73048 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 2014 / Notices 

Port group Period ending 

Halibut 

standard 

ex-vessel price 

Sablefish 

standard 

ex-vessel price 

November 30 ................................................................ 6.50 3.92 

1. Note: In many instances prices have not been reported to comply with confidentiality guidelines that prevent price reports when there are 

fewer than three processors operating in a location during a month. 2. Landing locations Within Port Group—Bering Sea: Adak, Akutan, Akutan Bay, Atka, Bristol Bay, Chefornak, Dillingham, Captains Bay, Dutch 

Harbor, Egegik, Ikatan Bay, Hooper Bay, King Cove, King Salmon, Kipnuk, Mekoryuk, Naknek, Nome, Quinhagak, Savoonga, St. George, St. 

Lawrence, St. Paul, Togiak, Toksook Bay, Tununak, Beaver Inlet, Ugadaga Bay, Unalaska. 3. Landing Locations Within Port Group—Central Gulf of Alaska: Anchor Point, Anchorage, Alitak, Chignik, Cordova, Eagle River, False Pass, 

West Anchor Cove, Girdwood, Chinitna Bay, Halibut Cove, Homer, Kasilof, Kenai, Kenai River, Alitak, Kodiak, Port Bailey, Nikiski, Ninilchik, Old 

Harbor, Palmer, Sand Point, Seldovia, Resurrection Bay, Seward, Valdez, Whittier. 4. Landing Locations Within Port Group—Southeast Alaska: Angoon, Baranof Warm Springs, Craig, Edna Bay, Elfin Cove, Excursion Inlet, 

Gustavus, Haines, Hollis, Hoonah, Hyder, Auke Bay, Douglas, Tee Harbor, Juneau, Kake, Ketchikan, Klawock, Metlakatla, Pelican, Petersburg, 

Portage Bay, Port Alexander, Port Graham, Port Protection, Point Baker, Sitka, Skagway, Tenakee Springs, Thorne Bay, Wrangell, Yakutat. 5. Landing Locations Within Port Group—All: For Alaska: All landing locations included in 2, 3, and 4. For California: Eureka, Fort Bragg, Other 

California. For Oregon: Astoria, Aurora, Lincoln City, Newport, Warrenton, Other Oregon. For Washington: Anacortes, Bellevue, Bellingham, 

Nagai Island, Edmonds, Everett, Granite Falls, Ilwaco, La Conner, Port Angeles, Port Orchard, Port Townsend, Ranier, Fox Island, Mercer Island, Seattle, Standwood, Other Washington. For Canada: Port Hardy, Port Edward, Prince Rupert, Vancouver, Haines Junction, Other Canada. 

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

Dated: December 3, 2014. 

Alan D. Risenhoover, 

Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–28724 Filed 12–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XD531 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Rocky Intertidal 

Monitoring Surveys Along the Oregon 

and California Coasts 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental 

harassment authorization. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA) regulations, notification is 

hereby given that NMFS has issued an 

Incidental Harassment Authorization 

(IHA) to the Partnership for 

Interdisciplinary Study of Coastal 

Oceans (PISCO) at the University of 

California (UC) Santa Cruz for an 

Incidental Harassment Authorization 

(IHA) to take marine mammals, by 

harassment, incidental to rocky 

intertidal monitoring surveys. 

DATES: Effective December 17, 2014, 

through December 16, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of the authorization, 

application, and associated 

Environmental Assessment (EA) and 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI) may be obtained by writing to 

Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and 

Conservation Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, National Marine 

Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, 

telephoning the contact listed below 

(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), 

or visiting the internet at: http://

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/

incidental.htm. Documents cited in this 

notice may also be viewed, by 

appointment, during regular business 

hours, at the aforementioned address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Pauline, 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. 

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, other 

means of effecting the least practicable 

impact on the species or stock and its 

habitat, 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.’’ 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

established an expedited process by 

which citizens of the United States can 

apply for an authorization to 

incidentally take small numbers of 

marine mammals by harassment. 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day 

time limit for NMFS review of an 

application followed by a 30-day public 

notice and comment period on any 

proposed authorizations for the 

incidental harassment of marine 

mammals. Within 45 days of the close 

of the comment period, NMFS must 

either issue or deny the authorization. 

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].’’ 

Summary of Request 

On July 30, 2014, NMFS received an 

application from PISCO for the taking of 

marine mammals incidental to rocky 

intertidal monitoring surveys along the 

Oregon and California coasts. NMFS 

determined that the application was 

adequate and complete on August 22, 

2014. On October 8, 2014, we published 

a notice in the Federal Register of our 

proposal to issue an IHA with 

preliminary determinations and 

explained the basis for the proposal and 

preliminary determinations (78 FR 

64918). The notice initiated a 30-day 

public comment period. Responses are 

discussed below. In December 2012, 

NMFS issued a 1-year IHA to PISCO to 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 2014 / Notices 73049 

take marine mammals incidental to 

these same proposed activities (77 FR 

72327, December 5, 2012). That IHA 

expired on December 2, 2013. In 

December 2013 NMFS issued another 1 

year IHA to PISCO to take marine 

mammals incidental to continuation of 

proposed activities which expires on 

December 16, 2014 (78 FR 79403, 

December 30, 2013). 

The research group at UC Santa Cruz 

operates in collaboration with two largescale marine research programs: PISCO 

and the Multi-agency Rocky Intertidal 

Network. The research group at UC 

Santa Cruz (PISCO) is responsible for 

many of the ongoing rocky intertidal 

monitoring programs along the Pacific 

coast. Monitoring occurs at rocky 

intertidal sites, often large bedrock 

benches, from the high intertidal to the 

water’s edge. Long-term monitoring 

projects include Community Structure 

Monitoring, Intertidal Biodiversity 

Surveys, Marine Protected Area 

Baseline Monitoring, Intertidal 

Recruitment Monitoring, and Ocean 

Acidification. Research is conducted 

throughout the year along the California 

and Oregon coasts and will continue 

indefinitely. Most sites are sampled one 

to two times per year over a 4–6 hour 

period during a negative low tide series. 

This IHA is only effective for a 12- 

month period. The following specific 

aspects of the proposed activities are 

likely to result in the take of marine 

mammals: Presence of survey personnel 

near pinniped haulout sites and 

approach of survey personnel towards 

hauled out pinnipeds. Take, by Level B 

harassment only, of individuals of three 

species of marine mammals is 

anticipated to result from the specified 

activity. 

Description of the Specified Activity 

and Specified Geographic Region 

PISCO focuses on understanding the 

nearshore ecosystems of the U.S. west 

coast through a number of 

interdisciplinary collaborations. PISCO 

integrates long-term monitoring of 

ecological and oceanographic processes 

at dozens of sites with experimental 

work in the lab and field. A short 

description of each project is contained 

here. Additional information can be 

found in PISCO’s application (see 

ADDRESSES) and the Notice of Proposed 

IHA (79 FR 60831, October 8, 2014). 

Community Structure Monitoring 

involves the use of permanent photoplot 

quadrats which target specific algal and 

invertebrate assemblages (e.g. mussels, 

rockweeds, barnacles). This project 

provides managers with insight into the 

causes and consequences of changes in 

species abundance. Each Community 

Structure site is surveyed over a 1-day 

period during a low tide series one to 

two times a year. Sites, location, number 

of times sampled per year, and typical 

sampling months for each site are 

presented in Table 1 in PISCO’s 

application (see ADDRESSES). 

Biodiversity Surveys, which are part 

of a long-term monitoring project and 

are conducted every 3–5 years at 

established sites, involve point contact 

identification along permanent 

transects, mobile invertebrate quadrat 

counts, sea star band counts, and tidal 

height topographic measurements. Table 

2 in PISCO’s application (see 

ADDRESSES) lists established 

biodiversity sites in Oregon and 

California. 

In September 2007, the state of 

California began establishing a network 

of Marine Protected Areas along the 

California coast as part of the Marine 

Life Protection Act (MLPA). Under 

baseline monitoring programs funded by 

Sea Grant and the Ocean Protection 

Council, PISCO established additional 

intertidal monitoring sites in the Central 

Coast, North Central Coast, and South 

Coast study regions. Six additional sites 

will be established and sampled in the 

North Coast study region during 2015 

(see Table 3 in PISCO’s application). 

Baseline characterization of newly 

established areas involves sampling of 

these new sites, as well as established 

sites both within and outside of marine 

protected areas. These sites were 

sampled using existing Community 

Structure and Biodiversity protocols for 

consistency. Resampling of these sites 

may take place as part of future marine 

protected area evaluation. 

Specified Geographic Location and 

Activity Timeframe 

PISCO’s research is conducted 

throughout the year along the California 

and Oregon coasts. Most sites are 

sampled one to two times per year over 

a 1-day period (4–6 hours per site) 

during a negative low tide series. Due to 

the large number of research sites, 

scheduling constraints, the necessity for 

negative low tides and favorable 

weather/ocean conditions, exact survey 

dates are variable and difficult to 

predict. Some sampling is anticipated to 

occur in all months, except for January, 

August, and September. 

The intertidal zones where PISCO 

conducts intertidal monitoring are also 

areas where pinnipeds can be found 

hauled out on the shore at or adjacent 

to some research sites. Accessing 

portions of the intertidal habitat may 

cause incidental Level B (behavioral) 

harassment of pinnipeds through some 

unavoidable approaches if pinnipeds 

are hauled out directly in the study 

plots or while biologists walk from one 

location to another. No motorized 

equipment is involved in conducting 

these surveys. The species for which 

Level B harassment is requested are: 

California sea lions (Zalophus 

californianus californianus); harbor 

seals (Phoca vitulina richardii); and 

northern elephant seals (Mirounga 

angustirostris). 

Comments and Responses 

A Notice of Proposed IHA was 

published in the Federal Register on 

October 8, 2014 (79 FR 60831) for public 

comment. During the 30-day public 

comment period, NMFS received one 

letter from the Marine Mammal 

Commission. No other organizations 

provided comments on the proposed 

issuance of an IHA for this activity. The 

Marine Mammal Commission 

recommended that NMFS issue the IHA, 

subject to inclusion of the proposed 

mitigation and monitoring measures. 

NMFS has included all of the mitigation 

and monitoring measures proposed in 

the Notice of Proposed IHA (79 FR 

60831, October 8, 2014) in the issued 

IHA. 

Description of Marine Mammals in the 

Area of the Specified Activity 

Several pinniped species can be 

found along the California and Oregon 

coasts. The three that are most likely to 

occur at some of the research sites are 

California sea lion, harbor seal, and 

northern elephant seal. On rare 

occasions, PISCO researchers have seen 

very small numbers (i.e., five or fewer) 

of Steller sea lions at one of the 

sampling sites. These sightings are rare. 

Therefore, encounters are not expected. 

However, if Steller sea lions are sighted 

before approaching a sampling site, 

researchers will abandon approach and 

return at a later date. For this reason, 

this species is not considered further in 

this IHA notice. 

We refer the public to Carretta et al. 

(2014) for general information on these 

species. The publication is available on 

the internet at: http://

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/pdf/

pacific2013_final.pdf. Additional 

information on the status, distribution, 

seasonal distribution, and life history 

can also be found in PISCO’s 

application and NMFS’ Notice of 

Proposed IHA (79 FR 60831, October 8, 

2014). The information has not changed 

and is therefore not repeated here. 

California (southern) sea otters 

(Enhydra lutris nereis), listed as 

threatened under the ESA and 

categorized as depleted under the 

MMPA, usually range in coastal waters 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
73050 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 2014 / Notices 

within 2 km (1.2 mi) of shore. This 

species is managed by the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service and is not considered 

further in this notice. 

Potential Effects of the Specified 

Activity on Marine Mammals 

The appearance of researchers may 

have the potential to cause Level B 

harassment of any pinnipeds hauled out 

at sampling sites. Although marine 

mammals are never deliberately 

approached by abalone survey 

personnel, approach may be 

unavoidable if pinnipeds are hauled out 

in the immediate vicinity of the 

permanent study plots. Disturbance may 

result in reactions ranging from an 

animal simply becoming alert to the 

presence of researchers (e.g., turning the 

head, assuming a more upright posture) 

to flushing from the haul-out site into 

the water. NMFS does not consider the 

lesser reactions to constitute behavioral 

harassment, or Level B harassment 

takes, but rather assumes that pinnipeds 

that move greater than 1 m (3.3 ft) or 

change the speed or direction of their 

movement in response to the presence 

of researchers are behaviorally harassed, 

and thus subject to Level B taking. 

Animals that respond to the presence of 

researchers by becoming alert, but do 

not move or change the nature of 

locomotion as described, are not 

considered to have been subject to 

behavioral harassment. NMFS’ Notice of 

Proposed IHA (79 FR 60831, October 8, 

2014) contains information regarding 

potential impacts to marine mammals 

from the specified activity. The 

information has not changed and is 

therefore not repeated here. 

Typically, even those reactions 

constituting Level B harassment would 

result at most in temporary, short-term 

disturbance. In any given study season, 

researchers will visit sites one to two 

times per year for a total of 4–6 hours 

per visit. Therefore, disturbance of 

pinnipeds resulting from the presence of 

researchers lasts only for short periods 

of time and is separated by significant 

amounts of time in which no 

disturbance occurs. Because such 

disturbance is sporadic, rather than 

chronic, and of low intensity, individual 

marine mammals are unlikely to incur 

any detrimental impacts to vital rates or 

ability to forage and, thus, loss of 

fitness. Correspondingly, even local 

populations, much less the overall 

stocks of animals, are extremely 

unlikely to accrue any significantly 

detrimental impacts. 

NMFS does not anticipate that the 

activities would result in the injury, 

serious injury, or mortality of pinnipeds 

because pups are only found at a couple 

of the sampling locations during certain 

times of the year and that many 

rookeries occur on the offshore islands 

and not the mainland areas where the 

activities would occur. In addition, 

researchers will exercise appropriate 

caution approaching sites, especially 

when pups are present and will redirect 

activities when pups are present. 

Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal 

Habitat 

The only habitat modification 

associated with the activity is the 

placement of permanent bolts and other 

sampling equipment in the intertidal. 

Bolts are installed during the set-up of 

a site and, at existing sites, this has 

already occurred. In some instances, 

bolts will need to be replaced or 

installed for new plots. Bolts are 7.6 to 

12.7 cm (2 to 5 in) long, stainless steel 

1 cm (3/8 in) Hex or Carriage bolts. They 

are installed by drilling a hole with a 

battery powered DeWalt 24 volt rotary 

hammer drill with a 1 cm (3/8 in) bit. 

The bolts protrude 1.3–7.6 cm (0.5–3 in) 

above the rock surface and are held in 

place with marine epoxy. Although the 

drill does produce noticeable noise, 

researchers have never observed an 

instance where near-by or offshore 

marine mammals were disturbed by it. 

Any marine mammal at the site would 

likely be disturbed by the presence of 

researchers and retreat to a distance 

where the noise of the drill would not 

increase the disturbance. In most 

instances, wind and wave noise also 

drown out the noise of the drill. The 

installation of bolts and other sampling 

equipment is conducted under the 

appropriate permits (Monterey Bay 

National Marine Sanctuary, California 

State Parks). Once a particular study has 

ended, the respective sampling 

equipment is removed. No trash or field 

gear is left at a site. Thus, the proposed 

activity is not expected to have any 

habitat-related effects, including to 

marine mammal prey species, that could 

cause significant or long-term 

consequences for individual marine 

mammals or their populations. 

Mitigation 

In order to issue an incidental take 

authorization (ITA) under section 

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must, 

where applicable, set forth the 

permissible methods of taking pursuant 

to such activity, and other means of 

effecting the least practicable impact on 

such species or stock and its habitat, 

paying particular attention to rookeries, 

mating grounds, and areas of similar 

significance, and on the availability of 

such species or stock for taking for 

certain subsistence uses (where 

relevant). 

PISCO shall implement several 

mitigation measures to reduce potential 

take by Level B (behavioral disturbance) 

harassment. Measures include: (1) 

Approaching study sites cautiously and 

quietly, such that any disturbance of 

pinnipeds is minimized and stampeding 

is avoided; (2) avoiding disturbance that 

may place pinniped pups at risk; (3) 

using binoculars to detect pinnipeds 

before close approach to avoid being 

seen by the animals; (4) monitoring the 

offshore area for predators (such as 

killer whales and white sharks) and 

avoid flushing of pinnipeds when 

predators are observed in nearshore 

waters; (5) rescheduling work at sites 

where pups are present, unless other 

means to accomplishing the work can be 

done without causing disturbance to 

mothers and dependent pups; (6) only 

flushing pinnipeds if they are located in 

the sampling plots and there are no 

other means to accomplish the survey 

(however, flushing must be done slowly 

and quietly so as not to cause a 

stampede); (7) not intentionally flushing 

pups if present at the sampling; and (8) 

rescheduling sampling if Steller sea 

lions are present at the study site. 

The methodologies and actions noted 

in this section will be utilized and 

included as mitigation measures in the 

IHA to ensure that impacts to marine 

mammals are mitigated to the lowest 

level practicable. The primary method 

of mitigating the risk of disturbance to 

pinnipeds, which will be in use at all 

times, is the selection of judicious 

routes of approach to study sites, 

avoiding close contact with pinnipeds 

hauled out on shore, and the use of 

extreme caution upon approach. In no 

case will marine mammals be 

deliberately approached by survey 

personnel, and in all cases every 

possible measure will be taken to select 

a pathway of approach to study sites 

that minimizes the number of marine 

mammals potentially harassed. In 

general, researchers will stay inshore of 

pinnipeds whenever possible to allow 

maximum escape to the ocean. Each 

visit to a given study site will last for 

approximately 4–6 hours, after which 

the site is vacated and can be reoccupied by any marine mammals that 

may have been disturbed by the 

presence of researchers. By arriving 

before low tide, worker presence will 

tend to encourage pinnipeds to move to 

other areas for the day before they haul 

out and settle onto rocks at low tide. 

PISCO will suspend sampling and 

monitoring operations immediately if an 

injured marine mammal is found in the 

vicinity of the project area and the 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 2014 / Notices 73051 

monitoring activities could aggravate its 

condition. 

NMFS has carefully evaluated 

PISCO’s mitigation measures and 

considered a range of other measures in 

the context of ensuring that NMFS 

prescribes the means of effecting the 

least practicable impact on the affected 

marine mammal species and stocks and 

their habitat. Our evaluation of potential 

measures included consideration of the 

following factors in relation to one 

another: 

• The manner in which, and the 

degree to which, the successful 

implementation of the measure is 

expected to minimize adverse impacts 

to marine mammals; 

• The proven or likely efficacy of the 

specific measure to minimize adverse 

impacts as planned; and 

• The practicability of the measure 

for applicant implementation. 

Based on our evaluation of the 

applicant’s final measures, NMFS has 

determined that the mitigation measures 

provide the means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on marine mammal 

species or stocks and their habitat, 

paying particular attention to rookeries, 

mating grounds, and areas of similar 

significance. 

Monitoring and Reporting 

In order to issue an ITA for an 

activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the 

MMPA states that NMFS must, where 

applicable, set forth ‘‘requirements 

pertaining to the monitoring and 

reporting of such taking’’. The MMPA 

implementing regulations at 50 CFR 

216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for 

ITAs must include the suggested means 

of accomplishing the necessary 

monitoring and reporting that will result 

in increased knowledge of the species 

and of the level of taking or impacts on 

populations of marine mammals that are 

expected to be present in the proposed 

action area. 

PISCO can add to the knowledge of 

pinnipeds in California and Oregon by 

noting observations of: (1) Unusual 

behaviors, numbers, or distributions of 

pinnipeds, such that any potential 

follow-up research can be conducted by 

the appropriate personnel; (2) tagbearing carcasses of pinnipeds, allowing 

transmittal of the information to 

appropriate agencies and personnel; and 

(3) rare or unusual species of marine 

mammals for agency follow-up. 

Monitoring requirements in relation 

to PISCO’s rocky intertidal monitoring 

will include observations made by the 

applicant. Information recorded will 

include species counts (with numbers of 

pups/juveniles when possible), numbers 

of observed disturbances, and 

descriptions of the disturbance 

behaviors during the monitoring 

surveys, including location, date, and 

time of the event. In addition, 

observations regarding the number and 

species of any marine mammals 

observed, either in the water or hauled 

out, at or adjacent to the site, will be 

recorded as part of field observations 

during research activities. Observations 

of unusual behaviors, numbers, or 

distributions of pinnipeds will be 

reported to NMFS so that any potential 

follow-up observations can be 

conducted by the appropriate personnel. 

In addition, observations of tag-bearing 

pinniped carcasses as well as any rare 

or unusual species of marine mammals 

will be reported to NMFS. Information 

regarding physical and biological 

conditions pertaining to a site, as well 

as the date and time that research was 

conducted will also be noted. 

If at any time injury, serious injury, or 

mortality of the species for which take 

is authorized should occur, or if take of 

any kind of any other marine mammal 

occurs, and such action may be a result 

of the research, PISCO will suspend 

research activities and contact NMFS 

immediately to determine how best to 

proceed to ensure that another injury or 

death does not occur and to ensure that 

the applicant remains in compliance 

with the MMPA. 

A draft final report must be submitted 

to NMFS Office of Protected Resources 

within 60 days after the conclusion of 

the 2014–2015 field season or 60 days 

prior to the start of the next field season 

if a new IHA will be requested. The 

report will include a summary of the 

information gathered pursuant to the 

monitoring requirements set forth in the 

IHA. A final report must be submitted 

to the Director of the NMFS Office of 

Protected Resources and to the NMFS 

West Coast Office Regional 

Administrator within 30 days after 

receiving comments from NMFS on the 

draft final report. If no comments are 

received from NMFS, the draft final 

report will be considered to be the final 

report. 

Estimated Take by Incidental 

Harassment 

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]. 

All anticipated takes would be by 

Level B harassment, involving 

temporary changes in behavior. The 

mitigation and monitoring measures are 

expected to minimize the possibility of 

injurious or lethal takes such that take 

by injury, serious injury, or mortality is 

considered remote. Animals hauled out 

close to the actual survey sites may be 

disturbed by the presence of biologists 

and may alter their behavior or attempt 

to move away from the researchers. 

As discussed earlier, NMFS considers 

an animal to have been harassed if it 

moved greater than 1 m (3.3 ft) in 

response to the researcher’s presence or 

if the animal was already moving and 

changed direction and/or speed, or if 

the animal flushed into the water. 

Animals that became alert without such 

movements were not considered 

harassed. 

For the purpose of this IHA, only 

Oregon and California sites that are 

frequently sampled and have a marine 

mammal presence during sampling were 

included in take estimates. Sites where 

only Biodiversity Surveys are conducted 

were not included due to the 

infrequency of sampling and rarity of 

occurrences of pinnipeds during 

sampling. In addition, Steller sea lions 

are not included in take estimates as 

they will not be disturbed by 

researchers or research activities since 

activities will not occur or will be 

suspended if Steller sea lions are 

present. A small number of harbor seal 

and northern elephant seal pup takes 

are anticipated as pups may be present 

at several sites during spring and 

summer sampling. 

Takes estimates are based on marine 

mammal observations from each site. 

Marine mammal observations are done 

as part of PISCO site observations, 

which include notes on physical and 

biological conditions at the site. The 

maximum number of marine mammals, 

by species, seen at any given time 

throughout the sampling day is recorded 

at the conclusion of sampling. A marine 

mammal is counted if it is seen on 

access ways to the site, at the site, or 

immediately up-coast or down-coast of 

the site. Marine mammals in the water 

immediately offshore are also recorded. 

Any other relevant information, 

including the location of a marine 

mammal relevant to the site, any 

unusual behavior, and the presence of 

pups is also noted. 

These observations formed the basis 

from which researchers with extensive 

knowledge and experience at each site 

estimated the actual number of marine 

mammals that may be subject to take. In 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
73052 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 2014 / Notices 

most cases the number of takes is based 

on the maximum number of marine 

mammals that have been observed at a 

site throughout the history of the site 

(2–3 observation per year for 5–10 years 

or more). Section 6 in PISCO’s 

application outlines the number of visits 

per year for each sampling site and the 

potential number of pinnipeds 

anticipated to be encountered at each 

site. Table 4 in PISCO’s application 

outlines the number of potential takes 

per site (see ADDRESSES). 

Based on this information, NMFS has 

authorized the take, by Level B 

harassment only, of 55 California sea 

lions, 183 harbor seals, and 30 northern 

elephant seals. These numbers are 

considered to be maximum take 

estimates; therefore, actual take may be 

slightly less if animals decide to haul 

out at a different location for the day or 

animals are out foraging at the time of 

the survey activities. 

Negligible Impact and Small Numbers 

Analysis and Determination 

NMFS typically includes our 

negligible impact and small numbers 

analyses and determinations under the 

same section heading of our Federal 

Register notices. Despite co-locating 

these terms, we acknowledge that 

negligible impact and small numbers are 

distinct standards under the MMPA and 

treat them as such. The analyses 

presented below do not conflate the two 

standards; instead, each standard has 

been considered independently, and we 

have applied the relevant factors to 

inform our negligible impact and small 

numbers determinations. 

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.’’ In making a 

negligible impact determination, NMFS 

considers a variety of factors, including 

but not limited to: (1) The number of 

anticipated mortalities; (2) the number 

and nature of anticipated injuries; (3) 

the number, nature, intensity, and 

duration of Level B harassment; and (4) 

the context in which the take occurs. 

No injuries or mortalities are 

anticipated to occur as a result of 

PISCO’s rocky intertidal monitoring, 

and none are authorized. The behavioral 

harassments that could occur would be 

of limited duration, as researchers only 

conduct sampling one to two times per 

year at each site for a total of 4–6 hours 

per sampling event. Therefore, 

disturbance will be limited to a short 

duration, allowing pinnipeds to 

reoccupy the sites within a short 

amount of time. 

Some of the pinniped species may use 

some of the sites during certain times of 

year to conduct pupping and/or 

breeding. However, some of these 

species prefer to use the offshore islands 

for these activities. At the sites where 

pups may be present, PISCO will 

implement certain mitigation measures, 

such as no intentional flushing if 

dependent pups are present, which will 

avoid mother/pup separation and 

trampling of pups. 

Of the three marine mammal species 

anticipated to occur in the activity 

areas, none are listed under the ESA. 

Table 1 in this document presents the 

abundance of each species or stock, the 

authorized take estimates, and the 

percentage of the affected populations 

or stocks that may be taken by 

harassment. Based on these estimates, 

PISCO would take less than 1.1% of 

each species or stock. Because these are 

maximum estimates, actual take 

numbers are likely to be lower, as some 

animals may select other haulout sites 

the day the researchers are present. 

Based on the analysis contained 

herein of the likely effects of the 

specified activity on marine mammals 

and their habitat, and taking into 

consideration the implementation of the 

mitigation and monitoring measures, 

NMFS finds that the rocky intertidal 

monitoring program will result in the 

incidental take of small numbers of 

marine mammals, by Level B 

harassment only, and that the total 

taking from the rocky intertidal 

monitoring program will have a 

negligible impact on the affected species 

or stocks. 

TABLE 1—POPULATION ABUNDANCE ESTIMATES, TOTAL AUTHORIZED LEVEL B TAKE, AND PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION

THAT MAY BE TAKEN FOR THE POTENTIALLY AFFECTED SPECIES DURING THE PROPOSED ROCKY INTERTIDAL MONITORING PROGRAM

Species Abundance * 

Total 

authorized 

level B take 

Percentage of 

stock or 

population 

Harbor Seal .................................................................................................................................. 1 30,196 

2 16,165 

183 0.6–1.1 

California Sea Lion ...................................................................................................................... 296,750 60 0.02 

Northern Elephant Seal ............................................................................................................... 124,000 30 0.03 

* Abundance estimates are taken from the 2013 U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments (Carretta et al., 2014). 1 California stock abundance estimate; 

2Oregon/Washington stock abundance estimate 

Impact on Availability of Affected 

Species or Stock for Taking for 

Subsistence Uses 

There are no relevant subsistence uses 

of marine mammals implicated by this 

action. Therefore, NMFS has 

determined that the total taking of 

affected species or stocks would not 

have an unmitigable adverse impact on 

the availability of such species or stocks 

for taking for subsistence purposes. 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

None of the marine mammals for 

which incidental take is authorized are 

listed as threatened or endangered 

under the ESA. NMFS’ Permits and 

Conservation Division worked with the 

NMFS West Coast Regional Office to 

ensure that Steller sea lions would be 

avoided and incidental take would not 

occur. Therefore, NMFS has determined 

that issuance of the IHA to PISCO under 

section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA will 

have no effect on species listed as 

threatened or endangered under the 

ESA. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

In 2012, we prepared an EA analyzing 

the potential effects to the human 

environment from conducting rocky 

intertidal surveys along the California 

and Oregon coasts and issued a FONSI 

on the issuance of an IHA for PISCO’s 

rocky intertidal surveys in accordance 

with section 6.01 of the NOAA 

Administrative Order 216–6 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 236 / Tuesday, December 9, 2014 / Notices 73053 

(Environmental Review Procedures for 

Implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act, May 20, 

1999). PISCO’s proposed activities and 

impacts for 2013–2014 are within the 

scope of our 2012 EA and FONSI. We 

have reviewed the 2012 EA and 

determined that there are no new direct, 

indirect, or cumulative impacts to the 

human and natural environment 

associated with the IHA requiring 

evaluation in a supplemental EA and 

we, therefore, reaffirm the 2012 FONSI. 

Authorization 

As a result of these determinations, 

NMFS has authorized the take of marine 

mammals incidental to PISCO’s rocky 

intertidal monitoring research activities, 

provided the previously mentioned 

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 

requirements are incorporated. 

Dated: December 3, 2014. 

Donna S. Wieting, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–28807 Filed 12–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

[Docket ID: DoD–2014–OS–0157] 

Proposed Collection; Comment 

Request 

AGENCY: Defense Media Activity, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

Defense Media Activity announces a 

proposed public information collection 

and seeks public comment on the 

provisions thereof. Comments are 

invited on: (a) Whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed information collection; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the information collection on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

DATES: Consideration will be given to all 

comments received by February 9, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and title, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Federal Docket Management 

System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, 

East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, 

VA 22350–3100. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name, docket 

number and title for this Federal 

Register document. The general policy 

for comments and other submissions 

from members of the public is to make 

these submissions available for public 

viewing on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov as they are 

received without change, including any 

personal identifiers or contact 

information. 

Any associated form(s) for this 

collection may be located within this 

same electronic docket and downloaded 

for review/testing. Follow the 

instructions at http://

www.regulations.gov for submitting 

comments. Please submit comments on 

any given form identified by docket 

number, form number, and title. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

request more information on this 

proposed information collection or to 

obtain a copy of the proposal and 

associated collection instruments, 

please write to the Defense Media 

Activity, American Forces NetworkBroadcast Center, 23755 Z Street, 

Riverside, CA 92518, or call 951–413– 

2569. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title; Associated Form; and OMB 

Number: AFNConnect (AFNC); OMB 

Control Number 0704–TBD. 

Needs and Uses: The information 

collection requirement is necessary to 

obtain and audit the eligibility of DoD 

Employees, DoD contractors, 

Department of State (DoS) employees, 

military personnel (including retirees 

and active reservists) and their family 

members OCONUS to receive restricted 

American Forces Radio and Television 

Service (AFRTS) programming services 

(i.e., radio, television, and web 

streaming services). Demographic data 

will also be collected to ensure DMA 

provides its services in the most 

efficient and cost effective manner. 

Affected Public: Individuals or 

households 

Annual Burden Hours: 1,667 

Number of Respondents: 10,000 

Responses Per Respondent: 1 

Average Burden Per Response: 10 

minutes 

Frequency: On occasion 

The American Forces Network (AFN) 

is a broadcast service of the Defense 

Media Activity (DMA). AFN provides an 

internal information program to provide 

U.S. radio and television news, 

information, and entertainment 

programming to Military Service 

members, DoD civilian and contract 

employees, and their families overseas, 

on board U.S. Navy and Coast Guard 

ships at sea, and other authorized users. 

This DoD internal information program 

(1) provides U.S. military commanders 

worldwide with a unique means to 

communicate internal information 

directly to DoD personnel and their 

family members overseas; (2) provides 

overseas DoD personnel and their 

families the same type of information 

and entertainment programming as their 

fellow citizens in the United States; (3) 

assists in maintaining and enhancing 

the morale, readiness, situational 

awareness, and well-being of DoD 

personnel and their family members 

overseas. AFN communicates messages 

and themes from senior DoD leaders 

(i.e., Secretary of Defense, Secretaries of 

the Military Departments, Chairman of 

the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Military Service 

Chiefs of Staff, Combatant 

Commanders), as well as other leaders 

in the chain of command, in order to 

support and improve quality of life and 

morale, promote situational awareness, 

provide timely and immediate force 

protection information, and sustain 

readiness. 

Much of the content distributed by 

AFN is commercial programming whose 

distribution is restricted to targeted 

OCONUS audiences. The AFNConnect 

system is an automated system which 

will allow potential consumers of AFN 

content to quickly validate their 

location and status, and be 

automatically authorized to receive AFN 

programming. 

Dated: December 3, 2014. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2014–28731 Filed 12–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

Renewal of Department of Defense 

Federal Advisory Committees 

AGENCY: DoD. 

ACTION: Renewal of Federal Advisory 

Committee. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is 

publishing this notice to announce that 

it is renewing the charter for the 

Department of Defense Military Family 

Readiness Council (‘‘the Council’’). 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES