Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 19, 2022 / Notices 42999 

8See Initiation Notice (‘‘All firms listed below 

that wish to qualify for separate rate status in the 

administrative reviews involving NME countries 

must complete, as appropriate, either a separate rate 

application or certification, as described below.’’) 

9See 19 CFR 351.309(c). 

10See 19 CFR 351.309(d); see also Temporary 

Rule Modifying AD/CVD Service Requirements Due 

to COVID–19, 85 FR 17006, 17007 (March 26, 2020) 

(‘‘To provide adequate time for release of case briefs 

via ACCESS, E&C intends to schedule the due date 

for all rebuttal briefs to be 7 days after case briefs 

are filed (while these modifications remain in 

effect).’’). 

11See Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD 

Service Requirements Due to COVID–19; Extension 

of Effective Period, 85 FR 41363 (July 10, 2020). 

12 Id. 

13See Amended New Review. 

companies for which a review was 

requested and which did not 

demonstrate separate rate eligibility to 

be part of the China-wide entity.8

Accordingly, for the preliminary results, 

we consider Tianjin Tonghe and Ningbo 

Homey, neither of which submitted a 

separate rate application, to be part of 

the China-wide entity. 

Disclosure and Public Comment 

Normally, Commerce discloses the 

calculations used in its analysis to 

parties in a review within five days of 

the date of publication of the notice of 

preliminary results, in accordance with 

19 CFR 351.224(b). However, in this 

case, there are no calculations to 

disclose. 

Interested parties may submit case 

briefs no later than 30 days after the 

date of publication of these preliminary 

results of review.9 Rebuttal briefs may 

be filed no later than seven days after 

the written comments are filed, and all 

rebuttal comments must be limited to 

comments raised in the case briefs.10

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and 

(d)(2), parties who submit case or 

rebuttal briefs in this review are 

encouraged to submit with each 

argument: (1) a statement of the issue; 

(2) a brief summary of the argument; 

and (3) a table of authorities. Note that 

Commerce has temporarily modified 

certain of its requirements for serving 

documents containing business 

proprietary information, until further 

notice.11

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), 

interested parties who wish to request a 

hearing, limited to issues raised in the 

case and rebuttal briefs, must submit a 

request to the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, within 30 

days after the date of publication of this 

notice. Requests should contain the 

party’s name, address, telephone 

number, the number of participants, and 

a list of the issues to be discussed. If a 

request for a hearing is made, we intend 

to hold the hearing at the date and time 

to be determined.12 Parties should 

confirm by telephone the date, time, and 

location of the hearing two days before 

the scheduled date. 

Unless the deadline is otherwise 

extended, we intend to issue the final 

results of this review, which will 

include the results of our analysis of the 

issues raised in any briefs, within 120 

days of publication of these preliminary 

results in the Federal Register, pursuant 

to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, and 19 

CFR 351.213(h). 

Assessment Rates 

Upon issuance of the final results, 

Commerce will determine, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping (AD) duties 

on all appropriate entries covered by 

this review, in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.212(b). If Commerce continues to 

find that Tianjin Tonghe and Ningbo 

Homey are part of the China-wide entity 

in the final results, Commerce intends 

to instruct CBP to liquidate POR entries 

of subject merchandise from these 

companies at the China-wide rate. 

Moreover, if Commerce continues to 

make a no-shipment finding for Wah 

Yuen in the final results, any suspended 

entries of subject merchandise 

associated with Wah Yuen will also be 

liquidated at the China-wide rate. 

Commerce intends to issue assessment 

instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 

days after the date of publication of the 

final results of this review. If a timely 

summons is filed at the U.S. Court of 

International Trade, the assessment 

instructions will direct CBP not to 

liquidate relevant entries until the time 

for parties to file a request for a statutory 

injunction has expired (i.e., within 90 

days of publication). 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective for all 

shipments of the subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date of the final results of 

this administrative review, as provided 

for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) 

Wah Yuen’s cash deposit rate will 

continue to be its existing exporterspecific rate; 13 (2) for previously 

investigated or reviewed Chinese and 

non-Chinese exporters for which a 

review was not requested and that 

received a separate rate in a prior 

segment of this proceeding, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the 

existing exporter-specific rate; (3) for all 

Chinese exporters of subject 

merchandise that have not been found 

to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash 

deposit rate will be the rate for the 

China-wide entity; and (4) for all nonChinese exporters of subject 

merchandise that have not received 

their own rate, the cash deposit rate will 

be the rate applicable to the Chinese 

exporter that supplied that non-Chinese 

exporter. These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice also serves as a 

preliminary reminder to importers of 

their responsibility under 19 CFR 

351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding 

the reimbursement of AD duties prior to 

liquidation of the relevant entries 

during this review period. Failure to 

comply with this requirement could 

result in Commerce’s presumption that 

reimbursement of AD duties occurred 

and the subsequent assessment of 

double AD duties. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

We are issuing and publishing the 

preliminary results of this 

administrative review in accordance 

with sections 751(a)(l) and 777(i)(l) of 

the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213 and 19 

CFR 351.221(b)(4). 

Dated: July 12, 2022. 

Lisa W. Wang, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2022–15364 Filed 7–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[RTID 0648–XC157] 

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 


jspears on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
43000 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 19, 2022 / Notices 

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). 

of Authorization (LOA) has been issued 

to CGG for the take of marine mammals 

incidental to geophysical survey activity 

in the Gulf of Mexico. 

DATES: The LOA is effective from 

September 1, 2022, through April 30, 

2023. 

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: Ben 

Laws, 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 

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 

CGG plans to conduct a 3D ocean 

bottom node (OBN) survey of 

approximately 144 lease blocks in the 

central GOM (Green Canyon and Walker 

Ridge protraction areas), with 

approximate water depths ranging from 

100 to 2,500 meters (m). See Section F 

of the LOA application for a map of the 

area. 

CGG anticipates using two dual 

source vessels, towing airgun array 

sources consisting of either 32 elements, 

with a total volume of 5,110 cubic 

inches (in3), or 28 elements, with total 

volume of 4,470 in3. Please see CGG’s 

application for additional detail. 

Consistent with the preamble to the 

final rule, the survey effort proposed by 

CGG 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 3D OBN 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 3D OBN survey 

effort, largely due to the greater area 

covered by the modeled proxies. 

Summary descriptions of these modeled 

survey geometries are available in the 

preamble to the proposed rule (83 FR 

29212, 29220; June 22, 2018). Coil was 

selected as the best available proxy 

survey type in this case, because the 

spatial coverage of the planned survey 

is most similar to the coil survey 

pattern. The planned 3D OBN survey 

will involve two source vessels sailing 

along survey lines approximately 65 km 

in length. The coil survey pattern was 

assumed to cover approximately 144 

kilometers squared (km2) per day 

(compared with approximately 795 km2, 

199 km2, and 845 km2 per day for the 

2D, 3D NAZ, and 3D WAZ survey 

patterns, respectively). Among the 

different parameters of the modeled 

survey patterns (e.g., area covered, line 

spacing, number of sources, shot 

interval, total simulated pulses), NMFS 

considers area covered per day to be 

most influential on daily modeled 

exposures exceeding Level B 

harassment criteria. Although CGG is 

not proposing to perform a survey using 

the coil geometry, its planned 3D OBN 

survey is expected to cover 

approximately 100 km2 per day, 

meaning that the coil proxy is most 

representative of the effort planned by 

CGG in terms of predicted Level B 

harassment exposures. 

In addition, all available acoustic 

exposure modeling results assume use 

of a 72-element, 8,000 in3 array. Thus, 

estimated take numbers for this LOA are 

considered conservative due to 

differences in both the airgun array 

(maximum 32 elements, 5,110 in3) and 

the daily survey area planned by CGG 

(100 km2), as compared to those 

modeled for the rule. 

The survey will take place over 

approximately 90 days, including 65 

days of sound source operation. The 


jspears on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 19, 2022 / Notices 43001 

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). 

4However, note that these species have been 

observed over a greater range of water depths in the 

GOM than have killer whales. 

survey plan includes 20 days within 

Zone 2 and 45 days within Zone 5. The 

seasonal distribution of survey days is 

not known in advance. Therefore, the 

take estimates for each species are based 

on the season that produces the greater 

value. 

Additionally, 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. The approach used in the 

acoustic exposure modeling, in which 

seven modeling zones were defined over 

the U.S. GOM, necessarily averages finescale information about marine mammal 

distribution over the large area of each 

modeling zone. This can result in 

unrealistic projections regarding the 

likelihood of encountering particularly 

rare species and/or species not expected 

to occur outside particular habitats. 

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 certain 

marine mammal species produces 

results that are inconsistent with what 

is known regarding their occurrence in 

the GOM. Accordingly, we have 

adjusted the calculated take estimates 

for those species as described below. 

Rice’s whales (formerly known as 

GOM Bryde’s whales) 3 are mostly found 

in a ‘‘core habitat area’’ located in the 

northeastern GOM in waters between 

100–400 m depth along the continental 

shelf break (Rosel et al., 2016). (Note 

that this core habitat area is outside the 

scope of the rule.) However, whaling 

records suggest that Rice’s whales 

historically had a broader distribution 

within similar habitat parameters 

throughout the GOM (Reeves et al., 

2011; Rosel and Wilcox, 2014). In 

addition, habitat-based density 

modeling identified similar habitat (i.e., 

approximately 100–400 m water depths 

along the continental shelf break) as 

being potential Rice’s whale habitat 

(Roberts et al., 2016), although the core 

habitat area contained approximately 92 

percent of the predicted abundance of 

Rice’s whales. See discussion provided 

at, e.g., 83 FR 29212, 29228, 29280 (June 

22, 2018); 86 FR 5322, 5418 (January 19, 

2021). 

There are few data on Rice’s whale 

occurrence outside of the northeastern 

GOM core habitat area. There were two 

sightings of unidentified large baleen 

whales (recorded as Balaenoptera sp. or 

Bryde’s/sei whale) in 1992 in the 

western GOM during systematic survey 

effort and, more recently, a NOAA 

survey reported observation of a Rice’s 

whale in the western GOM in 2017 

(NMFS, 2018). There were five potential 

sightings of Rice’s whales by protected 

species observers (PSOs) aboard 

industry geophysical survey vessels 

west of New Orleans from 2010–2014, 

all within the 200–400 m isobaths 

(Rosel et al., 2021). In addition, 

sporadic, year-round recordings of 

Rice’s whale calls were made south of 

Louisiana within approximately the 

same depth range between 2016 and 

2017 (Soldevilla et al., in press). 

Although Rice’s whales may occur 

outside of the core habitat area, we 

expect that any such occurrence would 

be limited to the narrow band of 

suitable habitat described above (i.e., 

100–400 m) and that, based on the few 

available records, these occurrences 

would be rare. CGG’s planned activities 

will overlap this depth range, with 

approximately 18 percent of the area 

expected to be ensonified by the survey 

above root-mean-squared pressure 

received levels (RMS SPL) of 160 dB 

(referenced to 1 micropascal (re 1 mPa)) 

overlapping the 100–400 m isobaths. 

Therefore, while we expect take of 

Rice’s whale to be unlikely, there is 

some reasonable potential for take of 

Rice’s whale to occur in association 

with this survey. However, 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 

Rice’s whales would result in estimated 

take numbers that are inconsistent with 

the assumptions made in the rule 

regarding expected Rice’s whale take (86 

FR 5322, 5403; January 19, 2021). 

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). 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 (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 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 less than 

20 occasions during the 1992–2009 

NOAA surveys (Fraser’s dolphin and 

false killer whale).4 However, 

observational data collected by 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 


jspears on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
43002 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 19, 2022 / Notices 

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 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 to 1– 

30 m 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. 

In addition, as noted above in relation 

to the general take estimation 

methodology, the assumed proxy source 

(72-element, 8,000-in3 array) results in a 

significant overestimate of the actual 

potential for take to occur. NMFS’ 

determination in reflection of the 

information discussed above, which 

informed the final rule, is that use of the 

generic acoustic exposure modeling 

results for killer whales for this survey 

would 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 past authorizations, NMFS has 

often addressed situations involving the 

low likelihood of encountering a rare 

species such as Rice’s whales or killer 

whales in the GOM through 

authorization of take of a single group 

of average size (i.e., representing a 

single potential encounter). See 83 FR 

63268; December 7, 2018. See also 86 

FR 29090; May 28, 2021 and 85 FR 

55645; September 9, 2020. For the 

reasons expressed above, NMFS 

determined that a single encounter of 

Rice’s whales or killer whales is more 

likely than the model-generated 

estimates and has authorized take 

associated with a single group 

encounter (i.e., up to 2 and 7 animals, 

respectively). 

Based on the results of our analysis, 

NMFS has determined that the level of 

taking authorized through the LOA is 

consistent with the findings made for 

the total taking allowable under the 

regulations for the affected species or 

stocks of marine mammals. See Table 1 

in this notice and Table 9 of the 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 

are determined as described above in 

the Summary of Request and Analysis 

section. Subsequently, the total 

incidents of harassment for each species 

are multiplied by scalar ratios to 

produce a derived product that better 

reflects the number of individuals likely 

to be taken within a survey (as 

compared to the total number of 

instances of take), accounting for the 

likelihood that some individual marine 

mammals may be taken on more than 

one day (see 86 FR 5322, 5404; January 

19, 2021). The output of this scaling, 

where appropriate, is incorporated into 

adjusted total take estimates that are the 

basis for NMFS’ small numbers 

determinations, as depicted in Table 1. 

This product is 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 assessment 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 Scaled take 1 Abundance 2 Percent abundance 

Rice’s whale ..................................................................................................... 2 n/a 51 3.9 

Sperm whale .................................................................................................... 1,184 500.7 2,207 22.7 

Kogia spp ......................................................................................................... 3 448 136.1 4,373 3.7 

Beaked whales ................................................................................................ 5,224 527.6 3,768 14.0 

Rough-toothed dolphin .................................................................................... 1,206 346.3 4,853 7.1 

Bottlenose dolphin ........................................................................................... 36,314 10,422.2 176,108 5.9 

Clymene dolphin .............................................................................................. 2,528 725.4 11,895 6.1 

Atlantic spotted dolphin ................................................................................... 6,628 1,902.3 74,785 2.5 

Pantropical spotted dolphin ............................................................................. 11,471 3,292.3 102,361 3.2 

Spinner dolphin ................................................................................................ 3,073 882.1 25,114 3.5 

Striped dolphin ................................................................................................. 987 283.3 5,229 5.4 

Fraser’s dolphin ............................................................................................... 292 83.9 1,665 5.0 

Risso’s dolphin ................................................................................................. 743 219.3 3,764 5.8 

Melon-headed whale ....................................................................................... 1,661 489.9 7,003 7.0 

Pygmy killer whale ........................................................................................... 391 115.3 2,126 5.4 

False killer whale ............................................................................................. 644 190.0 3,204 5.9 

Killer whale ...................................................................................................... 7 n/a 267 2.6


jspears on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 19, 2022 / Notices 43003 

TABLE 1—TAKE ANALYSIS—Continued 

Species Authorized 

take Scaled take 1 Abundance 2 Percent abundance 

Short-finned pilot whale ................................................................................... 480 141.7 1,981 7.2 

1Scalar ratios were applied to ‘‘Authorized Take’’ values as described at 86 FR 5322, 5404 (January 19, 2021) to derive scaled take numbers 

shown here. 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. 3 Includes 24 takes by Level A harassment and 424 takes by Level B harassment. Scalar ratio is applied to takes by Level B harassment only; 

small numbers determination made on basis of scaled Level B harassment take plus authorized Level A harassment take. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of CGG’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 and therefore 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 

CGG authorizing the take of marine 

mammals incidental to its geophysical 

survey activity, as described above. 

Dated: July 13, 2022. 

Catherine G. Marzin, 

Deputy Director, Office of Protected 

Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2022–15310 Filed 7–18–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

Review and Approval; Comment 

Request; Reporting Requirements for 

Commercial Fisheries Authorization 

Under Section 118 of the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act 

AGENCY: National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of information collection, 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Commerce, in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA), invites the general public and 

other Federal agencies to comment on 

proposed, and continuing information 

collections, which helps us assess the 

impact of our information collection 

requirements and minimize the public’s 

reporting burden. The purpose of this 

notice is to allow for 60 days of public 

comment preceding submission of the 

collection to OMB. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, 

comments regarding this proposed 

information collection must be received 

on or before September 19, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

invited to submit written comments to 

Adrienne Thomas, NOAA PRA Officer, 

at Adrienne.thomas@noaa.gov. Please 

reference OMB Control Number 0648– 

0292 in the subject line of your 

comments. Do not submit Confidential 

Business Information or otherwise 

sensitive or protected information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

specific questions related to collection 

activities should be directed to Jaclyn 

Taylor, NOAA National Marine 

Fisheries Service, Office of Protected 

Resources, 1315 East-West Highway, 

Silver Spring, MD 20910; (301) 427– 

8402; or Jaclyn.Taylor@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

This request is for an extension of a 

currently approved information 

collection and is sponsored by National 

Marine Fisheries Service Office of 

Protected Resources. 

The Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.; MMPA or the 

Act) mandates the protection and 

conservation of marine mammals and 

makes the taking of marine mammals, 

except under limited exceptions, a 

violation of the Act. MMPA section 118 

provides an exception to that 

prohibition for taking of marine 

mammals incidental to commercial 

fishing operations subject to 

requirements listed in that section. The 

owner of any fishing vessel engaged in 

any fishery identified by the National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as 

having either frequent (Category I) or 

occasional (Category II) takes of a 

marine mammal is to register with the 

Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) in 

order to obtain an authorization for the 

purpose of lawfully, incidentally taking 

marine mammals. Fishers operating in 

fisheries identified by NMFS as having 

only a remote chance (Category III) of 

taking marine mammals need not 

register for such an authorization. 

The owner or operator of a 

commercial fishing vessel, regardless of 

the classification of the fishery, is 

required under the Act to report all 

incidental mortality and injury of 

marine mammals in the course of 

commercial fishing operations. 

Supplying the information within 48- 

hours after the end of a fishing trip is 

mandated under Section 118(e) of the 

MMPA and is needed by NMFS to 

determine the correct category 

placement for fisheries. MMPA section 

118(c) requires NMFS to reexamine the 

classification of fisheries based on 

information gathered under the MMPA, 

including these injury and mortality 

reports from fishermen. 

Minor revisions are being made to the 

form to clarify the instructions for 

completing the ‘‘Description of the 

mortality/injury incident’’ 

(DESCRIPTION OF UNKNOWN 

SPECIES OR CIRCUMSTANCES OF 

MORTALITY/INJURY INCIDENT field) 

and the ‘‘Coast Guard document 

number’’ (COAST GUARD DOCUMENT 

NO. or VESSEL’S STATE 

REGISTRATION NO field). 

II. Method of Collection 

Respondents have a choice of either 

electronic or paper forms. Methods of 

submittal include online forms, email of 

electronic or scanned forms, mail and 

facsimile transmission of paper forms. 

III. Data 

OMB Control Number: 0648–0292. 

Form Number(s): None. 

Type of Review: Regular submission 

(extension of currently approved 

collection). 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations; Individuals or 


jspears on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES