern elephant seal: no reaction. 

Delta II (July 15, 2004) .............. 1.34 Adams Cove ............................. California sea lion: 10 percent alerted (number unknown—night 

launch). 

Atlas V (March 13, 2008) ........... 1.24 Cardwell Point .......................... Northern elephant seal: no reaction (109 pups).

Delta II (May 5, 2009) ................ 0.76 West of Judith Rock ................. California sea lion: no reaction (784 animals). 

Atlas V (April 14, 2011) ............. 1.01 Cuyler Harbor ........................... Northern elephant seal: no reaction (445 animals). 

Atlas V (September 13, 2012) ... 2.10 Cardwell Point .......................... California sea lion: no reaction (460 animals). 

Northern elephant seal: no reaction (68 animals). 

Harbor seal: 20 of 36 (56 percent) flushed into water. 

Atlas V (April 3, 2014) ............... 0.74 Cardwell Point .......................... Harbor seal: 1 of ∼25 flushed into water; no reaction from others. 

Atlas V (December 12, 2014) .... 1.18 Point Bennett ............................ California sea lion: 5 of ∼225 alerted; none flushed. 

Atlas V (October 8, 2015) .......... 1.96 East Adams Cove of Point 

Bennett.

California sea lion: ∼60 percent of CSL alerted and raised their 

heads. None flushed. 

Northern elephant seal: No visible response to sonic boom, 

none flushed. 

Northern fur seal: 60 percent alerted and raised their heads. 

None flushed. 

Atlas V (March 1, 2017) ............. a ∼0.8 Cuyler Harbor on San Miguel 

Island.

Northern elephant seal: 13 of 235 (6 percent) alerted; none 

flushed. 

aPeak sonic boom at the monitoring site was ∼2.2 psf, but was in infrasonic range—not audible to pinnipeds. Within the audible frequency 

spectrum, boom at monitoring site estimated at ∼0.8 psf. 

Post-launch monitoring of pinniped 

behavior shows that return to prelaunch numbers of animals and types of 

behaviors occurs within minutes or up 

to an hour or two after each launch 

event, regardless of species. 

Responsiveness also varies with time 

of year and age class, with juvenile 

pinnipeds being more likely to react by 

entering the water and temporarily 

leaving the haulout site. The probability 

and type of behavioral response also 

depends on the season, the group 

composition, and the type of activity or 

behavior at the time of disturbance. For 

example, in some cases, harbor seals 

have been found to be more responsive 

during the pupping/breeding season 

(Holst et al., 2005a; Holst et al., 2008) 

while in other instances, lone 

individuals seem more prone to react 

than mothers and pups (Ugoretz and 

Greene Jr., 2012). California sea lions 

seem to be consistently less responsive 

during the pupping season (Holst et al., 

2010; Holst et al., 2005a; Holst et al., 

2008; Holst et al., 2011; Holst et al., 

2005b; Ugoretz and Greene Jr., 2012). 

Pup abandonment could theoretically 

result in instances where adults flush 

into the water as a result of sound from 

an in-season launch. In its application, 

USSF cites one instance of a stampede 

on NCI that was triggered by launch 

noise in excess of that predicted to 

occur from USSF’s proposed activity. 

No instances of pup abandonment are 

reflected in site-specific monitoring 

data. Given there is only one known 

instance of a stampede and no known 

pup abandonment, we find that 

abandonment is not likely to occur from 

future activities that create similar 

sound levels as those in the past. While 

reactions are variable, and can involve 

abrupt movements by some individuals, 

biological impacts of observed 

responses to launch activities and 

supporting operations appear to be 

limited in duration and consist of 

behavioral disruption including 

temporary abandonment of a haul out 

area. 

Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal 

Habitat 

Habitat includes, but is not 

necessarily limited to, rookeries, mating 

grounds, feeding areas, and areas of 

similar significance. We do not 

anticipate that the proposed activities 

would result in any temporary or 

permanent effects on the habitats used 

by the marine mammals in the proposed 

area, including the food sources they 

use (i.e., fish and invertebrates). 

Therefore, it is not expected that the 

specified activities would impact 

feeding success of pinnipeds. 

While it is anticipated that the 

proposed activity may result in marine 

mammals avoiding certain haulout areas 

due to temporary ensonification of outof-water habitat, this impact is 

temporary and reversible and was 

discussed earlier in this document, in 

the context of behavioral modification. 

No impacts are anticipated to accrue to 

prey species or to foraging areas and inwater habitat frequented by pinnipeds. 

The main impact associated with the 

proposed activity will be temporarily 

elevated in-air noise levels and the 

associated reaction of certain pinnipeds, 

previously discussed in this proposed 

rule. 

Estimated Take of Marine Mammals 

This section provides an estimate of 

the number of incidental takes proposed 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5463 

for this rule, which will inform both 

NMFS’ consideration of ‘‘small 

numbers’’ and the negligible impact 

determinations. 

Harassment is the only type of take 

expected to result from these activities. 

Except with respect to military 

readiness activities, 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). As stated above, 

a comparatively small portion of USSF’s 

activities are considered military 

readiness activities. For military 

readiness activities, the MMPA defines 

‘‘harassment’’ as: (i) Any act that injures 

or has the significant potential to injure 

a marine mammal or marine mammal 

stock in the wild (Level A harassment); 

or (ii) Any act that disturbs or is likely 

to disturb a marine mammal or marine 

mammal stock in the wild by causing 

disruption of natural behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering, to a point where 

the behavioral patterns are abandoned 

or significantly altered (Level B 

harassment). The take estimate 

methodology outlined below is 

considered appropriate for the 

quantification of take by Level B 

harassment based on either of the two 

definitions. 

Authorized takes would be by Level B 

harassment only, in the form of 

disruption of behavioral patterns for 

individual marine mammals resulting 

from exposure to launch related visual 

or auditory stimulus. Based on the 

nature of the activity and as shown in 

activity-specific studies (described 

below), Level A harassment is neither 

anticipated nor proposed to be 

authorized. As described previously, no 

serious injury or mortality is anticipated 

or proposed to be authorized for this 

activity. Below we describe how the 

proposed take numbers are estimated. 

For acoustic impacts, generally 

speaking, we estimate take by 

considering: (1) acoustic thresholds 

above which NMFS believes the best 

available science indicates marine 

mammals will be behaviorally harassed 

or incur some degree of permanent 

hearing impairment; (2) the area that 

will be ensonified above these levels in 

a day; (3) the density or occurrence of 

marine mammals within these 

ensonified areas; and, (4) the number of 

days of activities. We note that while 

these factors can contribute to a basic 

calculation to provide an initial 

prediction of potential takes, additional 

information that can qualitatively 

inform take estimates is also sometimes 

available (e.g., previous monitoring 

results or average group size). Below, we 

describe the factors considered here 

(which include thresholds for take from 

launches and UAS, considered in 

combination with pinniped survey data 

in the form of daily counts) in more 

detail and present the proposed take 

estimates. 

Acoustic Thresholds 

For underwater sounds, NMFS 

recommends the use of acoustic 

thresholds that identify the received 

levels above which exposed marine 

mammals would be reasonably expected 

to be behaviorally harassed (equated to 

Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of 

some degree (equated to Level A 

harassment). Thresholds have also been 

developed identifying the received level 

of in-air sound above which exposed 

pinnipeds would likely be behaviorally 

harassed. Here, thresholds for 

behavioral disturbance from launch 

activities have been developed based on 

observations of pinniped responses 

before, during, and after launches and 

UAS activity. For rocket and missile 

launches at VSFB, given the sound 

levels and proximity, NMFS assumes 

that all rocket launches will 

behaviorally harass pinnipeds of any 

species hauled out at sites around the 

periphery of the base. For rocket 

launches from VSFB that transit over or 

near NCI, based on several years of 

onsite behavioral observations and 

monitoring data, NMFS predicts that 

those that create a sonic boom over 2.0 

psf could behaviorally harass pinnipeds 

of any species hauled out on NCI. For 

UAS activity NMFS predicts that, given 

the potential variability of locations, 

routing and altitudes necessary to meet 

mission needs, classes 0–3 could 

behaviorally harass pinnipeds of any 

species hauled out at VSFB. 

Regarding potential hearing 

impairment, the effects of launch noise 

on pinniped hearing were the subject of 

studies at the site in the past. In 

addition to monitoring pinniped haulout sites before, during and after 

launches, researchers were previously 

required to capture harbor seals at 

nearby haulouts and Point Conception 

to test their sensitivity to launch noises. 

Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) 

tests were performed under 5-year SRPs 

starting in 1997. The goal was to 

determine whether launch noise 

affected the hearing of pinnipeds 

(MMCG and SAIC 2012a). The low 

frequency sounds from launches can be 

intense, with the potential of causing a 

temporary threshold shift (TTS), in 

which part or all of an animal’s hearing 

range is temporarily diminished. In 

some cases, this diminishment can last 

from minutes to days before hearing 

returns to normal. None of the seals 

tested in these studies over a span of 15 

years showed signs of TTS or PTS, 

supporting a finding that launch noise 

at the levels tested is unlikely to cause 

PTS and that any occurrence of TTS 

may be of short duration. 

Ensonified Area 

Here, we describe operational and 

environmental parameters of the activity 

that are used in estimating the area 

ensonified above the acoustic 

thresholds, including source levels and 

transmission loss coefficient. 

Because the haulouts at NCI are more 

distant from the rocket launch sites than 

those at VSFB, different methods are 

used to predict when launches are likely 

to impact pinnipeds at the two sites. As 

stated above, for rocket and missile 

launches at VSFB, NMFS conservatively 

assumes that all rocket launches will 

behaviorally harass pinnipeds of any 

species hauled out at sites around the 

periphery of the base. For rocket 

launches from VSFB that transit over or 

near NCI, NMFS predicts that those that 

are projected to create a sonic boom 

over 2 psf could behaviorally harass 

pinnipeds of any species hauled out on 

NCI. For UAS activity, NMFS predicts 

that classes 0–3 could behaviorally 

harass pinnipeds of any species hauled 

out at VSFB. 

The USSF is not able to predict the 

exact areas that will be impacted by 

noise associated with the specified 

activities, including sonic booms, 

launch noise and UAS operations. Many 

different types of launch vehicle types 

are operated from VSFB. Different 

combinations of vehicles and launch 

sites create different sound profiles, and 

dynamic environmental conditions also 

bear on sound transmission. As such, 

the different haul-out sites around the 

periphery of the base are ensonified to 

varying degrees when launches and, 

when applicable, recoveries of first stage 

boosters occur. USSF is not able to 

predict the exact timing, types and 

trajectories of these future rocket launch 

programs. However, as described below, 

rocket launches are expected to 

behaviorally disturb pinnipeds at VSFB 

and some launches are also expected to 

disturb pinniped hauled out at NCI. 

Missiles are only expected to impact 

pinnipeds at Lion Rock (Point Sal), and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5464 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

UAS impacts are only expected to occur 

at Small Haulout 1 (in VSFB). 

Therefore, for the purposes of 

estimating take, we conservatively 

estimate that all haulout sites at VSFB 

will be ensonified by rocket launch 

noise above the level expected to result 

in behavioral disturbance. Different 

space launch vehicles also have varying 

trajectories, which result in different 

sonic boom profiles, some of which are 

likely to affect areas on the NCI (San 

Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, and 

Anacapa). Based on several years of 

onsite monitoring data, harassment of 

marine mammals is unlikely to occur 

when the intensity of a sonic boom is 

below 2 psf. Santa Cruz and Anacapa 

Islands are not expected to be impacted 

by sonic booms in excess of 2 psf 

(USAF, 2018), therefore, USSF does not 

anticipate take of marine mammals on 

these islands, and NMFS concurs. Sonic 

booms from VSFB launches or 

recoveries can impact haul out areas 

and may take marine mammals on San 

Miguel Island and occasionally on Santa 

Rosa Island. In order to accommodate 

the variability of possible launches and 

(when applicable) sonic booms over 

NCI, USSF estimates that 25 percent of 

pinniped haulouts on San Miguel and 

Santa Rosa Islands may be ensonified to 

a level above 2 psf. NMFS concurs, and 

we consider this to be a conservative 

assumption based on sonic boom 

models which show that areas predicted 

to be impacted by a sonic boom with 

peak overpressures of 2 psf and above 

are typically limited to isolated parts of 

a single island, and sonic boom model 

results tend to overestimate actual 

recorded sonic booms on the NCI 

(personal communication: R. Evans, 

USSF, to J. Carduner, NMFS, OPR). 

Modeling has not been required for 

launches of currently deployed missiles 

because of their trajectories west of 

VSFB and north of San Miguel Island 

and the previously well-documented 

acoustic properties of the missiles. The 

anticipated GBSD is expected to utilize 

approximately the same trajectories as 

the current ICBM, and the GBSD 

program will be required to model at 

least one representative launch. When 

missiles are launched in a generally 

western direction (they turn south 

several hundred miles from VSFB and at 

high altitude), there is no sonic boom 

impact on the NCI; thus take of 

pinnipeds on NCI is not anticipated 

from missile launches. Given flight 

characteristics and trajectories, take 

from missile launch is not anticipated 

for most species. However, given 

proximity and the generally western 

trajectory, noise from missile launches 

from North Base may take California sea 

lions that haul out at Lion Rock (Point 

Sal) near VSFB’s northern boundary. 

Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take 

Estimation 

In this section, we bring together the 

information above and describe take 

from the three different activity types 

(rockets, missiles, and UAS) expected to 

occur at VSFB and NCI, the marine 

mammal occurrence data (based on two 

survey series specific to VSFB and NCI), 

species and location-specific data 

related the likelihood of either exposure 

(e.g., tidal differences) or response (e.g., 

proportion of previously recorded 

responses that qualify as take), and the 

amount of activity. We describe the 

calculations used to arrive at the take 

estimates for each activity, species, and 

location, and present the total estimated 

take in table 14. 

NMFS uses a three-tiered scale to 

determine whether the response of a 

pinniped on land to stimuli is indicative 

of Level B harassment under the MMPA 

(table 5). NMFS considers the behaviors 

that meet the definitions of both 

movements and flushes in table 5 to 

qualify as behavioral harassment. Thus 

a pinniped on land is considered by 

NMFS to have been behaviorally 

harassed if it moves greater than two 

times its body length, or if the animal 

is already moving and changes direction 

and/or speed, or if the animal flushes 

from land into the water. Animals that 

become alert or stir without other 

movements indicative of disturbance are 

not considered harassed. Prior 

observations of pinniped responses to 

certain exposures may be used to 

predict future responses and assist in 

estimating take. Here, the levels of 

observed responses of particular species 

during monitoring are used to inform 

take estimate correction factors as 

described in the species and activityspecific sections below. 

TABLE 5—LEVELS OF PINNIPED BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE ON LAND

Level Type of response Definition 

Characterized 

as behavioral 

harassment by 

NMFS 

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.

No. 

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.

Yes. 

3 ............................ Flush ...................... All retreats (flushes) to the water ......................................................................... Yes. 

Data collected from marine mammal 

surveys including monthly marine 

mammal surveys and launch-specific 

monitoring conducted by the USSF at 

VSFB, and observations collected by 

NMFS at NCI, represent the best 

available information on the occurrence 

of the six pinniped species expected to 

occur in the project area. Monthly 

marine mammal surveys at VSFB are 

conducted to document the abundance, 

distribution and status of pinnipeds at 

VSFB. When possible, these surveys are 

timed to coincide with the lowest 

afternoon tides of each month, when the 

greatest numbers of animals are usually 

hauled out. Data gathered during 

monthly surveys include: species, 

number, general behavior, presence of 

pups, age class, gender, reactions to 

natural or human-caused disturbances, 

and environmental conditions. Some 

species are observed regularly at VSFB 

and the NCI (e.g., California sea lion), 

while other species are observed less 

frequently (e.g., northern fur seals and 

Guadalupe fur seals). 

Take estimates were calculated 

separately for each stock in each year 

the proposed regulations would be valid 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5465 

(from 2024 to 2029), on both VAFB and 

the NCI, based on the number of 

animals assumed hauled out at each 

location that are expected to be 

behaviorally harassed by the stimuli 

associated with the specified activities 

(i.e., launch, sonic boom, or UAS noise). 

First, the number of hauled out animals 

per month was estimated at both VAFB 

and the NCI for each stock, based on 

survey data and subject matter expert 

input. Second, we estimated the 

percentage of animals that would be 

taken by harassment from a launch at a 

given site, using the corrections and 

adjustments. In order to determine that 

percentage, we considered whether 

certain factors could result in fewer than 

the total estimated number at a location 

being harassed. These factors include 

whether the extent of ensonification is 

expected to affect only a portion of the 

animals in an area, tidal inundation that 

displaces animals from affected areas 

and for species reactivity to launch 

noise, life history patterns and, where 

appropriate, seasonal dispersal patterns. 

Launches covered in this 

authorization are not expected to 

produce a sonic boom over the 

mainland except that some first stage 

recoveries back to launch facilities on 

the base that may do so. Because first 

stage recoveries always occur within ten 

minutes of the initial launch, a response 

from any given animal to both launch 

and recovery are considered to be one 

instance of take, even when both launch 

and recovery meet or exceed the 2 psf 

threshold for calculating take. 

Vandenberg Space Force Base 

As described above, rocket launches, 

missile launches, and UAS activities are 

expected to result in take of pinnipeds 

on VSFB at haul outs along the 

periphery of the base. Because the 

supporting information and/or methods 

are different for these three activity 

types, we describe them separately 

below. Launches from different launch 

facilities at VSFB create different 

degrees of ensonification at specific 

haul out sites, and further, USSF has 

limited ability to forecast which launch 

sites may be used for future launches. 

As described previously, some launches 

also involve the recovery of a booster 

component back to the launch site, or to 

an alternate offshore location. 

As noted above, NMFS first estimated 

the number of hauled out animals per 

month at VAFB for each stock. NMFS 

used marine mammal counts collected 

by USSF during monthly marine 

mammal surveys to approximate 

haulout abundance. NMFS compared 

monthly counts for a given species from 

2020 to 2022 and selected the highest 

count (sum across all haul out sites) for 

each month for each species, as 

indicated in table 6. NMFS then 

selected the highest monthly count for 

each species and used that as the 

estimated number of animals that would 

be hauled out at any given time during 

a launch. Because launches from 

different SLCs impact different haulouts, we expect that using this highest 

monthly estimate will result in a 

conservative take estimate. Therefore, 

NMFS considers the 2020–2022 survey 

data relied upon to be the best data 

available. 

As further indicated in the table 7, 

and described below, the predicted 

number of animals taken by each 

launch, by species, is adjusted as 

indicated to account for the fact that (1) 

for some species, animals are only 

hauled out and available to be taken 

during low tide and (2) years of 

monitoring reports showing that 

different species respond behaviorally 

to launches in a different manner. 

TABLE 6—VSFB MAX COUNTS FROM MONTHLY SURVEYS, 2020–2022 

Month Pacific harbor seal California sea lion Steller sea lion Northern elephant 

seal 

Jan ......................................................... 61 11 None in USSF record 2020–2022 ........ 76 

Feb ......................................................... 73 9 0 ............................................................ 63 

Mar ......................................................... 105 0 0 ............................................................ 50 

Apr .......................................................... 87 3 0 ............................................................ 173 

May ........................................................ 95 * 112 0 ............................................................ * 302 

Jun ......................................................... * 149 72 0 ............................................................ 78 

Jul ........................................................... 61 26 0 ............................................................ 20 

Aug ......................................................... 60 1 0 ............................................................ 11 

Sept ........................................................ 54 16 0 ............................................................ 82 

Oct .......................................................... 59 2 0 ............................................................ 228 

Nov ......................................................... 65 28 0 ............................................................ 251 

Dec ......................................................... 51 16 0 ............................................................ 122 

USSF Estimated Max: * 5 .....................

Note: * indicates the highest monthly count for a given species. 

Rocket Launches at VSFB 

USSF assumes that all rocket 

launches would take, by Level B 

harassment, animals hauled out at sites 

around the periphery of the base. Some 

rocket launches create overpressure at 

time of launch, and some recoveries of 

first-stage boosters can create a sonic 

boom when they return to the launch 

pad. Some flights also transit over or 

near portions of the NCI, but potential 

impacts to marine mammals at the NCI 

are discussed separately, below. Table 8 

lists the proposed take by Level B 

harassment from rocket launch and 

recovery activities at VSFB, and below, 

we describe how NMFS estimated take 

for each species. Note that northern fur 

seal and Guadalupe fur seal are not 

anticipated to occur at VSFB, and 

therefore, NMFS does not anticipate 

impacts to these species at VSFB. 

Harbor Seals 

Pacific harbor seals haul out regularly 

at more than ten sites on both north and 

south VSFB. They are the most 

widespread pinniped species on VSFB 

and have been seen in all months, with 

decades of successful pupping. Rocket 

launches from sites closer to the 

haulouts are more likely to cause 

disturbance, including noise and visual 

impacts. Many of their haulout sites are 

inundated during high tide, and NMFS 

anticipates that take of this species 

would only occur during low tides. 

Rocket launches from sites closer to the 

haulouts are more likely to cause 

disturbance, including noise and visual 

impacts. However, to capture 

variability, we assume that all rocket 

launches result in Level B harassment of 

100 percent of the harbor seals at all 

VSFB haulouts. 

To determine the number of animals 

that would be taken by Level B 

harassment, we multiplied the max 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5466 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

count indicated in table 6 by the 

number of proposed launches per year 

(table 8) for each year of the proposed 

authorization. As noted in table 6, 

monitoring data show that, generally 

speaking, most if not all harbor seals 

exposed to launch noise exhibit a 

behavioral response to launch stimulus 

that equates to take by Level B 

harassment and, therefore, we predict 

that 100 percent of animals exposed to 

launch noise will be taken per launch. 

However, given that most haulout sites 

at VSFB are inundated at high tide, 

NMFS applied a 50 percent correction 

factor (table 7). Therefore, estimated 

takes = max daily count (149) X tidal 

correction factor (0.5) X number of 

rocket launches in the area for each year 

for each year (40 in year 1, etc.), and the 

resulting take numbers NMFS proposes 

to authorize are listed in table 8. 

California Sea Lion 

California sea lions on VSFB only 

haul out regularly at Rocky Point (north 

and south) and Amphitheatre Cove. 

California sea lions are most abundant 

at the haul out in Zone G at Lion Rock 

(Point Sal). Rocket launches from SLC– 

6, SLC–8, and the future SLC–11, which 

are closest to North Rocky Point, would 

be the most likely to result in noise and 

visual impacts. Rocket launches from 

SLC–3E and SLC–4E, both farther 

inland and some four times the 

distance, are less likely to impact 

California sea lions at North Rocky 

Point. During very high tides and strong 

winds, when spray is heavy, the sea 

lions often leave this site or are unable 

to access it. Therefore, NMFS assumes 

that for any given rocket launch at 

VSFB, 50 percent of the maximum 

number of California sea lions that haul 

out at VSFB may be taken by Level B 

harassment. 

To determine the number of animals 

that would be taken by Level B 

harassment, we multiplied the max 

count indicated in table 6 by the 

number of proposed launches per year 

(table 8) for each year of the proposed 

authorization. As noted in table 6, 

monitoring data show that, generally 

speaking, most if not all California sea 

lions hauled out at VSFB would exhibit 

a behavioral response to launch 

stimulus that equates to take by Level B 

harassment and, therefore, we predict 

that 100 percent of animals exposed to 

launch noise will be taken per launch. 

However, given that most haulout sites 

at VSFB are inundated at high tide, 

NMFS applied a 50 percent correction 

factor (table 7). Therefore, the number of 

estimated takes = max daily count (112) 

× tidal correction factor (0.5) × number 

of rocket launches in the area (40 in year 

1, etc.), and the resulting take numbers 

NMFS proposes to authorize are listed 

in table 8. 

Northern Elephant Seal 

Northern elephant seals historically 

hauled out at VSFB only rarely, and 

most animals observed onsite were 

subadult males. In 2004, a record count 

of 188 animals was made, mostly newly 

weaned seals (MMCG and SAIC 2012a); 

these numbers continued to increase 

(unpublished data, however reported 

annually to NMFS). In November 2016, 

mature adults were observed in 

Amphitheatre Cove, and pupping was 

first documented in January 2017 with 

18 pups born and weaned. In January 

2018, a total of 25 pups were born and 

weaned; 26 in 2019, 34 in 2020, 33 in 

2021 and 49 in 2022. Two pups were 

born and weaned at Boathouse Beach in 

both 2021 and 2022. We assume that 

this site, in addition to Amphitheater, 

will support pupping in future years. 

Pupping occurs from December through 

March, with peak breeding in midFebruary. 

To determine the number of animals 

that would be taken by Level B 

harassment, we multiplied the max 

count indicated in table 6 by the 

number of proposed launches per year 

(table 8) for each year of the proposed 

authorization. As noted in table 6, given 

elephant seals’ known lack of sensitivity 

to noise, based on VSFB monitoring 

reports and the literature, NMFS 

predicts that only 15 percent of elephant 

seals exposed to the launch noise would 

respond in a manner that constitutes 

take by Level B harassment, and, 

therefore, a 15 percent correction factor 

was applied. We also note that, unlike 

for harbor seals and California sea lions, 

Northern elephant seal presence and 

numbers are not affected by tides. 

Therefore, the number of estimated 

takes = highest daily count (302) × 

behavioral harassment correction factor 

(0.15) × number of rocket launches in 

the area for each year (40 in year 1, etc.), 

and the resulting take numbers NMFS 

proposes to authorize are listed in table 

8. 

Steller Sea Lion 

Steller sea lions have been observed at 

VSFB since April 2012 (MMCG and 

SAIC 2012c), though as indicated in 

table 6, they were not observed between 

2020 and 2022. For purposes of 

estimating take, USSF estimates that up 

to five Steller sea lions may haul out at 

VSFB during any given launch. NMFS 

multiplied this number by the number 

of proposed launches per year for each 

year of the proposed authorization 

(Table 8). NMFS assumes that all rocket 

launches result in behavioral 

disturbance (i.e., Level B harassment) of 

100 percent of the Steller sea lions 

hauled out at VSFB. Therefore, the 

number of estimated takes = 5 animals 

× number of rocket launches in the area 

(40 in year 1, etc.), and the resulting 

take numbers NMFS proposes to 

authorize are listed in table 8. 

TABLE 7—CORRECTIONS AND ADJUSTMENTS BY STOCK AT VSFB 1 2

Stock 

VSFB, tidal 

inundation correction 

(percent) 

VSFB, behavioral 

disturbance 

correction 

(percent) 

Harbor seal (California) ....................................................................................................... 50 100 

California sea lion (California) ............................................................................................. 50 100 

Northern elephant seal (CA Breeding) ................................................................................ N/A 15 

Steller sea lion (eastern) ..................................................................................................... N/A 100 

1 Northern elephant seals and Steller sea lion takes are adjusted to reflect observed species-specific reactivity to launch stimulus. 2 ‘‘N/A’’ indicates that no tidal adjustment was made. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5467 

TABLE 8—PROPOSED ANNUAL AND 5-YEAR INSTANCES OF INCIDENTAL TAKE FROM ROCKET LAUNCH AND RECOVERY

ACTIVITIES AT VSFB 

2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 

5-year total 

estimated 

takes 

Number of Rocket Launches ................... 40 55 75 100 110 ........................

Pacific harbor seal (CA) ........................... 2,980 4,098 5,588 7,450 8,195 28,310 

California sea lion (U.S.) .......................... 2,240 3,080 4,200 5,600 6,160 21,280 

Northern elephant seal (CA breeding) ..... 1,812 2,492 3,398 4,530 4,983 17,214 

Steller sea lion (Eastern) ......................... 200 275 375 500 550 1,900 

UAS at VSFB 

As stated in the Description of 

Proposed Activity section, while 

harassment of hauled out pinnipeds 

from UAS classes 0–2 is unlikely to 

occur at altitudes of 200 ft and above 

(Erbe et al., 2017; Pomeroy et al., 2015; 

Sweeney et al., 2016; Sweeney and 

Gelatt, 2017), USSF conservatively 

assumes that UAS classes 0–3 

operations would take, by Level B 

harassment, some animals hauled out at 

Small Haul-Out 1 at VSFB. Aircraft are 

required to maintain a 1000-ft buffer 

around pinniped haul-out and rookery 

areas except in emergency 

circumstances, such as Search and 

Rescue. However, Small Haul-Out 1, has 

a reduced 500-ft buffer because 

pinnipeds using this particular site have 

acclimated to the activity. Therefore, a 

small number of takes by Level B 

harassment may result from UAS 

activity at Small Haul-Out 1, only. Table 

9 lists the proposed take by Level B 

harassment at VSFB from UAS 

activities, and below, we describe how 

NMFS estimated take for each species. 

Note that northern fur seal and 

Guadalupe fur seal are not anticipated 

to occur at VSFB, and therefore, NMFS 

does not anticipate impacts to these 

species at VSFB. While Northern 

elephant seals have been observed on 

nearby beaches, only Pacific harbor 

seals and California sea lions are known 

to use Small Haul-Out 1, and therefore, 

these are the only species anticipated to 

be taken by UAS activities. 

Pacific Harbor Seal 

Pacific harbor seals are the most 

common species at Small Haul-Out 1. 

USSF estimates that up to six harbor 

seals may be taken by Level B 

harassment at Small Haul-Out 1 during 

any given UAS activity, based upon 

previous monitoring data at Small HaulOut site 1. NMFS concurs, and 

multiplied this number by the number 

of proposed UAS class 0–3 activities per 

year (100). Therefore, the number of 

estimated takes per year = 6 animals × 

100 UAS activities, and the 

resultingtake numbers NMFS proposes 

to authorize are listed in table 9. 

California Sea Lion 

California sea lions haul out at Small 

Haul-Out 1, though they are less 

abundant than Pacific harbor seal at that 

site. USSF estimates that up to 1 

California sea lion may be taken by 

Level B harassment at Small Haul-Out 1 

during any given UAS activity, based 

upon previous monitoring data at Small 

Haul-Out site 1. NMFS concurs, and 

multiplied this number by the number 

of proposed UAS class 0–3 activities per 

year (100). Therefore, the number of 

estimated takes per year = 1 animal X 

100 UAS activities, and the resulting 

take numbers NMFS proposes to 

authorize are listed in table 9. 

TABLE 9—TAKE BY LEVEL B HARASSMENT OF PINNIPEDS FROM UAS ACTIVITY

Species 

Annual take by 

Level B 

harassment 

5-year total take 

by Level B 

harassment 

Pacific harbor seal ....................................................................................................................................... 600 3,000 

California sea lion ........................................................................................................................................ 100 500 

Missiles at VSFB 

USSF oversees missile launches from 

seven locations on VSFB. The launches 

occur on a routine basis up to 15 times 

per year. In addition to originating from 

different locations than rockets, missile 

trajectories are also different. All missile 

launches tend in north-westerly 

direction, and missiles in flight 

transition to a near-horizontal profile 

shortly after launch. USSF’s application 

describes that missile launches are not 

anticipated to result in take of 

pinnipeds at south VSFB, as they do not 

create a ‘‘boom.’’ However, USSF 

anticipates, and NMFS concurs, that 

missile launches from sites in North 

Base could take California sea lions at 

Lion Rock (Point Sal), an off-base 

location. Lion Rock (Point Sal) is the 

only site at which USSF anticipates that 

take of pinnipeds may occur during 

missile activities, and NMFS concurs. 

Lowry et al. (2021) provides marine 

mammal occurrence data at Lion Rock 

(Point Sal) for July 2016 and July 2017. 

While NMFS used more recent data 

(2020 to 2022) to estimate take of 

pinnipeds during rocket launch and 

UAS activities (described above), those 

surveys did not include Lion Rock 

(Point Sal), and therefore, NMFS has 

relied on the Lowry et al. (2021) data for 

missile launch impacts. 

For purposes of estimating take, 

NMFS conservatively estimates that up 

to 518 California sea lions may haul out 

at Lion Rock (Point Sal) during any 

given missile launch. This is the higher 

count of California sea lions at the site 

from 2016 (Lowry et al. 2021). NMFS 

multiplied this number by the number 

of proposed launches per year (15 

launches). NMFS conservatively 

assumes that all California sea lions at 

the site would be taken by Level B 

harassment during any given missile 

launch, though it is relatively unlikely 

that all 15 launches would fly close 

enough to this site to cause Level B 

harassment. Therefore, the number of 

estimated takes = 518 animals × number 

of rocket launches in the area in a given 

year (15), and NMFS proposes to 

authorize 7,770 takes by Level B 

harassment of California sea lion 

annually (38,850 over the duration of 

the proposed authorization) from 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5468 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

missile launches at VSFB, as indicated 

in table 10. 

TABLE 10—PROPOSED INSTANCES OF INCIDENTAL TAKE FROM MISSILE LAUNCHES (MILITARY READINESS ACTIVITY) AT

VSFB 

Species Location High count Launches/year Annual 

takes 

5-year total 

takes 1

California sea lion ............................. Lion Rock, Point Sal ........................ 518 (2019) 15 7,770 38,850 

1Annual take * 5 years. 

NCI 

While USSF does not propose 

launching rockets from NCI, as noted 

previously, a subset of VSFB rocket 

launches transit over or near NCI, and 

a subset of those may create a sonic 

boom that affects some portion of 

pinniped haulouts on NCI (San Miguel 

and Santa Rosa). No take of pinnipeds 

on NCI is expected to result from 

missile launches or UAS activities. To 

estimate take of marine mammals at NCI 

resulting from rocket launches at VSFB, 

NMFS first estimated the number of 

hauled out animals per species across 

all potentially affected haulouts on San 

Miguel and Santa Rosa Islands. NMFS 

selected the high count from San Miguel 

and Santa Rosa Islands between 2017 

and 2019 (NOAA Technical 

Memorandum SWFSC–656 (Lowry et 

al., 2021) and summed the high counts 

from each site (table 11). NMFS then 

applied a correction factor to this 

estimate to account for whether a given 

species is expected to be hauled out in 

the area during all or a portion of the 

year (table 12). This is referred to as 

Step 1 below. 

Next, NMFS determined the 

approximate number of sonic booms 

over 2 psf anticipated to occur over the 

NCI (28 over 5 years, as reflected in 

USSF’s application). USSF’s application 

indicates that during previous 

monitoring of pinnipeds on NCI during 

rocket launches, few to no behavioral 

reactions that would qualify as Level B 

harassment using the the 3-point scale 

(table 5) were observed during sonic 

booms of less than 2 psf. Therefore, in 

estimating take herein, NMFS assumes 

that take of marine mammals will only 

occur during sonic booms of 2 psf or 

greater. Summarizing 20 years of sonic 

boom modeling (MMCG and SAIC, 

2012a), we anticipate that no more than 

25 percent of space launches will 

produce a sonic boom greater than 2 psf 

over the NCI (estimated to be 28 

launches over 5 years). On one occasion, 

pinnipeds on one side of San Miguel 

Island, reacted to a boom, while animals 

four miles away on the other did not 

react, nor was the boom detected there 

by acoustic instruments (MMCG and 

SAIC, 2012a). Therefore, NMFS 

multiplied the number of annual booms 

(table 13) by a 0.25 correction factor for 

all species and rounded each year up to 

the next whole number. This is referred 

to as step 2 below. 

Next, NMFS multiplied the number of 

animals anticipated to be at a haulout 

during a launch (calculated in step 1) by 

the number of annual launches 

anticipated to affect animals at the 

haulouts (calculated in step 2), and then 

multiplied the product by the likelihood 

of a given species responding in a 

manner that would be considered take 

by Level B harassment (table 13). NMFS 

describes the calculations in further 

detail for each species, below. 

TABLE 11—NCI, HIGH COUNT 2017–2019 FROM SWFSC–656 

[Lowry et al. (2021)] 

2017 2019 

High count 

from 2017 and 

2019 

Pacific harbor seal: 

San Miguel ............................................................................................................................ 230 254 254 (2019) 

Santa Rosa ........................................................................................................................... 266 148 266 (2017) 

Sum ...................................................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ 520 

California sea lion: 

San Miguel ............................................................................................................................ 49,252 60,277 60,277 (2019) 

Santa Rosa ........................................................................................................................... 2,692 1,618 2,692 (2017) 

Sum ...................................................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ 62,969 

Northern elephant seal: 

San Miguel ............................................................................................................................ 2,327 2,791 2,791 (2019) 

Santa Rosa ........................................................................................................................... 1,169 1,015 1,169 (2017) 

Sum ...................................................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ 3,960 

Northern fur seal: 

San Miguel ............................................................................................................................ 4,520 4,377 4,520 (2017) 

Santa Rosa ........................................................................................................................... N/R N/R N/R 

Sum ...................................................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ 4,520 

Guadalupe fur seal: 

San Miguel ............................................................................................................................ N/R N/R N/R 

Santa Rosa ........................................................................................................................... N/R N/R N/R 

Sum ...................................................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ N/R 

Steller sea lion: 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5469 

TABLE 11—NCI, HIGH COUNT 2017–2019 FROM SWFSC–656—Continued 

[Lowry et al. (2021)] 

2017 2019 

High count 

from 2017 and 

2019 

San Miguel ............................................................................................................................ N/R N/R N/R 

Santa Rosa ........................................................................................................................... N/R N/R N/R 

Sum ...................................................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ 5 

Note: N/R: No sightings recorded. 

Harbor Seals 

For harbor seal, the sum of the high 

counts at the San Miguel and Santa Rosa 

haulouts during 2017 and 2019 is 520. 

NMFS expects Pacific harbor seals to 

occur at the haulouts year round, and 

therefore did not apply a correction for 

seasonal occurrence. NMFS multiplied 

the harbor seal haulout abundance (520) 

by the number of booms anticipated to 

overlap the haulouts (table 13, 

calculated in step 2 above). Based on 

years of monitoring reports showing the 

responses of harbor seals at NCI (which 

is farther from the launch sites than the 

VSFB sites) to launches, NMFS 

anticipates that 50 percent of harbor 

seals exposed to a sonic boom 

overlapping a haulout will be taken by 

Level B harassment. Therefore, for each 

year, the number of estimated takes = 

520 animals × number of sonic booms 

over 2 psf × 0.5, and the resulting take 

numbers NMFS proposes to authorize 

are listed in table 13. 

California Sea Lions 

For California sea lion, the sum of the 

high counts at the San Miguel and Santa 

Rosa haulouts during 2017 and 2019 is 

62,969. While some California sea lions 

remain in the general vicinity of 

southern California throughout the year 

and may haul out onshore, the use of 

haulout sites at NCI is principally for 

breeding during peak summer months. 

Given the fact that most male sea lions 

and a substantial portion of all sea lions 

are not onshore at NCI outside of the 

breeding season, we applied a 50 

percent correction factor to better relate 

instances of take to the number of 

individuals that may be hauled out and 

subject to acoustic effects of launches. 

NMFS multiplied the California sea lion 

haulout abundance (62,969) by the 

number of booms anticipated to overlap 

the haulouts (Table 13, calculated in 

Step 2 above). Based on years of 

monitoring reports showing the 

responses of California sea lions at NCI 

to launches, NMFS anticipates that 25 

percent of California sea lions exposed 

to a sonic boom overlapping a haulout 

will be taken by Level B harassment. 

Therefore, for each year, the number of 

estimated takes = 62,969 animals × 

number of sonic booms over 2 psf × 

0.25, and the resulting take numbers 

NMFS proposes to authorize are listed 

in table 13. 

Northern Elephant Seals 

For Northern elephant seal, the sum 

of the high counts at the San Miguel and 

Santa Rosa haulouts during 2017 and 

2019 is 3,960. NMFS expects Northern 

elephant seals to occur at the haulouts 

year round, and therefore did not apply 

a correction for seasonal occurrence. 

NMFS multiplied the Northern elephant 

seal haulout abundance (3,960) by the 

number of booms anticipated to overlap 

the haulouts (table 13, calculated in step 

2 above). Based on years of monitoring 

reports showing the responses of 

Northern elephant seals at NCI to 

launches, NMFS anticipates that 5 

percent of Northern elephant seals 

exposed to a sonic boom overlapping a 

haulout will be taken by Level B 

harassment. Therefore, for each year, the 

number of estimated takes = 3,960 

animals × number of sonic booms over 

2.0 psf × 0.05, and the resulting take 

numbers NMFS proposes to authorize 

are listed in table 13. 

Northern Fur Seal 

For Northern fur seal, the sum of the 

high counts at the San Miguel and Santa 

Rosa haulouts during 2017 and 2019 is 

4,377. Northern fur seals spend 

approximately 80 percent of the year at 

sea, generally well offshore (Carretta et 

al., 2011; Caretta et al., 2012). To 

account for that seasonal occurrence, 

NMFS applied a conservative seasonal 

correction factor of 60 percent. NMFS 

multiplied the Northern fur seal haulout 

abundance (4,377) by the number of 

booms anticipated to overlap the 

haulouts (table 13, calculated in step 2 

above). Based on years of monitoring 

reports showing the responses of 

Northern fur seals at NCI to launches, 

NMFS anticipates that 5 percent of 

Northern fur seals exposed to a sonic 

boom overlapping a haulout will be 

taken by Level B harassment. Therefore, 

for each year, the number of estimated 

takes = 4,377 animals × number of sonic 

booms over 2 psf × 0.05, and the 

resulting take numbers NMFS proposes 

to authorize are listed in table 13. 

Guadalupe Fur Seal 

For Guadalupe fur seal, the sum of the 

high counts at the San Miguel and Santa 

Rosa haulouts during 2017 and 2019 is 

5. NMFS estimates the potential for 

Guadalupe fur seals to occur at the 

haulouts to be comparable throughout 

the year and, therefore, did not apply a 

correction for seasonal occurrence. 

NMFS multiplied the Guadalupe fur 

seal haulout abundance (5) by the 

number of booms anticipated to overlap 

the haulouts (table 13, calculated in step 

2 above). Based on years of monitoring 

reports showing the responses of 

Guadalupe fur seals at NCI to launches, 

NMFS anticipates that 50 percent of 

Guadalupe fur seals exposed to a sonic 

boom overlapping a haulout will be 

taken by Level B harassment. Therefore, 

for each year, the number of estimated 

takes = 5 animals × number of sonic 

booms over 2 psf × 0.5, and the resulting 

take numbers NMFS proposes to 

authorize are listed in table 13. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5470 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 12—CORRECTIONS AND ADJUSTMENTS BY STOCK AT NCI 1 2

Species 

Species 

response to 

sonic boom 

(percent) 

Seasonal 

occurrence 

(percent of year) 

Harbor seal .................................................................................................................................................. 50 100 

California sea lion ........................................................................................................................................ 25 50 

Northern elephant seal ................................................................................................................................ 5 100 

Northern fur seal .......................................................................................................................................... 25 3 60 

Guadalupe fur seal ...................................................................................................................................... 50 4 N/A 

1 Northern elephant seals and Steller sea lion takes are adjusted to reflect observed species-specific reactivity to launch stimulus. 2 ‘‘N/A’’ indicates that a species is not expected to occur at the location. 

3Of note, from November to May, there are approximately 125 individuals at the NCI (S. Melin, 2019), further supporting a seasonal correction 

factor. 4Guadalupe fur seal are generally not expected to occur on the NCI. However, as described herein, given that they have occasionally been 

sighted on the NCI, NMFS is conservatively proposing to authorize take of Guadalupe fur seal as described herein. 

TABLE 13—PROPOSED TAKE BY LEVEL B HARASSMENT AT NCI 

[San Miguel and Santa Rosa] 

2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 5-year total 

take 

Maximum number of sonic booms ............................................................ 5 12 24 30 33 ........................

Maximum number of sonic booms over 2.0 psf ........................................ 2 3 6 8 9 ........................

Pacific harbor seal ..................................................................................... 520 780 1,560 2,080 2,340 7,280 

California sea lion ...................................................................................... 15,742 23,613 47,227 62,969 70,840 220,392 

Northern elephant seal .............................................................................. 396 594 2,970 3,960 4,455 12,375 

Northern fur seal ........................................................................................ 1,313 1,970 3,939 5,252 5,909 18,383 

Guadalupe fur seal .................................................................................... 5 8 15 20 23 70 

Total Proposed Take 

Table 14 sums the take estimates 

described above for VSFB (rocket 

launches, missile launches, and UAS) 

and NCI (rocket launches only). These 

takes represent the number of instances 

of harassment of pinnipeds following 

exposure to the indicated activities. 

However, every take does not 

necessarily, and in this case is not 

expected to, represent a separate 

individual. Rather, given the known 

repeated use of haulouts by pinnipeds 

of all species, it is reasonable to expect 

that some subset of the calculated takes 

represent repeated takes of the same 

individuals, which means that the 

number of individuals taken is expected 

to be significantly smaller than the 

number of instances of take. 

TABLE 14—TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUAL AND 5-YEAR TAKE 1 PROPOSED FOR AUTHORIZATION

Stock 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 

Highest 

1-year take 

estimated 

Stock 

abundance 

Highest annual 

instances of 

take as percent 

of stock 

abundance 

Pacific harbor seal .............................. 4,100 5,478 7,748 10,130 11,135 11,135 30,968 36 

California sea lion ............................... 25,852 34,563 59,297 76,439 84,870 84,870 257,606 33 

Northern elephant seal ........................ 2,208 3,086 6,368 8,490 9,438 9,438 187,386 5 

Steller sea lion .................................... 200 275 375 500 550 550 43,201 1 

Northern fur seal ................................. 1,313 1,970 3,939 5,252 5,909 5,909 14,050 42 

Guadalupe fur seal .............................. 5 8 15 20 23 23 34,187 0 

1Given the known repeated use of haulouts by pinnipeds of all species, it is reasonable to expect that some subset of the calculated takes represent repeated 

takes of the same individuals, which means that the number of individuals taken is expected to be significantly smaller than the number of instances of take. 

Proposed Mitigation 

In order to issue regulations and an 

LOA under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the 

MMPA, NMFS must set forth the 

permissible methods of taking pursuant 

to the activity, and other means of 

effecting the least practicable impact on 

the species or stock and its habitat, 

paying particular attention to rookeries, 

mating grounds, and areas of similar 

significance, and on the availability of 

the species or stock for taking for certain 

subsistence uses (latter not applicable 

for this action). NMFS regulations 

require applicants to include 

information about the availability and 

feasibility (economic and technological) 

of equipment, methods, and manner of 

conducting the activity or other means 

of effecting the least practicable adverse 

impact upon the affected species or 

stocks, and their habitat (50 CFR 

216.104(a)(11)). The NDAA for Fiscal 

Year 2004 amended the MMPA as it 

relates to military readiness activities 

and the incidental take authorization 

process such that ‘‘least practicable 

impact’’ shall include consideration of 

personnel safety, practicality of 

implementation, and impact on the 

effectiveness of the military readiness 

activity. 

In evaluating how mitigation may or 

may not be appropriate to ensure the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

species or stocks and their habitat, as 

well as subsistence uses where 

applicable, NMFS considers two 

primary factors: 

(1) The manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure(s) is 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5471 

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 and 

impact on operations, and, in the case 

of a military readiness activity, 

personnel safety, practicality of 

implementation, and impact on the 

effectiveness of the military readiness 

activity. 

Below, we describe the proposed 

mitigation measures for launches (rocket 

and missile), manned aircraft, and UAS. 

Launches (Rocket and Missile) 

USSF must provide pupping 

information to launch proponents at the 

earliest possible stage in the launch 

planning process to maximize their 

ability to schedule launches to 

minimize pinniped disturbance during 

pupping seasons on VSFB from 1 March 

to 30 April and on the Northern 

Channel Islands from 1 June–31 July. If 

practicable, rocket launches predicted to 

produce a sonic boom on the Northern 

Channel Islands >3 psf from 1 June–31 

July will be scheduled to coincide with 

tides in excess of +1.0 ft, with an 

objective to do so at least 50 percent of 

the time. USSF will provide a detailed 

plan to NMFS for approval that outlines 

how this measure will be implemented. 

This measure will minimize occurrence 

of launches during low tides when 

harbor seals and California sea lions are 

anticipated to haul out in the greatest 

numbers during times of year when 

pupping may be occurring, therefore 

further reducing the already unlikely 

potential for separation of mothers from 

pups and potential for injury during 

stampedes. While harbor seal pupping 

extends through June, harbor seals reach 

full size at approximately two months 

old, at which point they are less 

vulnerable to disturbances. In 

consideration of that and practicability 

concerns raised by USSF, this measure 

does not extend through the later 

portion of the harbor seal pupping 

season at VSFB. 

Manned Aircraft 

For manned flight operations, aircraft 

must use approved routes for testing 

and evaluation. Manned aircraft must 

also remain outside of a 1,000-ft buffer 

around pinniped rookeries and haul-out 

sites (except in emergencies such as law 

enforcement response or Search and 

Rescue operations, and with a reduced, 

500-ft buffer at Small Haul-out 1). As 

discussed earlier, use of these routes 

and implementation of the buffer would 

avoid behavioral disturbance of marine 

mammals from manned aircraft 

operations. 

UAS 

UAS classes 0–2 must maintain a 

minimum altitude of 300 ft over all 

known marine mammal haulouts when 

marine mammals are present, except at 

take-off and landing. Class 3 must 

maintain a minimum altitude of 500 ft, 

except at take-off and landing. UAS 

classes 4 and 5 only operate from the 

VSFB airfield and must maintain a 

minimum altitude of 1,000 ft over 

marine mammal haulouts except at takeoff and landing. USSF must not fly class 

4 or 5 UAS below 1,000 ft over haulouts. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s proposed measures, NMFS 

has preliminarily determined that the 

proposed mitigation measures provide 

the means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on the affected 

species or stocks and their habitat, 

paying particular attention to rookeries, 

mating grounds, and areas of similar 

significance. 

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an ITA for an 

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

MMPA states that NMFS must set forth 

requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking. 

The MMPA implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that 

requests for authorizations must include 

the suggested means of accomplishing 

the necessary monitoring and reporting 

that will result in increased knowledge 

of the species and of the level of taking 

or impacts on populations of marine 

mammals that are expected to be 

present while conducting the activities. 

Effective reporting is critical both to 

compliance as well as ensuring that the 

most value is obtained from the required 

monitoring. 

Monitoring and reporting 

requirements prescribed by NMFS 

should contribute to improved 

understanding of one or more of the 

following: 

• 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 

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

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

of marine mammal species with the 

activity; or (4) biological or behavioral 

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. 

The USSF has proposed a suite of 

monitoring measures on both VSFB and 

the NCI to document impacts of the 

specified activities on marine mammals. 

These proposed monitoring measures 

include both routine, semi-monthly 

counts at all haul out sites on VSFB, and 

launch-specific monitoring at VSFB 

and/or NCI when specific criteria are 

met. For monitoring at VSFB and NCI, 

monitoring must be conducted by at 

least one NMFS-approved PSO trained 

in marine mammal science. PSOs must 

have demonstrated proficiency in the 

identification of all age and sex classes 

of both common and uncommon 

pinniped species found at VSFB and the 

NCI. They must be knowledgeable of 

approved count methodology and have 

experience in observing pinniped 

behavior, especially that due to human 

disturbances, to document pinniped 

activity at the monitoring site(s) and to 

record marine mammal response to base 

operations. In the event that the 

requirement for PSO monitoring cannot 

be met (such as when access is 

prohibited due to safety concerns), 

daylight or night-time video monitoring 

may be used in lieu of PSO monitoring. 

Specific requirements for monitoring 

locations at VSFB and NCI respectively, 

are described in additional detail below. 

Rocket Launch Monitoring at VSFB 

At VSFB, USSF must conduct marine 

mammal monitoring and take acoustic 

measurements for all new rockets (for 

both existing and new launch 

proponents using the existing facilities) 

that are larger or louder than those that 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5472 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

have been previously launched from 

VSFB during their first three launches, 

and for the first three launches from any 

new facilities during March through 

July (i.e., the period during which 

harbor seals are pupping occurs and 

California sea lions are present). 

For the purposes of establishing 

monitoring criteria for VSFB haulouts, 

computer software is used to model 

sound pressure levels anticipated to 

occur for a given launch and/or 

recovery. Sonic boom modeling will be 

performed prior to the first three small 

or medium rocket launches from new 

launch proponents or at new launch 

facilities, and all heavy or super-heavy 

rocket launches. PCBoom, a 

commercially available modeling 

program, or an acceptable substitute, 

will be used to model sonic booms from 

new vehicles. 

Launch parameters specific to each 

launch will be incorporated into each 

model run, including: launch direction 

and trajectory, rocket weight, length, 

engine thrust, engine plume drag, and 

launch profile (vehicle position versus 

time from launch to first-stage burnout), 

among other aspects. Various weather 

scenarios will be analyzed from NOAA 

weather records for the region, then run 

through the model. Among other factors, 

these will include the presence or 

absence of the jet stream, and if present, 

its direction, altitude and velocity. The 

type, altitude, and density of clouds will 

also be considered. From these data, the 

models will predict peak amplitudes 

and impacted locations. As described 

below, this approach is also used to 

assess whether thresholds (Table 16) for 

marine mammal monitoring on NCI 

could be exceeded or not, and whether 

marine mammal monitoring will be 

necessary for animals hauled out at NCI. 

In general, on both VSFB and NCI, 

event-specific monitoring typically 

involves four to six observations of each 

significant haul-out area each day, over 

a period of 3 to 5 hours. For launches 

that occur during the harbor seal 

pupping season (March 1 through June 

30) or when higher numbers of 

California sea lions are present (June 1 

through July 31), monitoring will be 

conducted by at least one NMFSapproved protected species observer 

(PSO) trained in marine mammal 

science. Authorized PSOs shall have 

demonstrated proficiency in the 

identification of all age and sex classes 

of all marine mammal species that occur 

at VSFB. They shall be knowledgeable 

of approved count methodology and 

have experience in observing pinniped 

behavior, especially that due to human 

disturbances. 

When launch monitoring is required, 

monitoring will begin at least 72 hours 

prior to the launch and continue 

through at least 48 hours after the 

launch. For launches within the harbor 

seal pupping season, a two-week followup pup survey will be required to 

ensure that there were no adverse effects 

to pups. During daylight monitoring, 

time-lapse video recordings will be 

made to capture the reactions of 

pinnipeds to each launch, and during 

nighttime monitoring, USSF will 

employ night video monitoring, when 

feasible. Monitoring will include 

multiple surveys each day. When 

possible, PSOs will record: species, 

number, general behavior, presence of 

pups, age class, gender, and reaction to 

launch noise, or to natural or other 

human-caused disturbances. They will 

also record environmental conditions, 

including visibility, air temperature, 

clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, 

and swell height and direction. 

NCI Launch Monitoring 

USSF will conduct marine mammal 

monitoring and take acoustic 

measurements at the NCI if the sonic 

boom model indicates that pressures 

from a boom will reach or exceed the 

psf level detailed in table 15 during the 

indicated date range. These dates were 

determined to be appropriate to account 

for sensitive seasons, primarily 

pupping, for the various pinniped 

species. 

TABLE 15—PROPOSED NCI SONIC

BOOM LEVEL REQUIRING MONITORING, BY DATE

Dates Sonic boom 

level 

1 March–31 July ................... >5 psf. 

1 August–30 September ...... >7 psf. 

1 October–28 February ........ no monitoring. 

USSF will use specialized acoustic 

instruments to record sonic booms 

generated by launches from VSFB and 

resulting overflights or recoveries 

predicted to affect NCI haul out sites. 

VSFB will analyze the recordings to 

determine the intensity, duration, and 

frequency of sonic booms and resulting 

marine mammal responses in order to 

compare monitoring results with levels 

considered potentially harmful to 

marine mammals. The analysis can also 

be used to validate the efficacy of the 

model. 

Monitoring locations on NCI will be 

selected based upon the model results, 

prioritizing a significant haulout site on 

one of the islands where the maximum 

sound pressures are expected to occur. 

Currently, monitoring the reactions of 

northern fur seals and Pacific harbor 

seals to sonic booms is of a higher 

priority than monitoring of California 

sea lions and northern elephant seals, 

for which more data is currently 

available (Table 8). Monitoring the 

reactions of mother-pup pairs of any 

species is also a high priority. 

Considering the large numbers of 

pinnipeds (sometimes thousands) that 

occur on some NCI beaches, while 

estimates of the entire beach population 

will be made and their reactions to the 

launch noise noted, more focused and 

detailed monitoring will be conducted 

on a smaller subset or focal group. 

Photos and/or video recordings will be 

collected for daylight launches when 

feasible, and if the launch occurs in 

darkness night vision equipment will be 

used. Potential impediments to effective 

use of photographic and video 

equipment include periods of reduced 

visibility, terrain that obscures animals 

from view from one observation point, 

severe glare and fog that can occur, and/ 

or other factors. 

Monitoring will be conducted by at 

least one NMFS-approved PSO who is 

trained in marine mammal science. 

Another person will accompany the 

monitor for safety reasons. Monitoring 

will commence at least 72 hours prior 

to the launch, during the launch and at 

least 48 hours after the launch, unless 

no sonic boom is detected by the 

monitors and/or by the acoustic 

recording equipment, at which time 

monitoring would be stopped. If the 

launch occurs in darkness, night vision 

equipment will be used. Monitoring for 

each launch will include multiple 

surveys each day that record, when 

possible: species, number, general 

behavior, presence of pups, age class, 

gender, and reaction to sonic booms or 

natural or human-caused disturbances. 

Photos and/or video recordings will be 

taken when feasible. Environmental 

conditions will also be recorded, 

including visibility, air temperature, 

clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, 

and swell height and direction. 

USSF will continue to test equipment 

and emerging technologies, including 

but not limited to night vision cameras, 

newer models of remote video cameras 

and other means of remote monitoring 

at both VSFB and on the NCI. UASbased or space-based technologies that 

may become available will be evaluated 

for suitability and practicability, and for 

any advantage that remote sensing may 

provide to existing monitoring 

approaches, including ensuring 

coverage when scheduling constraints 

or other factors impede onsite 

monitoring at NCI. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5473 

Missile Launch Monitoring 

Multiple years of monitoring indicates 

that missile launches do not result in 

significant take (i.e., only a subset of 

pinnipeds, in the vicinity of the launch 

trajectory, respond in a manner that 

would qualify as a take, and the impacts 

appear comparatively minor and of 

short duration). Therefore, monitoring 

of marine mammals is only required for 

the first three launches of the missiles 

for the new GBSD during the months of 

March through July (i.e., the period 

during which harbor seals are pupping 

and California sea lions are present) 

across the 5-year duration of this rule. 

When missile launch monitoring is 

required, monitoring will include 

multiple surveys each day. When 

possible, PSOs will record: species, 

number, general behavior, presence of 

pups, age class, gender, and reaction to 

launch noise, or to natural or other 

human-caused disturbances. They will 

also record environmental conditions, 

including visibility, air temperature, 

clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, 

and swell height and direction. 

USSF Semi-Monthly Sentinel Surveys 

USSF conducts marine mammal 

surveys on a regular basis in addition to 

the monitoring that is required based on 

launch characteristics and sound 

pressure thresholds, described above. 

These regular surveys help characterize 

onsite trends in pinniped presence and 

abundance and, over the longer term, 

provide important context for 

interpreting seasonal trends and launchspecific monitoring results. The current 

monthly surveys have allowed 

researchers to assess haul-out patterns 

and relative abundance over time, 

presenting a better picture of pinniped 

population trends at VSFB and whether 

USSF operations are resulting in 

cumulative impacts. For the period of 

this LOA, and in conjunction with 

proposed changes of monitoring criteria 

for launches, the applicant proposes to 

change the frequency of sentinel surveys 

from monthly to semi-monthly (two 

surveys per month). 

Past surveys have captured important 

data including novel occurrences (such 

as unsuccessful California sea lion 

pupping on VSFB in 2003 and northern 

elephant seal pupping in 2017) and 

emerging or fleeting trends (such as 

greater numbers of northern elephant 

seals hauling out in 2004, and a 

temporary increase in California sea 

lions onsite in 2018 and 2019). These 

results, in conjunction with anticipated 

changes in launch activity and 

environmental factors underscore the 

value of consistent surveys collected on 

a regular basis, to provide sound context 

for launch-specific monitoring results. 

USSF will conduct semi-monthly 

surveys (two surveys per month, rather 

than the current monthly surveys) to 

monitor the abundance, distribution, 

and status of pinnipeds at VSFB. 

Whenever possible, these surveys will 

be timed to coincide with the lowest 

afternoon tides of each month when the 

greatest numbers of animals are usually 

hauled out. South VSFB surveys start 

about two hours before the low tide and 

end two hours afterward. North VSFB 

surveys are either conducted by a 

separate surveyor on the same day as 

south VSFB, or on the day before/after 

south VSFB surveys. North VSFB 

surveys require approximately 90 

minutes. Monitoring during nighttime 

low tides is not possible because of the 

dangerously unstable nature of the 

bluffs overlooking many of the 

observation points. Occasional VSFB or 

area closures also sometimes preclude 

monitoring on a given day, in which 

case the next best day will be selected. 

NMFS-approved PSOs will gather the 

following data at each site: species, 

number, general behavior, presence of 

pups, age class, gender, and any 

reactions to natural or human-caused 

disturbances. They will also record 

environmental conditions, including 

visibility, air temperature, clouds, wind 

speed and direction, tides, and swell 

height and direction. 

Adaptive Management 

The regulations governing the take of 

marine mammals incidental to launches 

and supporting activities at VSFB 

contain an adaptive management 

component. Our understanding of the 

effects of launches and supporting 

activities (e.g., acoustic and visual 

stressors) on marine mammals 

continues to evolve, which makes the 

inclusion of an adaptive management 

component both valuable and necessary 

within the context of 5-year regulations. 

The reporting requirements associated 

with this rule are designed to provide 

NMFS with monitoring data from the 

previous year to allow NMFS to 

consider whether any changes to 

existing mitigation, monitoring or 

reporting requirements are appropriate. 

The use of adaptive management also 

allows NMFS to consider new 

information from different sources to 

determine (with input from the USSF 

regarding practicability) on an annual or 

biennial basis if mitigation or 

monitoring measures should be 

modified (including additions or 

deletions). Mitigation measures could be 

modified if new data suggests that such 

modifications will have a reasonable 

likelihood of more effectively 

accomplishing the goals of the 

mitigation and monitoring and if the 

measures are practicable. If the 

modifications to the mitigation, 

monitoring, or reporting measures are 

substantial, NMFS will publish a notice 

of the planned LOA in the Federal 

Register and solicit public comment. 

Reporting 

Proposed reporting requirements 

would include launch monitoring 

reports for each launch where 

monitoring is required or conducted, 

annual reports describing all activities 

and monitoring conducted in the project 

area that are covered under this 

proposed rule during each year, and a 

comprehensive 5-year report. 

A launch monitoring report 

containing the following information 

would be submitted to NMFS within 90 

days after each rocket launch where 

monitoring is required: 

• Date(s) and time(s) of the launch 

(and sonic boom, if applicable); 

• Monitoring program design; and 

• Results of the monitoring program, 

including, but not necessarily limited 

to: 

Æ Date(s) and location(s) of marine 

mammal monitoring; 

Æ Number of animals observed, by 

species, on the haulout prior to 

commencement of the launch or 

recovery; 

Æ General behavior and, if possible, 

age (including presence of pups) and 

sex class of pinnipeds hauled out prior 

to the launch or recovery; 

Æ Number of animals, by species, age, 

and sex class, that responded at a level 

indicative of harassment; 

Æ Number of animals, by species, age, 

and sex class that entered the water, and 

any behavioral responses by pinnipeds 

that were likely in response to the 

specified activities, including in 

response to launch noise or a sonic 

boom; 

Æ Environmental conditions 

including visibility, air temperature, 

clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, 

and swell height and direction; and 

Æ Results of acoustic monitoring, 

including the recorded sound levels 

associated with the launch and/or sonic 

boom (if applicable). 

If a dead or seriously injured 

pinniped is found during post-launch 

monitoring, the incident must be 

reported to the NMFS Office of 

Protected Resources and the NMFS 

West Coast Regional Office 

immediately. 

USSF must submit an annual report to 

NMFS on March 1st of each year that 

summarizes the data reported in all 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5474 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

launch reports for the previous calendar 

year (as described above) including a 

summary of documented numbers of 

instances of harassment incidental to 

the specified activities. Annual reports 

would also include the results of the 

semi-monthly sentinel marine mammal 

monitoring and describe any 

documented takings incidental to the 

specified activities not included in the 

launch reports (e.g., takes incidental to 

aircraft or helicopter operations 

observed during the semi-monthly 

surveys). 

A final comprehensive 5- year report 

would be submitted to NMFS no later 

than 180 days prior to expiration of 

these regulations. This report must 

summarize the findings made in all 

previous reports and assess both the 

impacts at each of the major rookeries 

and assess any cumulative impacts on 

marine mammals from the specified 

activities. 

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 impacts or responses (e.g., 

intensity, duration), the context of any 

impacts or responses (e.g., critical 

reproductive time or location, foraging 

impacts affecting energetics), as well as 

effects on habitat, and the likely 

effectiveness of the mitigation. We also 

assess the number, intensity, and 

context of estimated takes by evaluating 

this information relative to population 

status. Consistent with the 1989 

preamble for NMFS’ implementing 

regulations (54 FR 40338, September 29, 

1989), the impacts from other past and 

ongoing anthropogenic activities are 

incorporated into this analysis via their 

impacts on the baseline (e.g., as 

reflected in the regulatory status of the 

species, population size and growth rate 

where known, ongoing sources of 

human-caused mortality, or ambient 

noise levels). 

To avoid repetition, this introductory 

discussion of our analysis applies to all 

the species listed in table 3, given that 

many of the anticipated effects of this 

project on different marine mammal 

stocks are expected to be relatively 

similar in nature. Where there are 

meaningful differences between species 

or stocks, or groups of species, in 

anticipated individual responses to 

activities, impact of expected take on 

the population due to differences in 

population status, or impacts on habitat, 

they are described independently in the 

analysis below. 

Activities associated with the 

proposed activities, as outlined 

previously, have the potential to disturb 

and temporarily displace marine 

mammals. Specifically, the specified 

activities may result in take, in the form 

of Level B harassment only, from 

airborne sounds resulting from launches 

and recoveries, including sonic booms 

from certain launches and sound or 

visual stimuli from UAS operations. 

Based on the best available information, 

including monitoring reports from 

similar activities conducted at the site, 

the Level B harassment of pinnipeds 

would likely be limited to reactions 

such as moving a short distance, with 

some hauled out animals moving 

toward or entering the water for a period 

of time following the disturbance. 

As mentioned previously, different 

species of marine mammals and 

different conditions at haul out sites can 

result in different degrees of response 

from the animals. Sufficient data 

collected onsite can be used to 

characterize the relative tendency of 

species to react to acoustic disturbance 

and, specifically, to noise from VSFB 

launches and operations. 

These distinctions in species response 

are discussed above in the Potential 

Effects of Specified Activities on Marine 

Mammals and Their Habitat section, 

and correction factors for species 

sensitivity are applied to the take 

estimates provided in this document. 

As discussed earlier, Level B 

harassment of pinnipeds from rocket 

and missile launch activities or UAS 

exposure is primarily expected to be of 

relatively short duration, in the form of 

changing position, direction, or location 

on the haulout or, on a subset of 

occasions, flushing into the water for 

some amount of time (up to a few 

hours). UAS flights would be conducted 

in accordance with minimum altitude 

requirements designed to minimize 

impacts over haulouts and planning 

measures are in place to minimize 

launch effects to pinnipeds on beaches 

where pupping is occurring. Given the 

potential for seasonal site fidelity, it is 

likely that some individuals will be 

taken multiple times during the course 

of the year as a result of exposure to 

multiple launches, and potentially UAS 

overflights. However, given the 

intermittency of the launches and the 

fact that they do not all originate from 

the same location, these repeated 

exposures are not expected to result in 

prolonged exposures over multiple 

days. Thus, even repeated instances of 

Level B harassment of some small 

subset of an overall stock is unlikely to 

result in any significant realized 

decrease in fitness of those individuals, 

and thus would not result in any 

adverse impact to the stock as a whole. 

Level B harassment would be reduced to 

the level of least practicable adverse 

impact through use of mitigation 

measures described above. 

As discussed earlier, some of the 

beaches that may be impacted by launch 

activities and UAS overflights support 

pupping in some months, specifically 

for harbor seals (March through June on 

VSFB and NCI), California sea lions 

(May through August on NCI), elephant 

seal (January through March on VSFB 

and December through March on NCI), 

and northern fur seal (June through 

August on San Miguel Island, NCI). 

Broadly speaking, flushing of 

pinnipeds into the water has the 

potential to result in mother-pup 

separation, or in extreme circumstances 

could result in a stampede, either of 

which could potentially result in 

serious injury or mortality. However, 

based on the best available information, 

including reports from over 20 years of 

monitoring pinniped response to launch 

noise at VSFB and the NCI, no serious 

injury or mortality of marine mammals 

is anticipated as a result of the proposed 

activities. Further, USSF is required to 

provide pupping information to launch 

proponents at the earliest possible stage 

in the launch planning process, to 

maximize their ability to schedule 

launches to minimize pinniped 

disturbance during Pacific harbor seal 

pupping on Vandenberg SFB (1 March 

to 30 April) and California sea lion 

pupping on the Northern Channel 

Islands (1 June-31 July of each year). If 

practicable, rocket launches predicted to 

produce a sonic boom on the Northern 

Channel Islands >5 psf during the 

California sea lion pupping season will 

be scheduled to coincide with tides in 

excess of +1.0 ft, with an objective to 

achieve such avoidance at least 50 

percent of the time which is expected to 

minimize the impacts at places and 

times where pupping could be 

occurring. Even in the instances of 

pinnipeds being harassed by sonic 

booms from rocket launches at VSFB, no 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5475 

evidence of abnormal behavior, injuries 

or mortalities, or pup abandonment as a 

result of sonic booms (SAIC 2013; 

CEMML, 2018) has been presented. 

These findings are supported by more 

than two decades of surveys at VSFB 

and the NCI (MMCG and SAIC, 2012). 

Post-launch monitoring generally 

reveals a return to normal behavioral 

patterns within minutes up to an hour 

or two of each launch, regardless of 

species. For instance and of note, 

research on abundance and fecundity 

has been conducted at San Miguel 

Island (recognized as an important 

pinniped rookery) for decades. This 

research, as well as SARs, support a 

conclusion that operations at VSFB have 

not had significant impacts on the 

numbers of animals observed at San 

Miguel Island rookeries and haulouts 

(SAIC, 2012). In addition, northern 

elephant seal pupping was documented 

on VSFB for the first time in 2017 and 

continued into 2022, further indicating 

that the effects of ongoing launch 

activities do not preempt new marine 

mammal activity and are unlikely to 

have impacted annual rates of 

recruitment or survival among affected 

species. 

In summary and as described above, 

the following factors primarily support 

our preliminary 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 injury, serious injury, or 

mortality are anticipated or authorized; 

• The anticipated instances of Level B 

harassment are expected to consist of, at 

worst, temporary modifications in 

behavior (i.e., short distance movements 

and occasional flushing into the water 

with return to haulouts within 

approximately 60–120 minutes), which 

are not expected to adversely affect the 

fitness of any individuals; 

• The proposed activities are 

expected to result in no long-term 

changes in the use by pinnipeds of 

rookeries and haulouts in the project 

area, based on over 20 years of 

monitoring data; and 

• The presumed efficacy of planned 

mitigation measures in reducing the 

effects of the specified activity to the 

level of least practicable adverse impact. 

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 

proposed monitoring and mitigation 

measures, NMFS preliminarily finds 

that the total marine mammal take from 

the proposed activity will have a 

negligible impact on all affected marine 

mammal species or stocks. 

Small Numbers 

As noted previously, only take of 

small numbers of marine mammals may 

be authorized under sections 

101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for 

specified activities other than military 

readiness activities. Here, a small 

portion of the activities (missile 

launches only) are considered military 

readiness activities, but we have 

conducted the assessment considering 

the totality of the take considered for 

this proposed rule. The MMPA does not 

define small numbers and so, in 

practice, where estimated numbers are 

available, NMFS compares the 

maximum number of individuals taken 

in any year 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. 

When the predicted maximum annual 

number of individuals to be taken is 

fewer than one-third of the species or 

stock abundance, the take is considered 

to be of small numbers. See 86 FR 5438– 

5440, January 19, 2021. Additionally, 

other qualitative factors may be 

considered in the analysis, such as the 

temporal or spatial scale of the 

activities. Here, we considered the 

tendency to show site fidelity among 

affected species, their seasonal 

distribution trends and the likelihood of 

individual animals being disturbed 

repeatedly (i.e., taken by multiple 

launches across multiple days within a 

year), rather than proceeding as though 

each instance of take affecting a 

different individual. 

For every year, the instances of take 

proposed for authorization of northern 

elephant seal, Steller sea lion, and 

Guadalupe fur seal comprise less than 

one-third of the best available 

population abundances (table 14). The 

number of animals authorized to be 

taken from these stocks would be 

considered small relative to the relevant 

stock’s abundances even if each 

estimated instance of take occurred to a 

new individual, which is an unlikely 

scenario. 

For harbor seals and California sea 

lions (years 4 and 5 only), and Northern 

fur seals (years 3, 4, and 5 only), the 

highest annual estimated instances of 

take are greater than or equal to onethird of the best available stock 

abundance (36, 33, and 42 percent, 

respectively). However, as noted 

previously, the number of expected 

instances of take do not necessarily 

represent the number of individual 

animals expected to be taken. The same 

individual can incur multiple takes by 

Level B harassment over the course of 

an activity that occurs multiple times in 

the same area (such as the USSF’s 

proposed activity) and especially where 

species have documented site fidelity to 

a location within the project area, as is 

the case here. Additionally, due to the 

nature of the specified activity—launch 

activities affecting animals at specific 

haul out locations, rather than a mobile 

activity occurring throughout the much 

larger stock range—only a much smaller 

portion of the stock would be expected 

to be impacted. Thus, while we propose 

to authorize the instances of incidental 

take of these species shown in table 14, 

the number of individuals that would be 

incidentally taken by the proposed 

activities would, in fact, be substantially 

lower than the authorized instances of 

take, and less than one third of the stock 

abundance for each of these species. We 

base the small numbers determination 

on the number of individuals taken 

versus the number of instances of take, 

as is appropriate when the information 

is available. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the proposed activity 

(including the proposed mitigation and 

monitoring measures) and the 

anticipated take of marine mammals, 

NMFS preliminarily finds that small 

numbers of marine mammals would 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. 

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. 

Endangered Species Act 

Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA of 1973 

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

that each Federal agency insure that any 

action it authorizes, funds, or carries out 

is not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any endangered or 

threatened species or result in the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

designated critical habitat. To ensure 

ESA compliance for the issuance of 

ITAs, NMFS consults internally 

whenever we propose to authorize take 

for endangered or threatened species, in 

this case with the NMFS Southwest 

Fisheries Science Center. 

NMFS is proposing to authorize a 

limited amount of take, by Level B 

harassment (5–23 annually, 70 over the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5476 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

course of the 5-year rule), of Guadalupe 

fur seals which are listed as Threatened 

under the ESA. On December 20, 2023, 

NMFS’ West Coast Regional Office 

concurred with OPR’s determination 

that USSF’s proposed activities are 

consistent with those addressed by the 

region’s February 15, 2019 letter of 

concurrence for the current LOA, and 

are not likely to adversely affect the 

Guadalupe fur seal. 

National Marine Sanctuaries Act 

Federal agency actions that are likely 

to injure national marine sanctuary 

resources are subject to consultation 

with the Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries (ONMS) under section 

304(d) of the National Marine 

Sanctuaries Act (NMSA). While rocket 

and missile launches do not occur in 

national marine sanctuary waters, 

depending on the direction of a given 

launch, rockets and missiles may cross 

over the Channel Islands National 

Marine Sanctuary. NMFS will work 

with NOAA’s Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries to fulfill our responsibilities 

under the NMSA as warranted and will 

complete any NMSA requirements prior 

to a determination on the issuance of 

the final rule and LOA. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

To comply with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

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

216–6A, NMFS must review its 

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

ITA) with respect to potential impacts 

on the human environment. 

This action is consistent with 

categories of activities identified in 

Categorical Exclusion B4 (ITAs with no 

anticipated serious injury or mortality) 

of the Companion Manual for NAO 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 preliminarily determined 

that the issuance of the proposed ITA 

qualifies to be categorically excluded 

from further NEPA review. 

We will review all comments 

submitted in response to this notice 

prior to concluding our NEPA process 

or making a final decision on the ITA 

request. 

Request for Information 

NMFS requests interested persons to 

submit comments, information, and 

suggestions concerning the USSF 

request and the proposed regulations 

(see ADDRESSES). All comments will be 

reviewed and evaluated as we prepare a 

final rule and make final determinations 

on whether to issue the requested 

authorization. This notice and 

referenced documents provide all 

environmental information relating to 

our proposed action for public review. 

Classification 

Pursuant to the procedures 

established to implement Executive 

Order 12866, the Office of Management 

and Budget has determined that this 

proposed rule is not significant. 

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the 

Chief Counsel for Regulation of the 

Department of Commerce has certified 

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration that this 

proposed rule, if adopted, would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

The USSF is the sole entity that would 

be subject to the requirements in these 

proposed regulations, and the USSF is 

not a small governmental jurisdiction, 

small organization, or small business, as 

defined by the RFA. Because of this 

certification, a regulatory flexibility 

analysis is not required and none has 

been prepared. This rule does not 

contain a collection-of-information 

requirement subject to the provisions of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act because 

the applicant is a Federal agency. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 217 

Exports, Fish, Imports, Marine 

mammals, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Transportation. 

Dated: January 19, 2024. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

PART 217—REGULATIONS 

GOVERNING THE TAKE OF MARINE 

MAMMALS INCIDENTAL TO 

SPECIFIED ACTIVITIES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 217 

continues to read as follows: 

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

otherwise noted. 

■ 2. Revise subpart G to read as follows: 

Subpart G—Taking and Importing 

Marine Mammals; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to U.S. Space 

Force Launches and Operations at 

Vandenberg Space Force Base, 

California 

Sec. 

217.60 Specified activity and specified 

geographical region. 

217.61 Effective dates. 

217.62 Permissible methods of taking. 

217.63 Prohibitions. 

217.64 Mitigation requirements. 

217.65 Requirements for monitoring and 

reporting. 

217.66 Letters of Authorization. 

217.67 Renewals and modifications of 

Letter of Authorization. 217.68–217.69 

[Reserved] 

§ 217.60 Specified activity and specified 

geographical region. 

(a) Regulations in this subpart apply 

only to the United States Space Force 

(USSF) and those persons it authorizes 

to conduct activities on its behalf, for 

the taking of marine mammals that 

occurs in the areas outlined in 

paragraph (b) of this section incidental 

to rocket and missile launches and 

supporting operations. 

(b) The incidental taking of marine 

mammals under these regulations may 

be authorized in a Letter of 

Authorization (LOA) only for activities 

originating at Vandenberg Space Force 

Base (VSFB). 

§ 217.61 Effective dates. 

(a) Regulations in this subpart are 

effective from April 10, 2024, through 

April 10, 2029. 

(b) [Reserved] 

§ 217.62 Permissible methods of taking. 

(a) Under an LOA issued pursuant to 

§ 216.106 of this chapter and §§ 217.66 

or 217.67, the Holder (hereinafter the 

USSF) may incidentally, but not 

intentionally, take marine mammals by 

Level B harassment, as described in 

§ 217.60(a) and (b), provided the activity 

is in compliance with all terms, 

conditions, and requirements of the 

regulations in this subpart and the 

appropriate LOA. 

(b) The incidental take of marine 

mammals by the activities listed in 

§ 217.60 is limited to the following 

species and stocks: 

TABLE 1 TO § 217.62(b) 

Species Stock 

California sea lion ........... United States. 

Northern fur seal ............ California. 

Guadalupe fur seal ......... Mexico. 

Steller sea lion ................ Eastern. 

Harbor seal ..................... California. 

Northern elephant seal ... California Breeding. 

§ 217.63 Prohibitions. 

(a) Except for takings contemplated in 

§ 217.62 and authorized by a LOA 

issued under § 216.106 of this chapter 

and §§ 217.66 and 217.67, it shall be 

unlawful for any person to do any of the 

following in connection with the 

activities listed in § 217.60: 

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

terms, conditions, and requirements of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5477 

this subpart or a LOA issued under 

§§ 216.106 of this chapter and §§ 217.66 

or 217.67 of this chapter; 

(2) Take any marine mammal species 

or stock not specified in such LOAs; 

(3) Take any marine mammal 

specified in such LOAs in any manner 

other than as specified; or 

(4) Take a marine mammal specified 

in such LOAs if NMFS determines after 

notice and comment that the taking 

allowed for one or more activities under 

16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(A) is having or may 

have more than a negligible impact on 

the species or stocks of such marine 

mammal. 

(b) [Reserved] 

§ 217.64 Mitigation requirements. 

(a) When conducting the activities 

identified in § 217.60(a) and (b), the 

mitigation measures contained in any 

Letter of Authorization issued under 

§ 216.106 of this chapter and §§ 217.66 

or 217.67 must be implemented. These 

mitigation measures include (but are not 

limited to): 

(1) USSF must provide pupping 

information to launch proponents at the 

earliest possible stage in the launch 

planning process and direct launch 

proponents to, if practicable, avoid 

scheduling launches during pupping 

seasons on VSFB from 1 March to 30 

April and on the Northern Channel 

Islands from 1 June–31 July. If 

practicable, rocket launches predicted to 

produce a sonic boom on the Northern 

Channel Islands >3 psf from 1 June–31 

July will be scheduled to coincide with 

tides in excess of +1.0 ft, with an 

objective to do so at least 50 percent of 

the time. 

(2) For manned flight operations, 

aircraft must use approved routes for 

testing and evaluation. Manned aircraft 

must also remain outside of a 1,000-ft 

buffer around pinniped rookeries and 

haul-out sites (except in emergencies 

such as law enforcement response or 

Search and Rescue operations, and with 

a reduced, 500-ft buffer at Small Haulout 1). 

(3) UAS classes 0–2 must maintain a 

minimum altitude of 300 ft over all 

known marine mammal haulouts when 

marine mammals are present, except at 

take-off and landing. Class 3 must 

maintain a minimum altitude of 500 ft, 

except at take-off and landing. UAS 

classes 4 and 5 only operate from the 

VSFB airfield and must maintain a 

minimum altitude of 1,000 ft over 

marine mammal haulouts except at takeoff and landing. USSF must not fly class 

4 or 5 UAS below 1,000 ft over haulouts. 

(b) [Reserved] 

§ 217.65 Requirements for monitoring and 

reporting. 

(a) Monitoring at VSFB and NCI must 

be conducted by at least one NMFSapproved Protected Species Observer 

(PSO) trained in marine mammal 

science. PSOs must have demonstrated 

proficiency in the identification of all 

age and sex classes of all marine 

mammal species that occur at VSFB and 

on NCI. They must be knowledgeable of 

approved count methodology and have 

experience in observing pinniped 

behavior, especially that due to human 

disturbances. 

(b) In the event that the PSO 

requirements described in paragraph (a) 

of this section cannot be met (e.g., 

access is prohibited due to safety 

concerns), daylight or night-time video 

monitoring may be used in lieu of PSO 

monitoring. 

(c) At VSFB, USSF must conduct 

marine mammal monitoring and take 

acoustic measurements for all new 

rockets (for both existing and new 

launch proponents using the existing 

facilities) that are larger or louder than 

those that have been previously 

launched from VSFB during their first 

three launches and for the first three 

launches from any new facilities during 

March through July. 

(1) For launches that occur during the 

harbor seal pupping season (March 1 

through June 30) or when higher 

numbers of California sea lions are 

present (June 1 through July 31), 

monitoring must be conducted by at 

least one NMFS-approved PSO trained 

in marine mammal science. 

(2) When launch monitoring is 

required, monitoring must begin at least 

72 hours prior to the launch and 

continue through at least 48 hours after 

the launch. Monitoring must include 

multiple surveys each day. 

(3) For launches within the harbor 

seal pupping season, USSF must 

conduct a follow-up survey of pups. 

(4) For launches that occur during 

daylight, USSF must make time-lapse 

video recordings to capture the 

reactions of pinnipeds to each launch. 

For launches that occur at night, USSF 

will employ night video monitoring, 

when feasible. 

(5) When possible, PSOs must record: 

species, number, general behavior, 

presence and number of pups, age class, 

gender, and reaction to launch noise, or 

to natural or other human-caused 

disturbances. PSOs must also record 

environmental conditions, including 

visibility, air temperature, clouds, wind 

speed and direction, tides, and swell 

height and direction. 

(d) USSF must conduct sonic boom 

modeling prior to the first three small or 

medium rocket launches from new 

launch proponents or at new launch 

facilities, and all heavy or super-heavy 

rocket launches. 

(e) USSF must conduct marine 

mammal monitoring and take acoustic 

measurements at the NCI if the sonic 

boom model indicates that pressures 

from a boom will reach or exceed 5 psf 

from 1 March through 31 July or 7 psf 

from 1 August through 30 September. 

No monitoring is required on NCI from 

1 October through 28 February. 

(1) The monitoring site must be 

selected based upon the model results, 

prioritizing a significant haulout site on 

one of the islands where the maximum 

sound pressures are expected to occur. 

(2) USSF must estimate the number of 

animals on the monitored beach and 

record their reactions to the launch 

noise and conduct more focused 

monitoring on a smaller subset or focal 

group. 

(3) Monitoring must commence at 

least 72 hours prior to the launch, 

during the launch and at least 48 hours 

after the launch, unless no sonic boom 

is detected by the monitors and/or by 

the acoustic recording equipment, at 

which time monitoring may be stopped. 

(4) For launches that occur in 

darkness, USSF must use night vision 

equipment. 

(5) Monitoring for each launch must 

include multiple surveys each day that 

record, when possible: species, number, 

general behavior, presence of pups, age 

class, gender, and reaction to sonic 

booms or natural or human-caused 

disturbances. 

(6) USSF must collect photo and/or 

video recordings for daylight launches 

when feasible, and if the launch occurs 

in darkness night vision equipment will 

be used. 

(7) USSF must record environmental 

conditions, including visibility, air 

temperature, clouds, wind speed and 

direction, tides, and swell height and 

direction. 

(f) USSF must continue to test 

equipment and emerging technologies, 

including but not limited to night vision 

cameras, newer models of remote video 

cameras and other means of remote 

monitoring at both VSFB and on the 

NCI. 

(g) USSF must evaluate UAS based or 

space-based technologies that become 

available for suitability, practicability, 

and for any advantage that remote 

sensing may provide to existing 

monitoring approaches. 

(h) USSF must monitor marine 

mammals during the first three launches 

of the missiles for the new Ground 

Based Strategic Defense program during 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
5478 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

the months of March through July across 

the 5-year duration of this rule. 

(1) When launch monitoring is 

required, monitoring must include 

multiple surveys each day. 

(2) When possible, PSOs must record: 

species, number, general behavior, 

presence and number of pups, age class, 

gender, and reaction to launch noise, or 

to natural or other human-caused 

disturbances. PSOs must also record 

environmental conditions, including 

visibility, air temperature, clouds, wind 

speed and direction, tides, and swell 

height and direction. 

(i) USSF must conduct semi-monthly 

surveys (two surveys per month) to 

monitor the abundance, distribution, 

and status of pinnipeds at VSFB. 

Whenever possible, these surveys will 

be timed to coincide with the lowest 

afternoon tides of each month when the 

greatest numbers of animals are usually 

hauled out. If a VSFB or area closure 

precludes monitoring on a given day, 

USSF must monitor on the next best 

day. 

(1) PSOs must gather the following 

data at each site: species, number, 

general behavior, presence and number 

of pups, age class, gender, and any 

reactions to natural or human-caused 

disturbances. PSOs must also record 

environmental conditions, including 

visibility, air temperature, clouds, wind 

speed and direction, tides, and swell 

height and direction. 

(j) For each rocket or missile launch 

where monitoring is required as 

described in paragraphs (a), (c), and (e) 

of this section, USSF must submit a 

launch report to NMFS’ West Coast 

Region and Office of Protected 

Resources within 90 days. This report 

must contain the following information: 

(1) Date(s) and time(s) of the launch 

(and sonic boom, if applicable); 

(2) Monitoring program design; and 

(3) Results of the monitoring program, 

including, but not necessarily limited 

to: 

(i) Date(s) and location(s) of marine 

mammal monitoring; 

(ii) Number of animals observed, by 

species, on the haulout prior to 

commencement of the launch or 

recovery; 

(iii) General behavior and, if possible, 

age (including presence and number of 

pups) and sex class of pinnipeds hauled 

out prior to the launch or recovery; 

(iv) Number of animals, by species, 

age, and sex class, that responded at a 

level indicative of harassment; 

(v) Number of animals, by species, 

age, and sex class that entered the water, 

and any behavioral responses by 

pinnipeds that were likely in response 

to the specified activities, including in 

response to launch noise or a sonic 

boom; 

(vi) Environmental conditions 

including visibility, air temperature, 

clouds, wind speed and direction, tides, 

and swell height and direction; and 

(vii) Results of acoustic monitoring, 

including the recorded sound levels 

associated with the launch and/or sonic 

boom (if applicable). 

(k) If the activity identified in 

§ 217.60(a) likely resulted in the 

mortality or injury of any marine 

mammals or in any take of marine 

mammals not identified in § 217.62, 

then the USSF must notify the NMFS 

Office of Protected Resources and the 

NMFS West Coast Region stranding 

coordinator within 48 hours of the 

discovery of the injured or dead marine 

mammal. 

(i) USSF must submit an annual 

report each year to NMFS Office of 

Protected Resources. This report must 

summarize the data reported in all 

launch reports for the previous calendar 

year (as described in paragraph (g) of 

this section) including a summary of 

documented numbers of instances of 

harassment incidental to the specified 

activities. The annual reports must also 

include the results of the semi-monthly 

sentinel marine mammal monitoring 

and describe any documented takings 

incidental to the specified activities not 

included in the launch reports (e.g., 

takes incidental to aircraft or helicopter 

operations observed during the semimonthly surveys). 

(l) USSF must submit a final, 

comprehensive 5-year report to NMFS 

Office of Protected Resources. This 

report must: 

(1) Summarize the activities 

undertaken and the results reported in 

all previous reports; 

(2) Assess the impacts at each of the 

major rookeries; and 

(3) Assess the cumulative impacts on 

pinnipeds and other marine mammals 

from the activities specified in 

§ 217.60(a) and (b); 

§ 217.66 Letters of Authorization. 

(a) To incidentally take marine 

mammals pursuant to this subpart, the 

USSF must apply for and obtain an LOA 

in accordance with § 216.106 of this 

chapter. 

(b) An LOA, unless suspended or 

revoked, may be effective for a period of 

time not to exceed expiration of this 

subpart. 

(c) If an LOA expires prior to the 

expiration date of this subpart, the 

USSF may apply for and obtain a 

renewal LOA. 

(d) In the event of projected changes 

to the activity or to mitigation, 

monitoring, or reporting (excluding 

changes made pursuant to the adaptive 

management provision of § 217.67(c)(1) 

required by an LOA, USSF must apply 

for and obtain a modification of the 

LOA as described in § 217.67. 

(e) Each LOA will set forth: 

(1) Permissible methods of incidental 

taking; 

(2) Means of effecting the least 

practicable adverse impact (i.e., 

mitigation) on the species, its habitat, 

and on the availability of the species for 

subsistence uses; and 

(3) Requirements for monitoring and 

reporting. 

(f) Issuance of the LOA shall be based 

on a determination that the level of 

taking will be consistent with the 

findings made for the total taking 

allowable under these regulations. 

(g) Notice of issuance or denial of a 

LOA shall be published in the Federal 

Register within 30 days of a 

determination. 

§ 217.67 Renewals and modifications of 

Letter of Authorization. 

(a) A LOA issued under §§ 216.106 of 

this chapter and 217.66 for the activity 

identified in § 217.60(a) and (b) shall be 

modified upon request by the applicant, 

provided that: 

(1) The specified activity and 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

measures, as well as the anticipated 

impacts, are the same as those described 

and analyzed for this subpart (excluding 

changes made pursuant to the adaptive 

management provision in paragraph 

(c)(1) of this section); and 

(2) NMFS determines that the 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

measures required by the previous LOA 

under these regulations were 

implemented. 

(b) For LOA modification or renewal 

requests by the applicant that include 

changes to the activity or the mitigation, 

monitoring, or reporting measures 

(excluding changes made pursuant to 

the adaptive management provision in 

paragraph (c)(1) of this section) that do 

not change the findings made for the 

regulations or that result in no more 

than a minor change in the total 

estimated number of takes (or 

distribution by species or stock or 

years), NMFS may publish a notice of 

proposed changes to the LOA in the 

Federal Register, including the 

associated analysis of the change, and 

solicit public comment before issuing 

the LOA. 

(c) An LOA issued under §§ 216.106 

of this chapter and 217.66 for the 

activity identified in § 217.60(a) and (b) 

may be modified by NMFS under the 

following circumstances: 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 19 / Monday, January 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules 5479 

(1) After consulting with the USSF 

regarding the practicability of the 

modifications, NMFS, through adaptive 

management, may modify (including 

adding or removing measures) the 

existing mitigation, monitoring, or 

reporting measures if doing so creates a 

reasonable likelihood of more 

effectively accomplishing the goals of 

the mitigation and monitoring. 

(i) Possible sources of data that could 

contribute to the decision to modify the 

mitigation, monitoring, or reporting 

measures in an LOA include: 

(A) Results from the USSF’s 

monitoring from the previous year(s); 

(B) Results from other marine 

mammal and/or sound research or 

studies; or 

(C) Any information that reveals 

marine mammals may have been taken 

in a manner, extent or number not 

authorized by these regulations or a 

subsequent LOA. 

(ii) If, through adaptive management, 

the modifications to the mitigation, 

monitoring, or reporting measures are 

more than minor, NMFS will publish a 

notice of the proposed changes to the 

LOA in the Federal Register and solicit 

public comment. 

(2) If NMFS determines that an 

emergency exists that poses a significant 

risk to the well-being of the species or 

stocks of marine mammals specified in 

LOAs issued pursuant to §§ 216.106 of 

this chapter and 217.62, an LOA may be 

modified without prior notice or 

opportunity for public comment. Notice 

would be published in the Federal 

Register within 30 days of the action. 

§§ 217.68–217.69 [Reserved] 

[FR Doc. 2024–01366 Filed 1–26–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1