Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2005 / Notices 49915

Summary of Activity Under the Current 

LOAs

In compliance with the 2004–2005 

LOAs, on May 28, 2005, the Navy 

submitted the annual report on 

SURTASS LFA sonar operations. A 

summary of that report (Navy, 2005) 

follows.

During the period between February 

16, 2004 and February 15, 2005 (the 

reporting period required under the 

2004 LOAs), the R/V Cory Chouest

operated in the Philippine Sea in the 

winter and spring of 2004. The RV Cory 

Chouest conducted four training 

missions covering a period of 38.8 days 

with 93.3 hours of transmissions by the 

LFA sonar array. The purposes of the 

training missions are to provide fully 

functional hardware and software, 

extensive personnel training, job 

experience, and operational/system 

monitoring in a variety of LFA sonar 

mission scenarios and acoustic 

environments. All LFA sonar operations 

included the operation of the HighFrequency Marine Mammal Monitoring 

(HF/M3) sonar and compliance with all 

mitigation requirements.

The second SURTASS LFA sonar 

system, onboard the USNS 

IMPECCABLE (T-AGOS 23), 

commenced sea trials in late February 

2004. During the spring and summer of 

2004, the USNS IMPECCABLE 

conducted five training missions in the 

Philippine Sea and the northwest 

Pacific Ocean covering a period of 26.2 

days with 63.0 hours of transmissions 

by the LFA array. All LFA sonar 

operations included the operation of the 

HF/M3 sonar and compliance with all 

mitigation requirements.

In summary, SURTASS LFA sonar 

operations from February 16, 2004 to 

February 15, 2005 consisted of nine 

training missions totaling 65.1 days of 

operations with 156.3 hours of active 

transmissions by the LFA sonar array. 

Operations were conducted at three 

different sites in the Philippine sea 

located in the Kuroshio Current and 

North Pacific Tropical Gyre West 

Provinces.

Summary of Monitoring Under the 

2004–2005 LOAs

In the annual report, the Navy 

provides a post-operational assessment 

of whether incidental harassment 

occurred within the LFA sonar 

mitigation and buffer zones and 

estimates of the percentages of marine 

mammal stocks possibly harassed using 

predictive modeling based on dates/

times/location of actual operations, 

system characteristics, oceanographic 

conditions, and animal demographics. 

Post-operational incidental harassment 

estimates indicate that there were no 

marine mammal exposures to received 

levels at or above 180 dB (Navy, 2005).

The percentage of marine mammal 

stocks estimated to be exposed to noise 

between 120 and 180 dB (re 1 microPa) 

from the LFA sonar array, both pre- and 

post-operational risk assessment 

estimates, were all below the 12–percent 

maximum percentage authorized under 

the LOAs. The majority of the estimates 

were below 1 percent; however, there 

were marine mammal stocks at all three 

sites with more than 1 percent estimated 

exposed to between 120 and 180 dB: (1) 

east of Japan, the short-finned pilot 

whale (1.67 percent) and the false killer 

whale (1.58 percent); (2) in the North 

Philippine Sea, the short-finned pilot 

whale (1.50 percent); and (3) in the West 

Philippine Sea, the Pacific white-sided 

dolphin (9.72 percent), the melonheaded whale (9.46 percent), the false 

killer whale (4.22 percent), Risso’s 

dolphin (3.6 percent), the short-finned 

pilot whale (3.46 percent), the 

humpback whale (3.27 percent), the 

bottlenose dolphin (2.45 percent), the 

Minke whale (1.75 percent), the pygmy 

killer whale (1.69 percent), Blainville’s 

beaked whale (1.27 percent), and the 

rough-toothed dolphin (1.10 percent).

During the nine missions, no sightings 

of marine mammals were noted by the 

trained personnel responsible for 

marine animal monitoring, and no 

marine mammal vocalizations were 

identified on the SURTASS passive 

sonar displays.

The HF/M3 sonar operated 

continuously during the course of the 

missions in accordance with the LOAs. 

As required by the LOAs, the HF/M3 

sonar was ‘‘ramped up’’ prior to 

operations. During seven of the nine 

missions, there were 12 HF/M3 alerts 

that were identified as possible marine 

mammal detections. No additional 

correlating data were available to further 

verify, identify, or clarify these 

detections. Because these detections met 

the minimum shutdown criteria (i.e., 

multiple detections (two or more) 

within the same area), the Navy’s 

requisite protocols were followed, and 

LFA sonar transmissions were 

suspended a total of 12 times. In 

addition, during one mission there were 

two suspensions of LFA sonar 

operations due to HF/M3 sonar software 

failures.

Authorization

Accordingly, NMFS has issued two 

LOAs to the U.S. Navy, authorizing the 

incidental harassment of marine 

mammals incidental to operating the 

two SURTASS LFA sonar systems for 

training, testing and routine military 

operations. Issuance of these two LOAs 

is based on findings, described in the 

preamble to the final rule (67 FR 46712, 

July 16, 2002) and supported by 

information contained in the Navy’s 

required annual report on SURTASS 

LFA sonar, that the activities described 

under these two LOAs will have no 

more than a negligible impact on marine 

mammal stocks and will not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the affected marine 

mammal stocks for subsistence uses. 

These LOAs also comply with the 

NDAA amendments to the MMPA.

These LOAs remain valid through 

August 15, 2006, provided the Navy 

remains in conformance with the 

conditions of the regulations and the 

LOAs, and the mitigation, monitoring, 

and reporting requirements described in 

50 CFR 216.184–216.186 (67 FR 46712, 

July 16, 2002) and in the LOAs are 

undertaken.

Dated: August 22, 2005.

Michael Payne,

Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 05–16938 Filed 8–24–05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary; Defense 

Science Board

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee 

meeting; improvised explosive devices 

(IEDs). 

SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board 

Task Force on Improvised Explosive 

Devices (IEDs) will meet in closed 

session on September 13, 2005, at 

Strategic Analysis, Inc., 3601 Wilson 

Boulevard, Arlington, VA. The Task 

Force will explore methods and 

techniques to significantly reduce the 

effects of IEDs on U.S. and coalition 

forces in operations such as are 

currently being conducted in Operation 

Iraqi Freedom (OIF). The Task Force 

should examine ways to counter the use 

as well as mitigate the consequences of 

IEDs. The Task Force should examine 

ways to counter the use as well as 

mitigate the consequences of IEDs.

DATES: September 13, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Strategic Analysis, Inc., 

3601 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTC 

Scott Dolgoff, USA, Defense Science 

Board, 3140 Defense Pentagon, Room 

3C553, Washington, DC 20301–3140, via 

49916 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2005 / Notices 

e-mail at scott.dolgoff@osd.mil, or via 

phone at (703) 571–0082.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

mission of the Defense Science Board is 

to advise the Secretary of Defense and 

the Under Secretary of Defense for 

Acquisition, Technology & Logistics on 

scientific and technical matters as they 

affect the perceived needs of the 

Department of Defense. At these 

meetings, the Defense Science Board 

Task Force will consider the entire 

spectrum of intervention objects, 

including deterrence, dissuasion, 

remote pre-detonation, remote 

disarming, elimination of sources and/

or manufacturing facilities, discovery 

and remove of critical personnel, 

discovery and removal of employed 

devices, or anything else that has the 

end effect of either lowering the value 

or raising the cost of employing IEDs as 

an insurgent or terrorist weapons of 

choice. The Task Force will have four 

primary objectives: Assess the current 

state of the art of allied forces in 

countering adversary use of IEDs in 

operations such as OIF; recommend a 

mid- to-long-term set of integrated 

activities aimed at improving the state 

of the art in reducing the effect of IEDs 

over the next three to ten years; provide 

recommendations on short term (over 

the next six months to three years) 

incremental improvements in U.S. 

forces’ ability to counter or reduce the 

effectiveness of IEDs, and identify any 

synergies that may exist between 

current counter-IED and countermine 

efforts. 

In accordance with section 10(d) of 

the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 

Pub. L. 92–463, as amended (5 U.S.C. 

App. 2), it has been determined that this 

Defense Science Board Task Force 

meeting concerns matters listed in 5 

U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and that, accordingly, 

this meeting will be closed to the 

public.

Dated: August 19, 2005. 

Jeannette Owings-Ballard, 

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 05–16911 Filed 8–24–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. RT01–74–000] 

GridSouth Transco, L.L.C., Carolina 

Power & Light Company, Duke Energy 

Corporation, South Carolina Electric & 

Gas Company; Notice of Filing 

August 16, 2005. 

Take notice that on August 11, 2005, 

Carolina Power & Light Company, Duke 

Energy Corporation, and South Carolina 

Electric & Gas Company, (collectively, 

GridSouth Sponsors) notified the 

Commission that they have elected to 

terminate the GridSouth Transco 

project. 

Any person desiring to intervene or to 

protest this filing must file in 

accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of 

the Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 

Protests will be considered by the 

Commission in determining the 

appropriate action to be taken, but will 

not serve to make protestants parties to 

the proceeding. Any person wishing to 

become a party must file a notice of 

intervention or motion to intervene, as 

appropriate. Such notices, motions, or 

protests must be filed on or before the 

comment date. Anyone filing a motion 

to intervene or protest must serve a copy 

of that document on the Applicant and 

all the parties in this proceeding. 

The Commission encourages 

electronic submission of protests and 

interventions in lieu of paper using the 

‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov. 

Persons unable to file electronically 

should submit an original and 14 copies 

of the protest or intervention to the 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 

888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426. 

This filing is accessible on-line at 

http://www.ferc.gov, using the 

‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for 

review in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room in Washington, DC. 

There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the 

Web site that enables subscribers to 

receive e-mail notification when a 

document is added to a subscribed 

docket(s). For assistance with any FERC 

Online service, please e-mail 

FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or call 

(866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call 

(202) 502–8659. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on September 15, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. E5–4645 Filed 8–24–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. RP05–565–000] 

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of 

America; Notice of Emergency Petition 

for Waivers 

August 18, 2005. 

Take notice that on August 16, 2005, 

Natural Gas Pipeline Company of 

America (Natural), pursuant to Rule 207 

of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, submitted an emergency 

petition for waivers to help its shippers 

respond to what it states is a force 

majeure situation that will temporarily 

reduce capacity on a portion of 

Natural’s system. Natural requests that 

the Commission grant this petition by 

no later than August 23, 2005 to allow 

its ‘‘customers and the market generally 

to mitigate the impact of the capacity 

reduction’’. 

Any person desiring to protest this 

filing must file in accordance with Rule 

211 of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 

385.211). Protests to this filing will be 

considered by the Commission in 

determining the appropriate action to be 

taken, but will not serve to make 

protestants parties to the proceeding. 

Such protests must be filed in 

accordance with the provisions of 

Section 154.210 of the Commission’s 

regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone 

filing a protest must serve a copy of that 

document on all the parties to the 

proceeding. 

The Commission encourages 

electronic submission of protests and 

interventions in lieu of paper using the 

‘‘eFiling’’ link at http://www.ferc.gov.

Persons unable to file electronically 

should submit an original and 14 copies 

of the protest or intervention to the 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 

888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426. 

This filing is accessible on-line at 

http://www.ferc.gov, using the 

‘‘eLibrary’’ link and is available for 

review in the Commission’s Public 

Reference Room in Washington, DC. 

There is an ‘‘eSubscription’’ link on the 

web site that enables subscribers to 

receive email notification when a 

document is added to a subscribed 

docket(s). For assistance with any FERC 

Online service, please email 

FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or call 

(866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call 

(202) 502–8659.