Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; U.S. Navy Training Activities in the Gulf of Alaska Temporary Maritime Activities Area
Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 38 (Friday, February 26, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Number 38 (Friday, February 26, 2016)
Proposed Rules
Pages 9949-10023
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov
FR Doc No: 2016-03622
Page 9949
Vol. 81
Friday,
No. 38
February 26, 2016
Part II
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 218
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; U.S. Navy Training Activities in the Gulf of Alaska Temporary Maritime Activities Area; Proposed Rule
Page 9950
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 218
Docket No. 141125997-6058-01
RIN 0648-BE67
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; U.S. Navy Training Activities in the Gulf of Alaska Temporary Maritime Activities Area
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments and information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the U.S. Navy (Navy) for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to the training activities conducted in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) Temporary Maritime Activities Area (TMAA) Study Area (hereafter referred to the Study Area) from May 2016 through May 2021. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue regulations and subsequent Letter of Authorization (LOA) to the Navy to incidentally harass marine mammals.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than March 28, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2016-0008, by any of the following methods:
Electronic submissions: submit all electronic public comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal, Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2016-0008, click the ``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
Mail: Submit comments to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225.
Fax: (301) 713-0376; Attn: Jolie Harrison.
Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fiorentino, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8477.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability
A copy of the Navy's LOA application, which contains a list of the references used in this proposed rule, may be obtained by visiting the internet at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/military.htm. The Navy is preparing a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS)/Overseas EIS (OEIS) for the GOA TMAA Study Area to evaluate all components of the proposed training activities. The Navy previously analyzed training activities in the Study Area in the 2011 GOA Navy Training Activities FEIS (GOA FEIS/OEIS) (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2011a). The GOA Draft Supplemental EIS (DSEIS)/OEIS was released to the public on August 23, 2014, for review until October 22, 2014. The Navy is the lead agency for the GOA SEIS/OEIS, and NMFS is a cooperating agency pursuant to 40 CFR 1501.6 and 1508.5. The GOA DSEIS/
OEIS, which also contains a list of the references used in this proposed rule, may be viewed at: http://www.goaeis.com. Documents cited in this notice may also be viewed, by appointment, during regular business hours, at the aforementioned address.
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 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.''
The National Defense Authorization Act of 2004 (NDAA) (Pub. L. 108-
136) removed the ``small numbers'' and ``specified geographical region'' limitations indicated above and amended the definition of ``harassment'' as applies to a ``military readiness activity'' to read as follows (section 3(18)(B) of the MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1362(18)(B)): ``(i) any act that injures or has the significant potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild'' Level A Harassment; or ``(ii) any act that disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a point where such behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly altered'' Level B Harassment.
Summary of Request
On July 28, 2014, NMFS received an application from the Navy requesting a LOA for the take of 19 species of marine mammals incidental to Navy training activities to be conducted in the Study Area over 5 years. On October 14, 2014, the Navy submitted a revised LOA application to reflect minor changes in the number and types of training activities. To address minor inconsistencies with the DSEIS, the Navy submitted a final revision to the LOA application (hereafter referred to as the LOA application) on January 21, 2015.
The Navy is requesting a 5-year LOA for training activities to be conducted from 2016 through 2021. The Study Area is a polygon roughly the shape of a 300 nm by 150 nm rectangle oriented northwest to southeast in the long direction, located south of Prince William Sound and east of Kodiak Island, Alaska (see Figure 1-1 of the LOA application for a map of the Study Area). The activities conducted within the Study Area are classified as military readiness activities. The Navy states that these activities may expose some of the marine mammals present within the Study Area to sound from underwater
Page 9951
acoustic sources and explosives. The Navy requests authorization to take 19 marine mammal species by Level B (behavioral) harassment; one of those marine mammal species (Dall's porpoise) may be taken by Level A (injury) harassment. The Navy is not requesting mortality takes for any species.
The LOA application and the GOA DSEIS/OEIS contain acoustic thresholds that, in some instances, represent changes from what NMFS has used to evaluate the Navy's activities for previous authorizations. The revised thresholds, which the Navy developed in coordination with NMFS, are based on the evaluation and inclusion of new information from recent scientific studies; a detailed explanation of how they were derived is provided in the GOA DSEIS/OEIS Criteria and Thresholds for U.S. Navy Acoustic and Explosive Effects Analysis Technical Report (available at http://www.goaeis.com). The revised thresholds are adopted for this proposed rulemaking.
NOAA is currently in the process of developing Acoustic Guidance on thresholds for onset of auditory impacts from exposure to sound, which will be used to support assessments of the effects of anthropogenic sound on marine mammals. To develop this Guidance, NOAA is compiling, interpreting, and synthesizing the best information currently available on the effects of anthropogenic sound on marine mammals, and is committed to finalizing the Guidance through a systematic, transparent process that involves internal review, external peer review, and public comment.
In December 2013, NOAA released for public comment a ``Draft Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammals: Acoustic Threshold Levels for Onset of Permanent and Temporary Threshold Shifts'' (78 FR 78822) (the term ``threshold shift'' refers to noise-induced hearing loss). The Draft Guidance was generally consistent with the Navy's Permanent Threshold Shifts/Temporary Threshold Shifts (PTS/TTS) criteria used in the GOA DSEIS/OEIS and detailed within Finneran and Jenkins (2012). Prior to the finalization of this guidance by NOAA, the Navy suggested revisions to the criteria (e.g., auditory weighting functions and PTS/TTS thresholds) based on a number of studies available since the Navy's Phase 2 modeling (the acoustic effects modeling currently employed by the Navy for training and testing activities), including Finneran et al. (2005), Finneran et al. (2010), Finneran and Schlundt (2013), Kastelein et al. (2012a), Kastelein et al. (2012b), Kastelein et al. (2014a), Kastelein et al. (2014b), Popov et al. (2013), and Popov et al. (2011). In January 2015, the Navy submitted a draft proposal (Finneran 2015) to NOAA staff for their consideration.
Finneran (2015) proposed new weighting functions and thresholds for predicting PTS/TTS in marine mammals. The methodologies presented within this paper build upon the methodologies used to develop the criteria applied within the Navy's GOA DSEIS/OEIS (Finneran and Jenkins, 2012) and incorporate relevant auditory research made available since 2012. While Finneran and Jenkins (2012) presented a conservative approach to development of auditory weighting functions where data was limited, Finneran (2015) synthesizes a wide range of auditory data, including newly available studies, to predict refined auditory weighting functions and corresponding TTS thresholds across the complete hearing ranges of functional hearing groups.
During the development process of NOAA's Draft Guidance, NOAA incorporated Finneran (2015) into its Draft Guidance. As a result, the Navy's proposal (Finneran, 2015) was submitted for peer review by external subject matter experts, in accordance with the process previously conducted for NOAA's Draft Guidance. Peer review comments were received by NOAA in April 2015. NOAA subsequently developed a Peer Review Report, which was published on its Web site on July 31, 2015. The published report documents the Navy's proposal (Finneran, 2015) that underwent peer review, the peer-review comments, and NOAA's responses to those comments. NOAA then incorporated this information into revised Draft Guidance which was published in the Federal Register for public review and comment (80 FR 45642) on July 31, 2015. The auditory weighting functions and PTS/TTS thresholds provided in that revised Draft Guidance will not be adopted by NOAA or applied to applicants until Final Guidance is issued. At the time of this proposed rulemaking, Final Guidance has not been issued. Therefore, the Navy has not adopted these proposed criteria in its GOA DSEIS/OEIS. However, the underlying science contained within Finneran (2015) has been addressed qualitatively within the applicable sections of the GOA DSEIS/OEIS and this rulemaking.
If the proposed criteria in Finneran (2015) were adopted by NOAA, incorporated into its Final Guidance, and applied to the Navy in the future, predicted numbers of PTS/TTS would change for most functional hearing groups. However, because Finneran (2015) relies on much of the same data as the auditory criteria presented in the Navy's GOA DSEIS/
OEIS, these changes would not be substantial, and in most cases would result in a reduction in the predicted impacts. Predicted PTS/TTS would be reduced over much to all of their hearing range for low-frequency cetaceans and phocids. Predicted PTS/TTS for mid-frequency and high-
frequency cetaceans would be reduced for sources with frequencies below about 3.5 kHz and remain relatively unchanged for sounds above this frequency. Predicted auditory effects on otariids would increase for frequencies between about 1 kHz and 20 kHz and decrease for frequencies above and below these points, although otariids remain the marine mammals with the least sensitivity to potential PTS/TTS. Overall, predicted auditory effects within this rulemaking would not change significantly.
In summary, NOAA's continuing evaluation of all available science for the Acoustic Guidance could result in changes to the acoustic criteria used to model the Navy's activities for this rulemaking, and, consequently, the enumerations of ``take'' estimates. However, at this time, the results of prior Navy modeling described in this notice represent the best available estimate of the number and type of take that may result from the Navy's use of acoustic sources in the GOA Study Area. Further, consideration of the revised Draft Guidance and information contained in Finneran (2015) does not alter our assessment of the likely responses of marine mammals to acoustic sources employed by Navy in the GOA Study Area, or the likely fitness consequences of those responses. Finally, while acoustic criteria may also inform mitigation and monitoring decisions, this rulemaking requires a robust adaptive management program that regularly addresses new information and allows for modification of mitigation and/or monitoring measures as appropriate.
Background of Request
The Navy's mission is to organize, train, equip, and maintain combat-ready naval forces capable of winning wars, deterring aggression, and maintaining freedom of the seas. This mission is mandated by federal law (10 U.S.C. 5062), which ensures the readiness of
Page 9952
the naval forces of the United States.\1\ The Navy executes this responsibility by establishing and executing training programs, including at-sea training and exercises, and ensuring naval forces have access to the ranges, operating areas (OPAREAs), and airspace needed to develop and maintain skills for conducting naval activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Title 10, Section 5062 of the U.S.C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Navy proposes to continue conducting training activities within the Study Area, which have been ongoing since the 1990s. The tempo and types of training activities have fluctuated because of the introduction of new technologies, the evolving nature of international events, advances in war fighting doctrine and procedures, and force structure (organization of ships, submarines, aircraft, weapons, and personnel) changes. Such developments influence the frequency, duration, intensity, and location of required training activities.
The Navy's LOA request covers training activities that would occur for a 5-year period following the expiration of the current MMPA authorization for the GOA TMAA, which expires in 2016.
Description of the Specified Activity
The Navy is requesting authorization to take marine mammals incidental to conducting training activities. The Navy has determined that sonar use and underwater detonations are the stressors most likely to result in impacts on marine mammals that could rise to the level of harassment. Detailed descriptions of these activities are provided in the DSEIS/OEIS and in the LOA application (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/military.htm) and are summarized here.
Overview of Training Activities
The Navy routinely trains in the Study Area in preparation for national defense missions. Training activities and exercises covered in the Navy's LOA request are briefly described below, and in more detail within chapter 2 of the GOA DSEIS/OEIS. Each military training activity described meets a requirement that can be traced ultimately to requirements set forth by the National Command Authority.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``National Command Authority'' is a term used by the United States military and government to refer to the ultimate lawful source of military orders. The term refers collectively to the President of the United States (as commander-in-chief) and the United States Secretary of Defense.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Navy categorizes training activities into eight functional warfare areas called primary mission areas: anti-air warfare; amphibious warfare; strike warfare; anti-surface warfare (ASUW); anti-
submarine warfare (ASW); electronic warfare; mine warfare (MIW); and naval special warfare (NSW). Most training activities are categorized under one of these primary mission areas; those activities that do not fall within one of these areas are in a separate ``other'' category. Each warfare community (surface, subsurface, aviation, and special warfare) may train within some or all of these primary mission areas. However, not all primary mission areas are conducted within the Study Area.
The Navy described and analyzed the effects of its training activities within the GOA DSEIS/OEIS. In its assessment, the Navy concluded that of the activities conducted within the Study Area, sonar use and underwater detonations were the stressors resulting in impacts on marine mammals that could rise to the level of harassment as defined under the MMPA. Therefore, the LOA application provides the Navy's assessment of potential effects from these stressors. The specific acoustic sources used in the LOA application are contained in the GOA DSEIS/OEIS and are presented in the following sections based on the primary mission areas.
Anti-Surface Warfare (ASUW)
The mission of ASUW is to defend against enemy ships or boats. In the conduct of ASUW, aircraft use cannons, air-launched cruise missiles or other precision-guided munitions; ships employ torpedoes, naval guns, and surface-to-surface (S-S) missiles; and submarines attack surface ships using torpedoes or submarine-launched, anti-ship cruise missiles.
Anti-surface warfare training in the Study Area includes S-S gunnery and missile exercises (GUNEX and MISSILEX) and air-to-surface (A-S) bombing exercises (BOMBEX), GUNEX, and MISSILEX. Also included in this mission area is a sinking exercise that may include S-S and A-S components.
Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW)
The mission of ASW is to locate, neutralize, and defeat hostile submarine threats to surface forces. ASW is based on the principle of a layered defense of surveillance and attack aircraft, ships, and submarines all searching for hostile submarines. These forces operate together or independently to gain early warning and detection, and to localize, track, target, and attack hostile submarine threats.
Anti-submarine warfare training addresses basic skills such as detection and classification of submarines, distinguishing between sounds made by enemy submarines and those of friendly submarines, ships, and marine life. ASW training evaluates the ability of fleet assets to use systems, for example, active and passive sonar and torpedo systems to counter hostile submarine threats. More advanced, integrated ASW training exercises are conducted in coordinated, at-sea training events involving submarines, ships, and aircraft. This training integrates the full spectrum of ASW from detecting and tracking a submarine to attacking a target using simulated weapons.
Description of Sonar, Ordnance, Targets, and Other Systems
The Navy uses a variety of sensors, platforms, weapons, and other devices to meet its mission. Training with these systems and devices may introduce acoustic (sound) energy into the environment. The Navy's current LOA application describes underwater sound as one of two types: impulsive and non-impulsive. Sonar and similar sound producing systems are categorized as non-impulsive sound sources. Underwater detonations of explosives and other percussive events are impulsive sounds.
Sonar and Other Active Acoustic Sources
Modern sonar technology includes a variety of sonar sensor and processing systems. In concept, the simplest active sonar emits sound waves, or ``pings,'' sent out in multiple directions, and the sound waves then reflect off of the target object in multiple directions. The sonar source calculates the time it takes for the reflected sound waves to return; this calculation determines the distance to the target object. More sophisticated active sonar systems emit a ping and then rapidly scan or listen to the sound waves in a specific area. This provides both distance to the target and directional information. Even more advanced sonar systems use multiple receivers to listen to echoes from several directions simultaneously and provide efficient detection of both direction and distance. Active sonar is rarely used continuously throughout the listed activities. In general, when sonar is in use, the sonar `pings' occur at intervals, referred to as a duty cycle, and the signals themselves are very short in duration. For example, sonar that emits a 1-second ping every 10 seconds has a 10 percent duty cycle. The Navy's largest hull-mounted mid-frequency sonar source typically emits a 1-second ping every 50 seconds representing a 2 percent duty cycle. The Navy utilizes sonar systems and other acoustic sensors in support of a variety of
Page 9953
mission requirements. Primary uses include the detection of and defense against submarines (ASW) and mines (MIW); safe navigation and effective communications; use of unmanned undersea vehicles; and oceanographic surveys. Sources of sonar and other active acoustic sources include surface ship sonar, sonobuoys, torpedoes, and unmanned underwater vehicles.
Ordnance and Munitions
Most ordnance and munitions used during training events fall into three basic categories: Projectiles (such as gun rounds), missiles (including rockets), and bombs. Ordnance can be further defined by their net explosive weight (NEW), which considers the type and quantity of the explosive substance without the packaging, casings, bullets, etc. NEW is the trinitrotoluene (TNT) equivalent of energetic material, which is the standard measure of strength of bombs and other explosives. For example, a 5-inch shell fired from a Navy gun is analyzed at approximately 9.5 pounds (lb.) (4.3 kilograms kg) of NEW. The Navy also uses non-explosive ordnance in place of explosive ordnance in many training and testing events. Non-explosive ordnance look and perform similarly to explosive ordnance, but lack the main explosive charge.
Defense Countermeasures
Naval forces depend on effective defensive countermeasures to protect themselves against missile and torpedo attack. Defensive countermeasures are devices designed to confuse, distract, and confound precision-guided munitions. Defensive countermeasures analyzed in this LOA application include acoustic countermeasures, which are used by surface ships and submarines to defend against torpedo attack. Acoustic countermeasures are either released from ships and submarines, or towed at a distance behind the ship.
Classification of Non-Impulsive and Impulsive Sources Analyzed
In order to better organize and facilitate the analysis of approximately 300 individual sources of underwater acoustic sound or explosive energy, a series of source classifications, or source bins, were developed by the Navy. The use of source classification bins provides the following benefits:
Provides the ability for new sensors or munitions to be covered under existing regulatory authorizations, as long as those sources fall within the parameters of a ``bin'';
Simplifies the source utilization data collection and reporting requirements anticipated under the MMPA;
Ensures a conservative approach to all impact analysis, as all sources in a single bin are modeled as the loudest source (e.g., lowest frequency, highest source level the term ``source level'' refers to the loudness of a sound at its source, longest duty cycle, or largest net explosive weight NEW) within that bin, which:
cir Allows analysis to be conducted more efficiently, without compromising the results; and
cir Provides a framework to support the reallocation of source usage (hours/explosives) between different source bins, as long as the total number and severity of marine mammal takes remain within the overall analyzed and authorized limits. This flexibility is required to support evolving Navy training requirements, which are linked to real world events.
There are two primary types of acoustic sources: Impulsive and non-
impulsive. A description of each source classification is provided in Tables 1 and 2. Impulsive source class bins are based on the NEW of the munitions or explosive devices or the source level for air and water guns. Non-impulsive acoustic sources are grouped into source class bins based on the frequency,\3\ source level,\4\ and, when warranted, the application in which the source would be used. The following factors further describe the considerations associated with the development of non-impulsive source bins:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Bins are based on the typical center frequency of the source. Although harmonics may be present, those harmonics would be several decibels (dB) lower than the primary frequency.
\4\ Source decibel levels are expressed in terms of sound pressure level (SPL) and are values given in dB referenced to 1 micropascal at 1 meter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frequency of the non-impulsive source.
cir Low-frequency sources operate below 1 kilohertz (kHz)
cir Mid-frequency sources operate at and above 1 kHz, up to and including 10 kHz
cir High-frequency sources operate above 10 kHz, up to and including 100 kHz
cir Very high-frequency sources operate above 100 kHz but below 200 kHz
Source level of the non-impulsive source.
cir Greater than 160 decibels (dB), but less than 180 dB
cir Equal to 180 dB and up to 200 dB
cir Greater than 200 dB
Application in which the source would be used.
cir How a sensor is employed supports how the sensor's acoustic emissions are analyzed.
cir Factors considered include pulse length (time source is on); beam pattern (whether sound is emitted as a narrow, focused beam or, as with most explosives, in all directions); and duty cycle (how often or how many times a transmission occurs in a given time period during an event).
As described in the GOA DSEIS/OEIS, non-impulsive acoustic sources that have low source levels (not loud), narrow beam widths, downward directed transmission, short pulse lengths, frequencies beyond known hearing ranges of marine mammals, or some combination of these characteristics, are not anticipated to result in takes of protected species and therefore were not modeled. These sources generally meet the following criteria and are qualitatively analyzed in the GOA DSEIS/
OEIS:
Acoustic sources with frequencies greater than 200 kHz (based on known marine mammal hearing ranges)
Sources with source levels less than 160 dB
Table 1--Impulsive (Explosive) Training Source Classes Analyzed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Net explosive weight
Source class munitions (lbs)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E5....................... 5-inch projectiles. >5-10
E6....................... AGM-114 Hellfire >10-20
missile.
E7....................... AGM-88 High-speed >20-60
Anti-Radiation
Missile.
E8....................... 250 lb. bomb....... >60-100
E9....................... 500 lb. bomb....... >100-250
Page 9954
E10...................... 1,000 lb. bomb/Air- >250-500
to-surface missile.
E11...................... MK-48 torpedo...... >500-650
E12...................... 2,000 lb. bomb..... >650-1,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Non-Impulsive Training Source Classes Analyzed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of
Source class category Source class representative sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid-Frequency (MF): Tactical and MF1 Hull-mounted surface
non-tactical sources that ship sonar (e.g., AN/
produce mid-frequency (1-10 SQS-53C and AN/SQS-
kHz) signals. 60).
MF3 Hull-mounted submarine
sonar (e.g., AN/BQQ-
10).
MF4 Helicopter-deployed
dipping sonar (e.g.,
AN/AQS-22 and AN/AQS-
13).
MF5 Active acoustic
sonobuoys (e.g.,
DICASS).
MF6 Active underwater sound
signal devices (e.g.,
MK-84).
MF11 Hull-mounted surface
ship sonar with an
active duty cycle
greater than 80%.
High-Frequency (HF): Tactical HF1 Hull-mounted submarine
and non-tactical sources that HF6 sonar (e.g., AN/BQQ-
produce highdashfrequency 10).
(greater than 10 kHz but less Active sources (equal
than 100 kHz) signals. to 180 dB and up to
200 dB).
Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW): ASW2
Tactical sources such as active
sonobuoys and acoustic
countermeasures systems used
during the conduct of ASW
training activities.
ASW3 Mid-frequency
Multistatic Active
Coherent sonobuoy
(e.g., AN/SSQ-125).
Mid-frequency towed
active acoustic
countermeasure systems
(e.g., AN/SLQ-25).
ASW4 Mid-frequency
expendable active
acoustic device
countermeasures (e.g.,
MK-3).
Torpedoes (TORP): Source classes TORP2 Heavyweight torpedo
associated with the active (e.g., MK-48, electric
acoustic signals produced by vehicles).
torpedoes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: dB = decibels, DICASS = Directional Command Activated Sonobuoy
System, kHz = kilohertz
Training
The training activities that the Navy proposes to conduct in the Study Area are described in Table 3. The table is organized according to primary mission areas and includes the activity name, associated stressor(s), description of the activity, the primary platform used (e.g., ship or aircraft type), duration of activity, type of non-
impulsive or impulsive sources used in the activity, and the number of activities per year. More detailed activity descriptions can be found in chapter 2 of the GOA DSEIS/OEIS. The Navy's Proposed Activities are anticipated to meet training needs in the years 2016-2021.
Table 3--Training Activities Within the Study Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weapons/rounds/sound
Category Training activity Description source
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anti-Surface Warfare (ASUW)
Impulsive...................... Gunnery Exercise, Ship crews engage surface Small-, Medium-, and
Surface-to-Surface targets with ship's small- Large-caliber high
(Ship) (GUNEX-S-S , medium-, and large- explosive rounds.
Ship). caliber guns. Some of the
small- and medium-caliber
gunnery exercises analyzed
include those conducted by
the U.S. Coast Guard.
Impulsive...................... Sinking Exercise...... Fixed-wing aircrews, High explosive bombs,
surface ships and missiles, Large-
submarine firing precision- caliber rounds and
guided and non-precision torpedoes.
weapons against a surface
target.
Impulsive...................... Bombing Exercise (Air- Fixed-wing aircrews deliver High explosive bombs.
to-Surface) (BOMBEX bombs against surface
A-S). targets.
Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW)
Non-impulsive.................. Tracking Exercise-- Submarine searches for, Mid- and high-
Submarine (TRACKEX-- detects, and tracks frequency submarine
Sub). submarine(s) and surface sonar.
ship(s).
Page 9955
Non-impulsive.................. Tracking Exercise-- Surface ship searches for, Mid-frequency surface
Surface (TRACKEX-- tracks, and detects ship sonar, acoustic
Surface). submarine(s). countermeasures, and
high-frequency active
sources.
Non-impulsive.................. Tracking Exercise-- Helicopter searches, Mid-frequency dipping
Helicopter (TRACKEX-- tracks, and detects sonar systems and
Helo). submarine(s). sonobuoys.
Non-impulsive.................. Tracking Exercise-- Maritime patrol aircraft Sonobuoys, such as
Maritime Patrol use sonobuoys to search DICASS sonobuoys.
Aircraft (TRACKEX-- for, detect, and track
MPA). submarine(s).
Non-impulsive.................. Tracking Exercise-- Maritime patrol aircraft mid-frequency MAC
Maritime Patrol crews search for, detect sonobuoys.
Aircraft (MAC and track submarines using
Sonobuoys). MAC sonobuoys.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: DICASS = Directional Command Activated Sonobuoy System; MAC=Multistatic Active Coherent
Summary of Impulsive and Non-Impulsive Sources
Table 4 provides a quantitative annual summary of training activities by sonar and other active acoustic source class analyzed in the Navy's LOA request.
Table 4--Annual Hours of Sonar and Other Active Acoustic Sources Used During Training Within the Study Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source class category Source class Units Annual use
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid-Frequency (MF) Active sources from 1 MF1....................... Hours..................... 541
to 10 kHz.
MF3....................... Hours..................... 48
MF4....................... Hours..................... 53
MF5....................... Items..................... 25
MF6....................... Items..................... 21
MF11...................... Hours..................... 78
High-Frequency (HF): Tactical and non- HF1....................... Hours..................... 24
tactical sources that produce signals HF6....................... Hours..................... 80
greater than 10 kHz but less than 100
kHz.
Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Active ASW ASW2...................... Hours..................... 80
sources.
ASW3...................... Hours..................... 546
ASW4...................... Items..................... 4
Torpedoes (TORP) Source classes TORP2..................... Items..................... 5
associated with active acoustic signals
produced by torpedoes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5 provides a quantitative annual summary of training explosive source classes analyzed in the Navy's LOA request.
Table 5--Annual Number of Training Explosive Source Detonations Used
During Training Within the Study Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual in-
water
Explosive class net explosive weight (pounds lb.) detonations
training
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E5 (> 5-10 lb.)......................................... 112
E6 (> 10-20 lb.)........................................ 2
E7 (> 20-60 lb.)........................................ 4
E8 (> 60-100 lb.)....................................... 6
E9 (> 100-250 lb.)...................................... 142
E10 (> 250-500 lb.)..................................... 32
E11 (> 500-650 lb.)..................................... 2
E12 (> 650-1,000 lb.)................................... 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duration and Location
Training activities would be conducted in the Study Area during two exercises of up to 21 days each per year (for a total of up to 42 days per year) to support a major joint training exercise in Alaska and off the Alaskan coast that involves the Departments of the Navy, the Army and the Air Force, and the U.S. Coast Guard (Coast Guard). The Service participants report to a unified or joint commander who coordinates the activities planned to demonstrate and evaluate the ability of the services to engage in a conflict and carry out plans in response to a threat to national security. The exercises would occur between the months of May and October of each year from 2016 to 2021.
The Study Area (see Figure 1-1 of the LOA application) is entirely at sea and is composed of the established GOA TMAA and a warning area in the Gulf of Alaska. The Navy uses ``at-sea'' to include its training activities in the Study Area that occur (1) on the ocean surface, (2) beneath the ocean surface, and (3) in the air above the ocean surface. Navy training activities occurring on or over the land outside the GOA TMAA are covered under previously prepared environmental documentation prepared by the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Army.
Gulf of Alaska Temporary Maritime Activities Area (GOA TMAA)
The GOA TMAA is a temporary area established in conjunction with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for up to two exercise periods of up to 21 days each, for a total of 42 days per year, that is a surface, undersea space, and airspace maneuver area within the Gulf of Alaska for ships, submarines, and aircraft to conduct required training activities. The GOA TMAA is a polygon roughly resembling a rectangle oriented from northwest to southeast,
Page 9956
approximately 300 nautical miles (nm) in length by 150 nm in width, located south of Prince William Sound and east of Kodiak Island.
Airspace of the GOA TMAA
The airspace of the GOA TMAA overlies the surface and subsurface training area and is called an Altitude Reservation (ALTRV). This ALTRV is a temporary airspace designation, typically requested by the Alaskan Command (ALCOM) and coordinated through the FAA for the duration of the exercise. This overwater airspace supports the majority of aircraft training activities conducted by Navy and Joint aircraft throughout the joint training exercise. The ALTRV over the GOA TMAA typically extends from the ocean surface to 60,000 feet (ft.) (18,288 meters m) above mean sea level and encompasses 42,146 square nautical miles (nm\2\) of airspace. For safety considerations, ALTRV information is sent via Notice to Airmen (NOTAM)/International NOTAM so that all pilots are aware of the area and that Air Traffic Control will keep known Instrument Flight Rules aircraft clear of the area.
Additionally, the GOA TMAA overlies a majority of Warning Area W-
612 (W-612) located over Blying Sound, towards the northwestern quadrant of the GOA TMAA. When not included as part of the GOA TMAA, W-
612 provides 2,256 nm\2\ of special use airspace for the Air Force and Coast Guard to fulfill some of their training requirements. Air Force, Army, National Guard, and Coast Guard activities conducted as part of at-sea joint training within the GOA TMAA are included in the DSEIS/
OEIS analysis. No Navy training activities analyzed in this proposed rule occur in the area of W-612 that is outside of the GOA TMAA (see Figure 1-1 of the LOA application).
Sea and Undersea Space of the GOA TMAA
The GOA TMAA surface and subsurface areas are also depicted in Figure 1-1 of the LOA application. Total surface area of the GOA TMAA is 42,146 nm\2\. Due to weather conditions, annual joint training activities are typically conducted during the summer months (April-
October). The GOA TMAA undersea area lies beneath the surface area as depicted in Figure 1-1 of the LOA application. The undersea area extends to the seafloor.
The complex bathymetric and oceanographic conditions, including a continental shelf, submarine canyons, numerous seamounts, and fresh water infusions from multiple sources, create a challenging environment in which to search for and detect submarines in ASW training activities. In the summer, the GOA TMAA provides a safe cold-water training environment that resembles other areas where Navy may need to operate in a real-world scenario.
The GOA TMAA meets large-scale joint exercise training objectives to support naval and joint operational readiness by providing a ``geographically realistic'' training area for U.S. Pacific Command, Joint Task Force Commander scenario-based training, and supports the mission requirement of Alaskan Command (ALCOM) to conduct joint training for Alaska-based forces. The strategic vision of the Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet is that the training area support naval operational readiness by providing a realistic, live-training environment for forces assigned to the Pacific Fleet and other users with the capability and capacity to support current, emerging, and future training requirements.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activities
Marine mammal species known to occur in the Study Area and their currently recognized stocks are presented in Table 6 consistent with the NMFS' U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report (Carretta et al., 2015) and the Alaska Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report (Muto and Angliss, 2015). Twenty-two marine mammal species have confirmed or possible occurrence within or adjacent to the Study Area, including seven species of baleen whales (mysticetes), eight species of toothed whales (odontocetes), six species of seals (pinnipeds), and the sea otter (mustelid). Nine of these species are listed under the ESA: Blue whale, fin whale, humpback whale, sei whale, sperm whale, gray whale (Western North Pacific stock), North Pacific right whale, Steller sea lion (Western U.S. stock), and sea otter. All these species are managed by NMFS or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
The species carried forward for analysis are those likely to be found in the Study Area based on the most recent data available, and do not include stocks or species that may have once inhabited or transited the area but have not been sighted in recent years (e.g., species which were extirpated because of factors such as nineteenth and twentieth century commercial exploitation). Several species that may be present in the Gulf of Alaska have an extremely low probability of presence in the Study Area. These species are considered extralimital, meaning there may be a small number of sighting or stranding records within the Study Area, but the area of concern is outside the species' range of normal occurrence. These species include beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas), false killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens), short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus), northern right whale dolphin (Lissodelphis borealis), and Risso's dolphin (Grampus griseus), and have been excluded from subsequent analysis.
Table 6--Marine Mammals With Possible or Confirmed Presence Within the Study Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock abundance \3\ Occurrence in region
Common name Scientific name \1\ Stock \2\ (CV) \4\ ESA/MMPA Status
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetacea
Suborder Mysticeti (baleen whales)
Family Balaenidae (right whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Pacific right whale.......... Eubalaena japonica.... Eastern North Pacific. 31 (0.23)............ Rare................. Endangered/Depleted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale..................... Megaptera novaeangliae Central North Pacific. 10,252 (0.042)....... Likely............... Endangered/ Depleted.
Western North Pacific. 893 (0.079).......... Likely............... Endangered/ Depleted.
Page 9957
Blue whale......................... Balaenoptera musculus. Eastern North Pacific. 1,647 (0.07)......... Seasonal; highest Endangered/ Depleted.
likelihood July to
December.
Central North Pacific. 81 (1.14)............ Seasonal; highest Endangered/ Depleted.
likelihood July to
December.
Fin whale.......................... Balaenoptera physalus. Northeast Pacific..... 1,368 (minimum Likely............... Endangered/ Depleted.
estimate) (n/a).
Sei whale.......................... Balaenoptera borealis. Eastern North Pacific. 126 (0.53)........... Rare................. Endangered/ Depleted.
Minke whale........................ Balaenoptera Alaska................ Not available........ Likely.
acutorostrata.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae (gray whale)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale......................... Eschrichtius robustus. Eastern North Pacific. 20,990 (0.05)........ Likely: Highest
numbers during
seasonal migrations.
Western North Pacific. 140 (0.043).......... Rare: Individuals Endangered/ Depleted.
migrate through GOA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suborder Odontoceti (toothed whales)
Family Physeteridae (sperm whale)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sperm whale........................ Physeter macrocephalus North Pacific......... Not available........ Likely; More likely Endangered/ Depleted.
in waters > 1,000 m
depth, most often >
2,000 m.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae (dolphins)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Killer whale....................... Orcinus orca.......... Alaska Resident....... 2,347 (n/a).......... Likely.
Eastern North Pacific 211: includes known Infrequent: few
Offshore. offshore killer sightings.
whales along the
U.S. west coast,
Canada, and Alaska
(n/a).
AT1 Transient......... 7.................... Rare; more likely
inside Prince
William Sound and
Kenai Fjords.
GOA, Aleutian Island, 587.................. Likely.
and Bering Sea
Transient.
Pacific whitedashsided dolphin... Lagenorhynchus North Pacific......... 26,880; specific to Likely.
obliquidens. the GOA, not the
management stock (n/
a).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor porpoise.................... Phocoena phocoena..... GOA................... 31,046 (0.21)........ Likely in nearshore
locations.
Southeast Alaska...... 11,146 (0.24)........ Likely in nearshore
locations.
Dall's porpoise.................... Phocoenoides dalli.... Alaska................ 83,400 (0.097); based Likely.
on survey data from
1987-1991.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Ziphiidae (beaked whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cuvier's beaked whale.............. Ziphius cavirostris... Alaska................ Not available........ Likely.
Baird's beaked whale............... Berardius bairdii..... Alaska................ Not available........ Likely.
Stejneger's beaked whale........... Mesoplodon stejnegeri. Alaska................ Not available........ Likely.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page 9958
Order Carnivora
Suborder Pinnipedia \5\
Family Otariidae (fur seals and sea lions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steller sea lion................... Eumetopias jubatus.... Eastern U.S........... 59,968 (minimum Likely.
estimate) (n/a).
Western U.S........... 49,497 (minimum Likely............... Endangered/ Depleted.
estimate) (n/a).
California sea lion................ Zalophus californianus U.S................... 296,750 (n/a)........ Rare.
Northern fur seal.................. Callorhinus ursinus... Eastern Pacific....... 648,534 (n/a)........ Likely............... Depleted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (true seals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern elephant seal............. Mirounga California Breeding... 179,000 (n/a)........ Likely.
angustirostris.
Harbor seal........................ Phoca vitulina........ Aleutian Islands...... 6,431 (n/a).......... Extralimital
Pribilof Islands...... 232 (n/a)............ Extralimital.
Bristol Bay........... 32,350 (n/a)......... Extralimital.
N. Kodiak............. 8,321 (n/a).......... Rare (inshore
waters).
S. Kodiak............. 19,199 (n/a)......... Rare (inshore
waters).
Prince William Sound.. 29,889 (n/a)......... Rare (inshore
waters).
Cook Inlet/Shelikof... 27,386 (n/a)......... Extralimital.
Glacier Bay/Icy Strait 7,210 (n/a).......... Rare (inshore
waters).
Lynn Canal/ Stephens.. 9,478 (n/a).......... Extralimital.
Sitka/Chatham......... 14,855 (n/a)......... Rare (inshore
waters).
Dixon/Cape Decision... 18,105 (n/a)......... Rare (inshore
waters).
Clarence Strait....... 31,634 (n/a)......... Extralimital.
Ribbon seal........................ Histriophoca fasciata. Alaska................ 184,000.............. Rare.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Mustelidae (otters) \6\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern sea otter................. Enhydra lutris kenyoni Southeast Alaska...... 10,563............... Rare.
Southcentral Alaska... 15,090............... Rare.
Southwest Alaska...... 47,676............... Rare................. Threatened.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Taxonomy follows Perrin et al. (2009).
\2\ Stock names and abundance estimates from Muto and Angliss (2015) and Carretta et al. (2015) except where noted.
\3\ The stated coefficient of variation (CV) from the NMFS Stock Assessement Reports is an indicator of uncertainty in the abundance estimate and
describes the amount of variation with respect to the population mean. It is expressed as a fraction or sometimes a percentage and can range upward
from zero, indicating no uncertainty, to high values. For example, a CV of 0.85 would indicate high uncertainty in the population estimate. When the
CV exceeds 1.0, the estimate is very uncertain. The uncertainty associated with movements of animals into or out of an area (due to factors such as
availability of prey or changing oceanographic conditions) is much larger than is indicated by the CVs that are given.
\4\ EXTRALIMITAL: There may be a small number of sighting or stranding records, but the area is outside the species range of normal occurrence. RARE:
The distribution of the species is near enough to the area that the species could occur there, or there are a few confirmed sightings. INFREQUENT:
Confirmed, but irregular sightings or acoustic detections. LIKELY: Confirmed and regular sightings or acoustic detections of the species in the area
year-round. SEASONAL: Confirmed and regular sightings or acoustic detections of the species in the area on a seasonal basis.
\5\ There are no data regarding the CV for some of the pinniped species given that abundance is determined by different methods than those used for
cetaceans.
\6\ There are no data regarding the CV for sea otter given that abundance is determined by different methods than those used for cetaceans.
Notes: CV = coefficient of variation, ESA = Endangered Species Act, GOA = Gulf of Alaska, m = meter(s), MMPA = Marine Mammal Protection Act, n/a = not
available, U.S. = United States.
Information on the status, distribution, abundance, and vocalizations of marine mammal species in the Study Area may be viewed in Chapter 4 of the LOA application (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/military.htm). Additional information on the general biology and ecology of marine mammals are included in the GOA DSEIS/
OEIS. In addition, NMFS annually publishes Stock Assessment Reports (SARs) for all marine mammals in U.S. EEZ waters, including stocks that occur within the Study Area (U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments, Carretta et al., 2015; Alaska Marine Mammal Stock Assessments, Muto and Angliss, 2015).
Marine Mammal Hearing and Vocalizations
Cetaceans have an auditory anatomy that follows the basic mammalian pattern, with some changes to adapt to the demands of hearing underwater. The typical mammalian ear is divided into an outer ear, middle ear, and inner ear.
Page 9959
The outer ear is separated from the inner ear by a tympanic membrane, or eardrum. In terrestrial mammals, the outer ear, eardrum, and middle ear transmit airborne sound to the inner ear, where the sound waves are propagated through the cochlear fluid. Since the impedance of water is close to that of the tissues of a cetacean, the outer ear is not required to transduce sound energy as it does when sound waves travel from air to fluid (inner ear). Sound waves traveling through the inner ear cause the basilar membrane to vibrate. Specialized cells, called hair cells, respond to the vibration and produce nerve pulses that are transmitted to the central nervous system. Acoustic energy causes the basilar membrane in the cochlea to vibrate. Sensory cells at different positions along the basilar membrane are excited by different frequencies of sound (Pickles, 1998).
Marine mammal vocalizations often extend both above and below the range of human hearing; vocalizations with frequencies lower than 20 Hz are labeled as infrasonic and those higher than 20 kHz as ultrasonic (National Research Council (NRC), 2003; Figure 4-1). Measured data on the hearing abilities of cetaceans are sparse, particularly for the larger cetaceans such as the baleen whales. The auditory thresholds of some of the smaller odontocetes have been determined in captivity. It is generally believed that cetaceans should at least be sensitive to the frequencies of their own vocalizations. Comparisons of the anatomy of cetacean inner ears and models of the structural properties and the response to vibrations of the ear's components in different species provide an indication of likely sensitivity to various sound frequencies. The ears of small toothed whales are optimized for receiving high-frequency sound, while baleen whale inner ears are best in low to infrasonic frequencies (Ketten, 1992; 1997; 1998).
Baleen whale vocalizations are composed primarily of frequencies below 1 kHz, and some contain fundamental frequencies as low as 16 Hz (Watkins et al., 1987; Richardson et al., 1995; Rivers, 1997; Moore et al., 1998; Stafford et al., 1999; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999) but can be as high as 24 kHz (humpback whale; Au et al., 2006). Clark and Ellison (2004) suggested that baleen whales use low-frequency sounds not only for long-range communication, but also as a simple form of echo ranging, using echoes to navigate and orient relative to physical features of the ocean. Information on auditory function in baleen whales is extremely lacking. Sensitivity to low-frequency sound by baleen whales has been inferred from observed vocalization frequencies, observed reactions to playback of sounds, and anatomical analyses of the auditory system. Although there is apparently much variation, the source levels of most baleen whale vocalizations lie in the range of 150-190 dB re 1 microPascal (microPa) at 1 m. Low-frequency vocalizations made by baleen whales and their corresponding auditory anatomy suggest that they have good low-frequency hearing (Ketten, 2000), although specific data on sensitivity, frequency or intensity discrimination, or localization abilities are lacking. Marine mammals, like all mammals, have typical U-shaped audiograms that begin with relatively low sensitivity (high threshold) at some specified low frequency with increased sensitivity (low threshold) to a species specific optimum followed by a generally steep rise at higher frequencies (high threshold) (Fay, 1988).
The toothed whales produce a wide variety of sounds, which include species-specific broadband ``clicks'' with peak energy between 10 and 200 kHz, individually variable ``burst pulse'' click trains, and constant frequency or frequency-modulated (FM) whistles ranging from 4 to 16 kHz (Wartzok and Ketten, 1999). The general consensus is that the tonal vocalizations (whistles) produced by toothed whales play an important role in maintaining contact between dispersed individuals, while broadband clicks are used during echolocation (Wartzok and Ketten, 1999). Burst pulses have also been strongly implicated in communication, with some scientists suggesting that they play an important role in agonistic encounters (McCowan and Reiss, 1995), while others have proposed that they represent ``emotive'' signals in a broader sense, possibly representing graded communication signals (Herzing, 1996). Sperm whales, however, are known to produce only clicks, which are used for both communication and echolocation (Whitehead, 2003). Most of the energy of toothed whale social vocalizations is concentrated near 10 kHz, with source levels for whistles as high as 100 to 180 dB re 1 microPa at 1 m (Richardson et al., 1995). No odontocete has been shown audiometrically to have acute hearing ( Navy aircraft participating in exercises at sea shall conduct and maintain, when operationally feasible and safe, surveillance for marine species of concern as long as it does not violate safety constraints or interfere with the accomplishment of primary operational duties.
Helicopters shall observe/survey the vicinity of an ASW training event for 10 minutes before the first deployment of active (dipping) sonar in the water.
The Navy is proposing to continue using the number of Lookouts (one) currently implemented for aircraft conducting non-hull-mounted MFA sonar activities.
Mitigation measures do not currently exist for other high-frequency active sonar activities associated with ASW, or for new platforms; therefore, the Navy is proposing to add a new Lookout and other measures for these activities and on these platforms when conducted in the Study Area. The recommended measure is provided below.
The Navy will have one Lookout on ships conducting high-frequency or non-hull mounted mid-frequency active sonar activities associated with ASW activities at sea.
Explosives and Impulsive Sound
Improved Extended Echo Ranging Sonobuoys
The Navy is not proposing use of Improved Extended Echo Ranging Sonobuoys during the GOA TMAA training activities.
Explosive Signal Underwater Sound Buoys Using >0.5-2.5 Pound Net Explosive Weight
Lookout measures do not currently exist for explosive signal underwater sound (SUS) buoy activities using >0.5-2.5 pound (lb.) net explosive weight (NEW). The Navy is proposing to add this measure. Aircraft conducting SUS activities using >0.5-2.5 lb. NEW will have one Lookout.
Gunnery Exercises--Small-, Medium-, and Large-Caliber Using a Surface Target
Currently, the Navy employs the following Lookout procedures during gunnery exercises:
From the intended firing position, trained Lookouts shall survey the mitigation zone for marine mammals prior to commencement and during the exercise as long as practicable.
If applicable, target towing vessels shall maintain a Lookout. If a marine mammal is sighted in the vicinity of the exercise, the tow vessel shall immediately notify the firing vessel in order to secure gunnery firing until the area is clear.
The Navy is proposing to continue using the Lookout procedures currently implemented for this activity. The Navy will have one Lookout on the vessel or aircraft conducting small-, medium-, or large-caliber gunnery exercises against a surface target. Towing vessels, if applicable, shall also maintain one Lookout.
Missile Exercises Using a Surface Target
Currently, the Navy employs the following Lookout procedures during missile exercises:
Aircraft shall visually survey the target area for marine mammals. Visual inspection of the target area shall be made by flying at 1,500 ft. (457 m) or lower, if safe to do so, and at slowest safe speed.
Page 9980
Firing or range clearance aircraft must be able to actually see ordnance impact areas.
The Navy is proposing to continue using the Lookout procedures currently implemented for this activity. When aircraft are conducting missile exercises against a surface target, the Navy will have one Lookout positioned in an aircraft.
Bombing Exercises (Explosive)
Currently, the Navy employs the following Lookout procedures during bombing exercises:
If surface vessels are involved, Lookouts shall survey for floating kelp and marine mammals.
Aircraft shall visually survey the target and buffer zone for marine mammals prior to and during the exercise. The survey of the impact area shall be made by flying at 1,500 ft. (460 m) or lower, if safe to do so, and at the slowest safe speed. Release of ordnance through cloud cover is prohibited: Aircraft must be able to actually see ordnance impact areas. Survey aircraft should employ most effective search tactics and capabilities.
The Navy is proposing to (1) continue implementing the current measures for bombing exercises, and (2) clarify the number of Lookouts currently implemented for this activity. The Navy will have one Lookout positioned in an aircraft conducting bombing exercises, and trained Lookouts in any surface vessels involved.
Weapons Firing Noise During Gunnery Exercises
The Navy is proposing to continue using the number of Lookouts currently implemented for gunnery exercises. The Navy will have one Lookout on the ship conducting explosive and non-explosive gunnery exercises. This may be the same Lookout described for Gunnery Exercises--Small-, Medium-, and Large-Caliber Using a Surface Target when that activity is conducted from a ship against a surface target.
Sinking Exercises
The Navy is proposing to continue using the number of Lookouts currently implemented for this activity. The Navy will have two Lookouts (one positioned in an aircraft and one on a vessel) during sinking exercises.
Physical Disturbance and Strike
Vessels
Currently, the Navy employs the following Lookout procedures to avoid physical disturbance and strike of marine mammals during at-sea training:
While underway, surface vessels shall have at least two Lookouts with binoculars; surfaced submarines shall have at least one Lookout with binoculars. Lookouts already posted for safety of navigation and man-overboard precautions may be used to fill this requirement. As part of their regular duties, Lookouts will watch for and report to the Officer of the Deck the presence of marine mammals.
Consistent with other ongoing Navy Phase 2 training and testing (NWTT, MITT, AFTT, HSTT), the Navy is proposing to revise the mitigation measures for this activity as follows: While underway, vessels will have a minimum of one Lookout.
Non-Explosive Practice Munitions
Gunnery Exercises--Small-, Medium-, and Large-Caliber Using a Surface Target
Currently, the Navy employs the same mitigation measures for non-
explosive practice munitions--small-, medium-, and large-caliber gunnery exercises--as described above for Gunnery Exercises--Small-, Medium-, and Large-Caliber Using a Surface Target.
The Navy is proposing to continue using the number of Lookouts currently implemented for these activities. The Navy will have one Lookout during activities involving non-explosive practice munitions (e.g., small-, medium-, and large-caliber gunnery exercises) against a surface target.
Missile Exercises Using a Surface Target
Currently, the Navy employs the same mitigation measures for non-
explosive missile exercises (including rockets) using a surface target as described for Missile Exercises Using a Surface Target (explosive).
The Navy is proposing to continue using the number of Lookouts currently implemented for these activities. When aircraft are conducting non-explosive missile exercises (including exercises using rockets) against a surface target, the Navy will have one Lookout positioned in an aircraft.
Bombing Exercises
Currently, the Navy employs the same mitigation measures for non-
explosive bombing exercises as described for Bombing Exercises (Explosive).
The Navy is proposing to continue using the same Lookout procedures currently implemented for these activities. The Navy will have one Lookout positioned in an aircraft during non-explosive bombing exercises, and trained Lookouts in any surface vessels involved.
Mitigation Zones
The Navy proposes to use mitigation zones to reduce the potential impacts to marine mammals from training activities. Mitigation zones are measured as the radius from a source. Unique to each activity category, each radius represents a distance that the Navy will visually observe to help reduce injury to marine species. Visual detections of applicable marine species will be communicated immediately to the appropriate watch station for information dissemination and appropriate action. If the presence of marine mammals is detected acoustically, Lookouts posted in aircraft and on surface vessels will increase the vigilance of their visual surveillance. As a reference, aerial surveys are typically made by flying at 1,500 ft. (457 m) altitude or lower at the slowest safe speed.
Many of the proposed activities have mitigation measures that are currently being implemented, as required by previous environmental documents or consultations. Most of the current mitigation zones for activities that involve the use of impulsive and non-impulsive sources were originally designed to reduce the potential for onset of TTS. For the GOA DSEIS/OEIS and the LOA application, the Navy updated the acoustic propagation modeling to incorporate updated hearing threshold metrics (i.e., upper and lower frequency limits), updated density data for marine mammals, and factors such as an animal's likely presence at various depths. An explanation of the acoustic propagation modeling process can be found in the Determination of Acoustic Effects on Marine Mammals for the Gulf of Alaska Training Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement technical report (Marine Species Modeling Team, 2014).
As a result of the updates to the acoustic propagation modeling, in some cases the ranges to onset of TTS effects are much larger than previous model outputs. Due to the ineffectiveness and unacceptable operational impacts associated with mitigating these large areas, the Navy is unable to mitigate for onset of TTS for every activity. In this GOA TMAA analysis, the Navy developed each recommended mitigation zone to avoid or reduce the potential for onset PTS, out to the predicted maximum range. In some cases where the ranges to effects are smaller than previous models estimated, the mitigation zones were adjusted accordingly to provide consistency
Page 9981
across the measures. Mitigating to the predicted maximum range to PTS consequently also mitigates to the predicted maximum range to onset mortality (1 percent mortality), onset slight lung injury, and onset slight gastrointestinal tract injury, since the maximum range to effects for these criteria are shorter than for PTS. Furthermore, in most cases, the predicted maximum range to PTS also consequently covers the predicted average range to TTS. Table 8 summarizes the predicted average range to TTS, average range to PTS, maximum range to PTS, and recommended mitigation zone for each activity category, based on the Navy's acoustic propagation modeling results.
The activity-specific mitigation zones are based on the longest range for all the functional hearing groups. The mitigation zone for a majority of activities is driven by either the high-frequency cetaceans or the sea turtles functional hearing groups. Therefore, the mitigation zones are even more protective for the remaining functional hearing groups (i.e., low-frequency cetaceans, mid-frequency cetaceans, and pinnipeds), and likely cover a larger portion of the potential range to onset of TTS.
This evaluation includes explosive ranges to TTS and the onset of auditory injury, non-auditory injury, slight lung injury, and mortality. For every source proposed for use by the Navy, the recommended mitigation zones included in Table 8 exceed each of these ranges. In some instances, the Navy recommends mitigation zones that are larger or smaller than the predicted maximum range to PTS based on the effectiveness and operational assessments. The recommended mitigation zones and their associated assessments are provided throughout the remainder of this section. The recommended measures are either currently implemented, are modifications of current measures, or are new measures.
For some activities specified throughout the remainder of this section, Lookouts may be required to observe for concentrations of detached floating vegetation (Sargassum or kelp paddies), which are indicators of potential marine mammal presence within the mitigation zone. Those specified activities will not commence if floating vegetation (Sargassum or kelp paddies) is observed within the mitigation zone prior to the initial start of the activity. If floating vegetation is observed prior to the initial start of the activity, the activity will be relocated to an area where no floating vegetation is observed. Training will not cease as a result of indicators entering the mitigation zone after activities have commenced. This measure is intended only for floating vegetation detached from the seafloor.
Table 8--Predicted Ranges to Effects and Recommended Mitigation Zones for Each Activity Category
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative source Predicted (longest) Predicted (longest) Predicted maximum Recommended
Activity category (bin) \1\ average range to TTS average range to PTS range to PTS mitigation zone
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Impulse Sound
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hull-Mounted MiddashFrequency SQS-53 ASW hull- 3,821 yd. (3.5 km) for 100 yd. (91 m) for Not Applicable....... 6 dB power down at
Active Sonar. mounted sonar (MF1). one ping. one ping. 1,000 yd. (914 m); 4
dB power down at 500
yd. (457 m); and
shutdown at 200 yd.
(183 m).
High-Frequency and NondashHull AQS-22 ASW dipping 230 yd. (210 m) for 20 yd. (18 m) for one Not applicable....... 200 yd. (183 m).
Mounted MiddashFrequency Active sonar (MF4). one ping. ping.
Sonar.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Explosive and Impulse Sound
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal Underwater Sound (SUS) buoys Explosive sonobuoy 290 yd. (265 m)....... 113 yd. (103 m)...... 309 yd. (283 m)...... 350 yd. (320 m).
using > 0.5-2.5 lb. NEW. (E3).
Gunnery Exercises--Small- and 40 mm projectile (E2). 190 yd. (174 m)....... 83 yd. (76 m)........ 182 yd. (167 m)...... 200 yd. (183 m).
Medium-Caliber (Surface Target).
Gunnery Exercises--Large-Caliber 5 in. projectiles (E5) 453 yd. (414 m)....... 186 yd. (170 m)...... 526 yd. (481 m)...... 600 yd. (549 m).
(Surface Target).
Missile Exercises (Including Maverick missile (E9). 949 yd. (868 m)....... 398 yd. (364 m)...... 699 yd. (639 m)...... 900 yd. (823 m).
Rockets) up to 250 lb. NEW Using a
Surface Target.
Missile Exercises up to 500 lb. NEW Harpoon missile (E10). 1,832 yd. (1.7 km).... 731 yd. (668 m)...... 1,883 yd. (1.7 km)... 2,000 yd. (1.8 km).
(Surface Target).
Bombing Exercises.................. MK-84 2,000 lb. bomb 2,513 yd. (2.3 km).... 991 yd. (906 m)...... 2,474 yd. (2.3 km)... 2,500 yd. (2.3
(E12). km)\2\.
Sinking Exercises.................. Various up to MK-84 2,513 yd. (2.3 km).... 991 yd. (906 m)...... 2,474 yd. (2.3 km)... 2.5 nm \(2)\.
2,000 lb. bomb (E12).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This table does not provide an inclusive list of source bins; bins presented here represent the source bin with the largest range to effects within
the given activity category.
\2\ Recommended mitigation zones are larger than the modeled injury zones to account for multiple types of sources or charges being used.
Notes: in = inches, km = kilometers, lb. = pounds, m = meters, nm = nautical miles, PTS = Permanent Threshold Shift, TTS = Temporary Threshold Shift,
yd. = yards
Page 9982
Non-Impulsive Sound
Hull-Mounted Mid-Frequency Active Sonar
The Navy is proposing to (1) continue implementing the current measures for MFAS and (2) to clarify the conditions needed to recommence an activity after a marine mammal has been detected.
Activities that involve the use of hull-mounted MFA sonar will use Lookouts for visual observation from a ship immediately before and during the activity. Mitigation zones for these activities involve powering down the sonar by 6 dB when a marine mammal is sighted within 1,000 yd. (914 m) of the sonar dome, and by an additional 4 dB when sighted within 500 yd. (457 m) from the source, for a total reduction of 10 dB. Active transmissions will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within 200 yd. (183 m). Active transmission will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes, (4) the ship has transited more than 2,000 yd. (1.8 km) beyond the location of the last sighting, or (5) the ship concludes that dolphins are deliberately closing in on the ship to ride the ship's bow wave (and there are no other marine mammal sightings within the mitigation zone). Active transmission may resume when dolphins are bow riding because they are out of the main transmission axis of the active sonar while in the shallow-wave area of the ship bow.
High-Frequency and Non-Hull-Mounted Mid-Frequency Active Sonar
Non-hull-mounted MFA sonar training activities include the use of aircraft deployed sonobuoys and helicopter dipping sonar. The Navy is proposing to: (1) Continue implementing the current mitigation measures for activities currently being executed, such as dipping sonar activities; (2) extend the implementation of its current mitigation to all other activities in this category; and (3) clarify the conditions needed to recommence an activity after a sighting. The recommended measures are provided below.
Mitigation will include visual observation from a vessel or aircraft (with the exception of platforms operating at high altitudes) immediately before and during active transmission within a mitigation zone of 200 yd. (183 m) from the active sonar source. For activities involving helicopter deployed dipping sonar, visual observation will commence 10 minutes before the first deployment of active dipping sonar. Helicopter dipping and sonobuoy deployment will not begin if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies), are observed in the mitigation zone. If the source can be turned off during the activity, active transmission will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Active transmission will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes for an aircraft-deployed source, (4) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes for a vessel-deployed source, (5) the vessel or aircraft has repositioned itself more than 400 yd. (370 m) away from the location of the last sighting, or (6) the vessel concludes that dolphins are deliberately closing in to ride the vessel's bow wave (and there are no other marine mammal sightings within the mitigation zone).
Explosives and Impulsive Sound
Explosive Signal Underwater Sound Buoys Using >0.5-2.5 Pound Net Explosive Weight
Mitigation measures do not currently exist for activities using explosive signal underwater sound (SUS) buoys.
The Navy is proposing to add the following recommended measures. Mitigation will include pre-exercise aerial monitoring during deployment within a mitigation zone of 350 yd. (320 m) around an explosive SUS buoy. Explosive SUS buoys will not be deployed if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone (around the intended deployment location). SUS deployment will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Deployment will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes.
Passive acoustic monitoring will also be conducted with Navy assets, such as sonobuoys, already participating in the activity. These assets would only detect vocalizing marine mammals within the frequency bands monitored by Navy personnel. Passive acoustic detections would not provide range or bearing to detected animals, and therefore cannot provide locations of these animals. Passive acoustic detections would be reported to Lookouts posted in aircraft in order to increase vigilance of their visual surveillance.
Gunnery Exercises--Small- and Medium-Caliber Using a Surface Target
The Navy is proposing to (1) continue implementing the current mitigation measures for this activity, (2) clarify the conditions needed to recommence an activity after a sighting, and (3) add a requirement to visually observe for kelp paddies.
Mitigation will include visual observation from a vessel or aircraft immediately before and during the exercise within a mitigation zone of 200 yd. (183 m) around the intended impact location. Vessels will observe the mitigation zone from the firing position. When aircraft are firing, the aircrew will maintain visual watch of the mitigation zone during the activity. The exercise will not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes for a firing aircraft, (4) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes for a firing ship, or (5) the intended target location has been repositioned more than 400 yd. (366 m) away from the location of the last sighting.
Gunnery Exercises--Large-Caliber Explosive Rounds Using a Surface Target
The Navy is proposing to (1) continue using the currently implemented mitigation zone measures for this activity, (2) clarify the conditions needed to recommence an activity after a sighting, and (3) implement a requirement to visually observe for kelp paddies. The recommended measures are provided below.
Mitigation will include visual observation from a ship immediately before and during the exercise within a mitigation zone of 600 yd. (549 m) around the intended impact location. Ships will observe the mitigation zone
Page 9983
from the firing position. The exercise will not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes.
Missile Exercises Up to 250 Pound Net Explosive Weight Using a Surface Target
Currently, the Navy employs a mitigation zone of 1,800 yd. (1.6 km) for all missile exercises. Because missiles have a wide range of warhead strength, the Navy is recommending two mitigation zones; one for missiles with warheads 250 lb. NEW and less, and a larger mitigation zone for missiles with larger warheads. The Navy is proposing to (1) modify the mitigation measures currently implemented for missile exercises involving missiles with 250 lb. NEW and smaller warheads by reducing the mitigation zone from 1,800 yd. (1.6 km) to 900 yd. (823 m). This new, reduced mitigation zone is a result of the most recent acoustic propogation modeling efforts (NAEMO) for the GOA TMAA and is based on a range to effect that is smaller than previously modeled for missile exercises using a surface target (as discussed below, the Navy is proposing to increase the mitigation zone for missiles with a NEW >250 lb.), (2) clarify the conditions needed to recommence an activity after a sighting, and (3) adopt the marine mammal mitigation zone size for floating vegetation for ease of implementation. The recommended measures are provided below.
When aircraft are involved in the missile firing, mitigation will include visual observation by the aircrew or supporting aircraft prior to commencement of the activity within a mitigation zone of 900 yd. (823 m) around the deployed target. The exercise will not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes or 30 minutes (depending on aircraft type).
Missile Exercises 251-500 Pound Net Explosive Weight (Surface Target)
Current mitigation measures apply to all missile exercises, regardless of the warhead size. The Navy proposes to add a mitigation zone that applies only to missiles with a NEW of 251 to 500 lb. The recommended measures are provided below.
When aircraft are involved in the missile firing, mitigation will include visual observation by the aircrew prior to commencement of the activity within a mitigation zone of 2,000 yd. (1.8 km) around the intended impact location. The exercise will not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes or 30 minutes (depending on aircraft type).
Bombing Exercises
Currently, the Navy employs the following mitigation zone procedures during bombing exercises:
Ordnance shall not be targeted to impact within 1,000 yd. (914 m) of known or observed floating kelp or marine mammals.
A 1,000 yd. (914 m) radius mitigation zone shall be established around the intended target.
The exercise will be conducted only if marine mammals are not visible within the mitigation zone.
The Navy is proposing to (1) maintain the existing mitigation zone to be used for non-explosive bombing activities, (2) revise the mitigation zone procedures to account for predicted ranges to impacts to marine species when high explosive bombs are used, (3) clarify the conditions needed to recommence an activity after a sighting, and (4) add a requirement to visually observe for kelp paddies.
Mitigation will include visual observation from the aircraft immediately before the exercise and during target approach within a mitigation zone of 2,500 yd. (2.3 km) around the intended impact location for explosive bombs and 1,000 yd. (920 m) for non-explosive bombs. The exercise will not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Bombing will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Bombing will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes.
Sinking Exercises
The Navy is proposing to (1) modify the mitigation measures currently implemented for this activity by increasing the mitigation zone from 2.0 nm to 2.5 nm, (2) clarify the conditions needed to recommence an activity after a sighting, (3) add a requirement to visually observe for kelp paddies, and (4) adopt the marine mammal and sea turtle mitigation zone size for concentrations of floating vegetation and aggregations of jellyfish for ease of implementation. The recommended measures are provided below.
Mitigation will include visual observation within a mitigation zone of 2.5 nm around the target ship hulk. Sinking exercises will include aerial observation beginning 90 minutes before the first firing, visual observations from vessels throughout the duration of the exercise, and both aerial and vessel observation immediately after any planned or unplanned breaks in weapons firing of longer than 2 hours. Prior to conducting the exercise, the Navy will review remotely sensed sea surface temperature and sea surface height maps to aid in deciding where to release the target ship hulk.
The Navy will also monitor using passive acoustics during the exercise. Passive acoustic monitoring would be conducted with Navy assets, such as passive ships sonar systems or sonobuoys, already participating in the activity. These assets would only detect vocalizing marine mammals within the frequency bands monitored by Navy personnel. Passive acoustic detections would not provide range or bearing to detected animals, and therefore cannot provide locations of these animals. Passive acoustic detections would be reported to Lookouts posted in aircraft and on vessels in order to increase vigilance of their visual surveillance. Lookouts will also increase observation vigilance before the use of torpedoes or unguided ordnance with a NEW of 500 lb. or greater, or if the Beaufort sea state is a 4 or above.
The exercise will not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the
Page 9984
mitigation zone. The exercise will cease if a marine mammal, sea turtle, or aggregation of jellyfish is sighted within the mitigation zone. The exercise will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on a determination of its course and speed and the relative motion between the animal and the source, or (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes. Upon sinking the vessel, the Navy will conduct post-exercise visual surveillance of the mitigation zone for 2 hours (or until sunset, whichever comes first).
Weapons Firing Noise During Gunnery Exercises--Large-Caliber
The Navy currently has no mitigation zone procedures for this activity in the Study Area.
The Navy is proposing to adopt measures currently used during Navy gunnery exercises in other ranges outside of the Study Area. For all explosive and non-explosive large-caliber gunnery exercises conducted from a ship, mitigation will include visual observation immediately before and during the exercise within a mitigation zone of 70 yd. (46 m) within 30 degrees on either side of the gun target line on the firing side. The exercise will not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes, or (4) the vessel has repositioned itself more than 140 yd. (128 m) away from the location of the last sighting.
Physical Disturbance and Strike
Vessels
The Navy's current measures to mitigate potential impacts to marine mammals from vessel and in-water device strikes during training activities are provided below:
Naval vessels shall maneuver to keep at least 500 yd. (457 m) away from any observed whale in the vessel's path and avoid approaching whales head-on. These requirements do not apply if a vessel's safety is threatened, such as when change of course will create an imminent and serious threat to a person, vessel, or aircraft, and to the extent vessels are restricted in their ability to maneuver. Restricted maneuverability includes, but is not limited to, situations when vessels are engaged in dredging, submerged activities, launching and recovering aircraft or landing craft, minesweeping activities, replenishment while underway and towing activities that severely restrict a vessel's ability to deviate course.
Vessels will take reasonable steps to alert other vessels in the vicinity of the whale. Given rapid swimming speeds and maneuverability of many dolphin species, naval vessels would maintain normal course and speed on sighting dolphins unless some condition indicated a need for the vessel to maneuver.
The Navy is proposing to continue to use the 500 yd. (457 m) mitigation zone currently established for whales, and to implement a 200 yd. (183 m) mitigation zone for all other marine mammals. Vessels will avoid approaching marine mammals head on and will maneuver to maintain a mitigation zone of 500 yd. (457 m) around observed whales and 200 yd. (183 m) around all other marine mammals (except bow-riding dolphins), providing it is safe to do so. The Navy is clarifying its existing speed protocol; while in transit, Navy vessels shall be alert at all times, use extreme caution, and proceed at a ``safe speed'' so that the vessel can take proper and effective action to avoid a collision with any sighted object or disturbance, including any marine mammal or sea turtle, and can be stopped within a distance appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions.
Towed In-Water Devices
The Navy currently has no mitigation zone procedures for this activity in the Study Area.
The Navy is proposing to adopt measures currently used in other ranges outside of the Study Area during activities involving towed in-
water devices. The Navy will ensure that towed in-water devices being towed from manned platforms avoid coming within a mitigation zone of 250 yd. (229 m) around any observed marine mammal, providing it is safe to do so.
Non-Explosive Practice Munitions
Gunnery Exercises--Small-, Medium-, and Large-Caliber Using a Surface Target
Currently, the Navy employs the same mitigation measures for non-
explosive gunnery exercises as described above for Gunnery Exercises--
Small-, Medium-, and Large-Caliber Using a Surface Target.
The Navy is proposing to (1) continue using the mitigation measures currently implemented for this activity, and (2) clarify the conditions needed to recommence an activity after a sighting. The recommended measures are provided below.
Mitigation will include visual observation from a vessel or aircraft immediately before and during the exercise within a mitigation zone of 200 yd. (183 m) around the intended impact location. The exercise will not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes for a firing aircraft, (4) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes for a firing ship, or (5) the intended target location has been repositioned more than 400 yd. (366 m) away from the location of the last sighting.
Bombing Exercises
The Navy is proposing to continue using the mitigation measures currently implemented for this activity. The recommended measure includes clarification of a post-sighting activity recommencement criterion.
Mitigation will include visual observation from the aircraft immediately before the exercise and during target approach within a mitigation zone of 1,000 yd. (914 m) around the intended impact location. The exercise will not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Bombing will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Bombing will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes.
Missile Exercises (Including Rockets) Using a Surface Target
The Navy is proposing to (1) modify the mitigation measures currently
Page 9985
implemented for this activity by reducing the mitigation zone from 1,800 yd. (1.6 km) to 900 yd. (823 m), (2) clarify the conditions needed to recommence an activity after a sighting, (3) adopt the marine mammal and sea turtle mitigation zone size for floating vegetation for ease of implementation, and (4) modify the platform of observation to eliminate the requirement to observe when ships are firing. The recommended measures are provided below.
When aircraft are firing, mitigation will include visual observation by the aircrew or supporting aircraft prior to commencement of the activity within a mitigation zone of 900 yd. (823 m) around the deployed target. The exercise will not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing will cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing will recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: (1) The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, (2) the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on a determination of its course and speed and the relative motion between the animal and the source, or (3) the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes or 30 minutes (depending on aircraft type).
Consideration of Time/Area Limitations
The Navy's and NMFS' analysis of effects to marine mammals considers emergent science regarding locations where cetaceans are known to engage in specific activities (e.g., feeding, breeding/
calving, or migration) at certain times of the year that are important to individual animals as well as populations of marine mammals (see discussion in Van Parijs, 2015). Where data were available, Van Parijs (2015) identified areas that are important in this way and named the areas Biologically Important Areas (BIAs). It is important to note that the BIAs were not meant to define exclusionary zones, nor were they meant to be locations that serve as sanctuaries from human activity, or areas analogous to marine protected areas (see Ferguson et al. (2015a) regarding the envisioned purpose for the BIA designations). The delineation of BIAs does not have direct or immediate regulatory consequences, although it is appropriate to consider them as part of the body of science that may inform mitigation decisions, depending on the circumstances. The intention was that the BIAs would serve as resource management tools and that they be considered along with any new information as well as, ``existing density estimates, range-wide distribution data, information on population trends and life history parameters, known threats to the population, and other relevant information'' (Van Parijs, 2015).
The Navy and NMFS have supported and will continue to support the Cetacean and Sound Mapping project, including representation on the Cetacean Density and distribution Working Group (CetMap), which informed NMFS' identification of BIAs. The same marine mammal density data present in the Navy's Marine Species Density Database Technical Report (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2014) and used in the analysis for the GOA SEIS/OEIS was used in the development of BIAs. The final products, including the Gulf of Alaska BIAs, from this mapping effort were completed and published in March 2015 (Aquatic Mammals, 2015; Calambokidis et al., 2015; Ferguson et al., 2015a, 2015b; Van Parijs, 2015). 131 BIAs for 24 marine mammal species, stocks, or populations in seven regions within U.S. waters were identified (Ferguson et al., 2015a). BIAs have been identified in the Gulf of Alaska in the vicinity of the GOA TMAA Study Area and include migratory and feeding BIAs for gray whale and North Pacific right whale, respectively. However, the degree of overlap between these BIAs and the Study area is negligible geographically. NMFS' recognition of an area as biologically important for some species activity is not equivalent to designation of critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act. Furthermore, the BIAs identified by NMFS in and around the Study Area do not represent the totality of important habitat throughout the marine mammals' full range.
NMFS' Office of Protected Resources routinely considers available information about marine mammal habitat use to inform discussions with applicants regarding potential spatio-temporal limitations on their activities that might help effect the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and their habitat. BIAs are useful tools for planning and impact assessments and are being provided to the public via this Web site: www.cetsound.noaa.gov. While these BIAs are useful tools for analysts, any decisions regarding protective measures based on these areas must go through the normal MMPA evaluation process (or any other statutory process that the BIAs are used to inform); the identification of a BIA does not pre-suppose any specific management decision associated with those areas, nor does it have direct or immediate regulatory consequences. NMFS and the Navy have discussed the BIAs listed above, what Navy activities take place in these areas (in the context of what their effects on marine mammals might be or whether additional mitigation is necessary), and what measures could be implemented to reduce impacts in these areas (in the context of their potential to reduce marine mammal impacts and their practicability). An assessment of the potential spatio-temporal and activity overlap of Navy training activities with the Gulf of Alaska BIAs listed above is included below and in Chapter 3.8 of the GOA DSEIS/OEIS. In addition, in the Group and Species-Specific Analysis section of this proposed rule NMFS has preliminarily assessed the potential effects of Navy training on the ability of gray whale and North Pacific right whale to engage in those activities for which the BIAs have been identified (migratory and feeding). As we learn more about marine mammal density, distribution, and habitat use (and the BIAs are updated), NMFS and the Navy will continue to reevaluate appropriate time-area measures through the Adaptive Management process outlined in these regulations.
North Pacific Right Whale Feeding Area--The NMFS-identified feeding area for North Pacific right whales (see Ferguson et al., 2015b) overlaps slightly with the GOA TMAA's southwestern corner. This feeding area is applicable from June to September so there is temporal overlap with the proposed Navy training but there is minimal ( An increase in our understanding of the likely occurrence of marine mammals and/or ESA-listed marine species in the vicinity of the action (i.e., presence, abundance, distribution, and/or density of species);
An increase in our understanding of the nature, scope, or context of the likely exposure of marine mammals and/or ESA-listed species to any of the potential stressor(s) associated with the action (e.g., tonal and impulsive sound), through better understanding of one or more of the following: (1) The action and the environment in which it occurs (e.g., sound source characterization, propagation, and ambient noise levels); (2) the affected species (e.g., life history or dive patterns); (3) the likely co-occurrence of marine mammals and/or ESA-listed marine species with the action (in whole or part) associated with specific adverse effects, and/or; (4) the likely biological or behavioral context of exposure to the stressor for the marine mammal and/or ESA-listed marine species (e.g., age class of exposed animals or known pupping, calving or feeding areas);
An increase in our understanding of how individual marine mammals or ESA-listed marine species respond (behaviorally or physiologically) to the specific stressors associated with the action (in specific contexts, where possible, e.g., at what distance or received level);
An increase in our understanding of how anticipated individual responses, to individual stressors or anticipated combinations of stressors, may impact either: (1) The long-term fitness and survival of an individual; or (2) the population, species, or stock (e.g., through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival);
An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of mitigation and monitoring measures;
A better understanding and record of the manner in which the authorized entity complies with the ITA and Incidental Take Statement;
An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals (through improved technology or methods), both specifically within the safety zone (thus allowing for more effective implementation of the mitigation) and in general, to better achieve the above goals; and
A reduction in the adverse impact of activities to the least practicable level, as defined in the MMPA.
Monitoring would address the ICMP top-level goals through a collection of specific regional and ocean basin studies based on scientific objectives. Quantitative metrics of monitoring effort (e.g., 20 days of aerial surveys) would not be a specific requirement. The adaptive management process and reporting requirements would serve as the basis for evaluating performance and compliance, primarily considering the quality of the work and results produced, as well as peer review and publications, and public dissemination of information, reports, and data. Details of the ICMP are available online (http://www.navymarinespeciesmonitoring. us/).
Strategic Planning Process for Marine Species Monitoring
The Navy also developed the Strategic Planning Process for Marine Species Monitoring, which establishes the guidelines and processes necessary to develop, evaluate, and fund individual projects based on objective scientific study questions. The process uses an underlying framework designed around top-level goals, a conceptual framework incorporating a progression of knowledge, and in consultation with a Scientific Advisory Group and other regional experts. The Strategic Planning Process for Marine Species Monitoring would be used to set intermediate scientific objectives, identify potential species of interest at a regional scale, and evaluate and select specific monitoring projects to fund or continue supporting for a given fiscal year. This process would also address relative investments to different range complexes based on goals across all range complexes, and monitoring would leverage multiple techniques for data acquisition and analysis whenever possible. The Strategic Planning Process for Marine Species Monitoring is also available online (http://www.navymarinespeciesmonitoring navymarinespeciesmonitoring.us/).
Past and Current Monitoring in the Study Area
NMFS has received multiple years' worth of annual exercise and monitoring reports addressing active sonar use and explosive detonations within the GOA TMAA and other Navy range complexes. The data and information contained in these reports have been considered in developing mitigation and monitoring measures for the proposed training activities within the Study Area. The Navy's annual exercise and monitoring reports may be viewed at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/military.htm and http://www.navymarinespeciesmonitoring.us. NMFS has reviewed these reports and summarized the results, as related to marine mammal monitoring, below.
-
The Navy has shown significant initiative in developing its marine species monitoring program and made considerable progress toward reaching goals and objectives of the ICMP.
-
Observation data from watchstanders aboard navy vessels is generally useful to indicate the presence or absence of marine mammals within the mitigation zones (and sometimes beyond) and to document the implementation of mitigation measures, but does not provide useful species-specific information or behavioral data.
Page 9988
-
Data gathered by experienced marine mammal observers can provide very valuable information at a level of detail not possible with watchstanders.
-
Though it is by no means conclusive, it is worth noting that no instances of obvious behavioral disturbance have been observed by Navy watchstanders or experienced marine mammal observers conducting visual monitoring.
-
Visual surveys generally provide suitable data for addressing questions of distribution and abundance of marine mammals, but are much less effective at providing information on movements and behavior, with a few notable exceptions where sightings are most frequent.
-
Passive acoustics and animal tagging have significant potential for applications addressing animal movements and behavioral response to Navy training activities, but require a longer time horizon and heavy investment in analysis to produce relevant results.
-
NMFS and the Navy should more carefully consider what and how information should be gathered by watchstanders during training exercises and monitoring events, as some reports contain different information, making cross-report comparisons difficult.
This section is a summary of Navy-funded compliance monitoring in the GOA TMAA since 2011. Additional Navy-funded monitoring outside of and in addition to the Navy's commitments to NMFS is provided later in this section.
Gulf of Alaska Study Area Monitoring, 2011-2015--During the LOA development process for the 2011 GOA FEIS/OEIS, the Navy and NMFS agreed that monitoring in the Gulf of Alaska should focus on augmenting existing baseline data, since regional data on species occurrence and density are extremely limited. There have been four reports to date covering work in the Gulf of Alaska (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2011c, 2011d, 2012, 2013f). Collecting baseline data was deemed a priority prior to focusing on exercise monitoring and behavioral response as is now being done in other Navy OPAREAs and ranges. There have been no previous dedicated monitoring efforts during Navy training activities in the GOA TMAA with the exception of deployed HARPs.
In July 2011, the Navy funded deployment of two long-term bottom-
mounted passive acoustic monitoring buoys by Scripps Institute of Oceanography. These HARPs were deployed southeast of Kenai Peninsula in the GOA TMAA with one on the shelf approximately 50 nm from land (in 111 fathoms 203 m depth) and on the shelf-break slope approximately 100 nm from land (in 492 fathoms 900 m depth). Intended to be collected annually, results from the first deployment (July 2011-May 2012) included over 5,756 hours of passive acoustic data (Baumann-
Pickering et al. 2012b). Identification of marine mammal sounds included four baleen whale species (blue whales, fin whales, gray whales, and humpback whales) and at least six species of odontocetes (killer whale, sperm whale, Stejneger's beaked whale, Baird's beaked whale, Cuvier's beaked whale, and an unidentified porpoise presumed to be Dall's porpoise; Baumann-Pickering et al., 2012b). Researchers also noted the detection of anthropogenic sound from commercial shipping. There were no Navy activities or vessels in the area at any time during the recording period.
Analysis of the passive acoustic detections made from May 2012 to June 2013 were presented in Baumann-Pickering et al. (2013), Debich et al. (2013), Debich et al. (2014), and the Navy's 2012, 2013, and 2014 GOA TMAA annual monitoring report submitted to NMFS (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2012, 2013f, 2014d). Three baleen whale species were detected: Blue whales, fin whales, and humpback whales. No North Pacific right whale calls were detected at either site during this monitoring period. At least seven species of odontocetes were detected: Risso's dolphins, killer whales, sperm whales, Baird's beaked whales, Cuvier's beaked whales, Stejneger's beaked whales, and unidentified porpoises (likely Dall's porpoise). Focused analysis of beaked whale echolocation recordings were presented in Baumann-Pickering et al. (2013).
As also presented in Debich et al. (2013) and U.S. Department of the Navy (2013f), broadband ship noise was found to be more common at the slope and Pratt Seamount monitoring sites within the GOA TMAA than at the nearshore (on shelf) site. Sonar (a variety of frequencies, most likely fathometers and fish-finders), were more common on the shelf and slope sites. Very few explosions were recorded at any of the three sites throughout the monitoring period. Origin of the few explosions detected are unknown, but there was no Navy explosive use in the GOA TMAA during this period, so these explosive-like events may be related to fisheries activity, lightning strikes, or some other unidentified source. There were no detections of Navy mid-frequency sonar use in the recordings (Debich et al. 2013, 2014; U.S. Department of the Navy 2013f, 2014d). In September 2012, an additional HARP buoy was deployed at Pratt Seamount (near the east end of the GOA TMAA) and in June 2013 two additional buoys were deployed in the GOA TMAA: One at the shelf-
break near the southwest corner of the GOA TMAA and one at Quinn Seamount (the approximate middle of the GOA TMAA's southeast boundary). This constitutes a total of five Navy-funded concurrent long-term passive acoustic monitoring packages present in the GOA TMAA through fall of 2014. Debich et al. (2013) reported the first detection of a North Pacific right whale at the Quinn Seamount site. Over two days between June and August 2013, the Quinn seamount HARP detected three hours of North Pacific right whale calls (Debich et al., 2014, Scaronirovicacute et al., in press). Given the recording device location near the southwest border of the GOA TMAA, inability of the device as configured to determine call directionality, and likely signal propagation of several 10s of miles, it remains uncertain if the detected calls orginated within or outside of the GOA TMAA. Previous related Navy funded monitoring at multiple sites within the Study Area reported no North Pacific right whale detections (Baumann-Pickering et al., 2012b, Debich et al., 2013). Additional monitoring conducted in the GOA TMAA through spring 2015 included the deployment of five HARPs to detect marine mammals and anthropogenic sounds (Rice et al., 2015). Future monitoring will include varying numbers of HARPs or other passive acoustic technologies based on annual Adaptive Management discussions with NMFS (see U.S. Department of the Navy 2014d for details in that regard).
In the Gulf of Alaska, the Navy has also funded two previous marine mammal surveys to gather occurrence and density data. Although there was no regulatory requirement for the Navy to undertake either survey, the Navy funded the data collection to first support analysis of potential effects for the 2011 GOA FEIS/OEIS and again recently to support the current SEIS/OEIS. The first Navy-funded survey (GOALS) was conducted by NMFS in April 2009 (see Rone et al., 2009). Line-transect survey visual data was gathered to support distance sampling statistics and acoustic data were collected over a 10-day period both within and outside the GOA TMAA. This survey resulted in sightings of several species and allowed for the derivation of densities for fin and humpback whale that supplemented multiple previous survey efforts in the
Page 9989
vicinity (Rone et al., 2009). In summer 2013, the Navy funded an additional visual line-transect survey in the offshore waters of the Gulf of Alaska (Rone et al., 2014). The GOALS II survey was a 30-day visual line-transect survey supplemented by use of passive acoustics and was a follow-on effort to the previously Navy-funded GOALS survey in 2009. The primary objectives for the GOALS II survey were to acquire baseline data to increase understanding of the likely occurrence (i.e., presence, abundance, distribution and/or density of species) of beaked whales and ESA-listed marine mammals in the Gulf of Alaska. Specific research objectives were:
Assess the abundance, spatial distribution and/or density of marine mammals, with a focus on beaked whales and ESA-listed cetacean species through visual line-transect surveys and passive acoustics using a towed hydrophone array and sonobuoys
Increase knowledge of species' vocal repertoire by linking visual sightings to vocally active cetaceans, in order to improve the effectiveness of passive acoustic monitoring
Attempt to photo-identify and biopsy sample individual whales opportunistically for analysis of population structure, genetics and habitat use
Attempt to locate whales for opportunistic satellite tagging using visual and passive acoustic methodology in order to provide information on both large- and fine-scale movements and habitat use of cetaceans
The Navy-funded GOALS II survey also sampled four distinct habitat areas (shelf, slope, offshore, and seamounts) which were partitioned into four strata. The survey design was intended to provide uniform coverage within the Gulf of Alaska. However, given the overall limited knowledge of beaked whales within the Gulf of Alaska, the survey was also designed to provide coverage of potential beaked whale habitat and resulted in 13 encounters with beaked whales numbering 67 individual animals (Rone et al., 2014). The following additional details are summarized from the presentation in Rone et al. (2014). The visual survey consisted of 4,504 km (2,431 nm) of `full-effort' and included 349 km (188 nm) of `transit-effort.' There was an additional 375 km (202 nm) of `fog-effort' (transect and transit). Based on total effort, there were 802 sightings (1,998 individuals) identified to species, with an additional 162 sightings (228 individuals) of unidentified cetaceans and pinnipeds. Acoustic surveying was conducted round-the-
clock with a towed-hydrophone array for 6,304 km (3,997 nm) of line-
transect effort totaling 426 hours of `standard' monitoring, with an additional 374 km (202 nm) of ~30 hours of `non-standard' and `chase' effort. There were 379 acoustic detections and 267 localizations of 6 identified cetacean species. Additionally, 186 acoustic sonobuoys were deployed with 7 identified cetacean species detected. Two satellite transmitter tags were deployed; a tag on a blue whale (B. musculus) transmitted for 9 days and a tag on a Baird's beaked whale (Berardius bairdii) transmitted for 15 days. Based on photo-identification matches, the tagged blue whale had been previously identified off Baja California, Mexico, in 2005. Photographs of five cetacean species were collected for photo-identification purposes: fin, humpback, blue, killer (Orcinus orca) and Baird's beaked whales. The estimates of abundance and density for five species were obtained for the first time for the central Gulf of Alaska. Overall, the Navy funded GOALS II survey provided one of the most comprehensive datasets on marine mammal occurrence, abundance, and distribution within that rarely surveyed area (Rone et al., 2014).
NMFS has acknowledged that the Navy's GOA TMAA monitoring will enhance understanding of marine mammal vocalizations and distributions within the offshore waters of the Gulf of Alaska. Additionally, NMFS pointed out that information gained from the investigations associated with the Navy's monitoring may be used in the adaptive management of monitoring measures in subsequent NMFS authorizations, if appropriate and in consultation with NMFS. The Navy is committed to structuring the Navy-sponsored research and monitoring program to address both NMFS' regulatory requirements as part of any MMPA authorizations while at the same time making significant contributions to the greater body of marine mammal science (see U.S. Department of the Navy, 2013f).
Pacific Northwest Cetacean Tagging--A Navy-funded effort in the Pacific Northwest is ongoing and involves attaching long-term satellite tracking tags to migrating gray whales off the coast of Oregon and northern California (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2013e). This study is being conducted by the University of Oregon and has also included tagging of other large whale species such as humpback whales, fin whales, and killer whales when encountered. This effort is not programmed, affiliated, or managed as part of the GOA TMAA monitoring, and is a separate regional project, but has provided information on marine mammals and their movements that has application to the Gulf of Alaska.
In one effort between May 2010 and May 2013, satellite tracking tags were placed on three gray whales, 11 fin whales, five humpback whales, and two killer whales off the Washington coast (Schorr et al., 2013). One tag on an Eastern North Pacific Offshore stock killer whale, in a pod encountered off Washington at Grays Harbor Canyon, remained attached and continued to transmit for approximately 3 months. In this period, the animal transited a distance of approximately 4,700 nm, which included time spent in the nearshore margins of the TMAA in the Gulf of Alaska where it would be considered part of the Offshore stock (for stock designations, see Muto and Angliss, 2015). In a second effort between 2012 and 2013, tags were attached to 11 Pacific Coast Feeding Group gray whales near Crescent City, California; in general, the tag-reported positions indicated these whales were moving southward at this time of year (Mate, 2013). The Navy's 2013 annual monitoring report for the Northwest Training and Testing Range contains the details of the findings from both research efforts described above (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2013e).
Proposed Monitoring for the GOA TMAA Study Area
Based on NMFS-Navy meetings in June and October 2011, and the upcoming annual monitoring meeting scheduled for March 2016, future Navy compliance monitoring, including ongoing monitoring, will address ICMP top-level goals through a series of regional and ocean basin study questions with a prioritization and funding focus on species of interest as identified for each range complex. The ICMP will also address relative investments to different range complexes based on goals across all range complexes, and monitoring will leverage multiple techniques for data acquisition and analysis whenever possible.
Within the GOA TMAA Study Area, the Navy's monitoring for GOA TMAA under this LOA authorization and concurrently in other areas of the Pacific Ocean will therefore be structured to address region-specific species-specific study questions in consultation with NMFS.
The outcome of the March 2016 Navy-NMFS monitoring meeting, including any proposed monitoring during the period covered by this proposed rule
Page 9990
(2016-2021) will be discussed in the final rule. In addition, Navy monitoring projects proposed during the 2016-2021 GOA TMAA rulemaking period will be posted on the Navy's marine species monitoring Web site (http://www.navymarinespeciesmonitoring.us/regions/pacific/current-
projects/).
Ongoing Navy Research
The U.S. Navy is one of the world's leading organizations in assessing the effects of human activities on the marine environment including marine mammals. From 2004 through 2013, the Navy has funded over $240M specifically for marine mammal research. Navy scientists work cooperatively with other government researchers and scientists, universities, industry, and non-governmental conservation organizations in collecting, evaluating, and modeling information on marine resources. They also develop approaches to ensure that these resources are minimally impacted by existing and future Navy operations. It is imperative that the Navy's R&D efforts related to marine mammals are conducted in an open, transparent manner with validated study needs and requirements. The goal of the Navy's R&D program is to enable collection and publication of scientifically valid research as well as development of techniques and tools for Navy, academic, and commercial use. Historically, R&D programs are funded and developed by the Navy's Chief of Naval Operations Energy and Environmental Readiness Division (OPNAV N45) and Office of Naval Research (ONR), Code 322 Marine Mammals and Biological Oceanography Program. The primary focus of these programs since the 1990s is on understanding the effects of sound on marine mammals, including physiological, behavioral, and ecological effects.
ONR's current Marine Mammals and Biology Program thrusts include, but are not limited to: (1) monitoring and detection research, (2) integrated ecosystem research including sensor and tag development, (3) effects of sound on marine life (such as hearing, behavioral response studies, physiology diving and stress, and PCAD), and (4) models and databases for environmental compliance.
To manage some of the Navy's marine mammal research programmatic elements, OPNAV N45 developed in 2011 a new Living Marine Resources (LMR) Research and Development Program (http://www.lmr.navy.mil/). The goal of the LMR Research and Development Program is to identify and fill knowledge gaps and to demonstrate, validate, and integrate new processes and technologies to minimize potential effects to marine mammals and other marine resources. Key elements of the LMR program include:
Providing science-based information to support Navy environmental effects assessments for research, development, acquisition, testing and evaluation as well as Fleet at-sea training, exercises, maintenance and support activities.
Improving knowledge of the status and trends of marine species of concern and the ecosystems of which they are a part.
Developing the scientific basis for the criteria and thresholds to measure the effects of Navy generated sound.
Improving understanding of underwater sound and sound field characterization unique to assessing the biological consequences resulting from underwater sound (as opposed to tactical applications of underwater sound or propagation loss modeling for military communications or tactical applications).
Developing technologies and methods to monitor and, where possible, mitigate biologically significant consequences to living marine resources resulting from naval activities, emphasizing those consequences that are most likely to be biologically significant.
Navy Research and Development
Navy Funded--Both the LMR and ONR Research and Development Programs periodically fund projects within the Study Area. Some data and results, when available from these R&D projects, are typically summarized in the Navy's annual range complex Monitoring Reports that are currently submitted to the NMFS each year. In addition, the Navy's Range Complex monitoring during training and testing activities is coordinated with the R&D monitoring in a given region to leverage research objectives, assets, and studies where possible under the ICMP.
The integration between the Navy's new LMR Research and Development Program and related range complex monitoring will continue and improve during this LOA application period with applicable results presented in GOA TMAA annual monitoring reports.
Other National Department of Defense Funded Initiatives--Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP) and Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) are the DoD's environmental research programs, harnessing the latest science and technology to improve environmental performance, reduce costs, and enhance and sustain mission capabilities. The Programs respond to environmental technology requirements that are common to all of the military Services, complementing the Services' research programs. SERDP and ESTCP promote partnerships and collaboration among academia, industry, the military Services, and other Federal agencies. They are independent programs managed from a joint office to coordinate the full spectrum of efforts, from basic and applied research to field demonstration and validation.
Adaptive Management
The final regulations governing the take of marine mammals incidental to Navy training activities in the Study Area would contain an adaptive management component carried over from previous authorizations. Although better than 5 years ago, our understanding of the effects of Navy training and testing activities (e.g., MFAS/HFAS, underwater detonations) on marine mammals is still relatively limited, and yet the science in this field is evolving fairly quickly. These circumstances make the inclusion of an adaptive management component both valuable and necessary within the context of 5-year regulations for activities that have been associated with marine mammal mortality in certain circumstances and locations.
The reporting requirements associated with this proposed rule are designed to provide NMFS with monitoring data from the previous year to allow NMFS to consider whether any changes are appropriate. NMFS and the Navy would meet to discuss the monitoring reports, Navy R&D developments, and current science and whether mitigation or monitoring modifications are appropriate. The use of adaptive management allows NMFS to consider new information from different sources to determine (with input from the Navy regarding practicability) on an annual or biennial basis if mitigation or monitoring measures should be modified (including additions or deletions). Mitigation measures could be modified if new data suggests that such modifications would have a reasonable likelihood of reducing adverse effects to marine mammals and if the measures are practicable.
The following are some of the possible sources of applicable data to be considered through the adaptive management process: (1) Results from monitoring and exercises reports, as required by MMPA authorizations; (2) compiled results of Navy funded R&D
Page 9991
studies; (3) results from specific stranding investigations; (4) results from general marine mammal and sound research; and (5) any information which reveals that marine mammals may have been taken in a manner, extent, or number not authorized by these regulations or subsequent LOA.
Proposed Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth ``requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking''. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring. Some of the reporting requirements are still in development and the final rulemaking may contain additional details not contained here. Additionally, proposed reporting requirements may be modified, removed, or added based on information or comments received during the public comment period. Reports from individual monitoring events, results of analyses, publications, and periodic progress reports for specific monitoring projects would be posted to the Navy's Marine Species Monitoring web portal: http://www.navymarinespeciesmonitoring.us. Currently, there are several different reporting requirements pursuant to these proposed regulations:
General Notification of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
Navy personnel would ensure that NMFS (the appropriate Regional Stranding Coordinator) is notified immediately (or as soon as clearance procedures allow) if an injured or dead marine mammal is found during or shortly after, and in the vicinity of, any Navy training exercise utilizing MFAS, HFAS, or underwater explosive detonations. The Navy would provide NMFS with species identification or a description of the animal(s), the condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if the animal is dead), location, time of first discovery, observed behaviors (if alive), and photographs or video (if available). The Navy shall consult the Stranding Response Plan to obtain more specific reporting requirements for specific circumstances.
Vessel Strike
NMFS has developed the following language to address monitoring and reporting measures specific to vessel strike. Most of this language comes directly from the Stranding Response Plan for other Navy training and testing rulemakings. This section has also been included in the regulatory text at the end of this proposed rule. Vessel strike during Navy training activities in the Study Area is not anticipated; however, in the event that a Navy vessel strikes a whale, the Navy shall do the following:
Immediately report to NMFS (pursuant to the established Communication Protocol) the:
Species identification (if known);
Location (latitude/longitude) of the animal (or location of the strike if the animal has disappeared);
Whether the animal is alive or dead (or unknown); and
The time of the strike.
As soon as feasible, the Navy shall report to or provide to NMFS, the:
Size, length, and description (critical if species is not known) of animal;
An estimate of the injury status (e.g., dead, injured but alive, injured and moving, blood or tissue observed in the water, status unknown, disappeared, etc.);
Description of the behavior of the whale during event, immediately after the strike, and following the strike (until the report is made or the animal is no longer sighted);
Vessel class/type and operational status;
Vessel length;
Vessel speed and heading; and
To the best extent possible, obtain a photo or video of the struck animal, if the animal is still in view.
Within 2 weeks of the strike, provide NMFS:
A detailed description of the specific actions of the vessel in the 30-minute timeframe immediately preceding the strike, during the event, and immediately after the strike (e.g., the speed and changes in speed, the direction and changes in direction, other maneuvers, sonar use, etc., if not classified);
A narrative description of marine mammal sightings during the event and immediately after, and any information as to sightings prior to the strike, if available; and use established Navy shipboard procedures to make a camera available to attempt to capture photographs following a ship strike.
NMFS and the Navy will coordinate to determine the services the Navy may provide to assist NMFS with the investigation of the strike. The response and support activities to be provided by the Navy are dependent on resource availability, must be consistent with military security, and must be logistically feasible without compromising Navy personnel safety. Assistance requested and provided may vary based on distance of strike from shore, the nature of the vessel that hit the whale, available nearby Navy resources, operational and installation commitments, or other factors.
Annual GOA TMAA Monitoring Report
The Navy shall submit an annual report of the GOA TMAA monitoring describing the implementation and results from the previous calendar year. Data collection methods will be standardized across range complexes and study areas to allow for comparison in different geographic locations. Although additional information will be gathered, Navy Lookouts collecting marine mammal data pursuant to the GOA TMAA monitoring plan shall, at a minimum, provide the same marine mammal observation data required in Sec. 218.155. The report shall be submitted either 90 days after the calendar year, or 90 days after the conclusion of the monitoring year to be determined by the Adaptive Management process. The GOA TMAA Monitoring Report may be provided to NMFS within a larger report that includes the required Monitoring Plan reports from multiple range complexes and study areas (the multi-Range Complex Annual Monitoring Report). Such a report would describe progress of knowledge made with respect to monitoring plan study questions across all Navy ranges associated with the Integrated Comprehensive Monitoring Program. Similar study questions shall be treated together so that progress on each topic shall be summarized across all Navy ranges. The report need not include analyses and content that does not provide direct assessment of cumulative progress on the monitoring plan study questions.
Annual GOA TMAA Exercise Report
Each year, the Navy shall submit a preliminary report detailing the status of authorized sound sources within 21 days after the anniversary of the date of issuance of the LOA. Each year, the Navy shall submit a detailed report within 3 months after the anniversary of the date of issuance of the LOA. The annual report shall contain information on Major Training Exercises (MTEs), Sinking Exercise (SINKEX) events, and a summary of all sound sources used (total hours or quantity per the LOA of each bin of sonar or other non-impulsive source; total annual number of each type of explosive exercises; and total annual expended/
detonated rounds missiles, bombs, sonobuoys, etc. for each explosive bin). The analysis in the detailed report will be
Page 9992
based on the accumulation of data from the current year's report and data collected from previous the report. Information included in the classified annual reports may be used to inform future adaptive management of activities within the GOA TMAA.
Sonar Exercise Notification
The Navy shall submit to NMFS (specific contact information to be provided in LOA) an electronic report within fifteen calendar days after the completion of any major training exercise indicating: Location of the exercise; beginning and end dates of the exercise; and type of exercise.
5-Year Close-Out Exercise Report
This report will be included as part of the 2021 annual exercise report. This report will provide the annual totals for each sound source bin with a comparison to the annual allowance and the 5-year total for each sound source bin with a comparison to the 5-year allowance. Additionally, if there were any changes to the sound source allowance, this report will include a discussion of why the change was made and include the analysis to support how the change did or did not result in a change in the SEIS and final rule determinations. The report will be submitted 3 months after the expiration of the rule. NMFS will submit comments on the draft close-out report, if any, within 3 months of receipt. The report will be considered final after the Navy has addressed NMFS' comments, or 3 months after the submittal of the draft if NMFS does not provide comments.
Estimated Take of Marine Mammals
In the Potential Effects section, NMFS' analysis identified the lethal responses, physical trauma, sensory impairment (PTS, TTS, and acoustic masking), physiological responses (particular stress responses), and behavioral responses that could potentially result from exposure to MFAS/HFAS or underwater explosive detonations. In this section, the potential effects to marine mammals from MFAS/HFAS and underwater detonation of explosives will be related to the MMPA regulatory definitions of Level A and Level B harassment and we will attempt to quantify the effects that might occur from the proposed training activities in the Study Area.
As mentioned previously, behavioral responses are context-
dependent, complex, and influenced to varying degrees by a number of factors other than just received level. For example, an animal may respond differently to a sound emanating from a ship that is moving towards the animal than it would to an identical received level coming from a vessel that is moving away, or to a ship traveling at a different speed or at a different distance from the animal. At greater distances, the nature of vessel movements could also potentially not have any effect on the animal's response to the sound. In any case, a full description of the suite of factors that elicited a behavioral response would require a mention of the vicinity, speed and movement of the vessel, or other factors. So, while sound sources and the received levels are the primary focus of the analysis and those that are laid out quantitatively in the regulatory text, it is with the understanding that other factors related to the training sometimes contribute to the behavioral responses of marine mammals, although they cannot be quantified.
Definition of Harassment
As mentioned previously, with respect to military readiness activities, section 3(18)(B) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: ``(i) any act that injures or has the significant potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild Level A Harassment; or (ii) any act that disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a point where such behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly altered Level B Harassment.'' It is important to note that, as Level B harassment is interpreted here and quantified by the behavioral thresholds described below, the fact that a single behavioral pattern (of unspecified duration) is abandoned or significantly altered and classified as a Level B take does not mean, necessarily, that the fitness of the harassed individual is affected either at all or significantly, or that, for example, a preferred habitat area is abandoned. Further analysis of context and duration of likely exposures and effects is necessary to determine the impacts of the estimated effects on individuals and how those may translate to population level impacts, and is included in the Analysis and Negligible Impact Determination.
Level B Harassment
Of the potential effects that were described earlier in this proposed rule, the following are the types of effects that fall into the Level B harassment category:
Behavioral Harassment--Behavioral disturbance that rises to the level described in the definition above, when resulting from exposures to non-impulsive or impulsive sound, is considered Level B harassment. Some of the lower level physiological stress responses discussed earlier would also likely co-occur with the predicted harassments, although these responses are more difficult to detect and fewer data exist relating these responses to specific received levels of sound. When Level B harassment is predicted based on estimated behavioral responses, those takes may have a stress-related physiological component as well. Except for some vocalization changes that may be compensating for auditory masking, all behavioral reactions are assumed to occur due to a preceding stress or cueing response; however, stress responses cannot be predicted directly due to a lack of scientific data. Responses can overlap; for example, an increased respiration rate is likely to be coupled to a flight response or other avoidance behavior. Factors to consider when trying to predict a stress response include the mammal's life history stage and whether they are naiumlve or experienced with the sound. Prior experience with a stressor may be of particular importance as repeated experience with a stressor may dull the stress response via acclimation (St. Aubin and Dierauf, 2001; Bejder et al., 2009).
As the statutory definition is currently applied, a wide range of behavioral reactions may qualify as Level B harassment under the MMPA, including but not limited to avoidance of the sound source, temporary changes in vocalizations or dive patters, temporary avoidance of an area, or temporary disruption of feeding, migrating, or reproductive behaviors. The estimates calculated by the Navy using the acoustic thresholds do not differentiate between the different types of potential behavioral reactions. Nor do the estimates provide information regarding the potential fitness or other biological consequences of the reactions on the affected individuals. We therefore consider the available scientific evidence to determine the likely nature of the modeled behavioral responses and the potential fitness consequences for affected individuals.
Acoustic Masking and Communication Impairment--Acoustic masking and communication impairment are considered Level B harassment as they can disrupt natural behavioral patterns by interrupting or limiting the marine mammal's receipt or transmittal of important information or
Page 9993
environmental cues. As discussed in the Analysis and Negligible Impact Determination later in this proposed rule, masking effects from MFAS/
HFAS are expected to be minimal. If masking or communication impairment were to occur briefly, it would be in the frequency range of MFAS, which overlaps with some marine mammal vocalizations; however, it would likely not mask the entirety of any particular vocalization, communication series, or other critical auditory cue, because the signal length, frequency, and duty cycle of the MFAS/HFAS signal does not perfectly mimic the characteristics of any marine mammal's vocalizations. The other sources used in Navy training, many of either higher frequencies (meaning that the sounds generated attenuate even closer to the source) or lower amounts of operation, are similarly not expected to result in masking or communication impairment.
Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS)--As discussed previously, TTS can affect how an animal behaves in response to the environment, including conspecifics, predators, and prey. The following physiological mechanisms are thought to play a role in inducing auditory fatigue: Effects to sensory hair cells in the inner ear that reduce their sensitivity, modification of the chemical environment within the sensory cells; residual muscular activity in the middle ear, displacement of certain inner ear membranes; increased blood flow; and post-stimulatory reduction in both efferent and sensory neural output. Ward (1997) suggested that when these effects result in TTS rather than PTS, they are within the normal bounds of physiological variability and tolerance and do not represent a physical injury. Additionally, Southall et al. (2007) indicate that although PTS is a tissue injury, TTS is not because the reduced hearing sensitivity following exposure to intense sound results primarily from fatigue, not loss, of cochlear hair cells and supporting structures and is reversible. Accordingly, NMFS classifies TTS (when resulting from exposure to sonar and other active acoustic sources and explosives and other impulsive sources) as Level B harassment, not Level A harassment (injury).
The sound characteristics that correlate with specific stress responses in marine mammals are poorly understood. Therefore, in practice, a stress response is assumed if a physiological reaction such as a hearing loss (threshold shift--i.e., TTS or PTS) or trauma is predicted (or if a behavioral response is predicted, as discussed in the Level B Harassment section).
Only non-TTS behavioral reactions and TTS are anticipated with the GOA TMAA training activities, and these Level B behavioral harassment takes are enumerated in Tables 12 and 13 and in the Negligible Impact Determination later in this proposed rule.
Level A Harassment
Of the potential effects that were described earlier, following are the types of effects that can fall into the Level A harassment category (unless they further rise to the level of serious injury or mortality):
Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS)--PTS (resulting either from exposure to MFAS/HFAS or explosive detonations) is irreversible and considered an injury. PTS results from exposure to intense sounds that cause a permanent loss of inner or outer cochlear hair cells or exceed the elastic limits of certain tissues and membranes in the middle and inner ears and result in changes in the chemical composition of the inner ear fluids. As mentioned above for TTS, a stress response is assumed if a physiological reaction such as a hearing loss (PTS) or trauma is predicted.
As discussed in the Negligible Impact Determination later in this proposed rule, only a small number (5) of Level A takes resulting from mild levels of PTS are predicted, and no serious injury or mortality takes are predicted, with the Navy's training activities in the GOA TMAA.
Tissue Damage due to Acoustically Mediated Bubble Growth--A few theories suggest ways in which gas bubbles become enlarged through exposure to intense sounds (MFAS/HFAS) to the point where tissue damage results. In rectified diffusion, exposure to a sound field would cause bubbles to increase in size which could cause tissue damage that would be considered injurious. A short duration of sonar pings (such as that which an animal exposed to MFAS would be most likely to encounter) would not likely be long enough to drive bubble growth to any substantial size. Alternately, bubbles could be destabilized by high-
level sound exposures such that bubble growth then occurs through static diffusion of gas out of the tissues. The degree of supersaturation and exposure levels observed to cause microbubble destabilization are unlikely to occur, either alone or in concert because of how close an animal would need to be to the sound source to be exposed to high enough levels, especially considering the likely avoidance of the sound source and the required mitigation. For the reasons above, Level A harassment in the form of tissue damage from acoustically mediated bubble growth is not predicted for training activities in the GOA TMAA.
Tissue Damage due to Behaviorally Mediated Bubble Growth--Several authors suggest mechanisms in which marine mammals could behaviorally respond to exposure to MFAS/HFAS by altering their dive patterns (unusually rapid ascent, unusually long series of surface dives, etc.) in a manner that might result in unusual bubble formation or growth ultimately resulting in tissue damage. In this scenario, the rate of ascent would need to be sufficiently rapid to compromise behavioral or physiological protections against nitrogen bubble formation.
There is considerable disagreement among scientists as to the likelihood of this phenomenon (Piantadosi and Thalmann, 2004; Evans and Miller, 2003). Although it has been argued that traumas from recent beaked whale strandings are consistent with gas emboli and bubble-
induced tissue separations (Jepson et al., 2003; Fernandez et al., 2005; Fernaacutendez et al., 2012), nitrogen bubble formation as the cause of the traumas has not been verified. If tissue damage does occur by this phenomenon, it would be considered an injury. Recent modeling by Kvadsheim et al. (2012) determined that while behavioral and physiological responses to sonar have the potential to result in bubble formation, the actual observed behavioral responses of cetaceans to sonar did not imply any significantly increased risk over what may otherwise occur normally in individual marine mammals. Level A harassment in the form of tissue damage from behaviorally mediated bubble growth is not anticipated for training activities in the GOA TMAA.
Physical Disruption of Tissues Resulting from Explosive Shock Wave--Physical damage of tissues resulting from a shock wave (from an explosive detonation) is classified as an injury. Blast effects are greatest at the gas-liquid interface (Landsberg, 2000) and gas-
containing organs, particularly the lungs and gastrointestinal tract, are especially susceptible (Goertner, 1982; Hill 1978; Yelverton et al., 1973). Nasal sacs, larynx, pharynx, trachea, and lungs may be damaged by compression/expansion caused by the oscillations of the blast gas bubble (Reidenberg and Laitman, 2003). Severe damage (from the shock wave) to the ears can include tympanic membrane rupture, fracture of the ossicles, damage to the cochlea, hemorrhage, and cerebrospinal fluid leakage into the middle ear. Explosions in the ocean or near the water surface can introduce loud, impulsive,
Page 9994
broadband sounds into the marine environment. These sounds are likely within the audible range of most marine mammals, but the duration of individual sounds is very short. The direct sound from explosions used during training activities last less than a second, and most events involve the use of only one or a few explosions. Furthermore, events are dispersed in time and throughout the GOA TMAA Study Area. These factors reduce the likelihood of these sources causing substantial physical disruption of tissues in marine mammals, especially when the avoidance and mitigation factors are taken into consideration. Consequently, no Level A harassment from explosive shock waves is anticipated from training activities in the GOA TMAA.
Vessel or Ordnance Strike--Vessel strike or ordnance strike associated with the specified activities would be considered Level A harassment, serious injury, or mortality. There are no records of any Navy vessel strikes to marine mammals during training activities in the GOA TMMA Study Area. There have been Navy strikes of large whales in areas outside the Study Area, such as Hawaii and Southern California. However, these areas differ significantly from the Study Area given that both Hawaii and Southern California have a much higher number of Navy vessel activities and much higher densities of large whales. The Navy's proposed actions would not result in any appreciable changes in locations or frequency of vessel activity, and there have been no whale strikes during any previous training activities in the Study Area. The manner in which the Navy has trained would remain consistent with the range of variability observed over the last decade so the Navy does not anticipate vessel strikes would occur within the Study Area during training events. As such, vessel or ordnance strike is not anticipated with the Navy activities in the Study Area and Level A harassment, serious injury, or mortality are not expected.
Take Thresholds
For the purposes of an MMPA authorization, three types of take are identified: Level B harassment; Level A harassment; and mortality (or serious injury leading to mortality). The categories of marine mammal responses (physiological and behavioral) that fall into the two harassment categories were described in the previous section.
Because the physiological and behavioral responses of the majority of the marine mammals exposed to non-impulse and impulse sounds cannot be easily detected or measured, and because NMFS must authorize take prior to the impacts to marine mammals, a method is needed to estimate the number of individuals that will be taken, pursuant to the MMPA, based on the proposed action. To this end, NMFS developed acoustic thresholds that estimate at what received level (when exposed to non-
impulse or impulse sounds) Level B harassment and Level A harassment of marine mammals would occur. The acoustic thresholds for non-impulse and impulse sounds are discussed below.
Level B Harassment Threshold (TTS)--Behavioral disturbance, acoustic masking, and TTS are all considered Level B harassment. Marine mammals would usually be behaviorally disturbed at lower received levels than those at which they would likely sustain TTS, so the levels at which behavioral disturbance are likely to occur is considered the onset of Level B harassment. The behavioral responses of marine mammals to sound are variable, context specific, and, therefore, difficult to quantify (see Risk Function section, below).
TTS is a physiological effect that has been studied and quantified in laboratory conditions. Because data exist to support an estimate of the received levels at which marine mammals will incur TTS, NMFS uses an acoustic criteria to estimate the number of marine mammals that might sustain TTS. TTS is a subset of Level B harassment (along with sub-TTS behavioral harassment) and the Navy is not specifically required to estimate those numbers; however, the more specifically the affected marine mammal responses can be estimated, the better the analysis.
Level A Harassment Threshold (PTS)--For acoustic effects, because the tissues of the ear appear to be the most susceptible to the physiological effects of sound, and because threshold shifts tend to occur at lower exposures than other more serious auditory effects, NMFS has determined that PTS is the best indicator for the smallest degree of injury that can be measured. Therefore, the acoustic exposure associated with onset-PTS is used to define the lower limit of Level A harassment.
PTS data do not currently exist for marine mammals and are unlikely to be obtained due to ethical concerns. However, PTS levels for these animals may be estimated using TTS data from marine mammals and relationships between TTS and PTS that have been determined through study of terrestrial mammals.
We note here that behaviorally mediated injuries (such as those that have been hypothesized as the cause of some beaked whale strandings) could potentially occur in response to received levels lower than those believed to directly result in tissue damage. As mentioned previously, data to support a quantitative estimate of these potential effects (for which the exact mechanism is not known and in which factors other than received level may play a significant role) do not exist. However, based on the number of years (more than 60) and number of hours of MFAS per year that the U.S. (and other countries) has operated compared to the reported (and verified) cases of associated marine mammal strandings, NMFS believes that the probability of these types of injuries is very low. Tables 9 and 10 provide a summary of non-impulsive and impulsive thresholds to TTS and PTS for marine mammals. A detailed explanation of how these thresholds were derived is provided in the Criteria and Thresholds Technical Report (Finneran and Jenkins, 2012) and summarized in Chapter 6 of the LOA application (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/military.htm).
Table 9--Onset TTS and PTS Thresholds for Non-Impulse Sound
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group Species Onset TTS Onset PTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency Cetaceans.............. All mysticetes......... 178 dB re 1microPa2- 198 dB re 1microPa2-
sec(LFII). sec(LFII).
Mid-Frequency Cetaceans.............. Most delphinids, beaked 178 dB re 1microPa2- 198 dB re 1microPa2-
whales, medium and sec(MFII). sec(MFII).
large toothed whales.
High-Frequency Cetaceans............. Porpoises, Kogia spp... 152 dB re 1microPa2- 172 dB re 1microPa2-
sec(HFII). secSEL (HFII).
Phocidae In-water.................... Harbor, Hawaiian monk, 183 dB re 1microPa2- 197 dB re 1microPa2-
elephant seals. sec(PWI). sec(PWI).
Page 9995
Otariidae & Obodenidae In-water...... Sea lions and fur seals 206 dB re 1microPa2- 220 dB re 1microPa2-
sec(OWI). sec(OWI).
Mustelidae In-water.................. Sea otters.............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LFII, MFII, HFII: New compound Type II weighting functions; PWI, OWI: Original Type I (Southall et al., 2007)
for pinniped and mustelid in water.
GRAPHIC TIFF OMITTED TP26FE16.000
Level B Harassment Risk Function (Behavioral Harassment)
As the statutory definition is currently applied, a wide range of behavioral reactions may qualify as Level B harassment under the MMPA, including but not limited to avoidance of the sound source, temporary changes in vocalizations or dive patters, temporary avoidance of an area, or temporary disruption of feeding, migrating, or reproductive behaviors. The estimates
Page 9996
calculated by the Navy using the acoustic thresholds do not differentiate between the different types of potential behavioral reactions. Nor do the estimates provide information regarding the potential fitness or other biological consequences of the reactions on the affected individuals. We therefore consider the available scientific evidence to determine the likely nature of the modeled behavioral responses and the potential fitness consequences for affected individuals.
Behavioral Response Criteria for Non-Impulsive Sound from Sonar and other Active Sources--In 2006, NMFS issued the first MMPA authorization to allow the take of marine mammals incidental to MFAS (to the Navy for RIMPAC). For that authorization, NMFS used 173 dB SEL as the criterion for the onset of behavioral harassment (Level B harassment). This type of single number criterion is referred to as a step function, in which (in this example) all animals estimated to be exposed to received levels above 173 db SEL would be predicted to be taken by Level B Harassment and all animals exposed to less than 173 dB SEL would not be taken by Level B harassment. As mentioned previously, marine mammal behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context specific (affected by differences in acoustic conditions; differences between species and populations; differences in gender, age, reproductive status, or social behavior; or the prior experience of the individuals), which means that there is support for alternate approaches for estimating behavioral harassment.
Unlike step functions, acoustic risk continuum functions (which are also called ``exposure-response functions'' or ``dose-response functions'' in other risk assessment contexts) allow for probability of a response that NMFS would classify as harassment to occur over a range of possible received levels (instead of one number) and assume that the probability of a response depends first on the ``dose'' (in this case, the received level of sound) and that the probability of a response increases as the ``dose'' increases. In January 2009, NMFS issued three final rules governing the incidental take of marine mammals (within Navy's Hawaii Range, Southern California Training and Testing Range, and Atlantic Fleet Active Sonar Training complexes) that used a risk continuum to estimate the percent of marine mammals exposed to various levels of MFAS that would respond in a manner NMFS considers harassment.
The Navy and NMFS have previously used acoustic risk functions to estimate the probable responses of marine mammals to acoustic exposures for other training and research programs. Examples of previous application include the Navy FEISs on the Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Low Frequency Active (SURTASS LFA) sonar (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2001c); the North Pacific Acoustic Laboratory experiments conducted off the Island of Kauai (Office of Naval Research, 2001), and the Supplemental EIS for SURTASS LFA sonar (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2007d). As discussed earlier, factors other than received level (such as distance from or bearing to the sound source, context of animal at time of exposure) can affect the way that marine mammals respond; however, data to support a quantitative analysis of those (and other factors) do not currently exist. It is also worth specifically noting that while context is very important in marine mammal response, given otherwise equivalent context, the severity of a marine mammal behavioral response is also expected to increase with received level (Houser and Moore, 2014). NMFS will continue to modify these criteria as new data become available and can be appropriately and effectively incorporated.
The particular acoustic risk functions developed by NMFS and the Navy (see Figures 1 and 2 of the LOA application) estimate the probability of behavioral responses to MFAS/HFAS (interpreted as the percentage of the exposed population) that NMFS would classify as harassment for the purposes of the MMPA given exposure to specific received levels of MFAS/HFAS. The mathematical function (below) underlying this curve is a cumulative probability distribution adapted from a solution in Feller (1968) and was also used in predicting risk for the Navy's SURTASS LFA MMPA authorization as well.
GRAPHIC TIFF OMITTED TP26FE16.001
Where:
R = Risk (0--1.0)
L = Received level (dB re: 1 microPa)
B = Basement received level = 120 dB re: 1 microPa
K = Received level increment above B where 50-percent risk = 45 dB re: 1 microPa
A = Risk transition sharpness parameter = 10 (odontocetes and pinnipeds) or 8 (mysticetes)
Detailed information on the above equation and its parameters is available in the LOA application and previous Navy documents listed above.
The harbor porpoise and beaked whales have unique criteria based on specific data that show these animals to be especially sensitive to sound. Harbor porpoise and beaked whale non-impulsive behavioral criteria are used unweighted--without weighting the received level before comparing it to the threshold (see Finneran and Jenkins, 2012).
It has been speculated for some time that beaked whales might have unusual sensitivities to sonar sound due to their likelihood of stranding in conjunction with mid-frequency sonar use, even in areas where other species were more abundant (D'Amico et al., 2009), but there were not sufficient data to support a separate treatment for beaked whales until recently. With the recent publication of results from Blainville's beaked whale monitoring and experimental exposure studies on the instrumented AUTEC range in the Bahamas (McCarthy et al. 2011; Tyack et al. 2011), there are now statistically strong data suggesting that beaked whales tend to avoid actual naval mid-frequency sonar in real anti-submarine training scenarios as well as playbacks of killer whale vocalizations, and other anthropogenic sounds. Tyack et al. (2011) report that, in reaction to sonar playbacks, most beaked whales stopped echolocating, made long slow ascent, and moved away from the sound. During an exercise using mid-frequency sonar, beaked whales avoided the sonar acoustic footprint at a distance where the received level was ``around 140 dB'' (SPL) and once the exercise ended, beaked whales re-inhabited the center of exercise area within 2-3 days (Tyack et al., 2011). The Navy has therefore adopted an unweighted 140 dB re 1 microPa SPL threshold for significant behavioral effects for all beaked whales (family: Ziphiidae).
Since the development of the criterion, analysis of the data the 2010 and 2011 field seasons of the southern California Behavioral Responses Study have been published. The study, DeRuiter et al. (2013b), provides similar evidence of Cuvier's beaked whale sensitivities to sound based on two controlled exposures. Two whales, one in each season, were tagged and exposed to simulated mid-frequency active sonar at distances of 3.4-9.5 km. The 2011 whale was also incidentally exposed to mid-frequency active sonar from a distant naval exercise (approximately 118 km away). Received levels from the mid-
frequency active sonar signals during the controlled and incidental exposures were calculated as
Page 9997
84-144 and 78-106 dB re 1 microPa rms, respectively. Both whales showed responses to the controlled exposures, ranging from initial orientation changes to avoidance responses characterized by energetic fluking and swimming away from the source. However, the authors did not detect similar responses to incidental exposure to distant naval sonar exercises at comparable received levels, indicating that context of the exposures (e.g., source proximity, controlled source ramp-up) may have been a significant factor. Because the sample size was limited (controlled exposures during a single dive in both 2010 and 2011) and baseline behavioral data was obtained from different stocks and geographic areas (i.e., Hawaii and Mediterranean Sea), and the responses exhibited to controlled exposures were not exhibited by an animal exposed to some of the same received levels of real sonar exercises, the Navy relied on the studies at the AUTEC that analyzed beaked whale responses to actual naval exercises using mid-frequency active sonar to evaluate potential behavioral responses by beaked whales to proposed training and testing activities using sonar and other active acoustic sources.
The information currently available regarding harbor porpoises suggests a very low threshold level of response for both captive and wild animals. Threshold levels at which both captive (Kastelein et al., 2000; Kastelein et al., 2005; Kastelein et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2008) and wild harbor porpoises (Johnston, 2002) responded to sound (e.g., acoustic harassment devices, acoustic deterrent devices, or other non-impulsive sound sources) are very low (e.g., approximately 120 dB re 1 muPa). Therefore, a SPL of 120 dB re 1 muPa is used in this analysis as a threshold for predicting behavioral responses in harbor porpoises instead of the risk functions used for other species (i.e., we assume for the purpose of estimating take that all harbor porpoises exposed to 120 dB or higher MFAS/HFAS will be taken by Level B behavioral harassment).
Behavioral Response Criteria for Impulsive Sound from Explosions -- If more than one explosive event occurs within any given 24-hour period within a training or testing event, behavioral criteria are applied to predict the number of animals that may be taken by Level B harassment. For multiple explosive events the behavioral threshold used in this analysis is 5 dB less than the TTS onset threshold (in sound exposure level). This value is derived from observed onsets of behavioral response by test subjects (bottlenose dolphins) during non-impulse TTS testing (Schlundt et al., 2000). Some multiple explosive events, such as certain naval gunnery exercises, may be treated as a single impulsive event because a few explosions occur closely spaced within a very short period of time (a few seconds). For single impulses at received sound levels below hearing loss thresholds, the most likely behavioral response is a brief alerting or orienting response. Since no further sounds follow the initial brief impulses, Level B take in the form of behavioral harassment beyond that associated with potential TTS would not be expected to occur. This reasoning was applied to previous shock trials (63 FR 230; 66 FR 87; 73 FR 143) and is extended to these Phase 2 criteria. Behavioral thresholds for impulsive sources are summarized in Table 11 and further detailed in the LOA application.
Since impulse events can be quite short, it may be possible to accumulate multiple received impulses at sound pressure levels considerably above the energy-based criterion and still not be considered a behavioral take. The Navy treats all individual received impulses as if they were one second long for the purposes of calculating cumulative sound exposure level for multiple impulse events. For example, five air gun impulses, each 0.1 second long, received at a Type II weighted sound pressure level of 167 dB SPL would equal a 164 dB sound exposure level, and would not be predicted as leading to a significant behavioral response (take) in MF or HF cetaceans. However, if the five 0.1 second pulses are treated as a 5 second exposure, it would yield an adjusted SEL of approximately 169 dB, exceeding the behavioral threshold of 167 dB SEL. For impulses associated with explosions that have durations of a few microseconds, this assumption greatly overestimates effects based on sound exposure level metrics such as TTS and PTS and behavioral responses. Appropriate weighting values will be applied to the received impulse in one-third octave bands and the energy summed to produce a total weighted sound exposure level value. For impulsive behavioral criteria, the Navy's weighting functions (detailed in Chapter 6 of the LOA application) are applied to the received sound level before being compared to the threshold.
Table 11--Behavioral Thresholds for Impulsive Sound
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive
behavioral
Hearing group threshold for > 2 Onset TTS
pulses/24 hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency Cetaceans......... 167 dB SEL (LFII). 172 dB SEL (MFII)
or 224 dB Peak
SPL.
Mid-Frequency Cetaceans......... 167 dB SEL (MFII).
High-Frequency Cetaceans........ 141 dB SEL (HFII). 146 dB SEL (HFII)
or 195 dB Peak
SPL.
Phocid Seals (in water)......... 172 dB SEL (PWI).. 177 dB SEL (PWI)
or 212 dB Peak
SPL.
Otariidae & Mustelidae (in 195 dB SEL (OWI).. 200 dB SEL (OWI)
water). or 212 dB Peak
SPL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: (1) LFII, MFII, HFII are New compound Type II weighting
functions; PWI, OWI = Original Type I (Southall et al., 2007) for
pinniped and mustelid in water (see Finneran and Jenkins 2012). (2)
SEL = re 1 muPa\2\-s; SPL = re 1 muPa, SEL = Sound Exposure Level,
dB = decibel, SPL = Sound Pressure Level.
Marine Mammal Density Estimates
A quantitative impact analysis requires an estimate of the number of animals that might be affected by anthropogenic activities. A key element of this estimation is knowledge of the abundance and concentration of the species in specific areas where those activities will occur. The most appropriate unit of metric for this type of analysis is animal density, or the number of animals present per unit area. Marine species density estimation requires a significant amount of effort to both collect and analyze data to produce a reasonable estimate. Unlike surveys for terrestrial wildlife, many marine species spend much of their time submerged, and are not easily observed. In order to collect enough sighting data to make reasonable density estimates, multiple observations are required, often in areas that are not easily accessible (e.g., far offshore). Ideally, marine species sighting data would be collected for the specific area and time period (e.g., season) of interest and density estimates derived accordingly. However, in many places, poor weather conditions and high sea states prohibit
Page 9998
the completion of comprehensive visual surveys.
For most cetacean species, abundance is estimated using line-
transect surveys or mark-recapture studies (e.g., Barlow, 2010, Barlow and Forney, 2007, Calambokidis et al., 2008). The result provides one single density estimate value for each species across broad geographic areas, such as waters within the U.S. EEZ off California, Oregon, and Washington. This is the general approach applied in estimating cetacean abundance in the NMFS Stock Assessment Reports. Although the single value provides a good average estimate of abundance (total number of individuals) for a specified area, it does not provide information on the species distribution or concentrations within that area, and it does not estimate density for other timeframes or seasons that were not surveyed. More recently, habitat modeling has been used to estimate cetacean densities (Barlow et al., 2009; Becker et al., 2010, 2012a, b, c; Ferguson et al., 2006a; Forney et al., 2012; Redfern et al., 2006). These models estimate cetacean density as a continuous function of habitat variables (e.g., sea surface temperature, seafloor depth, etc.) and thus allow predictions of cetacean densities on finer spatial scales than traditional line-transect or mark-recapture analyses. Within the geographic area that was modeled, densities can be predicted wherever these habitat variables can be measured or estimated.
Uncertainty in published density estimates is typically large because of the low number of sightings available for their derivation. Uncertainty is typically expressed by the coefficient of variation (CV) of the estimate, which is derived using standard statistical methods and describes the amount of variation with respect to the population mean. It is expressed as a fraction or sometimes a percentage and can range upward from zero, indicating no uncertainty, to high values. For example, a CV of 0.85 would indicate high uncertainty in the population estimate. When the CV exceeds 1.0, the estimate is very uncertain. The uncertainty associated with movements of animals into or out of an area (due to factors such as availability of prey or changing oceanographic conditions) is much larger than is indicated by the CV.
The methods used to estimate pinniped at-sea densities are typically different than those used for cetaceans. This is discussed in more detail in the Navy Marine Species Density Database Technical Report (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2014). Pinniped abundance is generally estimated via shore counts of animals at known rookeries and haulout sites. Translating these numbers to in-water densities is difficult given the variability in foraging ranges, migration, and haulout behavior between species and within each species, and is driven by factors such as age class, sex class, seasonal variation, etc. Details of the density derivation for each species of pinniped in the Study Area are provided in the U.S. Department of the Navy (2014). In summary, the methods used to derive pinniped densities involved a series of species-specific data reviews to compile the most accurate and up-to-date information available. The total abundance divided by the area of the region was the resultant density estimate for each species in a given location.
There is no single source of density data for every area, marine mammal species, and season because of the fiscal costs, resources, and effort involved to provide enough survey coverage to sufficiently estimate density. NMFS Southwest Fisheries Science Center conducts standard U.S. West Coast surveys every 5-6 years and cannot logistically support more frequent studies. The U.S. Navy has funded two previous marine mammal surveys in the GOA TMAA (Rone et al., 2009, 2014) in the summer time-period when Navy training activities are most likely to occur. The density data used to quantitatively estimate impacts to marine mammals from Navy training in the GOA TMAA are based on the best available science and were agreed upon with NMFS as a cooperating agency for the SEIS/OEIS. As the federal regulator for the MMPA, the NMFS role included having staff biologists review and comment on the analysis and the SEIS/OEIS. The review also included coordination with NMFS regional scientists from the Southwest Fisheries Science Center and Alaska Fisheries Science Center on the latest emergent data presented in their Pacific Stock Assessment Reports.
In May 2015, the Marine Mammal Commission also reviewed the Marine Species Density Database Technical Report (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2014) and pointed out some textual errors that the Navy subsequently corrected, but otherwise did not identify any changes in the data used for acoustic effects modeling.
A certain number of sightings are required to generate the quality of data necessary to produce either traditional line-transect density estimates or spatial habitat modeled density values. The at-sea identification of some species of specific MMPA designated stocks is not always possible from available field data, nor would additional data collection likely address the identification issue based on low animal occurrence (e.g., Western North Pacific gray whale), cryptic behaviors (e.g., beaked whales), and appearance similarities between stocks (e.g., Steller sea lions). In the absence of species-specific population survey data for these species, density estimates are derived from different methods and data sources, based on NMFS recommendations. The different methods for each of these species are described in Section 3.8.3.1.6.1 (Marine Species Density Data) of the DSEIS/OEIS and the Marine Species Density Database Technical Report (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2014). NMFS and Navy have determined that these alternative density estimates are sufficient for determining the impacts of Navy training on these marine mammals under all applicable statutes, and therefore are the best available science.
Therefore, to characterize marine mammal density for areas of concern, including the GOA TMAA Study Area, the Navy compiled data from multiple sources. Each data source may use different methods to estimate density and uncertainty (e.g., variance) associated with the estimates.
The Navy thus developed a protocol to select the best available data sources based on species, area, and time (season). The Navy then used this protocol to identify the best density data from available sources, including habitat-based density models, line-transect analyses, and peer-reviewed published studies. These data were incorporated into a Geographic Information System database that includes seasonal (summer/fall and winter/spring) density values for every marine mammal species present within the Study Area. Detailed information on the Navy's selection protocol, datasets, and specific density values are provided in the Navy Marine Species Density Database Technical Report (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2014).
Quantitative Modeling To Estimate Take for Impulsive and Non-Impulsive Sound
The Navy performed a quantitative analysis to estimate the number of marine mammals that could be affected by acoustic sources or explosives used during Navy training activities. Inputs to the quantitative analysis include marine mammal density estimates; marine mammal depth occurrence distributions; oceanographic and environmental data; marine mammal hearing data; and criteria and thresholds for levels of potential effects. The quantitative analysis consists of
Page 9999
computer modeled estimates and a post-model analysis to determine the number of potential mortalities and harassments. The model calculates sound energy propagation from sonar, other active acoustic sources, and explosives during naval activities; the sound or impulse received by animat (virtual representation of an animal) dosimeters representing marine mammals distributed in the area around the modeled activity; and whether the sound or impulse received by a marine mammal exceeds the thresholds for effects. The model estimates are then further analyzed to consider animal avoidance and implementation of mitigation measures, resulting in final estimates of potential effects due to Navy training.
Various computer models and mathematical equations can be used to predict how energy spreads from a sound source (e.g., sonar or underwater detonation) to a receiver (e.g., dolphin or sea turtle). Basic underwater sound models calculate the overlap of energy and marine life using assumptions that account for the many, variable, and often unknown factors that can influence the result. Assumptions in previous and current Navy models have intentionally erred on the side of overestimation when there are unknowns or when the addition of other variables was not likely to substantively change the final analysis. For example, because the ocean environment is extremely dynamic and information is often limited to a synthesis of data gathered over wide areas and requiring many years of research, known information tends to be an average of a seasonal or annual variation. El Nintildeo Southern Oscillation events of the ocean-atmosphere system are an example of dynamic change where unusually warm or cold ocean temperatures are likely to redistribute marine life and alter the propagation of underwater sound energy. Previous Navy modeling therefore made some assumptions indicative of a maximum theoretical propagation for sound energy (such as a perfectly reflective ocean surface and a flat seafloor).
More complex computer models build upon basic modeling by factoring in additional variables in an effort to be more accurate by accounting for such things as variable bathymetry and an animal's likely presence at various depths.
The Navy has developed new software tools, up to date marine mammal density data, and other oceanographic data for the quantification of estimated acoustic impacts to marine mammal impacts from Navy activities. This new approach is the resulting evolution of the basic model previously used by the Navy and reflects a more complex modeling approach as described below. The new model, NAEMO, is the standard model now used by the navy to estimate the potential acoustic effects of Navy training and testing activities on marine mammals. Although this more complex computer modeling approach accounts for various environmental factors affecting acoustic propagation, the current software tools do not consider the likelihood that a marine mammal would attempt to avoid repeated exposures to a sound or avoid an area of intense activity where a training or testing event may be focused. Additionally, the software tools do not consider the implementation of mitigation (e.g., stopping sonar transmissions when a marine mammal is within a certain distance of a ship or mitigation zone clearance prior to detonations). In both of these situations, naval activities are modeled as though an activity would occur regardless of proximity to marine mammals and without any horizontal movement by the animal away from the sound source or human activities. Therefore, the final step of the quantitative analysis of acoustic effects is to consider the implementation of mitigation and the possibility that marine mammals would avoid continued or repeated sound exposures. This final, post-
analysis step in the modeling process is meant to better quantify the predicted effects by accounting for likely animal avoidance behavior and implementation of standard Navy mitigations.
The incorporation of mitigation factors for the reduction of predicted effects used a conservative approach (erring on the side of overestimating the number of effects) since reductions as a result of implemented mitigation were only applied to those events having a very high likelihood of detecting marine mammals.
The steps of the quantitative analysis of acoustic effects, the values and assumptions that went into the Navy's model, and the resulting ranges to effects are detailed in Chapter 6 (Section 6.5) of the LOA application (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/). Details of the model's processes and the description and derivation of the inputs are presented in the Navy's Determination of Acoustic Effects technical Report (Marine Species Modeling Team, 2014). The post-model analysis, which considers the potential for avoidance and highly effective mitigation during the use of sonar and other active acoustic sources and explosives, is described in Section 6.5 of the LOA application. A detailed explanation of the post-model acoustic effect analysis quantification process is also provided in the technical report Post-Model Quantitative Analysis of Animal Avoidance Behavior and Mitigation Effectiveness for the Gulf of Alaska Training (U.S. Department of the Navy, 2014c; also available at: http://goaeis.com/Documents/SupplementalEISOEISDocumentsandReferences/SupportingTechnicalDocuments.aspx).
Take Request
The GOA DSEIS/OEIS considered all training activities proposed to occur in the Study Area that have the potential to result in the MMPA defined take of marine mammals. The stressors associated with these activities included the following:
Acoustic (sonar and other active non-impulse sources, explosives, swimmer defense airguns, weapons firing, launch and impact noise, vessel noise, aircraft noise);
Energy (electromagnetic devices);
Physical disturbance or strikes (vessels, in-water devices, military expended materials, seafloor devices);
Entanglement (fiber optic cables, guidance wires, parachutes);
Ingestion (munitions, military expended materials other than munitions); and
Secondary stressors (sediments and water quality).
The Navy determined, and NMFS agrees, that two stressors could potentially result in the incidental taking of marine mammals from training activities within the Study Area: (1) Non-impulsive stressors (sonar and other active acoustic sources) and (2) impulsive stressors (explosives). Non-impulsive and impulsive stressors have the potential to result in incidental takes of marine mammals by harassment, injury, or mortality.
Training Activities
A detailed analysis of effects due to marine mammal exposures to impulsive and non-impulsive sources in the Study Area is presented in Chapter 6 of the LOA application. Based on the model and post-model analysis described in Chapter 6 of the LOA application, Table 12 summarizes the Navy's final take request for training activities for a year (up to 2 exercises occurring over a 7-month period April-
October) and the summation over a 5-year period (up to 2 exercises occurring over a 7-month period April-October for a total of 10 exercises).
Page 10000
Table 12--Summary of Annual and 5-Year Take Requests for GOA TMAA Training Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Training activities
-------------------------------------------------
MMPA Category Source Annual authorization 5-Year authorization
sought sought
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mortality............................ Explosives............. 0...................... 0.
Level A.............................. Sonar and other active 5 (Dall's porpoise only 25 (Dall's porpoise
acoustic sources; as shown in Table 13). only as shown in Table
explosives. 13).
Level B.............................. Sonar and other active 36,522 (Species 182,610 (Species
acoustic sources; specific data shown in specific data shown in
explosives. Table 13). Table 13).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive and Non-Impulsive Sources
Table 13 provides details on the Navy's final take request for training activities by species from the acoustic effects modeling estimates. Derivations of the numbers presented in Table 13 are described in more detail within Chapter 6 of the LOA application. Level A effects are only predicted to occur for Dall's porpoises. There are no mortalities predicted for any of the proposed training activities.
Table 13--Species-Specific Take Requests From Modeling Estimates of Impulsive and Non-Impulsive Source Effects
for All Training Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual 5-Year
Species Stock ---------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Level A Level B Level A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Pacific right whale..... Eastern North 7 0 35 0
Pacific.
Humpback whale................ Central North 129 0 645 0
Pacific.
Western North 10 0 50 0
Pacific.
Blue whale.................... Eastern North 95 0 475 0
Pacific.
Central North 0 0 0 0
Pacific.
Fin whale..................... Northeast 2,582 0 12,910 0
Pacific.
Sei whale..................... Eastern North 13 0 65 0
Pacific.
Minke whale................... Alaska.......... 87 0 435 0
Gray whale.................... Eastern North 0 0 0 0
Pacific.
Western North 0 0 0 0
Pacific.
Sperm whale................... North Pacific... 197 0 985 0
Killer whale.................. Alaska Resident. 564 0 2,820 0
Eastern North 53 0 265 0
Pacific
Offshore.
AT1 Transient... 1 0 5 0
GOA, Aleutian 144 0 720 0
Island, and
Bearing Sea
Transient.
Pacific white-sided dolphin... North Pacific... 1,963 0 9,815 0
Harbor porpoise............... Gulf of Alaska.. 5,484 0 27,420 0
Southeast Alaska 1,926 0 9,630 0
Dall's porpoise............... Alaska.......... 16,244 5 81,220 25
Cuvier's beaked whale......... Alaska.......... 2,544 0 12,720 0
Baird's beaked whale.......... Alaska.......... 401 0 2,005 0
Stejneger's beaked whale...... Alaska.......... 1,153 0 5,765 0
Steller sea lion.............. Eastern U.S..... 671 0 3,355 0
Western U.S..... 572 0 2,860 0
California sea lion........... U.S............. 5 0 25 0
Northern fur seal............. Eastern Pacific- 1,428 0 7,140 0
Alaska.
Northern elephant seal........ California 245 0 1,225 0
Breeding.
Harbor seal................... Aleutian Islands 0 0 0 0
Pribilof Islands 0 0 0 0
Bristol Bay..... 0 0 0 0
North Kodiak.... 1 0 5 0
South Kodiak.... 1 0 5 0
Prince William 2 0 10 0
Sound.
Cook Inlet/ 0 0 0 0
Shelikof.
Glacier Bay/Icy 0 0 0 0
Strait.
Lynn Canal/ 0 0 0 0
Stephens.
Harbor seal................... Sitka/Chatham... 0 0 0 0
Dixon/Cape 0 0 0 0
Decision.
Clarence Strait. 0 0 0 0
Ribbon seal................... Alaska.......... 0 0 0 0
---------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.................... ................ 36,522 5 182,610 25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marine Mammal Habitat
The Navy's proposed training activities could potentially affect marine mammal habitat through the introduction of sound into the water column, impacts to the prey species of marine mammals, bottom disturbance, or changes in water quality. Each of these components was considered in the
Page 10001
GOA DSEIS/OEIS and was determined by the Navy to have no effect on marine mammal habitat. Based on the information below and the supporting information included in the GOA DSEIS/OEIS, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the proposed training activities would not have adverse or long-term impacts on marine mammal habitat.
Expected Effects on Habitat
Unless the sound source or explosive detonation is stationary and/
or continuous over a long duration in one area, the effects of the introduction of sound into the environment are generally considered to have a less severe impact on marine mammal habitat than the physical alteration of the habitat. Acoustic exposures are not expected to result in long-term physical alteration of the water column or bottom topography, as the occurrences are of limited duration and are intermittent in time. Surface vessels associated with the activities are present in limited duration and are intermittent as they move relatively rapidly through any given area. Most of the high-explosive military expended materials would detonate at or near the water surface. Only bottom-laid explosives are likely to affect bottom substrate; habitat used for underwater detonations and seafloor device placement would primarily be soft-bottom sediment. Once on the seafloor, military expended material would likely be colonized by benthic organisms because the materials would serve as anchor points in the shifting bottom substrates, similar to a reef. The surface area of bottom substrate affected would make up a very small percentage of the total training area available in the Study Area.
Effects on Marine Mammal Prey
Invertebrates--Marine invertebrate distribution in the Study Area is influenced by habitat, ocean currents, and water quality factors such as temperature, salinity, and nutrient content (Levinton 2009). The distribution of invertebrates is also influenced by their distance from the equator (latitude); in general, the number of marine invertebrate species increases toward the equator (Macpherson 2002). The higher number of species (diversity) and abundance of marine invertebrates in coastal habitats, compared with the open ocean, is a result of more nutrient availability from terrestrial environments and the variety of habitats and substrates found in coastal waters (Levinton 2009).
The GOA is one of the world's most productive ocean regions and the habitats associated with these cold and turbulent waters contain identifiable collections of macrohabitats that sustain a multitude of invertebrate species. Invertebrates in the GOA provide valuable links in the food chain and perform ecosystem functions such as nutrient processing. For humans, invertebrates contribute to economic, cultural, and recreational activities in the GOA.
All marine invertebrate taxonomic groups are represented in the Study Area. Major invertebrate phyla and the general zones they inhabit in the Study Area are described in Chapter 3 of the 2011 GOA FEIS/OEIS.
Very little is known about sound detection and use of sound by aquatic invertebrates (Budelmann 2010; Montgomery et al., 2006; Popper et al., 2001). Organisms may detect sound by sensing either the particle motion or pressure component of sound, or both. Aquatic invertebrates probably do not detect pressure since many are generally the same density as water and few, if any, have air cavities that would function like the fish swim bladder in responding to pressure (Budelmann, 2010; Popper et al., 2001). Many marine invertebrates, however, have ciliated ``hair'' cells that may be sensitive to water movements, such as those caused by currents or water particle motion very close to a sound source (Budelmann, 2010; Mackie and Singla, 2003). These cilia may allow invertebrates to sense nearby prey or predators or help with local navigation. Marine invertebrates may produce and use sound in territorial behavior, to deter predators, to find a mate, and to pursue courtship (Popper et al., 2001).
Both behavioral and auditory brainstem response studies suggest that crustaceans may sense sounds up to three kilohertz (kHz), but best sensitivity is likely below 200 Hz (Lovell et al., 2005; Lovell et al., 2006; Goodall et al., 1990). Most cephalopods (e.g., octopus and squid) likely sense low-frequency sound below 1,000 Hz, with best sensitivities at lower frequencies (Budelmann, 2010; Mooney et al., 2010; Packard et al., 1990). A few cephalopods may sense higher frequencies up to 1,500 Hz (Hu et al., 2009). Squid did not respond to toothed whale ultrasonic echolocation clicks at sound pressure levels ranging from 199 to 226 dB re 1 muPa peak-to-peak, likely because these clicks were outside of squid hearing range (Wilson et al., 2007). However, squid exhibited alarm responses when exposed to broadband sound from an approaching seismic airgun with received levels exceeding 145 to 150 dB re 1 muPa root mean square (McCauley et al., 2000b).
Little information is available on the potential impacts on marine invertebrates of exposure to sonar, explosions, and other sound-
producing activities. It is expected that most marine invertebrates would not sense mid- or high-frequency sounds, distant sounds, or aircraft noise transmitted through the air-water interface. Most marine invertebrates would not be close enough to intense sound sources, such as some sonars, to potentially experience impacts to sensory structures. Any marine invertebrate capable of sensing sound may alter its behavior if exposed to non-impulsive sound, although it is unknown if responses to non-impulsive sounds occur. Continuous noise, such as from vessels, may contribute to masking of relevant environmental sounds, such as reef noise. Because the distance over which most marine invertebrates are expected to detect any sounds is limited and vessels would be in transit, any sound exposures with the potential to cause masking or behavioral responses would be brief and long-term impacts are not expected. Although non-impulsive underwater sounds produced during training activities may briefly impact individuals, intermittent exposures to non-impulsive sounds are not expected to impact survival, growth, recruitment, or reproduction of widespread marine invertebrate populations.
Detonations associated with the Navy's GOA TMAA activities would occur well offshore (the middle of the GOA TMAA is 140 nm offshore; except for a point near Cape Cleare on Montague Island 12 nm away, the nearest shoreline Kenai Peninsula is 24 nm north of the GOA TMAA northern boundary). As water depth increases away from shore, benthic invertebrates would be less likely to be impacted by detonations at or near the surface. In addition, detonations near the surface would release a portion of their explosive energy into the air, reducing the explosive impacts in the water. Some marine invertebrates may be sensitive to the low-frequency component of impulsive sound, and they may exhibit startle reactions or temporary changes in swim speed in response to an impulsive exposure. Because exposures are brief, limited in number, and spread over a large area, no long-term impacts due to startle reactions or short-term behavioral changes are expected. Although individual marine invertebrates may be injured or killed during an explosion or pile driving, no long-term impacts on
Page 10002
the survival, growth, recruitment, or reproduction of marine invertebrate populations are expected.
Fish--Fish are not distributed uniformly throughout the Study Area, but are closely associated with a variety of habitats. Some species range across thousands of square miles while others have small home ranges and restricted distributions (Helfman et al., 2009). The movements of some open-ocean species may never overlap with coastal fishes that spend their lives within several hundred feet (a few hundred meters) of the shore. Even within a single fish species, the distribution and specific habitats in which individuals occur may be influenced by its developmental stage, size, sex, reproductive condition, and other factors.
The distribution and abundance of fishes depends greatly on the physical and biological factors of the marine ecosystem, such as salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, population dynamics, predator and prey interaction oscillations, seasonal movements, reproduction and life cycles, and recruitment success (Helfman et al., 1997). A single factor is rarely responsible for the distribution of fish species; more often, a combination of factors is accountable. For example, open ocean species optimize their growth, reproduction, and survival by tracking gradients of temperature, oxygen, or salinity (Helfman et al., 1997). Another major component in understanding species distribution is the location of highly productive regions, such as frontal zones. These areas concentrate various prey species and their predators, such as tuna, and provide visual cues for the location of target species for commercial fisheries (NMFS, 2001).
At least 383 species belonging to 84 families of marine and anadromous fishes have been reported from the predominant ecosystems found in the GOA TMAA. Detailed information on taxa presence, distribution, and characteristics are provided in Chapter 3 of the 2011 GOA FEIS/OEIS.
All fish have two sensory systems to detect sound in the water: The inner ear, which functions very much like the inner ear in other vertebrates, and the lateral line, which consists of a series of receptors along the fish's body (Popper, 2008). The inner ear generally detects relatively higher-frequency sounds, while the lateral line detects water motion at low frequencies (below a few hundred Hz) (Hastings and Popper, 2005a). Although hearing capability data only exist for fewer than 100 of the 32,000 fish species, current data suggest that most species of fish detect sounds from 50 to 1,000 Hz, with few fish hearing sounds above 4 kHz (Popper, 2008). It is believed that most fish have their best hearing sensitivity from 100 to 400 Hz (Popper, 2003b). Additionally, some clupeids (shad in the subfamily Alosinae) possess ultrasonic hearing (i.e., able to detect sounds above 100,000 Hz) (Astrup, 1999). Permanent hearing loss, or permanent threshold shift has not been documented in fish. The sensory hair cells of the inner ear in fish can regenerate after they are damaged, unlike in mammals where sensory hair cells loss is permanent (Lombarte et al., 1993; Smith et al., 2006). As a consequence, any hearing loss in fish may be as temporary as the timeframe required to repair or replace the sensory cells that were damaged or destroyed (e.g., Smith et al., 2006).
Potential direct injuries from non-impulsive sound sources, such as sonar, are unlikely because of the relatively lower peak pressures and slower rise times than potentially injurious sources such as explosives. Non-impulsive sources also lack the strong shock waves associated with an explosion. Therefore, direct injury is not likely to occur from exposure to non-impulsive sources such as sonar, vessel noise, or subsonic aircraft noise. Only a few fish species are able to detect high-frequency sonar and could have behavioral reactions or experience auditory masking during these activities. These effects are expected to be transient and long-term consequences for the population are not expected. MFAS is unlikely to impact fish species because most species are unable to detect sounds in this frequency range and vessels operating MFAS would be transiting an area (not stationary). While a large number of fish species may be able to detect low-frequency sonar and other active acoustic sources, low-frequency active usage is rare and mostly conducted in deeper waters. Overall effects to fish from non-impulsive sound sources would be localized and infrequent.
Physical effects from pressure waves generated by underwater sounds (e.g. underwater explosions) could potentially affect fish within proximity of training activities. In particular, the rapid oscillation between high- and low-pressure peaks has the potential to burst the swim bladders and other gas-containing organs of fish (Keevin and Hemen, 1997). Sublethal effects, such as changes in behavior of fish, have been observed in several occasions as a result of noise produced by explosives (National Research Council of the National Academies, 2003; Wright, 1982). If an individual fish were repeatedly exposed to sounds from underwater explosions that caused alterations in natural behavioral patterns or physiological stress, these impacts could lead to long-term consequences for the individual such as reduced survival, growth, or reproductive capacity. However, the time scale of individual explosions is very limited, and training exercises involving explosions are dispersed in space and time. Consequently, repeated exposure of individual fish to sounds from underwater explosions is not likely and most acoustic effects are expected to be short-term and localized. Long-term consequences for populations would not be expected.
Marine Mammal Avoidance
Marine mammals may be temporarily displaced from areas where Navy training is occurring, but the area should be utilized again after the activities have ceased. Avoidance of an area can help the animal avoid further acoustic effects by avoiding or reducing further exposure. The intermittent or short duration of many activities should prevent animals from being exposed to stressors on a continuous basis (for the GOA TMAA, training activities will not occur continuously throughout the year, but rather, for a maximum of 21 days either once or twice annually). In areas of repeated and frequent acoustic disturbance, some animals may habituate or learn to tolerate the new baseline or fluctuations in noise level. While some animals may not return to an area, or may begin using an area differently due to training activities, most animals are expected to return to their usual locations and behavior.
Other Expected Effects
Other sources that may affect marine mammal habitat were considered in the GOA DSEIS/OEIS and potentially include the introduction of fuel, debris, ordnance, and chemical residues into the water column. The majority of high-order explosions would occur at or above the surface of the ocean, and would have no impacts on sediments and minimal impacts on water quality. While disturbance or strike from an item falling through the water column is possible, it is unlikely because (1) objects sink slowly, (2) most projectiles are fired at targets (and hit those targets), and (3) animals are generally widely dispersed throughout the water column and over the Study Area. Chemical, physical, or biological changes in sediment or water quality would not be detectable. In the event of an ordnance failure, the energetic materials it contained would remain mostly intact. The explosive materials
Page 10003
in failed ordnance items and metal components from training would leach slowly and would quickly disperse in the water column. Chemicals from other explosives would not be introduced into the water column in large amounts and all torpedoes would be recovered following training activities, reducing the potential for chemical concentrations to reach levels that can affect sediment quality, water quality, or benthic habitats.
Preliminary Analysis and Negligible Impact Determination
Negligible impact is ``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'' (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes, alone, is not enough information on which to base an impact determination, as the severity of harassment may vary greatly depending on the context and duration of the behavioral response, many of which would not be expected to have deleterious impacts on the fitness of any individuals. In determining whether the expected takes will have a negligible impact, in addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be ``taken,'' NMFS must consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any responses (critical reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), as well as the number and nature (e.g., severity) of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number of estimated mortalities, and the status of the species. As a reminder, the GOA TMAA training activities will not occur continuously throughout the year, but rather, for a maximum of 21 days either once or twice annually).
The Navy's specified activities have been described based on best estimates of the maximum amount of sonar and other acoustic source use or detonations that the Navy would conduct. There may be some flexibility in that the exact number of hours, items, or detonations may vary from year to year, but take totals are not authorized to exceed the 5-year totals indicated in Tables 12-13. We base our analysis and NID on the maximum number of takes authorized, although, as stated before, the number of takes are only a part of the analysis, which includes extensive qualitative consideration of other contextual factors that influence the degree of impact of the takes on the effected individuals. To avoid repetition, we provide some general analysis immediately below that applies to all the species listed in Tables 13, given that some of the anticipated effects (or lack thereof) of the Navy's training activities on marine mammals are expected to be relatively similar in nature. However, below that, we break our analysis into species, or groups of species where relevant similarities exist, to provide more specific information related to the anticipated effects on individuals or where there is information about the status or structure of any species that would lead to a differing assessment of the effects on the population.
The Navy's take request is based on its model and post-model analysis. In the discussions below, the ``acoustic analysis'' refers to the Navy's modeling results and post-model analysis. The model calculates sound energy propagation from sonar, other active acoustic sources, and explosives during naval activities; the sound or impulse received by animat dosimeters representing marine mammals distributed in the area around the modeled activity; and whether the sound or impulse received by a marine mammal exceeds the thresholds for effects. The model estimates are then further analyzed to consider animal avoidance and implementation of highly effective mitigation measures to prevent Level A harassment, resulting in final estimates of effects due to Navy training and testing. NMFS provided input to the Navy on this process and the Navy's qualitative analysis is described in detail in Chapter 6 of its LOA application (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/militry.htm).
Generally speaking, and especially with other factors being equal, the Navy and NMFS anticipate more severe effects from takes resulting from exposure to higher received levels (though this is in no way a strictly linear relationship throughout species, individuals, or circumstances) and less severe effects from takes resulting from exposure to lower received levels. The requested number of Level B takes does not equate to the number of individual animals the Navy expects to harass (which is lower), but rather to the instances of take (i.e., exposures above the Level B harassment threshold) that would occur. Additionally, these instances may represent either a very brief exposure (seconds) or, in some cases, longer durations of exposure within a day. Depending on the location, duration, and frequency of activities, along with the distribution and movement of marine mammals, individual animals may be exposed to impulse or non-impulse sounds at or above the Level B harassment threshold on multiple days. However, the Navy is currently unable to estimate the number of individuals that may be taken during training and testing activities. The model results estimate the total number of takes that may occur to a smaller number of individuals. While the model shows that an increased number of exposures may take place due to an increase in events/activities and ordnance, the types and severity of individual responses to training and testing activities are not expected to change.
Behavioral Harassment
As discussed previously in this proposed rule, marine mammals can respond to LF/MFAS/HFAS in many different ways, a subset of which qualifies as behavioral harassment. As described in the proposed rule, the Navy uses the behavioral response function to quantify the number of behavioral responses that would qualify as Level B behavioral harassment under the MMPA. As the statutory definition is currently applied, a wide range of behavioral reactions may qualify as Level B harassment under the MMPA, including but not limited to avoidance of the sound source, temporary changes in vocalizations or dive patterns, temporary avoidance of an area, or temporary disruption of feeding, migrating, or reproductive behaviors.
Some of the lower level physiological stress responses discussed earlier would also likely co-occur with the predicted harassments, although these responses are more difficult to detect and fewer data exist relating these responses to specific received levels of sound. Level B takes, then, may have a stress-related physiological component as well; however, we would not expect the Navy's generally short-term, intermittent, and (in the case of sonar) transitory activities to create conditions of long-term, continuous noise leading to long-term physiological stress responses in marine mammals.
The estimates calculated using the behavioral response function do not differentiate between the different types of potential reactions. Nor do the estimates provide information regarding the potential fitness or other biological consequences of the reactions on the affected individuals. We therefore consider the available scientific evidence to determine the likely nature of the modeled behavioral responses and the potential fitness consequences for affected individuals.
Page 10004
For LF/MFAS/HFAS use in the GOA TMAA, the Navy provided information (Table 14) estimating the percentage of behavioral harassment that would occur within the 6-dB bins (without considering mitigation or avoidance). As mentioned above, an animal's exposure to a higher received level is more likely to result in a behavioral response that is more likely to adversely affect the health of the animal. As illustrated below, the majority (including about 72 percent for the most powerful ASW hull-mounted sonar, which is responsible for a large portion of the sonar takes) of calculated takes from MFAS result from exposures less than 156 dB. Less than 1 percent of the takes are expected to result from exposures above 174 dB. Specifically, given a range of behavioral responses that may be classified as Level B harassment, to the degree that higher received levels are expected to result in more severe behavioral responses, only a small percentage of the anticipated Level B harassment from Navy activities might necessarily be expected to potentially result in more severe responses, especially when the distance from the source at which the levels below are received is considered (see Table 14). Marine mammals are able to discern the distance of a given sound source, and given other equal factors (including received level), they have been reported to respond more to sounds that are closer (DeRuiter et al., 2013). Further, the estimated number of responses do not reflect either the duration or context of those anticipated responses, some of which will be of very short duration, and other factors should be considered when predicting how the estimated takes may affect individual fitness. A recent study by Moore and Barlow (2013) emphasizes the importance of context (e.g., behavioral state of the animals, distance from the sound source, etc.) in evaluating behavioral responses of marine mammals to acoustic sources.
Table 14--Non-Impulsive Ranges in 6-dB bins and Percentage of Behavioral Harassments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sonar bin MF1 (e.g., SQS-53; ASW Sonar bin MF4 (e.g., AQS-22; ASW Sonar Bin MF5 (e.g., SSQ-62; ASW
hull mounted sonar) dipping sonar) sonobuoy)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of Percentage of Percentage of
Received level Distance at which behavioral Distance at which behavioral Distance at which behavioral
levels occur harassments levels occur harassments levels occur harassments
within radius of occurring at within radius of occurring at within radius of occurring at
source (m) given levels source (m) given levels source (m) given levels
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low Frequency Cetaceans
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
120 Most acoustic exposures (greater than 99 percent) would be within the non-injurious TTS or behavioral effects zones (Level B harassment consisting of generally temporary modifications in behavior) and none of the estimated exposures would result in mortality.
As mentioned earlier, an animal's exposure to a higher received level is more likely to result in a behavioral response that is more likely to adversely affect the health of the animal. For low frequency cetaceans (mysticetes) in the Study Area, most Level B exposures will occur at received levels less than 156 dB. The majority of estimated odontocete takes from MFAS/HFAS (at least for hull-mounted sonar, which is responsible for most of the sonar-related takes) also result from exposures to received levels less than 156 dB. Therefore, the majority of Level B takes are expected to be in the form of milder responses (i.e., lower-level exposures that still rise to the level of a take, but would likely be in the less severe range of responses that qualify as a take), and are not expected to have deleterious impacts on the fitness of any individuals. Marine mammal densities inputted into the acoustic effects model are also conservative, particularly when considering species for which data in portions of the Study Area is limited, and when considering the seasonal migrations that extend throughout the Study Area.
Acoustic disturbances caused by Navy sonar and explosives are short-term, intermittent, and (in the case of sonar) transitory. Even when an animal's exposure to active sonar may be more than one time, the intermittent nature of the sonar signal, the signal's low duty cycle (MFAS has a typical ping of every 50 seconds), and the fact that both the vessel and animal are moving, provide a very small chance that exposure to active sonar for individual animals and stocks would be repeated over extended periods of time. Consequently, we would not expect the Navy's activities to create conditions of long-term, continuous underwater noise leading to habitat abandonment or long-term hormonal or physiological stress responses in marine mammals.
Range complexes where intensive training and testing have been occurring for decades have populations of multiple species with strong site fidelity (including highly sensitive resident beaked whales at some locations) and increases in the number of some species. Populations of beaked whales and other odontocetes in the Bahamas, and in other Navy fixed ranges that have been operating for tens of years, appear to be stable.
Navy monitoring of Navy-wide activities since 2006 has documented hundreds of thousands of marine mammals on the range complexes and there are only two instances of overt behavioral change that have been observed.
Navy monitoring of Navy-wide activities since 2006 has documented no demonstrable instances of injury to marine mammals as a result of non-impulsive acoustic sources.
In at least three decades of similar Navy activities, only one instance of injury to marine mammals (March 25, 2011; three long-
beaked common dolphin off Southern California) has occurred as a known result of training or testing using an impulsive source (underwater explosion). Of note, the time-delay firing underwater explosive training activity implicated in the March 4 incident is not proposed for the training activities in the GOA Study Area.
The protective measures described in the Proposed Mitigation section above are designed to reduce vessel strike potential and avoid sound exposures that may cause serious injury, and to result in the least practicable adverse effect on marine mammal species or stocks.
Based on this analysis of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, which includes consideration of the materials provided in the Navy's LOA application and GOA DSEIS/OEIS, and dependent upon the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the Navy's training and testing activities in the GOA Study Area will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal species or stocks. NMFS proposes to issue regulations for these activities in order to prescribe the means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat, and to set forth requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of that taking.
Page 10016
Subsistence Harvest of Marine Mammals
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated by this action. None of the proposed training activities in the Study Area occur where traditional Arctic subsistence hunting exists. Therefore, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the total taking affecting species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
ESA
There are eight marine mammal species under NMFS jurisdiction that are listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA with confirmed or possible occurrence in the Study Area: Blue whale, fin whale, humpback whale, sei whale, sperm whale, gray whale (Western North Pacific stock), North Pacific right whale, and Steller sea lion (Western U.S. stock). The Navy will consult with NMFS pursuant to section 7 of the ESA, and NMFS will also consult internally on the issuance of a LOA under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA for GOA TMAA activities. Consultation will be concluded prior to a determination on the issuance of the final rule and a LOA.
NEPA
NMFS is a cooperating agency on the Navy's GOA DSEIS/OEIS, which was prepared and released to the public August 23, 2014. Upon completion, the GOA Final SEIS/OEIS will be made available for public review and posted on NMFS' Web site: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/military.htm. NMFS intends to adopt the GOA Final SEIS/OEIS, if adequate and appropriate. Currently, we believe that the adoption of the GOA Final SEIS/OEIS will allow NMFS to meet its responsibilities under NEPA for the issuance of regulations and LOA for GOA TMAA. If the GOA SEIS/OEIS is deemed inadequate by NMFS, NMFS would supplement the existing analysis to ensure that we comply with NEPA prior to issuing the final rule and LOA.
Classification
The Office of Management and Budget has determined that this proposed rule is not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce has certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA requires federal agencies to prepare an analysis of a rule's impact on small entities whenever the agency is required to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking. However, a federal agency may certify, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605 (b), that the action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Navy is the sole entity that would be affected by this rulemaking, and the Navy is not a small governmental jurisdiction, small organization, or small business, as defined by the RFA. Any requirements imposed by an LOA issued pursuant to these regulations, and any monitoring or reporting requirements imposed by these regulations, would be applicable only to the Navy. NMFS does not expect the issuance of these regulations or the associated LOA to result in any impacts to small entities pursuant to the RFA. Because this action, if adopted, would directly affect the Navy and not a small entity, NMFS concludes the action would not result in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 218
Exports, Fish, Imports, Incidental take, Indians, Labeling, Marine mammals, Navy, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seafood, Sonar, Transportation.
Dated: February 17, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.
For reasons set forth in the preamble, 50 CFR part 218 is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 218--REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE TAKING AND IMPORTING OF MARINE MAMMALS
0
-
The authority citation for part 218 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
Subpart N--Removed and Reserved
0
-
Remove and reserve subpart N, consisting of Sec. Sec. 218.120 through 218.129.
0
-
Subpart P is added to part 218 to read as follows:
Subpart P--Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; U.S. Navy's Gulf of Alaska Temporary Maritime Activities Area (GOA TMAA) Study Area
Sec.
218.150 Specified activity and specified geographical region.
218.151 Effective dates.
218.152 Permissible methods of taking.
218.153 Prohibitions.
218.154 Mitigation.
218.155 Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
218.156 Applications for letters of authorization.
218.157 Letters of authorization.
218.158 Renewal and modifications of letters of authorization and adaptive management.
Subpart P--Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; U.S. Navy's Gulf of Alaska Temporary Maritime Activities Area (GOA TMAA) Study Area
Sec. 218.150 Specified activity and specified geographical region.
(a) Regulations in this subpart apply only to the U.S. Navy for the taking of marine mammals that occurs in the area outlined in paragraph (b) of this section and that occurs incidental to the activities described in paragraph (c) of this section.
(b) The taking of marine mammals by the Navy is only authorized if it occurs within the GOA TMAA Study Area, which is bounded by a hexagon with the following six corners: 57deg30'deg N. lat., 141deg30'deg W. long.; 59deg36'deg N. lat., 148deg10'deg W. long.; 58deg57'deg N. lat., 150deg04'deg W. long.; 58deg20'deg N. lat., 151deg00'deg W. long.; 57deg16'deg N. lat., 151deg00'deg W. long.; and 55deg30'deg N. lat., 142deg00'deg W. long.
(c) The taking of marine mammals by the Navy is only authorized if it occurs incidental to the following activities:
(1) Sonar and other Active Sources Used During Training:
(i) Mid-frequency (MF) Source Classes:
(A) MF1--an average of 541 hours per year.
(B) MF3--an average of 48 hours per year.
(C) MF4--an average of 53 hours per year.
(D) MF5--an average of 25 items per year.
(E) MF6--an average of 21 items per year.
(F) MF11--an average of 78 hours per year.
(ii) High-frequency (HF) Source Classes:
(A) HF1--an average of 24 hours per year.
(B) HF6--an average of 80 items per year.
(iii) Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Source Classes:
(A) ASW2--an average of 80 hours per year.
(B) ASW3--an average of 546 hours per year.
(C) ASW4--an average 4 items per year.
Page 10017
(iv) Torpedoes (TORP):
(A) TORP2--an average of 5 items per year.
(B) Reserved
(2) Impulsive Source Detonations During Training:
(i) Explosive Classes:
(A) E5 (>5 to 10 pound lb net explosive weight (NEW))--an average of 112 detonations per year.
(B) E6 (>10 to 20 lb NEW)--an average of 2 detonations per year.
(C) E7 (>20 to 60 lb NEW)--an average of 4 detonations per year.
(D) E8 (>60 to 100 lb NEW)--an average of 6 detonations per year.
(E) E9 (>100 to 250 lb NEW)--an average of 142 detonations per year.
(F) E10 (>250 to 500 lb NEW)--an average of 32 detonations per year.
(G) E11 (>500 to 650 lb NEW)--an average of 2 detonations per year.
(H) E12 (>650 to 1,000 lb NEW)--an average of 4 detonations per year.
(ii) Reserved
Sec. 218.151 Effective dates.
Regulations in this subpart are effective May 4, 2016, through May 3, 2021.
Sec. 218.152 Permissible methods of taking.
(a) Under letter of authorization (LOA) issued pursuant to Sec. Sec. 216.106 and 218.157 of this chapter, the holder of the LOA may incidentally, but not intentionally, take marine mammals within the area described in Sec. 218.150, provided the activity is in compliance with all terms, conditions, and requirements of these regulations and the LOA.
(b) The activities identified in Sec. 218.150(c) must be conducted in a manner that minimizes, to the greatest extent practicable, any adverse impacts on marine mammals and their habitat.
(c) The incidental take of marine mammals under the activities identified in Sec. 218.150(c) is limited to the following species, by the identified method of take and the indicated number of times:
(1) Level B Harassment for all Training Activities:
(i) Mysticetes:
(A) Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus), Eastern North Pacific--475 (an average of 95 per year).
(B) Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus), Northeast Pacific--12,910 (an average of 2,582 per year).
(C) Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), Central North Pacific--645 (an average of 129 per year).
(D) Humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), Western North Pacific--50 (an average of 10 per year).
(E) Minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), Alaska--435 (an average of 87 per year).
(F) North Pacific right whale (Eubalaena japonica), Eastern North Pacific--35 (an average of 7 per year).
(G) Sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis), Eastern North Pacific--65 (an average of 13 per year).
(ii) Odontocetes:
(A) Baird's beaked whale (Berardius bairdii), Alaska--2,005 (an average of 401 per year).
(B) Cuvier's beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris), Alaska--12,720 (an average of 2,544 per year).
(C) Dall's porpoise (Phocoenoidea dalli), Alaska--81,220 (an average of 16,244 per year).
(D) Harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), GOA--27,420 (an average of 5,484 per year).
(E) Harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Southeast Alaska--9,630 (an average of 1,926 per year).
(F) Killer whale (Orcinus orca), Alaska Resident--2,820 (an average of 564 per year).
(G) Killer whale (Orcinus orca), Eastern North Pacific Offshore--
265 (an average of 53 per year).
(H) Killer whale (Orcinus orca), AT1 Transient--5 (an average of 1 per year).
(I) Killer whale (Orcinus orca), GOA, Aleutian Island, and Bearing Sea Transient--720 (an average of 144 per year).
(J) Pacific white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens), North Pacific--9,815 (an average of 1,963 per year).
(K) Stejneger's beaked whale (Mesoplodon stejnegeri), Alaska--5,765 (an average of 1,153 per year).
(L) Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus), North Pacific--985 (an average of 197 per year).
(iii) Pinnipeds:
(A) California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), U.S.--25 (an average of 5 per year).
(B) Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), Eastern U.S.--3,355 (an average of 671 per year).
(C) Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), Western U.S.--2,860 (an average of 572 per year).
(D) Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), North Kodiak--5 (an average of 1 per year).
(E) Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), South Kodiak--5 (an average of 1 per year).
(F) Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), Prince William Sound--10 (an average of 2 per year).
(G) Northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris), California Breeding--1,225 (an average of 245 per year).
(H) Northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus), Eastern Pacific--7,140 (an average of 1,428 per year).
(2) Level A Harassment for all Training Activities:
(i) Odontocetes:
(A) Dall's porpoise (Phocoenoidea dalli), Alaska--25 (an average of 5 per year).
(B) Reserved
(ii) Reserved
Sec. 218.153 Prohibitions.
Notwithstanding takings contemplated in Sec. 218.152 and authorized by an LOA issued under Sec. Sec. 216.106 and 218.157 of this chapter, no person in connection with the activities described in Sec. 218.150 may:
(a) Take any marine mammal not specified in Sec. 218.152(c);
(b) Take any marine mammal specified in Sec. 218.152(c) other than by incidental take as specified in Sec. 218.152(c);
(c) Take a marine mammal specified in Sec. 218.152(c) if such taking results in more than a negligible impact on the species or stocks of such marine mammal; or
(d) Violate, or fail to comply with, the terms, conditions, and requirements of these regulations or an LOA issued under Sec. Sec. 216.106 and 218.157 of this chapter.
Sec. 218.154 Mitigation.
(a) When conducting training activities, as identified in Sec. 218.150, the mitigation measures contained in the LOA issued under Sec. Sec. 216.106 and 218.157 of this chapter must be implemented. These mitigation measures include, but are not limited to:
(1) Lookouts.The Navy shall have two types of lookouts for the purposes of conducting visual observations: Those positioned on ships; and those positioned ashore, in aircraft, or on boats. The following are protective measures concerning the use of lookouts.
(i) Lookouts positioned on surface ships shall be dedicated solely to diligent observation of the air and surface of the water. Their observation objectives shall include, but are not limited to, detecting the presence of biological resources and recreational or fishing boats, observing mitigation zones, and monitoring for vessel and personnel safety concerns.
(ii) Due to manning and space restrictions on aircraft, small boats, and some Navy ships, lookouts for these platforms may be supplemented by the aircraft crew or pilot, boat crew, range site personnel, or shore-side personnel. Lookouts positioned in minimally
Page 10018
manned platforms may be responsible for tasks in addition to observing the air or surface of the water (e.g., navigation of a helicopter or small boat). However, all lookouts shall, considering personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the activity, comply with the observation objectives described above for lookouts positioned on ships.
(iii) All personnel standing watch on the bridge, Commanding Officers, Executive Officers, maritime patrol aircraft aircrews, anti-
submarine warfare helicopter crews, civilian equivalents, and lookouts shall successfully complete the United States Navy Marine Species Awareness Training prior to standing watch or serving as a lookout.
(iv) Lookout measures for non-impulsive sound:
(A) With the exception of vessels less than 65 ft (20 m) in length, ships using hull-mounted mid-frequency active sonar sources associated with anti-submarine warfare activities at sea shall have two Lookouts at the forward position of the vessel.
(B) While using hull-mounted mid-frequency active sonar sources associated with anti-submarine warfare activities at sea, vessels less than 65 ft (20 m) in length shall have one lookout at the forward position of the vessel due to space and manning restrictions.
(C) During non-hull mounted mid-frequency active sonar training activities, Navy aircraft participating in exercises at sea shall conduct and maintain, when operationally feasible and safe, surveillance for marine species of concern as long as it does not violate safety constraints or interfere with the accomplishment of primary operational duties. Helicopters shall observe/survey the vicinity of an anti-submarine warfare training event for 10 minutes before the first deployment of active (dipping) sonar in the water.
(D) Ships or aircraft conducting non-hull-mounted mid-frequency active sonar, such as helicopter dipping sonar systems, shall maintain one lookout.
(E) Ships conducting high-frequency active sonar shall maintain one lookout.
(v) Lookout measures for explosives and impulsive sound:
(A) Aircraft conducting explosive signal underwater sound buoy activities using >0.5-2.5 lb. NEW shall have one lookout.
(B) Surface vessels or aircraft conducting small-, medium-, or large-caliber gunnery exercises against a surface target shall have one lookout. From the intended firing position, trained lookouts shall survey the mitigation zone for marine mammals prior to commencement and during the exercise as long as practicable. Towing vessels, if applicable, shall also maintain one lookout. If a marine mammal is sighted in the vicinity of the exercise, the tow vessel shall immediately notify the firing vessel in order to secure gunnery firing until the area is clear.
(C) Aircraft conducting explosive bombing exercises shall have one lookout and any surface vessels involved shall have trained Lookouts. If surface vessels are involved, lookouts shall survey for floating kelp and marine mammals. Aircraft shall visually survey the target and buffer zone for marine mammals prior to and during the exercise. The survey of the impact area shall be made by flying at 1,500 ft. (460 m) or lower, if safe to do so, and at the slowest safe speed. Release of ordnance through cloud cover is prohibited: Aircraft must be able to actually see ordnance impact areas. Survey aircraft should employ most effective search tactics and capabilities.
(D) When aircraft are conducting missile exercises against a surface target, the Navy shall have one Lookout positioned in an aircraft. Aircraft shall visually survey the target area for marine mammals. Visual inspection of the target area shall be made by flying at 1,500 ft. (457 m) or lower, if safe to do so, and at slowest safe speed. Firing or range clearance aircraft must be able to actually see ordnance impact areas.
(E) Ships conducting explosive and non-explosive gunnery exercises shall have one Lookout on the ship. This may be the same lookout described in paragraph (B) above for surface vessels conducting small-, medium-, or large-caliber gunnery exercises when that activity is conducted from a ship against a surface target.
(F) During sinking exercises, two Lookouts shall be used. One lookout shall be positioned in an aircraft and one lookout shall be positioned on a vessel.
(vi) Lookout measures for physical strike and disturbance:
(A) While underway, surface ships shall have at least one lookout.
(B) Reserved
(vii) Lookout measures for non-explosive practice munitions:
(A) Gunnery exercises using non-explosive practice munitions (e.g., small-, medium-, and large-caliber) using a surface target shall have one lookout.
(B) During non-explosive bombing exercises one lookout shall be positioned in an aircraft and trained lookouts shall be positioned in any surface vessels involved.
(C) When aircraft are conducting non-explosive missile exercises (including exercises using rockets) against a surface target, the Navy shall have one lookout positioned in an aircraft.
(2) Mitigation Zones--The following are protective measures concerning the implementation of mitigation zones.
(i) Mitigation zones shall be measured as the radius from a source and represent a distance to be monitored.
(ii) Visual detections of marine mammals or sea turtles within a mitigation zone shall be communicated immediately to a watch station for information dissemination and appropriate action.
(iii) Mitigation zones for non-impulsive sound:
(A) The Navy shall ensure that hull-mounted mid-frequency active sonar transmission levels are limited to at least 6 dB below normal operating levels if any detected marine mammals or sea turtles are within 1,000 yd. (914 m) of the sonar dome (the bow).
(B) The Navy shall ensure that hull-mounted mid-frequency active sonar transmissions are limited to at least 10 dB below the equipment's normal operating level if any detected marine mammals or sea turtles are within 500 yd. (457 m) of the sonar dome.
(C) The Navy shall ensure that hull-mounted mid-frequency active sonar transmissions are ceased if any detected cetaceans or sea turtles are within 200 yd. (183 m) and pinnipeds are within 100 yd. (90 m) of the sonar dome. Transmissions shall not resume until the marine mammal has been observed exiting the mitigation zone, is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, has not been detected for 30 minutes, the vessel has transited more than 2,000 yd. beyond the location of the last detection, or the ship concludes that dolphins are deliberately closing in on the ship to ride the ship's bow wave (and there are no other marine mammal sightings within the mitigation zone). Active transmission may resume when dolphins are bow riding because they are out of the main transmission axis of the active sonar while in the shallow-wave area of the ship bow.
(D) The Navy shall ensure that high-frequency and non-hull-mounted mid-frequency active sonar transmission levels are ceased if any detected cetaceans are within 200 yd. (180 m) and pinnipeds are within 100 yd. (90 m) of the source. Transmissions shall not resume until the marine mammal has been observed exiting the mitigation zone, is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, the mitigation zone has been
Page 10019
clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes for an aircraft-deployed source, the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes for a vessel-deployed source, the vessel or aircraft has repositioned itself more than 400 yd. (370 m) away from the location of the last sighting, or the vessel concludes that dolphins are deliberately closing in to ride the vessel's bow wave (and there are no other marine mammal sightings within the mitigation zone).
(iv) Mitigation zones for explosive and impulsive sound:
(A) A mitigation zone with a radius of 350 yd. (320 m) shall be established for explosive signal underwater sonobuoys using >0.5 to 2.5 lb NEW. Explosive signal underwater sonobuoys shall not be deployed if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone (around the intended deployment location). Explosive signal underwater sonobuoy deployment shall cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Detonations shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes. Passive acoustic monitoring shall also be conducted with Navy assets, such as sonobuoys, already participating in the activity. These assets would only detect vocalizing marine mammals within the frequency bands monitored by Navy personnel. Passive acoustic detections would not provide range or bearing to detected animals, and therefore cannot provide locations of these animals. Passive acoustic detections would be reported to Lookouts posted in aircraft in order to increase vigilance of their visual surveillance.
(B) A mitigation zone with a radius of 200 yd. (180 m) shall be established for small- and medium-caliber gunnery exercises with a surface target. The exercise shall not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing shall cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes for a firing aircraft, the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes for a firing ship, or the intended target location has been repositioned more than 400 yd. (370 m) away from the location of the last sighting.
(C) A mitigation zone with a radius of 600 yd. (549 m) shall be established for large-caliber gunnery exercises with a surface target. The exercise shall not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing shall cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes.
(D) A mitigation zone with a radius of 900 yd. (823 m) shall be established for missile exercises with up to 250 lb NEW and a surface target. The exercise shall not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing shall cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes or 30 minutes (depending on aircraft type).
(E) A mitigation zone with a radius of 2,000 yd. (1.8 km) shall be established for missile exercises with 251 to 500 lb NEW using a surface target. The exercise shall not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing shall cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes or 30 minutes (depending on aircraft type).
(F) A mitigation zone with a radius of 2,500 yd. (2.3 km) around the intended impact location for explosive bombs and 1000 yd. (920 m) for non-explosive bombs shall be established for bombing exercises. The exercise shall not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Bombing shall cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Bombing shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes.
(G) A mitigation zone with a radius of 2.5 nautical miles shall be established for sinking exercises. Sinking exercises shall include aerial observation beginning 90 minutes before the first firing, visual observations from vessels throughout the duration of the exercise, and both aerial and vessel observation immediately after any planned or unplanned breaks in weapons firing of longer than 2 hours. Prior to conducting the exercise, the Navy shall review remotely sensed sea surface temperature and sea surface height maps to aid in deciding where to release the target ship hulk. The Navy shall also monitor using passive acoustics during the exercise. Passive acoustic monitoring would be conducted with Navy assets, such as passive ships sonar systems or sonobuoys, already participating in the activity. These assets would only detect vocalizing marine mammals within the frequency bands monitored by Navy personnel. Passive acoustic detections would not provide range or bearing to detected animals, and therefore cannot provide locations of these animals. Passive acoustic detections would be reported to lookouts posted in aircraft and on vessels in order to increase vigilance of their visual surveillance. Lookouts shall also increase observation vigilance before the use of torpedoes or unguided ordnance with a NEW of 500 lb. or greater, or if the Beaufort sea state is a 4 or above. The exercise shall not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. The exercise shall cease if a marine mammal, sea turtle, or aggregation of jellyfish is sighted within the mitigation zone. The exercise shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on a determination of its course and speed and the relative motion between the animal and the source, or the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes. Upon sinking the vessel, the Navy shall conduct post-exercise visual surveillance of the mitigation zone for 2
Page 10020
hours (or until sunset, whichever comes first).
(H) A mitigation zone of 70 yd. (46 m) shall be established for all explosive large-caliber gunnery exercises conducted from a ship. The exercise shall not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing shall cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes, or the vessel has repositioned itself more than 140 yd. (128 m) away from the location of the last sighting.
(v) Mitigation zones for vessels and in-water devices:
(A) A mitigation zone of 500 yd. (460 m) for observed whales and 200 yd (183 m) for all other marine mammals (except bow riding dolphins) shall be established for all vessel movement during training activities, providing it is safe to do so.
(B) A mitigation zone of 250 yd. (229 m) shall be established for all towed in-water devices, providing it is safe to do so.
(vi) Mitigation zones for non-explosive practice munitions:
(A) A mitigation zone of 200 yd. (180 m) shall be established for small, medium, and large caliber gunnery exercises using a surface target. The exercise shall not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing shall cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes for a firing aircraft, the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 30 minutes for a firing ship, or the intended target location has been repositioned more than 400 yd. (370 m) away from the location of the last sighting.
(B) A mitigation zone of 1,000 yd. (920 m) shall be established for bombing exercises. Bombing shall cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. The exercise shall not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Bombing shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes.
(C) A mitigation zone of 900 yd. (823 m) shall be established for missile exercises (including rockets) using a surface target. The exercise shall not commence if concentrations of floating vegetation (kelp paddies) are observed in the mitigation zone. Firing shall cease if a marine mammal is sighted within the mitigation zone. Firing shall recommence if any one of the following conditions is met: The animal is observed exiting the mitigation zone, the animal is thought to have exited the mitigation zone based on its course and speed, or the mitigation zone has been clear from any additional sightings for a period of 10 minutes or 30 minutes (depending on aircraft type).
(3) Stranding response plan. (i) The Navy shall abide by the letter of the ``Stranding Response Plan for Major Navy Training Exercises in the GOA TMAA Study Area,'' to include the following measures:
(A) Shutdown procedures. When an Uncommon Stranding Event (USE) occurs during a Major Training Exercise (MTE) in the Study Area, the Navy shall implement the procedures described below:
(1) The Navy shall implement a shutdown when advised by a NMFS Office of Protected Resources Headquarters Senior Official designated in the GOA TMAA Study Area Stranding Communication Protocol that a USE involving live animals has been identified and that at least one live animal is located in the water. NMFS and the Navy shall maintain a dialogue, as needed, regarding the identification of the USE and the potential need to implement shutdown procedures.
(2) Any shutdown in a given area shall remain in effect in that area until NMFS advises the Navy that the subject(s) of the USE at that area die or are euthanized, or that all live animals involved in the USE at that area have left the area (either of their own volition or herded).
(3) If the Navy finds an injured or dead animal floating at sea during an MTE, the Navy shall notify NMFS immediately or as soon as operational security considerations allow. The Navy shall provide NMFS with species or description of the animal(s), the condition of the animal(s), including carcass condition if the animal(s) is/are dead, location, time of first discovery, observed behavior (if alive), and photo or video (if available). Based on the information provided, NFMS shall determine if, and advise the Navy whether a modified shutdown is appropriate on a case-by-case basis.
(4) In the event, following a USE, that qualified individuals are attempting to herd animals back out to the open ocean and animals are not willing to leave, or animals are seen repeatedly heading for the open ocean but turning back to shore, NMFS and the Navy shall coordinate (including an investigation of other potential anthropogenic stressors in the area) to determine if the proximity of mid-frequency active sonar training activities or explosive detonations, though farther than 14 nautical miles from the distressed animal(s), is likely contributing to the animals' refusal to return to the open water. If so, NMFS and the Navy shall further coordinate to determine what measures are necessary to improve the probability that the animals will return to open water and implement those measures as appropriate.
(B) Within 72 hours of NMFS notifying the Navy of the presence of a USE, the Navy shall provide available information to NMFS (per the GOA TMAA Study Area Communication Protocol) regarding the location, number and types of acoustic/explosive sources, direction and speed of units using mid-frequency active sonar, and marine mammal sightings information associated with training activities occurring within 80 nautical miles (148 km) and 72 hours prior to the USE event. Information not initially available regarding the 80-nautical miles (148-km), 72-hour period prior to the event shall be provided as soon as it becomes available. The Navy shall provide NMFS investigative teams with additional relevant unclassified information as requested, if available.
(ii) Reserved
(b) Reserved
Sec. 218.155 Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
(a) The Holder of the Authorization must notify NMFS immediately (or as soon as operational security considerations allow) if the specified activity identified in Sec. 218.150 is thought to have resulted in the mortality or injury of any marine mammals, or in any take of marine mammals not identified in Sec. 218.152(c).
(b) The Holder of the LOA must conduct all monitoring and required reporting under the LOA, including abiding by the GOA TMAA monitoring plan.
Page 10021
(c) General notification of injured or dead marine mammals. Navy personnel shall ensure that NMFS (regional stranding coordinator) is notified immediately (or as soon as operational security considerations allow) if an injured or dead marine mammal is found during or shortly after, and in the vicinity of, a Navy training activity utilizing mid- or high-frequency active sonar, or underwater explosive detonations. The Navy shall provide NMFS with species or description of the animal(s), the condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if the animal is dead), location, time of first discovery, observed behaviors (if alive), and photo or video (if available). In the event that an injured, stranded, or dead marine mammal is found by the Navy that is not in the vicinity of, or during or shortly after, MFAS, HFAS, or underwater explosive detonations, the Navy shall report the same information as listed above as soon as operationally feasible and clearance procedures allow.
(d) General notification of ship strike. In the event of a ship strike by any Navy vessel, at any time or place, the Navy shall do the following:
(1) Immediately report to NMFS the species identification (if known), location (lat/long) of the animal (or the strike if the animal has disappeared), and whether the animal is alive or dead (or unknown), and the time of the strike.
(2) Report to NMFS as soon as operationally feasible the size and length of animal, an estimate of the injury status (ex., dead, injured but alive, injured and moving, unknown, etc.), vessel class/type and operational status.
(3) Report to NMFS the vessel length, speed, and heading as soon as feasible.
(4) Provide NMFS a photo or video, if equipment is available.
(5) Within 2 weeks of the strike, provide NMFS with a detailed description of the specific actions of the vessel in the 30-minute timeframe immediately preceding the strike, during the event, and immediately after the strike (e.g., the speed and changes in speed, the direction and changes in direction, other maneuvers, sonar use, etc., if not classified); a narrative description of marine mammal sightings during the event and immediately after, and any information as to sightings prior to the strike, if available; and use established Navy shipboard procedures to make a camera available to attempt to capture photographs following a ship strike.
(e) Communication plan. The Navy and NMFS shall develop a communication plan that will include all of the communication protocols (phone trees, etc.) and associated contact information required for NMFS and the Navy to carry out the necessary expeditious communication required in the event of a stranding or ship strike, including information described in the proposed notification measures above.
(f) Annual GOA TMAA monitoring report. The Navy shall submit an annual report of the GOA TMAA monitoring describing the implementation and results from the previous calendar year. Data collection methods shall be standardized across range complexes and study areas to allow for comparison in different geographic locations. Although additional information will be gathered, the protected species observers collecting marine mammal data pursuant to the GOA TMAA monitoring plan shall, at a minimum, provide the same marine mammal observation data required in Sec. 218.155. The report shall be submitted either 90 days after the calendar year, or 90 days after the conclusion of the monitoring year to be determined by the Adaptive Management process. The GOA TMAA Monitoring Report may be provided to NMFS within a larger report that includes the required Monitoring Plan reports from multiple range complexes and study areas (the multi-Range Complex Annual Monitoring Report). Such a report would describe progress of knowledge made with respect to monitoring plan study questions across all Navy ranges associated with the Integrated Comprehensive Monitoring Program. Similar study questions shall be treated together so that progress on each topic shall be summarized across all Navy ranges. The report need not include analyses and content that does not provide direct assessment of cumulative progress on the monitoring plan study questions.
(g) Annual GOA TMAA exercise reports. Each year, the Navy shall submit a preliminary report detailing the status of authorized sound sources within 21 days after the anniversary of the date of issuance of the LOA. Each year, the Navy shall submit a detailed report within 3 months after the anniversary of the date of issuance of the LOA. The annual report shall contain information on Major Training Exercises (MTEs), Sinking Exercise (SINKEX) events, and a summary of all sound sources used, as described in paragraph (g)(3) of this section. The analysis in the detailed report shall be based on the accumulation of data from the current year's report and data collected from previous the report. The detailed reports shall contain information identified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (4) of this section.
(1) MFAS/HFAS Major Training Exercises--This section shall contain the following information for Major Training Exercises conducted in the GOA TMAA:
(i) Exercise Information (for each MTE):
(A) Exercise designator.
(B) Date that exercise began and ended.
(C) Location.
(D) Number and types of active sources used in the exercise.
(E) Number and types of passive acoustic sources used in exercise.
(F) Number and types of vessels, aircraft, etc., participating in exercise.
(G) Total hours of observation by lookouts.
(H) Total hours of all active sonar source operation.
(I) Total hours of each active sonar source bin.
(J) Wave height (high, low, and average during exercise).
(ii) Individual marine mammal sighting information for each sighting in each exercise when mitigation occurred:
(A) Date/Time/Location of sighting.
(B) Species (if not possible, indication of whale/dolphin/
pinniped).
(C) Number of individuals.
(D) Initial Detection Sensor.
(E) Indication of specific type of platform observation made from (including, for example, what type of surface vessel or testing platform).
(F) Length of time observers maintained visual contact with marine mammal.
(G) Sea state.
(H) Visibility.
(I) Sound source in use at the time of sighting.
(J) Indication of whether animal is 2,000 yd from sonar source.
(K) Mitigation implementation. Whether operation of sonar sensor was delayed, or sonar was powered or shut down, and how long the delay was.
(L) If source in use is hull-mounted, true bearing of animal from ship, true direction of ship's travel, and estimation of animal's motion relative to ship (opening, closing, parallel).
(M) Observed behavior. Lookouts shall report, in plain language and without trying to categorize in any way, the observed behavior of the animals (such as animal closing to bow ride, paralleling course/speed, floating on surface and not swimming, etc.) and if any calves present.
(iii) An evaluation (based on data gathered during all of the MTEs) of the effectiveness of mitigation measures designed to minimize the received level
Page 10022
to which marine mammals may be exposed. This evaluation shall identify the specific observations that support any conclusions the Navy reaches about the effectiveness of the mitigation.
(2) SINKEXs. This section shall include the following information for each SINKEX completed that year:
(i) Exercise information (gathered for each SINKEX):
(A) Location.
(B) Date and time exercise began and ended.
(C) Total hours of observation by lookouts before, during, and after exercise.
(D) Total number and types of explosive source bins detonated.
(E) Number and types of passive acoustic sources used in exercise.
(F) Total hours of passive acoustic search time.
(G) Number and types of vessels, aircraft, etc., participating in exercise.
(H) Wave height in feet (high, low, and average during exercise).
(I) Narrative description of sensors and platforms utilized for marine mammal detection and timeline illustrating how marine mammal detection was conducted.
(ii) Individual marine mammal observation (by Navy lookouts) information (gathered for each marine mammal sighting) for each sighting in each exercise that required mitigation to be implemented:
(A) Date/Time/Location of sighting.
(B) Species (if not possible, indicate whale, dolphin, or pinniped).
(C) Number of individuals.
(D) Initial detection sensor.
(E) Length of time observers maintained visual contact with marine mammal.
(F) Sea state.
(G) Visibility.
(H) Whether sighting was before, during, or after detonations/
exercise, and how many minutes before or after.
(I) Distance of marine mammal from actual detonations (or target spot if not yet detonated).
(J) Observed behavior. Lookouts shall report, in plain language and without trying to categorize in any way, the observed behavior of the animal(s) (such as animal closing to bow ride, paralleling course/
speed, floating on surface and not swimming etc.), including speed and direction and if any calves present.
(K) Resulting mitigation implementation. Indicate whether explosive detonations were delayed, ceased, modified, or not modified due to marine mammal presence and for how long.
(L) If observation occurs while explosives are detonating in the water, indicate munition type in use at time of marine mammal detection.
(3) Summary of sources used.
(i) This section shall include the following information summarized from the authorized sound sources used in all training events:
(A) Total annual hours or quantity (per the LOA) of each bin of sonar or other non-impulsive source;
(B) Total annual number of each type of explosive exercises (of those identified as part of the ``Specified Activity'' in this proposed rule) and total annual expended/detonated rounds (missiles, bombs, sonobuoys, etc.) for each explosive bin.
(4) Geographic information presentation. The reports shall present an annual (and seasonal, where practical) depiction of training exercises and testing bin usage geographically across the Study Area.
(g) Sonar exercise notification. The Navy shall submit to NMFS (contact as specified in the LOA) an electronic report within fifteen calendar days after the completion of any major training exercise indicating:
(i) Location of the exercise.
(ii) Beginning and end dates of the exercise.
(iii) Type of exercise.
(h) Five-year close-out exercise report. This report shall be included as part of the 2021 annual exercise report. This report shall provide the annual totals for each sound source bin with a comparison to the annual allowance and the 5-year total for each sound source bin with a comparison to the 5-year allowance. Additionally, if there were any changes to the sound source allowance, this report shall include a discussion of why the change was made and include the analysis to support how the change did or did not result in a change in the SEIS and final rule determinations. The report shall be submitted 3 months after the expiration of this subpart. NMFS shall submit comments on the draft close-out report, if any, within 3 months of receipt. The report shall be considered final after the Navy has addressed NMFS' comments, or 3 months after the submittal of the draft if NMFS does not provide comments.
Sec. 218.156 Applications for letters of authorization (LOA).
To incidentally take marine mammals pursuant to the regulations in this subpart, the U.S. citizen (as defined by Sec. 216.106 of this chapter) conducting the activity identified in Sec. 218.150(c) (the U.S. Navy) must apply for and obtain either an initial LOA in accordance with Sec. 218.157 or a renewal under Sec. 218.158.
Sec. 218.157 Letters of authorization (LOA).
(a) An LOA, unless suspended or revoked, shall be valid for a period of time not to exceed the period of validity of this subpart.
(b) Each LOA shall set forth:
(1) Permissible methods of incidental taking;
(2) Means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the species, its habitat, and on the availability of the species for subsistence uses (i.e., mitigation); and
(3) Requirements for mitigation, monitoring and reporting.
(c) Issuance and renewal of the LOA shall be based on a determination that the total number of marine mammals taken by the activity as a whole shall have no more than a negligible impact on the affected species or stock of marine mammal(s).
Sec. 218.158 Renewals and modifications of letters of authorization (LOA) and adaptive management.
(a) A letter of authorization issued under Sec. Sec. 216.106 and 218.157 of this chapter for the activity identified in Sec. 218.150(c) shall be renewed or modified upon request of the applicant, provided that:
(1) The proposed specified activity and mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures, as well as the anticipated impacts, are the same as those described and analyzed for these regulations (excluding changes made pursuant to the adaptive management provision of this chapter), and;
(2) NMFS determines that the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures required by the previous LOA under these regulations were implemented.
(b) For LOA modification or renewal requests by the applicant that include changes to the activity or the mitigation, monitoring, or reporting (excluding changes made pursuant to the adaptive management provision of this chapter) that do not change the findings made for the regulations or result in no more than a minor change in the total estimated number of takes (or distribution by species or years), NMFS may publish a notice of proposed LOA in the Federal Register, including the associated analysis illustrating the change, and solicit public comment before issuing the LOA.
(c) A LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 and Sec. 218.157 of this chapter for the activity identified in Sec. 218.154 of this chapter may be modified by NMFS under the following circumstances:
Page 10023
(1) Adaptive management. NMFS may modify and augment the existing mitigation, monitoring, or reporting measures (after consulting with the Navy regarding the practicability of the modifications) if doing so creates a reasonable likelihood of more effectively accomplishing the goals of the mitigation and monitoring.
(i) Possible sources of data that could contribute to the decision to modify the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures in an LOA:
(A) Results from Navy's monitoring from the previous year(s);
(B) Results from other marine mammal and/or sound research or studies; or
(C) Any information that reveals marine mammals may have been taken in a manner, extent, or number not authorized by these regulations or subsequent LOA.
(ii) If, through adaptive management, the modifications to the mitigation, monitoring, or reporting measures are substantial, NMFS would publish a notice of proposed LOA in the Federal Register and solicit public comment.
(2) Emergencies. If NMFS determines that an emergency exists that poses a significant risk to the well-being of the species or stocks of marine mammals specified in Sec. 218.152(c), an LOA may be modified without prior notification and an opportunity for public comment. Notification would be published in the Federal Register within 30 days of the action.
FR Doc. 2016-03622 Filed 2-25-16; 8:45 am
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
