Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 97 /Wednesday, May 20, 1998 / Notices 27709

conclusion from the proposed rule stage

that the 1997 quotas would not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

engaged in the large coastal shark

fishery.

On May 2, 1997, a coalition of

commercial shark fishermen, dealers,

and organizations sued the Secretary of

Commerce (Secretary) to set aside the

1997 commercial shark quotas based on

allegations of uncertainty in the data

used in stock assessments, on lack of

international management, and on

NMFS’ determination that there would

be no significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

engaged in the Atlantic shark fishery.

On February 27, 1998, Judge Steven D.

Merryday, U.S. District Court, Middle

District of Florida, Tampa Division,

issued an amended order that found

‘‘that the Secretary acted within his

regulatory discretion in setting the

quotas but failed to conduct a proper

analysis to determine the quota’s

economic effect on small businesses’’ (p.

1). Judge Merryday ordered that the

agency submit further analyses on or

before May 15, 1998, and retained

jurisdiction over the case pending

review of the analyses. The quotas are

maintained until further order of the

Court. On April 14, 1998, NMFS

announced the availability of the draft

consideration of the economic effects

and potential alternatives to the 1997

quotas on the Atlantic large coastal

shark fishery in response to the judicial

order. Public comment was requested

on the assumptions, analysis, and

conclusions in the draft document. The

comments received were considered

and used to improve the document. A

summary of the comments and NMFS

response to each are contained within

the document. This final document was

submitted to the United States District

Court for the Middle District of Florida,

Tampa Division, on May 15, 1998.

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

Dated: May 14, 1998.

Gary C. Matlock,

Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 98–13352 Filed 5–19–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 051498A]

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 Western Geophysical/Western

Atlas International of Houston, Texas

(Western Geophysical) for 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 Western Geophysical 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 19, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the

application should be addressed to

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), 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 April 15, 1998, NMFS received an

application from Western Geophysical

requesting an 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 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 (Western Geophysical, 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 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 (Western Geophysical, 1998;

BPXA, 1996b, 1998; Lentfer, 1988;
27710 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 97 /Wednesday, May 20, 1998 / Notices

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 4

parallel cables 10 kilometers (km) (6.2

mi) long, separated 750 m (2,500 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. The source level planned for

this project—a maximum of 249 dB re

1 μPa-m (zero to peak) or 53 bar-meters

peak-to-peak from a 1,500 in3 array of

airguns—is in the lower to middle

portion of the range of source levels

commonly used for seismic operations

with airgun arrays (Richardson et al.,

1995). Normally, 36 seismic lines are

run for each patch, covering an area 6.0

km by 17.5 km (3.7 mi by 10.87 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, please refer to the

application (Western Geophysical,

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 (Western

Geophysical, 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

(Western Geophysical, 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. The levels,

frequencies, and types of noise that will

elicit a response vary between 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

(Western Geophysical, 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, Western Geophysical,

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 (Western

Geophysical, 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
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 97 /Wednesday, May 20, 1998 / Notices 27711

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 (Western Geophysical, 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, and aircraft, on

marine mammals and their food

sources, please refer to the application

(Western Geophysical, 1998).

Information on these effects is

incorporated in this document by

reference (see Western Geophysical,

1998).

Numbers of Marine Mammals Expected

to be Taken

Western Geophysical 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 <300

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 (Western Geophysical,

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 (Western

Geophysical, 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 (Western

Geophysical, 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 Western

Geophysical 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
27712 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 97 /Wednesday, May 20, 1998 / Notices

of the village. Kaktovik is located 50 mi

(80 km) east of the easternmost end of

Western Geophysical’s planned 1998

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 60 km

(37 mi) east of the closest part of

Western Geophysical’s planned seismic

exploration area for 1998 (Western

Geophysical, 1998).

Whalers from the village of Barrow

search for bowhead whales much

further from the planned seismic area,

>200 km (>125 mi) west (Western

Geophysical, 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.

Western Geophysical (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,

Inupiat 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, Western

Geophysical will participate in a

Communications and Avoidance

Agreement with the whalers to reduce

any potential interference with the hunt.

Also, it is believed that the monitoring

plan proposed by Western Geophysical

(1998; also see 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

(Western Geophysical, 1998). In

summer, boat crews hunt ringed,

spotted and bearded seals (Western

Geophysical, 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 (Western Geophysical, 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 (Western

Geophysical, 1998).

Mitigation

Western Geophysical 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,

Western Geophysical 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 170 m (558 ft) of an array

>60 in3 and ≤750 in3 at <2.5 m (8.3 ft)

depth;

(3) within 280 m (919 ft) of an array

>60 in3 and ≤750 in3 operating at >2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth;

(4) within 200 m (656 ft) of an array

>750 in3 and ≤1500 in3 operating at <2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth;

(5) within 350 m (1,148 ft) of an array

>750 in3 and ≤1500 in3 operating at >2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth;

Western Geophysical 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 660 m (2,165 ft) of an array

>60 in3 and ≤750 in3 at <2.5 m (8.3 ft)

depth;

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

>60 in3 and ≤750 in3 operating at >2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth;

(4) within 700 m (2,297 ft) of an array

>750 in3 and ≤840 in3 operating at <2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth; and

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

>750 in3 and ≤840 in3 operating at >2.5

m (8.3 ft) depth;

In addition, Western Geophysical

proposes to ramp-up 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, Western

Geophysical provided a monitoring plan

for assessing impacts to marine

mammals from seismic surveys in the

Beaufort Sea. This monitoring plan is

described in Western Geophysical

(1998) and in LGL Ltd. and Greeneridge

Sciences Inc. (1998). Although Western

Geophysical is prepared to discuss

coordination of research to the extent

practicable with other seismic

operations, Western Geophysical is

prepared to sponsor an independent

program. 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, Western Geophysical

plans to conduct the following:

Vessel-Based Visual Monitoring

A minimum of two biologist-observers

aboard the 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 nightvision 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.

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. Western Geophysical proposes to

avoid overflights of the Cross Island area

where whalers from Nuiqsut are based

during their fall whale hunt.

Consistent with 1996 and 1997 aerial

surveys in the U.S. Beaufort Sea, the

daily aerial surveys are proposed to

cover two grids: (1) A grid of 12 northsouth lines spaced 8 km (5 mi) apart and

extending from about 20 km (12.5 mi)

west of the western side of the thencurrent 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.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 97 /Wednesday, May 20, 1998 / Notices 27713

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

Western Geophysical (1998) and in LGL

Ltd. and Greeneridge Sciences Inc.

(1998), which are incorporated in this

document by reference.

Acoustical Measurements

The acoustic measurement program

proposed for 1998 is designed to be

continue work 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) boat-based acoustic

measurements, (2) OBC-based acoustic

measurements, (3) use of air-dropped

sonobuoys and (4) bottom-mounted

acoustical recorders.

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.

(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.

Western Geophysical and its proposed

consultant (Greeneridge Sciences) are

investigating the use of the OBC-system

to help document horizontal

propagation of the seismic surveys. In

addition, during late August and

September, autonomous seafloor

acoustic recorders will be placed on the

sea bottom at 3 locations to record lowfrequency sounds nearly continuously

for up to 3 weeks at a time. Information

includes characteristics of the seismic

pulses, ambient noise, and bowhead

calls. Additional data on these noise

sources will be obtained from

sonobuoys dropped from aircraft after

September 1.

For a more detailed description of

planned monitoring activities, please

refer to the application and supporting

document (Western Geophysical, 1998;

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, Western

Geophysical will estimate the number of

(1) 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) when no

monitoring observations were possible;

and (d) bowheads displaced seaward

from the main migration corridor.

Reporting

Western Geophysical 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 Western Geophysical

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 similar activities 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,

May 28, 1996) for open water seismic

operations in the Beaufort Sea, 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 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 Western Geophysical’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

and, therefore, the preparation of an

Environmental Impact Statement on this

action is not required by section 102(2)

of NEPA or its implementing

regulations.

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
27714 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 97 /Wednesday, May 20, 1998 / Notices

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, aerial survey

flights for bowhead whale assessments

will be initiated. 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 Western Geophysical 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 Western

Geophysical’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 14, 1998.

Patricia A. Montanio,

Deputy Director, Office of Protected

Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 98–13425 Filed 5–19–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 051398E]

Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management

Council; Meetings

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: The Mid-Atlantic Fishery

Management Council (Council) and its

Comprehensive Management

Committee; Committee Chairmen;

Information and Education Committee;

Habitat Committee; Executive

Committee; and Squid, Mackerel, and

Butterfish Committee will hold a public

meeting.

DATES: The meetings will be held on

Tuesday, June 2, 1998, to Thursday,

June 4, 1998. See SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION for specific dates and

times.

ADDRESSES: This meeting will be held at

the Sheraton Grand Hotel, Bicentennial

Park, New Bern, NC; telephone: 919–

638–3585.

Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery

Management Council, 300 S. New

Street, Dover, DE 19904; telephone:

302–674–2331.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christopher Moore, Ph.D., Acting

Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic

Fishery Management Council;

telephone: 302–674–2331, ext. 16.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

Tuesday, June 2, the Comprehensive

Management Committee will meet from

8:00–10:00 a.m. The Committee

Chairmen will meet from 10:00–11:00

a.m. The Information and Education

Committee will meet from 11:00 a.m.

until noon. The Habitat Committee,

together with the Dogfish Committee,

Surfclam and Ocean Quahog

Committee, Squid, Mackerel and

Butterfish Committee, Habitat Advisors,

and Scientific and Statistical

Committee, will meet from 1:00–5:00

p.m. On Wednesday, June 3, the

Executive Committee will meet from

7:00–9:00 a.m. Council will meet from

9:00–11:00 a.m. The Atlantic Mackerel,

Squid, and Butterfish Committee will

meet as a Council Committee of the

Whole from 11:00 until noon. Council

will meet from 1:00–2:00 p.m. to review

the Whiting Fishery Management Plan.

Council will meet from 2:00–5:00 p.m.,

together with the Atlantic States Marine

Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) Board,

to review Amendment 1 to the Bluefish

Fishery Management Plan. On

Thursday, June 4, Council will meet

from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m.

Agenda items for this meeting are:

Distribution and abundance and EFH

identification and recommendations on

dogfish, surfclams, ocean quahogs, and

squid, mackerel, butterfish; Review and

adoption of NMFS recommendations on

bluefish EFH; Review and hearing

adoption of NMFS consistency

amendment for consistency in Northeast

vessel permits (replacement and

upgrade); Adoption of mackerel limited

entry provisions for pubic hearing

document; Review and comment on

whiting, winter flounder, herring and

scallop management measures; Review

and adoption of Amendment 1 to the

Bluefish FMP for public hearing;

Review and adoption of Dogfish FMP

for public hearing; Review and adoption

of Monkfish FMP; Review

comprehensive management matrix;

Review Council newsletter, view

Council websight; hear committee

reports and other fishery management

matters.

Although other issues not contained

in this agenda may come before these

groups for discussion, in accordance

with the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act,

those issues may not be the subject of

formal action during this meeting.

Action will be restricted to those issues

specifically identified in the agenda

listed in this notice.

Special Accommodations

This meeting is physically accessible

to people with disabilities. Requests for

sign language interpretation or other

auxiliary aids should be directed to

Joanna Davis at the Council (see

ADDRESSES) at least 5 days prior to the

meeting date.

Dated: May 14, 1998.

Bruce C. Morehead,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 98–13370 Filed 5–19–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[051398D]

New England Fishery Management

Council; Public Meetings

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce