52638 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 22, 2021 / Notices 

specified performance requirements 

outlined in § 648.87(b)(4), including 

required coverage levels, in order to 

maintain eligibility. We must notify 

service providers, in writing, if NMFS 

withdraws approval for any reason. 

Approved Monitoring Service Providers 

On February 4, 2021, NMFS approved 

6 companies to provide monitoring 

services to the Northeast multispecies 

sectors in fishing years 2021 and 2022. 

Four of the six companies are approved 

to provide both at-sea and electronic 

monitoring services: A.I.S., Inc.; East 

West Technical Services, LLC; Fathom 

Research, LLC; and Saltwater, Inc. 

NMFS approved the other two 

companies to provide electronic 

monitoring services: Flywire Cameras 

and Teem Fish. 

Two additional companies also 

applied to provide electronic 

monitoring services, but we required 

additional information to complete their 

applications prior to making a 

determination. One company, New 

England Marine Monitoring, has since 

submitted a revised and complete 

application for our consideration. We 

approved New England Marine 

Monitoring to provide electronic 

monitoring services in fishing years 

2021 and 2022 because the applicant 

has met the application requirements 

and documented its ability to comply 

with service provider standards. The 

revised list of approved monitoring 

providers for fishing years 2021 and 

2022 is provided in Table 1. 

There will be an opportunity in the 

fall of 2021 for additional monitoring 

companies to apply for approval to 

provide at-sea and electronic monitoring 

services in fishing year 2022. We will 

closely monitor the performance of 

approved providers, and we will 

withdraw approval during the current 

approval term, or disapprove a provider 

in future fishing years, if we determine 

performance standards are not being 

met. 

TABLE 1—APPROVED PROVIDERS FOR FISHING YEARS 2021 AND 2022 

Provider Services * Address Phone Fax Website 

A.I.S., Inc .............. ASM/EM 540 Hawthorn St, Dartmouth, 

MA 02747.

508–990–9054 508–990–9055 https://aisobservers.com/. 

East West Technical Services, 

LLC.

ASM/EM 91 Point Judith Rd., Suite 26 

Unit 347, Narragansett, RI 

02882.

860–910–4957 860–223–6005 https://www.ewts.com/. 

Fathom Resources, LLC.ASM/EM 855 Aquidneck Ave., Unit 9, 

Middletown, RI 02842.

508–990–0997 508–991–7372 https://fathomresources.com/. 

Flywire Cameras .. EM P.O. BOX 55048, Lexington, 

KY 40511.

888–315–7796 502–861–6568 https://www.flywirecameras.com/. 

Saltwater, Inc ....... ASM/EM 733 N St., Anchorage, AK 

99501.

907–276–3241 907–258–5999 https://www.saltwaterinc.com/. 

Teem Fish ............ EM 90–425 Carrall St., Vancouver, 

BC V6B 6E3, Canada.

778–884–2598 ........................ https://teem.fish/. 

New England Marine Monitoring.EM 350 Commercial St., Portland, 

ME 04101.

508–269–8138 ........................ https://www.nemarinemonitoring.com/. 

* ASM/EM = At-sea and electronic monitoring; EM = Electronic monitoring only. 

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

Dated: September 16, 2021. 

Jennifer M. Wallace, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–20463 Filed 9–21–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB406] 

Taking and Importing Marine 

Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals 

Incidental to Geophysical Surveys 

Related to Oil and Gas Activities in the 

Gulf of Mexico 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of issuance of Letter of 

Authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA), as amended, its implementing 

regulations, and NMFS’ MMPA 

Regulations for Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Geophysical 

Surveys Related to Oil and Gas 

Activities in the Gulf of Mexico, 

notification is hereby given that a Letter 

of Authorization (LOA) has been issued 

to Anadarko Petroleum Corporation 

(Anadarko) for the take of marine 

mammals incidental to geophysical 

survey activity in the Gulf of Mexico. 

DATES: The LOA is effective from 

September 18, 2021 through March 17, 

2022. 

ADDRESSES: The LOA, LOA request, and 

supporting documentation are available 

online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

action/incidental-take-authorization-oiland-gas-industry-geophysical-surveyactivity-gulf-mexico. In case of problems 

accessing these documents, please call 

the contact listed below (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim 

Corcoran, Office of Protected Resources, 

NMFS, (301) 427–8401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

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

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

the Secretary of Commerce to allow, 

upon request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of small numbers of 

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) within a specified 

geographical region if certain findings 

are made and either regulations are 

issued or, if the taking is limited to 

harassment, a notice of a proposed 

authorization is provided to the public 

for review. 

An authorization for incidental 

takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 

that the taking will have a negligible 

impact on the species or stock(s), will 

not have an unmitigable adverse impact 

on the availability of the species or 

stock(s) for subsistence uses (where 

relevant), and if the permissible 

methods of taking and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of such takings are set 

forth. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 22, 2021 / Notices 52639 

1For purposes of acoustic exposure modeling, the 

GOM was divided into seven zones. Zone 1 is not 

included in the geographic scope of the rule. 2For purposes of acoustic exposure modeling, 

seasons include Winter (December–March) and 

Summer (April–November). 

impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact 

resulting from the specified activity that 

cannot be reasonably expected to, and is 

not reasonably likely to, adversely affect 

the species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival. 

Except with respect to certain 

activities not pertinent here, the MMPA 

defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any act of 

pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which 

(i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

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

the potential to disturb a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild by causing disruption of behavioral 

patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering (Level B 

harassment). 

On January 19, 2021, we issued a final 

rule with regulations to govern the 

unintentional taking of marine 

mammals incidental to geophysical 

survey activities conducted by oil and 

gas industry operators, and those 

persons authorized to conduct activities 

on their behalf (collectively ‘‘industry 

operators’’), in Federal waters of the 

U.S. Gulf of Mexico (GOM) over the 

course of 5 years (86 FR 5322; January 

19, 2021). The rule was based on our 

findings that the total taking from the 

specified activities over the 5-year 

period will have a negligible impact on 

the affected species or stock(s) of marine 

mammals and will not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of those species or stocks for 

subsistence uses. The rule became 

effective on April 19, 2021. 

Our regulations at 50 CFR 217.180 et 

seq. allow for the issuance of LOAs to 

industry operators for the incidental 

take of marine mammals during 

geophysical survey activities and 

prescribe the permissible methods of 

taking and other means of effecting the 

least practicable adverse impact on 

marine mammal species or stocks and 

their habitat (often referred to as 

mitigation), as well as requirements 

pertaining to the monitoring and 

reporting of such taking. Under 50 CFR 

217.186(e), issuance of an 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 and a 

determination that the amount of take 

authorized under the LOA is of no more 

than small numbers. 

Summary of Request and Analysis 

Anadarko plans to conduct a zero 

offset vertical seismic profile (VSP) 

survey after reaching total depth at 

Lease Block 129 in the Mississippi 

Canyon. (See map in Section F of 

Anadarko’s application.) Anadarko 

plans to use one of four possible airgun 

arrays for this survey: A 12-element 

array, with a total volume of 2,400 cubic 

inches (in3); an array consisting of 6 

elements with total volume of 1,500 in3; 

an array consisting of 6 elements, with 

a total volume of 1,200 in3; or an array 

consisting of 8 elements with a total 

volume of 1,170 in3. Please see 

Anadarko’s application for additional 

detail. 

Consistent with the preamble to the 

final rule, the survey effort proposed by 

Anadarko in its LOA request was used 

to develop LOA-specific take estimates 

based on the acoustic exposure 

modeling results described in the 

preamble (86 FR 5322, 5398; January 19, 

2021). In order to generate the 

appropriate take number for 

authorization, the following information 

was considered: (1) Survey type; (2) 

location (by modeling zone 1); (3) 

number of days; and (4) season.2 The 

acoustic exposure modeling performed 

in support of the rule provides 24-hour 

exposure estimates for each species, 

specific to each modeled survey type in 

each zone and season. 

No VSP surveys were included in the 

modeled survey types, and use of 

existing proxies (i.e., 2D, 3D NAZ, 3D 

WAZ, Coil) is generally conservative for 

use in evaluation of VSP survey effort. 

Summary descriptions of these modeled 

survey geometries are available in the 

preamble to the proposed rule (83 FR 

29212, 29220; June 22, 2018). Zero offset 

VSP surveys are significantly different 

from modeled survey geometries in that 

they are conducted from a stationary or 

near-stationary deployment very close 

to an active drilling platform. For this 

survey, the seismic source array will be 

deployed from a drillship at or near the 

borehole, with the seismic receivers 

(i.e., geophones) deployed in the 

borehole on wireline at specified depth 

intervals. Use of the 2D proxy for zero 

offset VSP surveys is expected to be 

significantly conservative. In addition, 

all available acoustic exposure modeling 

results assume use of a 72 element, 

8,000 in3 array. In this case, take 

numbers authorized through the LOA 

are considered very conservative (i.e., 

they likely overestimate take) due to 

differences in both the airgun array and 

the survey geometry planned by 

Anadarko, as compared to those 

modeled for the rule. The survey is 

planned to occur for 5 days in Zone 5. 

Although the survey is planned to occur 

in September 2021, the LOA is effective 

from September 18, 2021–March 17, 

2022 to account for potential delay. 

Therefore, the take estimates for each 

species are based on the season that has 

the greater value for the species (i.e., 

winter or summer). 

For some species, take estimates 

based solely on the modeling yielded 

results that are not realistically likely to 

occur when considered in light of other 

relevant information available during 

the rulemaking process regarding 

marine mammal occurrence in the 

GOM. Thus, although the modeling 

conducted for the rule is a natural 

starting point for estimating take, our 

rule acknowledged that other 

information could be considered (see, 

e.g., 86 FR 5322, 5442 (January 19, 

2021), discussing the need to provide 

flexibility and make efficient use of 

previous public and agency review of 

other information and identifying that 

additional public review is not 

necessary unless the model or inputs 

used differ substantively from those that 

were previously reviewed by NMFS and 

the public). For this survey, NMFS has 

other relevant information reviewed 

during the rulemaking that indicates use 

of the acoustic exposure modeling to 

generate a take estimate for killer whales 

produces results inconsistent with what 

is known regarding their occurrence in 

the GOM. Accordingly, we have 

adjusted the calculated take estimates 

for that species as described below. 

Killer whales are the most rarely 

encountered species in the GOM, 

typically in deep waters of the central 

GOM (Roberts et al., 2015; Maze-Foley 

and Mullin, 2006). The approach used 

in the acoustic exposure modeling, in 

which seven modeling zones were 

defined over the U.S. GOM, necessarily 

averages fine-scale information about 

marine mammal distribution over the 

large area of each modeling zone. NMFS 

has determined that the approach 

results in unrealistic projections 

regarding the likelihood of encountering 

killer whales. 

As discussed in the final rule, the 

density models produced by Roberts et 

al. (2016) provide the best available 

scientific information regarding 

predicted density patterns of cetaceans 

in the U.S. GOM. The predictions 

represent the output of models derived 

from multi-year observations and 

associated environmental parameters 

that incorporate corrections for 

detection bias. However, in the case of 

killer whales, the model is informed by 

few data, as indicated by the coefficient 

of variation associated with the 

abundance predicted by the model 

52640 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 22, 2021 / Notices 

3However, note that these species have been 

observed over a greater range of water depths in the 

GOM than have killer whales. 

(0.41, the second-highest of any GOM 

species model; Roberts et al., 2016). The 

model’s authors noted the expected 

non-uniform distribution of this rarelyencountered species (as discussed 

above) and expressed that, due to the 

limited data available to inform the 

model, it ‘‘should be viewed cautiously’’ 

(Roberts et al., 2015). 

NOAA surveys in the GOM from 

1992–2009 reported only 16 sightings of 

killer whales, with an additional three 

encounters during more recent survey 

effort from 2017–18 (Waring et al., 2013; 

www.boem.gov/gommapps). Two other 

species were also observed on fewer 

than 20 occasions during the 1992–2009 

NOAA surveys (Fraser’s dolphin and 

false killer whale 3). However, 

observational data collected by 

protected species observers (PSOs) on 

industry geophysical survey vessels 

from 2002–2015 distinguish the killer 

whale in terms of rarity. During this 

period, killer whales were encountered 

on only 10 occasions, whereas the next 

most rarely encountered species 

(Fraser’s dolphin) was recorded on 69 

occasions (Barkaszi and Kelly, 2019). 

The false killer whale and pygmy killer 

whale were the next most rarely 

encountered species, with 110 records 

each. The killer whale was the species 

with the lowest detection frequency 

during each period over which PSO data 

were synthesized (2002–2008 and 2009– 

2015). This information qualitatively 

informed our rulemaking process, as 

discussed at 86 FR 5322, 5334 (January 

19, 2021), and similarly informs our 

analysis here. 

The rarity of encounter during seismic 

surveys is not likely to be the product 

of high bias on the probability of 

detection. Unlike certain cryptic species 

with high detection bias, such as Kogia 

spp. or beaked whales, or deep-diving 

species with high availability bias, such 

as beaked whales or sperm whales, 

killer whales are typically available for 

detection when present and are easily 

observed. Roberts et al. (2015) stated 

that availability is not a major factor 

affecting detectability of killer whales 

from shipboard surveys, as they are not 

a particularly long-diving species. Baird 

et al. (2005) reported that mean dive 

durations for 41 fish-eating killer whales 

for dives greater than or equal to 1 

minute in duration was 2.3–2.4 minutes, 

and Hooker et al. (2012) reported that 

killer whales spent 78 percent of their 

time at depths between 0–10 meters (m). 

Similarly, Kvadsheim et al. (2012) 

reported data from a study of four killer 

whales, noting that the whales 

performed 20 times as many dives 1–30 

m in depth than to deeper waters, with 

an average depth during those most 

common dives of approximately 3 m. 

In summary, killer whales are the 

most rarely encountered species in the 

GOM and typically occur only in 

particularly deep water. While this 

information is reflected through the 

density model informing the acoustic 

exposure modeling results, there is 

relatively high uncertainty associated 

with the model for this species, and the 

acoustic exposure modeling applies 

mean distribution data over areas where 

the species is in fact less likely to occur. 

NMFS’ determination in reflection of 

the data discussed above, which 

informed the final rule, is that use of the 

generic acoustic exposure modeling 

results for killer whales will generally 

result in estimated take numbers that 

are inconsistent with the assumptions 

made in the rule regarding expected 

killer whale take (86 FR 5322, 5403; 

January 19, 2021). In this case, use of 

the acoustic exposure modeling 

produces an estimate of three killer 

whale exposures. Given the foregoing, it 

is unlikely that even one killer whale 

would be encountered during this 5-day 

survey, and accordingly no take of killer 

whales is authorized through this LOA. 

Based on the results of our analysis, 

NMFS has determined that the level of 

taking expected for this survey and 

authorized through the LOA is 

consistent with the findings made for 

the total taking allowable under the 

regulations. See Table 1 in this notice 

and Table 9 of the final rule (86 FR 

5322; January 19, 2021). 

Small Numbers Determination 

Under the GOM rule, NMFS may not 

authorize incidental take of marine 

mammals in an LOA if it will exceed 

‘‘small numbers.’’ In short, when an 

acceptable estimate of the individual 

marine mammals taken is available, if 

the estimated number of individual 

animals taken is up to, but not greater 

than, one-third of the best available 

abundance estimate, NMFS will 

determine that the numbers of marine 

mammals taken of a species or stock are 

small. For more information please see 

NMFS’ discussion of the MMPA’s small 

numbers requirement provided in the 

final rule (86 FR 5322, 5438; January 19, 

2021). 

The take numbers for authorization, 

which are determined as described 

above, are used by NMFS in making the 

necessary small numbers 

determinations, through comparison 

with the best available abundance 

estimates (see discussion at 86 FR 5322, 

5391; January 19, 2021). For this 

comparison, NMFS’ approach is to use 

the maximum theoretical population, 

determined through review of current 

stock abundance reports (SAR; 

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/ 

marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments) and modelpredicted abundance information 

(https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/ 

Duke/GOM/). For the latter, for taxa 

where a density surface model could be 

produced, we use the maximum mean 

seasonal (i.e., 3-month) abundance 

prediction for purposes of comparison 

as a precautionary smoothing of monthto-month fluctuations and in 

consideration of a corresponding lack of 

data in the literature regarding seasonal 

distribution of marine mammals in the 

GOM. Information supporting the small 

numbers determinations is provided in 

Table 1. 

TABLE 1—TAKE ANALYSIS

Species Authorized 

take 1 Abundance 2 Percent abundance 

Bryde’s whale 3 ............................................................................................................................ 0 51 n/a 

Kogia sp ....................................................................................................................................... 4 66 4,373 1.5 

Beaked whales ............................................................................................................................ 944 3,768 25.1 

Bottlenose dolphin ....................................................................................................................... 648 176,108 0.4 

Short-finned pilot whale ............................................................................................................... 70 1,981 3.5 

Sperm whale ................................................................................................................................ 178 2,207 8.1 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ............................................................................................................... 245 74,785 0.3 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 181 / Wednesday, September 22, 2021 / Notices 52641 

TABLE 1—TAKE ANALYSIS—Continued 

Species Authorized 

take 1 Abundance 2 Percent abundance 

Clymene dolphin .......................................................................................................................... 379 11,895 3.2 

False killer whale ......................................................................................................................... 78 3,204 2.4 

Fraser’s dolphin ........................................................................................................................... 5 65 1,665 2.5 

Killer whale .................................................................................................................................. 0 267 n/a 

Melon-headed whale ................................................................................................................... 243 7,003 3.5 

Pantropical spotted dolphin ......................................................................................................... 1,719 102,361 1.7 

Pygmy killer whale ....................................................................................................................... 49 2,126 2.3 

Risso’s dolphin ............................................................................................................................. 114 3,764 3.0 

Rough-toothed dolphin ................................................................................................................ 113 4,853 2.3 

Spinner dolphin ............................................................................................................................ 461 25,114 1.8 

Striped dolphin ............................................................................................................................. 148 5,229 2.8 

1Scalar ratios were not applied in this case due to brief survey duration. 

2Best abundance estimate. For most taxa, the best abundance estimate for purposes of comparison with take estimates is considered here to 

be the model-predicted abundance (Roberts et al., 2016). For those taxa where a density surface model predicting abundance by month was 

produced, the maximum mean seasonal abundance was used. For those taxa where abundance is not predicted by month, only mean annual 

abundance is available. For Rice’s whale and killer whale, the larger estimated SAR abundance estimate is used. 3The final rule refers to the GOM Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni). These whales were subsequently described as a new species, Rice’s 

whale (Balaenoptera ricei) (Rosel et al., 2021). 4 Includes 1 take by Level A harassment and 65 takes by Level B harassment. 

5 Modeled take of 41 increased to account for potential encounter with group of average size (Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006). 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of Anadarko’s proposed survey 

activity described in its LOA 

application and the anticipated take of 

marine mammals, NMFS finds that 

small numbers of marine mammals will 

be taken relative to the affected species 

or stock sizes (i.e., less than one-third of 

the best available abundance estimate) 

and therefore the taking is of no more 

than small numbers. 

Authorization 

NMFS has determined that the level 

of taking for this LOA request is 

consistent with the findings made for 

the total taking allowable under the 

incidental take regulations and that the 

amount of take authorized under the 

LOA is of no more than small numbers. 

Accordingly, we have issued an LOA to 

Anadarko authorizing the take of marine 

mammals incidental to its geophysical 

survey activity, as described above. 

Dated: September 16, 2021. 

Kimberly Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–20465 Filed 9–21–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB437] 

Fisheries of the South Atlantic; South 

Atlantic Fishery Management Council; 

Public Meetings 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of Seminar Series 

presentation. 

SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Fishery 

Management Council (Council) will host 

a presentation on Tuna Management 

Strategy Evaluation via webinar October 

12, 2021. 

DATES: The webinar presentation will be 

held on Tuesday, October 12, 2021, 

from 1 p.m. until 2:30 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: 

Meeting address: The presentation 

will be provided via webinar. The 

webinar is open to members of the 

public. Information, including a link to 

webinar registration will be posted on 

the Council’s website at: https://

safmc.net/safmc-meetings/othermeetings/ as it becomes available. 

Council address: South Atlantic 

Fishery Management Council, 4055 

Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N. 

Charleston, SC 29405. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim 

Iverson, Public Information Officer, 

SAFMC; phone: (843) 302–8439 or toll 

free: (866) SAFMC–10; fax: (843) 769– 

4520; email: kim.iverson@safmc.net. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Council will host a presentation from 

National Marine Fisheries Service on 

Tuna Management Strategy Evaluation 

(MSE). The Council is considering using 

MSEs in future management and this 

will provide a background on how 

MSEs have been used in other fisheries. 

A question and answer session will 

follow the presentation. Members of the 

public will have the opportunity to 

participate in the discussion. The 

presentation is for informational 

purposes only and no management 

actions will be taken. 

Special Accommodations 

The meeting is physically accessible 

to people with disabilities. Requests for 

auxiliary aids should be directed to the 

Council office (see ADDRESSES) 3 days 

prior to the meeting. 

Note: The times and sequence 

specified in this agenda are subject to 

change. 

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

Dated: September 17, 2021. 

Tracey L. Thompson, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–20529 Filed 9–21–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XB436] 

Pacific Fishery Management Council; 

Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery 

Management Council’s (Pacific Council) 

Highly Migratory Species Management 

Team (HMSMT) is holding a meeting, 

which is open to the public. 

DATES: The online meeting will be held 

on Tuesday, October 12, 2021, 

beginning at 1 p.m. (Pacific Daylight