[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 43 (Thursday, March 4, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10209-10212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-4874]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[I.D. 011304C]


Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; On-
Ice Seismic Operations in the Beaufort Sea

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of issuance of an Incidental Harassment Authorization.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection 
Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has 
issued an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take marine 
mammals by harassment incidental to conducting on-ice seismic 
operations from Cape Halkett to Oliktok Point in the Beaufort Sea to 
ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. (CPA).

DATES: Effective from February 27, 2004, through February 26, 2005.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the IHA and the application are available by 
writing to Mr. P. Michael Payne, Chief, Marine Mammal Conservation 
Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, 
Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225, or by telephoning the contact listed 
here. A copy of the application containing a list of the references 
used in this document may be obtained by writing to this address or by 
telephoning the contact listed here and is also available at: http://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot--res/PR2/Small--Take/smalltake--
info.htm[numsign]a pplications

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Skrupky, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 713-2322, ext 163.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) 
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the 
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine 
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than 
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain 
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking 
is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is 
provided to the public for review.
    Permission may be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a 
negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not have an 
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or 
stock(s) for subsistence uses and that the permissible methods of 
taking and requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of 
such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 
50 CFR 216.103 as ''...an impact resulting from the specified activity 
that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, 
adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates 
of recruitment or survival.''
    Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process 
by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization 
to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment. 
Under section 3(18)(A), the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as:

    Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the 
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the 
wild; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine 
mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral 
patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, 
nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering.

    The term ``Level A harassment'' means harassment described in 
subparagraph (A)(i). The term ``Level B harassment'' means harassment 
described in subparagraph (A)(ii).
    Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS 
review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and comment 
period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of 
marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the comment period, NMFS 
must either issue or deny issuance of the authorization.
    Summary of Request
    On November 12, 2003, NMFS received an application from CPA for the 
taking, by harassment, of two species of marine mammals incidental to 
conducting an on-ice seismic survey program. As presently scheduled, 
the seismic operations will be conducted at Cape Halkett to Oliktok 
Point to approximately 20 nautical miles offshore in the Beaufort Sea 
in Alaska.
    The purpose of the project is to gather information about the 
subsurface of the earth by measuring acoustic waves, which are 
generated on or near the surface. The acoustic waves reflect at 
boundaries in the earth that are characterized by acoustic impedance 
contrasts.

Description of the Activity

    The seismic surveys use the ``reflection'' method of data 
acquisition. Seismic exploration uses a controlled energy source to 
generate acoustic waves that travel through the earth, including sea 
ice and water, as well as sub-sea geologic formations, and then uses 
ground sensors to record the reflected energy transmitted back to the 
surface. When acoustic energy is generated, compression and shear waves 
form and travel in and on the earth. The compression and shear waves 
are affected by the geological formations of the earth as they travel 
in it and may be reflected, refracted, diffracted or transmitted when 
they reach a boundary represented by an acoustic impedance contrast. 
Vibroseis seismic operations use large trucks with vibrators that 
systematically put variable frequency energy into the earth. At least 
1.2 m (4 ft) of sea ice is required to support the various equipment 
and vehicles used to transport seismic equipment offshore for 
exploration activities. These ice conditions generally exist from 1 
January until 31 May in the Beaufort Sea. Several vehicles are normally 
associated with a typical vibroseis operation. One or two vehicles with 
survey crews move ahead of the operation and mark the energy input 
points. Crews with wheeled vehicles often require trail clearance with 
bulldozers for adequate access to and within the site. Crews with 
tracked vehicles are typically limited by heavy snow cover and may 
require trail clearance beforehand.
    With the vibroseis technique, activity on the surveyed seismic line 
begins with the placement of sensors. All sensors are connected to the 
recording vehicle by multi-pair cable sections. The vibrators move to 
the beginning of the line and begin recording data. The vibrators begin 
vibrating in synchrony via a simultaneous radio signal to all vehicles. 
In a typical survey, each vibrator will vibrate four times at each 
location. The entire formation of vibrators subsequently moves forward 
to the next energy input point (e.g. 67 m, or 220 ft, in most 
applications) and repeats the process. In a typical 16- to 18-hour day, 
a surveys will complete 6-16 km (4 to 10 linear miles) in 2-dimensional 
seismic operations and 24

[[Page 10210]]

to 64 km (15 to 40 linear miles) in a 3-dimensional seismic operation.

Comments and Responses

    On January 26, 2004 (69 FR 3564), NMFS published a notice of 
receipt and a 30-day public comment period was provided on the 
application and proposed authorization. That notice described the 
activity and anticipated effects on marine mammals. No comments were 
received on this proposed activity.

Description of Habitat and Marine Mammals Affected by the Activity

    A detailed description of the Beaufort Sea ecosystem can be found 
in several documents (Corps of Engineers, 1999; NMFS, 1999; Minerals 
Management Service (MMS), 1992, 1996, 2001). A detailed description of 
the seismic survey activities and its associated marine mammals can be 
found in the CPA application and a number of documents referenced in 
the CPA application (see ADDRESSES), and is not repeated here. Two 
marine mammal species are known to occur within the proposed study area 
and are included in this application: the ringed seal (Phoca hispida) 
and the bearded seal (Erignathus barbatus). Ringed seals are year-round 
residents in the Beaufort Sea. The worldwide population is estimated to 
be between 6 and 7 million seals (Stirling and Calvert, 1979). The 
Alaska stock of the Bering-Chukchi-Beaufort area is estimated at 1 to 
1.5 (Frost 1985) or 3.3 to 3.6 million seals (Frost et al. 1988). 
Although there are no recent population estimates in the Beaufort Sea, 
in 1999, Bengston et al. (2000) conducted aerial surveys from Barrow 
south to Shismaref in a portion of the Chukchi Sea and estimated the 
number of animals to be 245,048. The NMFS 2001 Stock Assessment Report 
states that there are at least as many ringed seals in the Beaufort 
Sea.
    Early estimates of bearded seals in the Bering and Chukchi seas 
range from 250,000 to 300,000 (Papov 1976, Burns 1981). Reliable 
estimates of bearded seal abundance in Alaska are unavailable. However, 
since bearded seals are normally found in broken ice that is unstable 
for on-ice seismic operation, bearded seals will rarely be encountered 
during seismic operations. Additional information on these species is 
available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot_res/PR2/Stock_Assessment_Program/sars.html.

Potential Effects on Marine Mammals

    Incidental take is anticipated to result from short-term 
disturbances by noise and physical activity associated with on-ice 
seismic operations. These operations have the potential to disturb and 
temporarily displace some seals. Pup mortality could occur if any of 
these animals were nursing and displacement was protracted. However, it 
is unlikely that a nursing female would abandon her pup given the 
normal levels of disturbance from the proposed activities and the 
typical movement patterns of ringed sea pups among different holes. 
Seals also use as many as four lairs spaced as far as 3437 m (11276 ft) 
apart. In addition, seals have multiple breathing holes. Pups may use 
more holes than adults, but the holes are generally closer together. 
This indicates that adult seals and pups can move away from seismic 
activities, particularly since the seismic equipment does not remain in 
any specific area for a prolonged time. Given those considerations, 
combined with the small proportion of the population potentially 
disturbed by the proposed activity, impacts are expected to be 
negligible for the ringed and bearded seal populations.
    In the winter, bearded seals are restricted to cracks, broken ice, 
and other openings in the ice. On-ice seismic operations avoid those 
areas for safety reasons. Therefore, any exposure of bearded seals to 
on-ice seismic operations would be limited to distant and transient 
exposure. Bearded seals exposed to a distant on-ice seismic operation 
might dive into the water. Consequently, no significant effects on 
individual bearded seals or their population are expected, and the 
number of individuals that might be temporarily disturbed would be very 
low.
    Please see the Federal Register notice from the 2003 CPA activities 
(68 FR 14401, March 25, 2003) and the Federal Register notice of 
receipt of application for the 2004 CPA activities (69 FR 3564, January 
26, 2004) for more information regarding the potential effects on 
marine mammals during on-ice seismic operations.

Potential Effects on Subsistence

    Residents of the village of Nuiqsut are the primary subsistence 
users in the activity area. The subsistence harvest during winter and 
spring is primarily ringed seals, but during the open-water period both 
ringed and bearded seals are taken. Nuiqsut hunters may hunt year 
round; however, in more recent years most of the harvest has been in 
open water instead of the more difficult hunting of seals at holes and 
lairs (McLaren, 1958; Nelson, 1969). The most important area for 
Nuiqsut hunters is off the Colville River Delta, between Fish Creek and 
Pingok Island, which corresponds to approximately the eastern half to 
the activity area. Seal hunting occurs in this area by snow machine 
before spring break-up and by boat during summer. Subsistence patterns 
may be reflected through the harvest data collected in 1992, when 
Nuiqsut hunters harvested 22 of 24 ringed seals and all 16 bearded 
seals during the open water season from July to October (Fuller and 
George, 1997). Harvest data for 1994 and 1995 show 17 of 23 ringed 
seals were taken from June to August, while there was no record of 
bearded seals being harvested during these years (Brower and Opie, 
1997). Only a small number of ringed seals was harvested during the 
winter to early spring period, which corresponds to the time of the 
proposed on-ice seismic operations.
    Based on harvest patterns and other factors, on-ice seismic 
operations in the activity area are not expected to have an unmitigable 
adverse impact on subsistence uses of ringed and bearded seals because:
    (1) Operations would end before the spring ice breakup, after which 
subsistence hunters harvest most of their seals.
    (2) Operations would temporarily displace relatively few seals, 
since most of the habitat in the activity area is marginal to poor and 
supports relatively low densities of seals during winter. Displaced 
seals would likely move a short distance and remain in the area for 
potential harvest by native hunters (Frost and Lowry, 1988; Kelly et 
al., 1988).
    (3) The area where seismic operations would be conducted is small 
compared to the large Beaufort Sea subsistence hunting area associated 
with the extremely wide distribution of ringed seals.
    (4) To the maximum extent practicable, offshore vibroseis 
activities in Harrison Bay would progress in a westward direction and 
from deeper water shoreward to minimize disturbance to any subsistence 
hunting that may occur during seismic operations. If subsistence 
hunting occurred during winter, it would primarily be in the eastern 
half of Harrison Bay.
    In order to ensure the least practicable adverse impact on the 
species and the subsistence use of ringed seals, all activities will be 
conducted as far as practicable from any observed ringed seal 
structure, and crews will be required to avoid hunters and the 
locations of any seals being hunted in the activity area, whenever 
possible. Finally, CPA will consult with

[[Page 10211]]

subsistence hunters of Nuiqsut and provide the community, the North 
Slope Borough, and the Inupiat Community of the North Slope with 
information about its planned activities (timing and extent) before 
initiating any on-ice seismic activities.

Mitigation

    The following mitigation measures will be implemented: (1) All 
activities will be conducted as far as practicable from any observed 
ringed or bearded seal lair and no energy source will be placed over a 
ringed or bearded seal lair; (2) only vibrator-type energy-source 
equipment shown to have similar or lesser effects will be used; (3) CPA 
will provide training for the seismic crews so they can recognize 
potential areas of ringed seal lairs and adjust the seismic operations 
accordingly; and (4) monitoring will take place, as described below.
    CPA will also continue to work with NMFS, other Federal agencies, 
the State of Alaska, Native communities of Barrow and Nuiqsut, and the 
Inupiat Community of the Arctic Slope (ICAS) to assess measures to 
further minimize any impact from seismic activity. A Plan of 
Cooperation will be developed between CPA and Nuiqsut to ensure that 
seismic activities do not interfere with subsistence harvest of ringed 
or bearded seals.

Marine Mammal Monitoring

    Ringed seal pupping occurs in lairs from late March to mid-to-late 
April (Smith and Hammill, 1981). Prior to commencing on-ice seismic 
surveys after March 20, 2004, CPA must either use trained dogs to 
survey the entire area for seal structures potentially affected by 
vibroseis and surveys for seal structures will be conducted to a 
distance of at least 150 m (492 ft) from the outer edges of the 
vibroseis patch, or CPA must use trained dogs to survey a subsample of 
the area potentially affected by vibroseis and surveys for seal 
structures will be conducted to a distance of at least 150 m (492 ft) 
from the outer edges of the vibroseis patch. The seal structure survey 
will be conducted before selection of precise transit routes to ensure 
that seals, particularly pups, are not injured by equipment. The 
locations of all seal structures will be recorded by a Global 
Positioning System (GPS), staked, and flagged with surveyor's tape. 
Surveys will be conducted 150 m (492 ft) to each side of the transit 
routes. Actual width of the route may vary depending on wind speed and 
direction, which strongly influence the efficiency and effectiveness of 
dogs locating seal structures. The survey will be conducted in only the 
portions of the activity area where water depths exceed 3 m (9.8 ft). 
Few, if any, seals inhabit ice-covered waters below 3 m (9.8 ft) due to 
water freezing to the bottom or poor prey availability caused by the 
limited amount of ice-free water. If trained dogs are not available, 
potential habitat will be identified by trained marine mammal 
biologists based on the characteristics of the ice (i.e., deformation 
and cracks) and avoided by vibroseis operations.
    The impact of take, while anticipated to be negligible, will be 
assessed by conducting a second seal structure survey immediately after 
the end of the seismic surveys. A single on-ice survey will be 
conducted by biologists on snowmachines using a GPS to relocate and 
determine the status of seal structures located during the initial 
survey. The status (active vs. inactive) of each structure will be 
determined to assess the level of incidental take by seismic 
operations. The number of active seal structures abandoned between the 
initial survey and the final survey will be the basis for enumerating 
take. Take estimates will be determined by using observed densities of 
seal on ice reported by Moulton et al. (2001) for the Northstar 
project, which is approximately 37 km (20 nm) from the eastern edge of 
the proposed activity area.
    In the event that seismic surveys can be completed in that portion 
of the activity area [gteqt] 3 m (9.8 ft) before mid-March, no field 
surveys would be conducted of seal structures. Under this scenario, 
surveys would be completed before pups are born and disturbance would 
be negligible. Therefore, take estimates would be determined for only 
that portion of the activity area exposed to seismic surveys after 
March 20, which would be in water 3 m (9.8 ft) or less deep. Take for 
this area would be estimated by using the observed density (13/100 
km\2\) reported by Moulton et al. (2001) for water depths between 0 to 
3 m (0 to 9.8 ft) in the Northstar project area, which is the only 
source of a density estimate stratified by water depth for the Beaufort 
Sea. This would be an overestimation requiring a substantial downward 
adjustment to reflect the actual take of seals using lairs, since few 
if any of the structures in these water depths would be used for 
birthing, and the Moulton et al. (2001) estimate includes all seals. 
This monitoring program was reviewed at the fall 2002 on-ice meeting 
sponsored by NMFS' National Marine Mammal Laboratory in Seattle and 
found acceptable.

Reporting

    An annual report must be submitted to NMFS within 90 days of 
completing the year's activities.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    NMFS has determined that no species listed as threatened or 
endangered under the ESA will be affected by issuing an authorization 
under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    The information provided in the 1998 Environmental Assessment (EA) 
for winter seismic activities led NOAA Fisheries to conclude that 
implementation of either the preferred alternative or other 
alternatives identified in the EA would not have a significant impact 
on the human environment. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement 
was not prepared. The proposed action discussed in this document is 
identical to the 1998 action, except that it is only one year in 
duration. A reference search has indicated that no significant new 
scientific information or analyses have been developed in the past 
several years. Accordingly, this action is categorically excluded from 
further review under NOAA Administrative Order 216-6.

Conclusions

    The anticipated impact of winter seismic activities on the species 
or stock of ringed and bearded seals is expected to be negligible for 
the following reasons:
    (1) The activity area supports a small proportion (<1 percent) of 
the ringed and bearded seal populations in the Beaufort Sea.
    (2) Most of the winter-run seismic lines will be on ice over 
shallow water where ringed seals are absent or present in very low 
abundance. Over 60 percent of the activity area is near shore and/or in 
water less than 3 m (9.8 ft) deep, which is generally considered poor 
seal habitat. Moulton et al. (2001) reported that only 6 percent of 660 
ringed seals observed on ice in the Northstar project area were in 
water between 0 to 3 m (0 to 9.8 ft)deep.
    (3) Seismic operators will avoid moderate and large pressure 
ridges, where seal and pupping lairs are likely to be most numerous, 
for reasons of safety and because of normal operational constraints.
    (4) Many of the on-ice seismic lines and connecting ice roads will 
be laid out and explored during January and February, when many ringed 
seals are

[[Page 10212]]

still transient, and considerably before the spring pupping season.
    (5) The sounds from energy produced by vibrators used during on-ice 
seismic programs typically are at frequencies well below those used by 
ringed seals to communicate (1000 Hz). Thus, ringed seal hearing is not 
likely to be very good at those frequencies and seismic sounds are not 
likely to have strong masking effects on ringed seal calls. This effect 
is further moderated by the quiet intervals between seismic energy 
transmissions.
    (6) There has been no major displacement of seals away from on-ice 
seismic operations (Frost and Lowry, 1988). Further confirmation of 
this lack of major response to industrial activity is illustrated by 
the fact that there has been no major displacement of seals near the 
Northstar Project. Studies at Northstar have shown a continued presence 
of ringed seals throughout winter and creation of new seal structures 
(Williams et al., 2001).
    (7) Although seals may abandon structures near seismic activity, 
studies have not demonstrated a cause and effect relationship between 
abandonment and seismic activity or biologically significant impact on 
ringed seals. Studies by Williams et al. (2001), Kelley et al. (1986, 
1988) and Kelly and Quakenbush (1990) have shown that abandonment of 
holes and lairs and establishment or re-occupancy of new ones is an 
ongoing natural occurrence, with or without human presence. Link et al. 
(1999) compared ringed seal densities between areas with and without 
vibroseis activity and found densities were highly variable within each 
area and inconsistent between areas (densities were lower for 5 days, 
equal for 1 day, and higher for 1 day in vibroseis area), suggesting 
other factors beyond the seismic activity likely influenced seal use 
patterns. Consequently, a wide variety of natural factors influence 
this patterns of seal use including time of day, weather, season, ice 
deformation, ice thickness, accumulation of snow, food availability and 
predators as well as ring seal behavior and populations dynamics.
    (8) In winter, bearded seals are restricted to cracks, broken ice, 
and other openings in the ice. On-ice seismic operations avoid those 
areas for safety reasons. Therefore, any exposure of bearded seals to 
on-ice seismic operations would be limited to distant and transient 
exposure. Bearded seals exposed to a distant on-ice seismic operation 
might dive into the water. Consequently, no significant effects on 
individual bearded seals or their population are expected, and the 
number of individuals that might be temporarily disturbed would be very 
low.
    As a result, CPA believes the effects of on-ice seismic are 
expected to be limited to short-term and localized behavioral changes 
involving relatively small numbers of seals. NMFS has determined, based 
on information in the application and EA, that these changes in 
behavior will have no more than a negligible impact on the affected 
species or stocks of ringed and bearded seals (NMFS, 1998). Also, the 
potential effects of the proposed on-ice seismic operations during 2004 
are unlikely to have an unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence uses 
of these two species.

Authorization

    NMFS has issued an IHA to take marine mammals, by harassment, 
incidental to conducting seismic surveys at Cape Halkett to Oliktok 
Point in the Beaufort Sea in Alaska, provided the previously mentioned 
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. 
NMFS has determined that the activity would result in only the 
harassment of marine mammals; would have no more than a negligible 
impact on the affected marine mammal stocks; and would not have an 
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of species or stocks for 
subsistence uses.

    Dated: February 27, 2004.
P. Michael Payne,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 04-4874 Filed 3-3-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S