Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 87 /Wednesday, May 6, 1998 / Notices 25015

is necessary for the proper performance

of the functions of the agency, including

whether the information shall have

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden

(including hours and cost) of the

proposed collection of information; ( c)

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the

burden of the collection of information

on respondents, including through the

use of automated collection techniques

or other forms of information

technology.

Comments submitted in response to

this notice will be summarized and/or

included in the request for OMB

approval of this information collection;

they also will become a matter of public

record.

Dated: April 30, 1998.

Linda Engelmeier,

Departmental Forms Clearance Officer, Office

of Management and Organization.

[FR Doc. 98–12000 Filed 5–5–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–07–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Export Administration

Information Systems Technical

Advisory Committee; Notice of Closed

Meeting

A meeting of the Information System

Technical Advisory Committee (ISTAC)

will be held May 21, 1998, 9:00 a.m., in

the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room

1617M–2, 14th Street between

Pennsylvania Avenue and Constitution

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. The

ISTAC advises the Office of the

Assistant Secretary for Export

Administration with respect to technical

questions that affect the level of export

controls applicable to information

systems equipment and technology.

The Committee will meet only in

Executive Session to discuss matters

properly classified under Executive

order 12958, dealing with the U.S.

export control program and strategic

criteria related thereto.

The Assistant Secretary for

Administration, with the concurrence of

the General Counsel, formally

determined on October 3, 1997,

pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal

Advisory Committee Act, as amended,

that the series of meetings of the

Committee and of any Subcommittees

thereof, dealing with the classified

materials listed in 5 U.S.C., 552b(c)(1)

shall be exempt from the provisions

relating to public meetings found in

section 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3), of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act. The

remaining series of meetings or portions

thereof will be open to the public.

A copy of the Notice of Determination

to close meetings or portions of

meetings of the Committee is available

for public inspection and copying in the

Central Reference and Records

Inspection Facility, Room 6020, U.S.

Department of Commerce, Washington,

DC 20230. For further information,

contact Lee Ann Carpenter on (202)

482–2583.

Dated: April 30, 1998.

Lee Ann Carpenter,

Director, Technical Advisory Committee Unit.

[FR Doc. 98–12008 Filed 5–5–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–33–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

Applications for Duty-Free Entry of

Scientific Instruments

Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the

Educational, Scientific and Cultural

Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub.

L. 89–651; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part

301), we invite comments on the

question of whether instruments of

equivalent scientific value, for the

purposes for which the instruments

shown below are intended to be used,

are being manufactured in the United

States.

Comments must comply with 15 CFR

301.5(a)(3) and (4) of the regulations and

be filed within 20 days with the

Statutory Import Programs Staff, U.S.

Department of Commerce, Washington,

D.C. 20230. Applications may be

examined between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00

P.M. in Room 4211, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.

Docket Number: 98–022. Applicant:

Texas A&M University, Plant Genome

Mapping Laboratory, Heep Center for

SCSC, Room 610, College Station, TX

77843–2474. Instrument: Robot, Model

X8000. Manufacturer: Genetix Ltd.,

United Kingdom. Intended Use: The

instrument is intended to be used for

studies of recombinant bacteria

containing cloned DNA inserts from

flowering plants (for example cotton,

sorghum or rice) or other non-infectious

sources. Experiments will be conducted

which involve the identification of

specific bacterial clones that contain

DNA which corresponds to particular

genes or related DNA elements

previously assigned to a ‘‘map position’’

along the chromosomes of the source

organism (flowering plant). In addition,

the instrument will be used for

educational purposes in the courses: (a)

GENE 485: Undergraduate Research, (b)

GENE 691: Postgraduate Research and

(C) GENE 654: Analysis of Complex

Genomes. Application accepted by

Commissioner of Customs: April 20,

1998.

Docket Number: 98–023. Applicant:

University of Iowa, Department of

Ophthalmology, 200 Hawkins Drive,

11190E PFP, Iowa City, IA 52242.

Instrument: Electron Microscope, Model

JEM–1220. Manufacturer: JEOL, Ltd.,

Japan. Intended Use: The instrument is

intended to be used for studies of ocular

tissues and cells from humans and

animals to determine the extent of, and

to quantitate, pathological changes in

ocular tissues of human donors afflicted

with age-related macular degeneration

and animal models of this disease.

Application accepted by Commissioner

of Customs: April 21, 1998.

Frank W. Creel

Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff.

[FR Doc. 98–12046 Filed 5–5–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 041598A]

Small Takes of Marine Mammals

Incidental to Specified Activities;

Offshore Seismic Activities in the

Beaufort Sea

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of application

and proposed authorization for a small

take exemption; request for comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request

from the BP Exploration (Alaska), 900

East Benson Boulevard, Anchorage, AK

99519 (BPXA) for a renewal of an

authorization to take small numbers of

marine mammals by harassment

incidental to conducting seismic

surveys in the Beaufort Sea in state and

Federal waters. Under the Marine

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS

is requesting comments on its proposal

to authorize BPXA to incidentally take,

by harassment, small numbers of

bowhead whales and other marine

mammals in the above mentioned areas

during the open water period of 1998.

DATES: Comments and information must

be received no later than June 5, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the

application should be addressed to
25016 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 87 /Wednesday, May 6, 1998 / Notices

Michael Payne, Chief, Marine Mammal

Division, Office of Protected Resources,

NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver

Spring, MD 20910–3225. A copy of the

application, a 1996 environmental

assessment (EA), the 1997 informal

section 7 consultation, BPXA’s 1997 90-

day Report, and a list of references used

in this document may be obtained by

writing to this address or by telephoning

one of the contacts listed here.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kenneth R. Hollingshead, (301) 713–

2055, Brad Smith, (907) 271–5006.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

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

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

the Secretary of Commerce to allow,

upon request, the incidental, but not

intentional taking of marine mammals

by U.S. citizens who engage in a

specified activity (other than

commercial fishing) within a specified

geographical region if certain findings

are made and either regulations are

issued or, if the taking is limited to

harassment, notice of a proposed

authorization is provided to the public

for review.

Permission may be granted if NMFS

finds that the taking will have a

negligible impact on the species or

stock(s) and will not have an

unmitigable adverse impact on the

availability of the species or stock(s) for

subsistence uses and that the

permissible methods of taking and

requirements pertaining to the

monitoring and reporting of such taking

are set forth.

On April 10, 1996 (61 FR 15884),

NMFS published an interim rule

establishing, among other things,

procedures for issuing incidental

harassment authorizations under section

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for activities

in Arctic waters. For additional

information on the procedures to be

followed for this authorization, please

refer to that document.

Summary of Request

On March 26, 1998, NMFS received

an application from BPXA requesting a

1-year renewal of its authorization for

the harassment of small numbers of

several species of marine mammals

incidental to conducting seismic

surveys during the open water season in

the Beaufort Sea between Harrison Bay

and Camden Bay/Flaxman Island, AK.

Weather permitting, the survey is

expected to take place between

approximately July 1 and October 20,

1998. A detailed description of the work

proposed for 1998 is contained in the

application (BPXA, 1998) and is

available upon request (see ADDRESSES).

Description of Habitat and Marine

Mammal Affected by the Activity

A detailed description of the Beaufort

Sea ecosystem and its associated marine

mammals can be found in the EA

prepared for this authorization (BPXA,

1996b) or in other documents (Minerals

Management Service (MMS), 1992,

1996). This information is incorporated

by reference and need not be repeated

here. A copy of the EA is available upon

request (see ADDRESSES).

Marine Mammals

The Beaufort/Chukchi Seas support a

diverse assemblage of marine mammals,

including bowhead whales (Balaena

mysticetus), gray whales (Eschrichtius

robustus), belukha (Delphinapterus

leucas), ringed seals (Phoca hispida),

spotted seals (Phoca largha) and

bearded seals (Erignathus barbatus).

Descriptions of the biology and

distribution of these species and of

others can be found in several other

documents (BPXA, 1996b, 1998; Lentfer,

1988; MMS, 1992, 1996; Small and

DeMaster, 1995; Hill et al., 1997). Please

refer to those documents for information

on these species.

Potential Effects of Seismic Surveys on

Marine Mammals

Disturbance by seismic noise is the

principal means of taking by this

activity. Support vessels and aircraft

will provide a secondary source of

noise. The physical presence of vessels

and aircraft could also lead to nonacoustic effects involving visual or other

cues.

Seismic surveys are used to obtain

data about formations several thousands

of feet deep. The proposed seismic

operation is an ocean bottom cable

(OBC) survey. OBC surveys involve

dropping cables from a ship to the ocean

bottom, forming a patch consisting of 6

cables 5.9 kilometers (km) (3.7 mi) long,

separated 660 m (2,165 ft) from each

other. Sensors (hydrophones) are

attached to the cables. These

hydrophones are used to detect seismic

energy reflected back from underground

rock strata. The original source of this

energy is a submerged acoustic source,

called a seismic airgun array, that

releases compressed air into the water,

creating an acoustical energy pulse that

is directed downward toward the

seabed. Normally, 27 seismic lines are

run for each patch, covering an area 7.3

km by 8.6 km (4.5 mi by 5.3 mi),

centered over the patch.

After sufficient data have been

recorded to allow accurate mapping of

the rock strata, the cable is lifted onto

the deck of a cable-retrieval vessel,

moved to a new location (ranging from

several hundred to a few thousand feet

away), and placed onto the seabed

again. For a more detailed description of

the seismic operation, including the

sizes of the various airguns, and for

numbers of vessels planned for this

survey, please refer to the application

(BPXA, 1998).

Depending upon ambient conditions

and the sensitivity of the receptor,

underwater sounds produced by open

water seismic operations may be

detectable a substantial distance away

from the activity. Any sound that is

detectable is (at least in theory) capable

of eliciting a disturbance reaction by a

marine mammal or of masking a signal

of comparable frequency (BPXA, 1998).

An incidental harassment take is

presumed to occur when marine

mammals in the vicinity of the seismic

source, the seismic vessel, other vessels,

or aircraft react to the generated sounds

or to visual cues.

Seismic pulses are known to cause

bowhead whales to behaviorally

respond within a distance of several

kilometers (Richardson et al., 1995).

Although some limited masking of lowfrequency sounds (e.g., whale calls) is a

possibility, the intermittent nature of

seismic source pulses (1 second in

duration every 6 to 12 seconds) will

limit the extent of masking. Bowhead

whales are known to continue calling in

the presence of seismic survey sounds,

and their calls can be heard between

seismic pulses (Richardson et al., 1986).

Masking effects are expected to be

absent in the case of belukhas, given

that sounds important to them are

predominantly at much higher

frequencies than are airgun sounds

(BPXA, 1998).

Hearing damage is not expected to

occur during the project. It is not known

whether a marine mammal very close to

an airgun array would be at risk of

temporary or permanent hearing

impairment, but temporary threshold

shift is a theoretical possibility for

animals within a few hundred meters

(Richardson et al., 1995) of the source.

However, planned monitoring and

mitigation measures (described later in

this document) are designed to detect

marine mammals occurring near the

array and to avoid exposing them to

sound pulses that have any possibility

of causing hearing damage.

When the received levels of noise

exceed some behavioral reaction

threshold, cetaceans will show

disturbance reactions (BPXA, 1998). The

levels, frequencies, and types of noise

that will elicit a response vary between
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 87 /Wednesday, May 6, 1998 / Notices 25017

and within species, individuals,

locations, and seasons. Behavioral

changes may be subtle alterations in

surface, respiration, and dive cycles.

More conspicuous responses include

changes in activity or aerial displays,

movement away from the sound source,

or complete avoidance of the area. The

reaction threshold and degree of

response are related to the activity of the

animal at the time of the disturbance.

Whales engaged in active behaviors,

such as feeding, socializing, or mating,

are less likely than resting animals to

show overt behavioral reactions, unless

the disturbance is directly threatening

(BPXA, 1998).

Bowhead Whales

Various studies (Reeves et al., 1984,

Fraker et al., 1985, Richardson et al.,

1986, Ljungblad et al., 1988) have

reported that, when an operating

seismic vessel approaches within a few

kilometers, most bowhead whales

exhibit strong avoidance behavior and

changes in surfacing, respiration, and

dive cycles. Bowheads exposed to

seismic pulses from vessels more than

7.5 km (4.5 mi) away rarely showed

observable avoidance of the vessel, but

their surface, respiration, and dive

cycles appeared altered in a manner

similar to that observed in whales

exposed at a closer distance (BPXA,

1996a, 1996b, 1998).

Within a 6–99 km (3.7–60 mi) range,

it has not been possible to determine a

specific distance at which subtle

behavioral changes no longer occur

(Richardson and Malme, 1993), given

the high variability observed in

bowhead whale behavior (BPXA, 1996a,

1996b). Analysis of the results from

BPXA’s 1996 seismic monitoring

program does not provide conclusive

evidence about the radius of avoidance

of bowheads to the seismic program.

The peak number of bowhead sightings

was 10–20 km (6.2–12.3 mi) from shore

during no-seismic periods and 20–30

km (12.3–18.6 mi) from shore during

periods that may have been influenced

by seismic noise. This difference was

not statistically significant, but the low

numbers of sightings preclude

meaningful interpretation (BPXA, 1998).

Inupiat whalers believe that migrating

bowheads are sometimes displaced at

distances considerably greater than 6 to

8 km (3.7 to 5.0 mi)(Rexford, 1996).

Scientific studies done to date have

limitations as discussed in part by

Moore and Clark (1992) and MMS

(1996). It is possible that, when

additional data are available, it will be

demonstrated that bowheads sometimes

do avoid seismic vessels at distances

beyond 6 to 8 km (3.7 to 5.0 mi). Also,

whalers have mentioned that bowheads

sometimes seem more ‘‘skittish’’ and

more difficult to approach when seismic

exploration is underway in the area.

This ‘‘skittish’’ behavior may be related

to the observed subtle changes in the

behavior of bowheads exposed to

seismic pulses from distant seismic

vessels (Richardson et al., 1986).

Gray Whales

The reactions of gray whales to

seismic pulses are similar to those of

bowheads. Migrating gray whales along

the California coast were noted to slow

their speed of swimming, turn away

from seismic noise sources, and increase

their respiration rates. Malme et al.

(1983, 1984, 1988) concluded that

approximately 50 percent showed

avoidance when the average received

pulse level was 170 dB (re 1 μPa @ 1 m).

By some behavioral measures, clear

effects were evident at average pulse

levels of 160+dB; less consistent results

were suspected at levels of 140–160 dB.

Belukha

The belukha is the only species of

toothed whale (Odontoceti) expected to

be encountered in the Beaufort Sea.

Because their hearing threshold at

frequencies below 100 Hz (where most

of the energy from airgun arrays is

concentrated) is poor (125 dB re 1 μPa

@ 1 m) or more depending upon

frequency (Johnson et al., 1989;

Richardson et al., 1991, 1995), belukha

are not predicted to be strongly

influenced by seismic noise. However,

because of the high source levels of

seismic pulses, airgun sounds may be

audible to belukha at distances of 100

km (Richardson and Wursig, 1997). The

reaction distance for belukha, although

presently unknown, is expected to be

less than that for bowheads, given the

presumed poorer sensitivity of belukhas

than that of bowheads for low-frequency

sounds (BPXA, 1998).

Ringed, Largha and Bearded Seals

No detailed studies of reactions by

seals to noise from open water seismic

exploration have been published

(Richardson et al., 1995). However,

there are some data on the reactions of

seals to various types of impulsive

sounds (J. Parsons as quoted in Greene,

et al. 1985; Anon., 1975; Mate and

Harvey, 1985). These studies indicate

that ice seals typically either tolerate or

habituate to seismic noise produced

from open water sources.

Underwater audiograms have been

obtained using behavioral methods for

three species of phocinid seals, ringed,

harbor, and harp seals (Pagophilus

groenlandicus). These audiograms were

reviewed in Richardson et al. (1995).

Below 30–50 kHz, the hearing threshold

of phocinids is essentially flat down to

at least 1 kHz and ranges between 60

and 85 dB (re 1 μPa @ 1 m). There are

few data on hearing sensitivity of

phocinid seals below 1 kHz. NMFS

considers harbor seals to have a hearing

threshold of 70–85 dB at 1 kHz (60 FR

53753, October 17, 1995), and recent

measurements for a harbor seal indicate

that, below 1 kHz, its thresholds

deteriorate gradually to 97 dB (re 1 μPa

@ 1 m) at 100 Hz (Kastak and

Schusterman, 1995a, b).

Because no studies to date have

focused on pinniped reaction to

underwater noise from pulsed, seismic

arrays in open water (Richardson et al.,

1991, 1995), as opposed to in-air

exposure to continuous noise,

substantive conclusions are not possible

at this time. However, assuming a sound

pressure level of 80–100 dB over its

threshold is needed in order to cause

annoyance and 130 dB for injury (pain),

as is the current thought based upon

human studies (Advanced Research

Projects Agency and NMFS, 1995), it

appears unlikely that pinnipeds would

be harassed or injured by low frequency

sounds from a seismic source unless

they were within close proximity of the

array. For permanent injury, pinnipeds

would likely need to remain in the highnoise field for extended periods of time.

Existing evidence also suggests that,

while they may be capable of hearing

sounds from seismic arrays, seals appear

to tolerate intense pulsatile sounds

without known effect once they learn

that there is no danger associated with

the noise (see, for example, NMFS/

Washington Department of Wildlife,

1995). In addition, they will apparently

not abandon feeding or breeding areas

due to exposure to these noise sources

(Richardson et al., 1991) and may

habituate to certain noises over time.

Since seismic work is fairly common in

Beaufort Sea waters, pinnipeds have

been previously exposed to seismic

noise and may not react to it after initial

exposure.

Other Effects

For a discussion on the anticipated

effects of ships, boats, aircraft, and

smaller acoustic devices, such as single

airguns, sparkers, sub-bottom profilers,

side-scan sonar, and bathymetric

sounders, on marine mammals and their

food sources, please refer to the

application (BPXA, 1998). Information

on these effects is incorporated in this

document by reference (see BPXA,

1998). Numbers of Marine Mammals

Expected to be Taken
25018 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 87 /Wednesday, May 6, 1998 / Notices

BPXA estimates that the following

numbers of marine mammals may be

subject to Level B harassment, as

defined in 50 CFR 216.3:

Species Population size

Harassment takes in

1998

Possible Probable

Bowhead .......................................................................................................................................... 8,000 ...................... 800 <400

Gray whale ....................................................................................................................................... 23,000 .................... <10 0

Belukha ............................................................................................................................................ 41,610 .................... 250 <150

Ringed seal ...................................................................................................................................... 1–1.5 million .......... 400 <400

Spotted seal ..................................................................................................................................... >200,000 ................ 10 <5

Bearded seal .................................................................................................................................... >300,000 ................ 50 <30

Effects of Seismic Noise and Other

Activities on Subsistence Needs

The disturbance and potential

displacement of marine mammals by

sounds from seismic activities are the

principle concerns related to

subsistence use of the area. The harvest

of marine mammals (mainly bowhead

whales, ringed seals, and bearded seals)

is central to the culture and subsistence

economies of the coastal North Slope

communities (BPXA, 1998). In

particular, if migrating bowhead whales

are displaced farther offshore by

elevated noise levels, the harvest of

these whales could be more difficult

and dangerous for hunters. The harvest

could also be affected if bowheads

become more skittish when exposed to

seismic noise (BPXA, 1998).

Nuiqsut is the community closest to

the area of the proposed activity, and it

harvests bowhead whales only during

the fall whaling season. In recent years,

Nuiqsut whalers typically take zero to

four whales each season (BPXA, 1998).

Nuiqsut whalers concentrate their

efforts on areas north and east of Cross

Island, generally in water depths greater

than 20 m (65 ft). Cross Island, the

principle field camp location for

Nuiqsut whalers, is located within the

general area of the proposed seismic

area. Thus, the possibility and timing of

potential seismic operations in the Cross

Island area requires BPXA to provide

NMFS with a Plan of Cooperation (also

called the Communications and

Avoidance Agreement) with North

Slope Borough residents to avoid any

unmitigable adverse impact on

subsistence needs.

Whalers from the village of Kaktovik

search for whales east, north, and west

of the village. Kaktovik is located 60 mi

(38 km) east of the easternmost end of

the planned seismic exploration area.

The westernmost reported harvest

location was about 21 km (13 mi) west

of Kaktovik, near 70°10′N, 144°W

(Kaleak, 1996). That site is

approximately 40 km (25 mi) east of the

closest part of the planned seismic

exploration area for 1998 (BPXA, 1998).

Whalers from the village of Barrow

search for bowhead whales much

further from the planned seismic area,

>200 km (>125 mi) west (BPXA, 1998).

The location of the proposed seismic

activity is south of the center of the

westward migration route of bowhead

whales, but there is some overlap. BPXA

(1998) believes that, although whales

may be able to hear the sounds emitted

by the seismic array out to a distance of

50 km (30 mi) or more, it is unlikely that

changes in migration route will occur at

distances of >25 km (>15 mi).

Alternatively, whalers believe that

bowheads begin to divert from their

normal migration path more than 48 km

(35 mi) away (MMS, 1996).

It is recognized that it is difficult to

determine the maximum distance at

which reactions occur (Moore and

Clark, 1992). As a result, BPXA is

developing a Communications and

Avoidance Agreement with the whalers

to reduce potential interference with the

hunt. Also, it is believed that the

monitoring plan proposed by BPXA

(LGL Ltd. and Greeneridge Sciences Inc,

1998) will provide information that will

help resolve uncertainties about the

effects of seismic exploration on the

accessibility of bowheads to hunters.

While seismic exploration has some

potential to influence subsistence seal

hunting activities, the peak season for

seal hunting is during the winter

months when the harvest consists

almost exclusively of ringed seals

(BPXA, 1998). In summer, boat crews

hunt ringed, spotted and bearded seals

(BPXA, 1998). The most important

sealing area for Nuiqsut hunters is off

the Colville delta, extending as far west

as Fish Creek and as far east as Pingok

Island (BPXA, 1998). This area overlaps

with the westernmost portion of the

planned seismic area. In this area,

during summer, sealing occurs by boat

when hunters apparently concentrate on

bearded seals (BPXA, 1998).

Mitigation

BPXA proposes to continue the

mitigation program carried out in 1996

and 1997. BPXA plans to use biological

observers to monitor marine mammal

presence in the vicinity of the seismic

array. To avoid the potential for serious

injury to marine mammals, BPXA will

power down the seismic source if

pinnipeds are sighted within the area

delineated by the 190 dB isopleth or:

(1) within 60 m (197 ft) of a single

airgun or an array of ≤60 in3.

(2) within 110 m (361 ft) of an array

>60 in3 and ≤720 in3 at <2.5 m (8.3 ft)

depth;

(3) within 190 m (623 ft) of an array

>60 in3 and ≤720 in3 operating at ≥2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth;

(4) within 150 m (492 ft) of an array

>720 in3 and ≤840 in3 operating at <2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth;

(5) within 250 m (820 ft) of an array

>720 in3 and ≤840 in operating at

≥2.5 m (8.3 ft) depth;

(6) within 260 m (853 ft) of an array

>840 in3 operating at ≥2.5 m (8.3 ft)

depth; and

(7) within 130 m (426 ft) of an array

>840 in3 operating at >2.5 m (8.3 ft)

depth.

BPXA will power down the seismic

source if bowhead, gray, or belukha

whales are sighted within the area

delineated by the 180 dB isopleth or:

(1) within 160 m (525 ft) of a single

airgun or an array of ≤60 in3;

(2) within 600 m (1,928 ft) of an array

>60 in3 and ≤720 in3 at >2.5 m (8.3 ft)

depth;

(3) within 800 m (2,625 ft) of an array

>60 in3 and ≤720 in3 operating at ≤2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth;

(4) within 700 m (2,298 ft) of an array

>720 in3 and ≤840 in3 operating at <2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth;

(5) within 900 m (2,953 ft) of an array

>720 in3 and ≤840 in3 operating at ≤2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth;

(6) within 1020 m (3,346 ft) of an

array >840 in3 operating at ≥2.5 m (8.3

ft) depth; and
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 87 /Wednesday, May 6, 1998 / Notices 25019

1Because individual watches will normally be

limited to no more than 4 consecutive hours, NMFS

believes that no seismic vessel (including those

conducting shallow-hazards surveys) will be able to

operate with fewer than two observers, unless

surveys are shorter than 4 consecutive hours.

(7) within 640 m (2,100 ft) of an array

>840 in3 operating at >2.5 m (8.3 ft)

depth.

In addition, BPXA proposes to rampup the seismic source to operating levels

at a rate no greater than 6 dB/min. If the

array includes airguns of different sizes,

the smallest gun will be fired first.

Additional guns will be added at

intervals appropriate to limit the rate of

increase in source level to a maximum

of 6 dB/min.

Monitoring

As part of its application, BPXA

provided a monitoring plan for

assessing impacts to marine mammals

from seismic surveys in the Beaufort

Sea. This monitoring plan is described

in detail in BPXA (1998) and LGL Ltd.

and Greeneridge Sciences Inc. (1998).

As required by the MMPA, this

monitoring plan will be subject to a

peer-review panel of technical experts

prior to formal acceptance by NMFS.

Preliminarily, BPXA plans to conduct

the following

Vessel-Based Visual Monitoring

A minimum of two biologist-observers

aboard each seismic vessel will search

for and observe marine mammals

whenever seismic operations are in

progress, and for at least 30 minutes

prior to planned start of shooting. These

observers will scan the area

immediately around the vessels with

reticulated binoculars during the

daytime and with night-vision

equipment during the night (prior to

mid-August, there are no hours of

darkness). Individual watches will

normally be limited to no more than 4

consecutive hours. 1

When mammals are detected within a

safety zone designated to prevent injury

to the animals (see Mitigation), the

geophysical crew leader will be notified

so that shutdown procedures can be

implemented immediately.

Aerial Surveys

From September 1, 1998, until 3 days

after the seismic program ends, aerial

surveys will be conducted daily,

weather permitting. The primary

objective will be to document the

occurrence, distribution, and

movements of bowhead and belukha

whales in and near the area where they

might be affected by the seismic pulses.

These observations will be used to

estimate the level of harassment takes

and to assess the possibility that seismic

operations affect the accessibility of

bowhead whales for subsistence

hunting. Pinnipeds will be recorded

when seen. Aerial surveys will be at an

altitude of 300 m (1,000 ft) above sea

level. BPXA proposes to avoid

overflights of the Cross Island area

where whalers from Nuiqsut are based

during their fall whale hunt.

Consistent with the 1996 and 1997

aerial surveys, the daily aerial surveys

are proposed to cover two grids: (1) A

grid of 12 north-south lines spaced 8 km

(5 mi) apart and extending from about

20 km (12.5 mi) west of the western side

of the then-current seismic exploration

area to 50 km (30 mi) east of its eastern

edge, and from the barrier islands north

to approximately the 100 m (328 ft)

depth contour; and (2) a grid of 4 survey

lines within the above region, also

spaced 8 km (5 mi) apart and mid-way

between the longer lines, to provide

more intensive coverage of the area of

the seismic operations and immediate

surrounding waters.

When the seismic program is

relocated east or west along the coast

during the 1998 season, both survey

grids will be relocated a corresponding

distance along the coast. Information on

the survey program can be found in

BPXA (1998) and in LGL Ltd. and

Greeneridge Sciences Inc. (1998), which

are incorporated herein by reference.

Acoustical Measurements

The acoustic measurement program

proposed for 1998 is designed to be a

sequel to the program conducted in

1996 and 1997 (see BPXA, 1996a, 1997,

and 1998; LGL Ltd. and Greeneridge

Sciences Inc., 1996, 1997, and 1998).

The acoustic measurement program is

planned to include (1) retrieval of

autonomous seafloor acoustic recorders

(ASARs) deployed and not recovered in

1997 and analysis of usable data

contained in those recorders, (2)

deployment of ASARs during the 1998

seismic program to provide continuous

acoustic data for extended periods, (3)

boat-based acoustic measurements, (4)

OBC-based acoustic measurements, and

(5) use of air-dropped sonobuoys.

The boat-based acoustical

measurement program is proposed for a

7-day period in August 1998. The

objectives of this survey will be as

follows: (1) To measure the levels and

other characteristics of the horizontally

propagating seismic survey sounds from

the type(s) of airgun array(s) to be used

in 1998 as a function of distance and

aspect relative to the seismic source

vessel(s) and to water depth.

(2) To measure the levels and

frequency composition of the vessel

sounds emitted by vessels used

regularly during the 1998 program,

excluding vessels whose sounds were

characterized adequately in previous

years.

(3) To obtain additional site-specific

ambient noise data, which determine

signal-to-noise ratios for seismic and

other acoustic signals at various ranges

from their sources. This aspect of the

monitoring is described in more detail

in BPXA (1998) and LGL Ltd. and

Greeneridge Sciences Inc. (1998).

Estimates of Marine Mammal Take

Estimates of takes by harassment will

be made through vessel and aerial

surveys. Preliminarily, BPXA will

estimate the number of (a) marine

mammals observed within the area

ensonified strongly by the seismic

vessel; (b) marine mammals observed

showing apparent reactions to seismic

pulses (e.g., heading away from the

seismic vessel in an atypical direction);

(c) marine mammals subject to take by

type (a) or (b) above when no

monitoring observations were possible;

and (d) bowheads displaced seaward

from the main migration corridor.

Reporting

BPXA will provide an initial report on

1998 activities to NMFS within 90 days

of the completion of the seismic

program. This report will provide dates

and locations of seismic operations,

details of marine mammal sightings,

estimates of the amount and nature of

all takes by harassment, and any

apparent effects on accessibility of

marine mammals to subsistence users.

A final technical report will be

provided by BPXA within 20 working

days of receipt of the document from the

contractor, but no later than April 30,

1999. The final technical report will

contain a description of the methods,

results, and interpretation of all

monitoring tasks.

Consultation

Under section 7 of the Endangered

Species Act (ESA), NMFS completed an

informal consultation on the issuance of

an incidental harassment authorization

for this activity on June 26, 1997. A

copy of that document is available upon

request (see ADDRESSES). If an

authorization to incidentally harass

listed marine mammals is issued under

the MMPA, NMFS will issue an

Incidental Take Statement under section

7 of the ESA.

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)

In conjunction with the 1996 notice of

proposed authorization (61 FR 26501,
25020 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 87 /Wednesday, May 6, 1998 / Notices

May 28, 1996), NMFS released an EA

that addressed the impacts on the

human environment from issuance of

the authorization and the alternatives to

the proposed action. No comments were

received on that document and, on July

18, 1996, NMFS concluded that neither

implementation of the proposed

authorization to BPXA for the

harassment of small numbers of several

species of marine mammals incidental

to conducting seismic surveys during

the open water season in the U.S.

Beaufort Sea nor the alternatives to that

action would significantly affect the

quality of the human environment. As a

result, the preparation of an

environmental impact statement on this

action is not required by section 102(2)

of NEPA or its implementing

regulations. A copy of the EA is

available upon request (see ADDRESSES).

This year’s activity is a continuation

of the seismic work conducted in 1996

and 1997. For BPXA’s 1998 application,

NMFS has conducted a review of the

impacts expected from the issuance of

an Incidental Harassment Authorization

in comparison to those impacts

evaluated in 1996. As assessed in detail

in this document, NMFS has

preliminarily determined that there will

be no more than a negligible impact on

marine mammals from the issuance of

the harassment authorization and that

there will not be any unmitigable

impacts to subsistence communities,

provided the mitigation measures

required under the authorization are

implemented. Because the activity is

substantially the same as the one

conducted in 1996 and no new impacts

on the environment have been

identified, a new EA is not warranted.

Conclusions

NMFS has preliminarily determined

that the short-term impact of conducting

seismic surveys in the U.S. Beaufort Sea

will result, at worst, in a temporary

modification in behavior by certain

species of cetaceans and possibly

pinnipeds. While behavioral

modifications may be made by these

species to avoid the resultant noise, this

behavioral change is expected to have a

negligible impact on the animals.

As the number of potential incidental

harassment takes will depend on the

distribution and abundance of marine

mammals (which vary annually due to

variable ice conditions and other

factors) in the area of seismic

operations, due to the distribution and

abundance of marine mammals during

the projected period of activity and the

location of the proposed seismic activity

in waters generally too shallow and

distant from the edge of the pack ice for

most marine mammals of concern, the

number of potential harassment takings

is estimated to be small. In addition, no

take by injury and/or death is

anticipated, and the potential for

temporary or permanent hearing

impairment will be avoided through the

incorporation of the mitigation

measures mentioned in this document.

No rookeries, mating grounds, areas of

concentrated feeding, or other areas of

special significance for marine

mammals occur within or near the

planned area of operations during the

season of operations.

Because bowhead whales are east of

the seismic area in the Canadian

Beaufort Sea until late August/early

September, seismic activities are not

expected to impact subsistence hunting

of bowhead whales prior to that date.

After August 31, 1998, BPXA will

initiate aerial survey flights for bowhead

whale assessments. Appropriate

mitigation measures to avoid an

unmitigable adverse impact on the

availability of bowhead whales for

subsistence needs will be the subject of

consultation between BPXA and

subsistence users.

Also, while open-water seismic

exploration in the U.S. Beaufort Sea has

some potential to influence seal hunting

activities by residents of Nuiqsut,

because (1) the peak sealing season is

during the winter months, (2) the main

summer sealing is off the Colville Delta),

and (3) the zone of influence by seismic

sources on belukha and seals is fairly

small, NMFS believes that BPXA’s

seismic survey will not have an

unmitigable adverse impact on the

availability of these stocks for

subsistence uses.

Proposed Authorization

NMFS proposes to issue an incidental

harassment authorization for the 1998

Beaufort Sea open water season for a

seismic survey provided the above

mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and

reporting requirements are incorporated.

NMFS has preliminarily determined

that the proposed seismic activity

would result in the harassment of only

small numbers of bowhead whales, gray

whales, and possibly belukha whales,

bearded seals, and largha seals; would

have a negligible impact on these

marine mammal stocks; and would not

have an unmitigable adverse impact on

the availability of marine mammal

stocks for subsistence uses.

Information Solicited

NMFS requests interested persons to

submit comments, and information,

concerning this request (see ADDRESSES).

Dated: May 1, 1998.

Patricia A. Montanio,

Deputy Director, Office of Protected

Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 98–12001 Filed 5–5–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING

COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:

Commodity Futures Trading

Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m., Thursday,

May 28, 1998.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington,

D.C., 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

Enforcement Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Jean A. Webb, 202–418–5100.

Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 98–12118 Filed 5–4–98; 10:46 am]

BILLING CODE 6351–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

Submission for OMB review; comment

request

ACTION: Notice.

The Department of Defense has

submitted to OMB for clearance, the

following proposal for collection of

information under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

Chapter 35).

Title and OMB Number: Defense

Federal Acquisition Regulation

Supplement (DFARS) Appendix I,

Department of Defense Pilot MentorProte ́ge ́ Program; OMB Number 0704–

0332.

Type of Request: Extension.

Number of Respondents: 124.

Responses Per Respondent: 2.

Annual Responses: 248.

Average Burden Per Response: 1 hour

response; 2 recordkeeping hours.

Annual Burden Hours: 496 (Includes

248 recordkeeping hours.)

Needs and Uses: In order to evaluate

whether the purposes of the DoD Pilot

Mentor-Prote ́ge ́ Program (established

under Section 831 of Public Law 101–

510, National Defense Authorization Act

for Fiscal Year 1991, as amended) have

been attained, Appendix I of the DFARS

requires that companies participating in