[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 78 (Thursday, April 22, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21816-21825]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-9145]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[I.D. 022304A]


Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine 
MammalsIncidental to Conducting the Precision Strike Weapon (PSW) 
Testing and Training by Eglin Air Force Base in the Gulf of Mexico

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

ACTION: Notice of receipt of application for an incidental take 
authorization; request for comments and information.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from Eglin Air Force Base (Eglin 
AFB), for authorization to harass marine mammals incidental to testing 
and training during Precision Strike Weapons (PSW) tests in the Gulf of 
Mexico (GOM), a military readiness activity. As a result of this 
request, NMFS is proposing to issue a 1-year incidental harassment 
authorization (IHA) to take marine mammals by Level B harassment 
incidental to this activity and will propose regulations at a later 
time that would govern the incidental taking of marine mammals under a 
Letter of Authorization (LOA) issued to Eglin AFB for a period of up to 
5 years after the 1-year IHA expires. In order to issue IHAs and 
promulgate regulations and LOAs thereunder, NMFS must determine that 
these takings will have a negligible impact on the affected species and 
stocks of marine mammals. NMFS invites comment on Eglin AFB's 
application, NMFS' preliminary determinations on the impact of the 
activity on marine mammals and suggestions on the content of the 
regulations.

DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than May 24, 
2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to P. Michael Payne, Chief, 
Marine Mammal Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, 
National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver 
Spring, MD 20910-3226. The mailbox address for providing email comments 
on this action is [email protected] Include in the subject line of 
the e-mail comment the following document identifier: 022304A. Comments 
sent via email, including all attachments, must not exceed a 10-
megabyte file size. A copy of the application containing a list of 
references used in this document may

[[Page 21817]]

be obtained by writing to this address or by telephoning the contact 
listed here (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). A copy of the Draft 
Environmental Assessment (Draft EA) is available by writing to the 
Department of the Air Force, AAC/EMSN, Natural Resources Branch, 501 
DeLeon St., Suite 101, Eglin AFB, FL 32542-5133.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth R. Hollingshead, NMFS, 301-
713-2055, ext 128.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal 
Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)(MMPA) direct the Secretary of 
Commerce (Secretary) 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 
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 if 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.''
    Subsection 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. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2004 
(NDAA)(Public Law 108-136) amended the definition of ``harassment'' in 
section 18(A) of the MMPA as it applies to a ``military readiness 
activity'' to read as follows:
    (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 February 4, 2004, Eglin AFB submitted a request for a 1-year IHA 
and for an LOA (to take effect after the expiration of the IHA), for 
the incidental, but not intentional taking (in the form of noise-
related harassment), of marine mammals incidental to PSW testing within 
the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range (EGTTR) for the next five years, 
as authorized by section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA. The EGTTR is described 
as the airspace over the Gulf of Mexico that is controlled by Eglin AFB 
is also sometimes referred to as the ``Eglin Water Range.''
    PSW missions involve air-to-surface impacts of two weapons, the 
Joint Air-to-Surface Stand-off Missile (JASSM) AGM-158 A and B and the 
small-diameter bomb (SDB) (GBU-39/B) that result in underwater 
detonations of up to approximately 300 lbs (136 kg) and 96 lbs (43.5 
kg, double SDB) of net explosive weight, respectively.
    The JASSM is a precision cruise missile designed for launch from 
outside area defenses to kill hard, medium-hard, soft, and area type 
targets. The JASSM has a range of more than 200 nm (370 km) and carries 
a 1,000-lb (453.6 kg) warhead. The JASSM has approximately 300 lbs (136 
kg) of TNT equivalent net-explosive-weight (NEW). The explosive used is 
AFX-757, a type of plastic bonded explosive (PBX) formulation with 
higher blast characteristics and less sensitivity to many physical 
effects that could trigger unwanted explosions. The JASSM would be 
launched from an aircraft at altitudes greater than 25,000 ft (7620 m). 
The JASSM would cruise at altitudes greater than 12,000 ft (3658 m) for 
the majority of the flight profile until it makes the terminal maneuver 
toward the target. The JASSM exercise involves a maximum of two live 
shots (single) and 4 inert shots (single) each year for the next 5 
years. Detonation of the JASSM would occur under one of three 
scenarios: (1) Detonation upon impact with the target (about 5 ft (1.5 
m) above the GOM surface); (2) detonation upon impact with a barge 
target at the surface of the GOM; or (3) detonation at 120 milliseconds 
after contact with the surface of the GOM.
    The SDB is a glide bomb. Because of its capabilities, the SDB 
system is an important element of the Air Force's Global Strike Task 
Force. The SDB has a range of up to 50 nm (92.6 km) and carries a 
217.4-lb (98.6 kg) warhead. The SDB has approximately 48 lbs (21.7 kg) 
of TNT equivalent NEW. The explosive used is AFX-757. Launch from an 
aircraft would occur at altitudes greater than 15,000 ft (4572 m). The 
SDB would commence a non-powered glide to the intended target. The SDB 
exercise involves a maximum of six live shots a year, with two of the 
shots occurring simultaneously and a maximum of 12 inert shots with up 
to two occurring simultaneously. Detonation of the SDBs would occur 
under one of two scenarios: (1) Detonation of one or two bombs upon 
impact with the target (about 5 ft (1.5 m)above the GOM surface), or 
(2) a height of burst (HOB) test: Detonation of one or two bombs 10 to 
25 ft (3 to 7.6 m)above the GOM surface.
    The JASSM and SDBs would be launched from B-1, B-2, B-52, F-15, F-
16, F-18, or F-117 aircraft. Chase aircraft would include F-15, F-16, 
and T-38 aircraft. These aircraft would follow the test items during 
captive carry and free flight but would not follow either item below a 
predetermined altitude as directed by Flight Safety. Other assets on 
site may include an E-9 turboprop aircraft or MH-60/53 helicopters 
circling around the target location. Tanker aircraft including KC-10s 
and KC-135s would also be used. A second unmanned barge may also be on 
location to hold instrumentation. Targets include a platform of five 
containers strapped, braced, and welded together to form a single 
structure and a hopper barge, typical for transportation of grain.
    The proposed action would occur in the northern GOM in the EGTTR. 
Targets would be located in water less than 200 ft (61 m) deep and from 
15 to 24 nm (27.8 to 44.5 km) offshore, south of Santa Rosa Island and 
south of Cape San Blas Site D3-A.

Description of Marine Mammals Affected by the Activity

    There are 29 species of marine mammals documented as occurring in 
Federal waters of the GOM. Information on those species that may be 
impacted by this activity are discussed in the Eglin AFB application 
and the Draft EA. A summary of that information is provided in this 
section.
    General information on these species can be found in Wursig et al. 
(2000. The Marine Mammals of the Gulf of Mexico, TAMU Press, College 
Station, TX) and in the NMFS Stock Assessment Reports (Waring, 2002). 
This latter document is available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot_res/PR2/Stock_Assessment_Program/sars.html#Stock Assessment Reports
    Marine mammal species that potentially occur within the EGTTR

[[Page 21818]]

include several species of cetaceans and one sirenian, the West Indian 
manatee. During winter months, manatee distribution in the GOM is 
generally confined to southern Florida. During summer months, a few may 
migrate north as far as Louisiana. However, manatees primarily inhabit 
coastal and inshore waters and rarely venture offshore. PSW missions 
would be conducted offshore. Therefore, effects on manatees are 
considered very unlikely.
    Cetacean abundance estimates for the study area are derived from 
GulfCet II (Davis et al., 2000) aerial surveys of the continental shelf 
within the Minerals Management Service Eastern Planning Area, an area 
of 70,470 km\2\. Texas A&M University and NMFS conducted these surveys 
from 1996 to 1998. Abundance and density data from the aerial survey 
portion of the survey best reflect the occurrence of cetaceans within 
the EGTTR, given that the survey area overlaps approximately one-third 
of the EGTTR and nearly the entire continental shelf region of the 
EGTTR where military activity is highest. The GulfCet II aerial surveys 
identified different density estimates of marine mammals for the shelf 
and slope geographic locations. Only the shelf data is used because PSW 
missions will only be conducted on the shelf.
    In order to maximize species conservation and protection, the 
species density estimate data were adjusted to reflect more realistic 
encounters of these animals in their natural environment. Refer to 
``Conservative Estimates of Marine Mammal Densities'' in this document 
and Eglin AFB's application for more information on density estimates. 
A brief description of each marine mammal species observed during 
GulfCet II aerial surveys on the shelf that has the potential to be 
present in the PSW test area is summarized here.

Atlantic Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus)

    Bottlenose dolphins are distributed worldwide in tropical and 
temperate waters. In the GOM, several coastal and offshore stocks have 
been identified (see Waring et al. 2002) and one stock occurs in the 
inshore waters of the entire GOM. Waring et al. (2002) provides the 
following minimum population estimates for the GOM bottlenose dolphin 
stocks: outer shelf, 43,233; shelf and slope, 4,530; western Gulf, 
2,938; northern Gulf, 3,518; eastern Gulf, 8,953; and Bay, Sound & 
Estuarine waters, 3,933. Baumgartner et al. (2001) suggest a bimodal 
distribution in the northern GOM, with a shelf population occurring out 
to the 150-m (492 ft) isobath and a shelf break population out to the 
750-m (2461 ft) isobath. Occurrence in water with depth greater than 
1,000 m (3281 ft) is not considered likely. Migratory patterns from 
inshore to offshore are likely associated with the movements of prey 
rather than a preference for a particular habitat characteristic (such 
as surface water temperature) (Ridgeway, 1972; Irving, 1973; Jefferson 
et al., 1992).
    The average herd or group size of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins in 
shelf and slope waters was approximately four and 10 individuals, 
respectively, per herd as determined by GulfCet II surveys of eastern 
Gulf waters (Davis et al., 2000). The diet of Atlantic bottlenose 
dolphins consists mainly of fish, crabs, squid, and shrimp (Caldwell 
and Caldwell, 1983).

Atlantic Spotted Dolphins (Stenella frontalis)

    Atlantic spotted dolphins are endemic to the tropical and warm 
temperate Atlantic Ocean. This species ranges from the latitude of Cape 
May, NJ, along mainland shores to Venezuela, including the GOM and 
Lesser Antilles (Caldwell and Caldwell, 1983). Sightings of this 
species are concentrated along the continental shelf and shelf edge 
(Fritts et al., 1983), but they also occur farther offshore. At one 
time, Atlantic spotted dolphins were considered to be the most abundant 
species of dolphin in offshore waters (Schmidly, 1981), with most 
sightings occurring at an average of 168 km (90.7 nm) offshore. The 
best available abundance estimate for this species in the northern GOM 
is the combined estimate of abundance for both the OCS (39,307, 
CV=0.31) and oceanic (238, CV=0.87) waters from 1996 to 2001, which is 
39,545 (CV=0.31)(NMFS, 2003).
    The preferred depth of the spotted dolphin is believed to be 
associated with food availability and water temperature. The diet of 
the Atlantic spotted dolphin consists of squid and fish.

Dwarf Sperm Whales and Pygmy Sperm Whales

    Dwarf sperm whales (Kogia simus) commonly inhabit the deeper 
offshore water, generally eating squid, crustaceans, and fish (Caldwell 
and Caldwell, 1983), but they do move into inshore waters during 
calving season. The pygmy sperm whale (Kogia breviceps) has a diet 
similar to that of the dwarf sperm whale. Both pygmy and dwarf sperm 
whales have been sighted in the northern GOM primarily along the 
continental shelf edge and in deeper shelf waters during all seasons 
except winter (Mullin et al., 1994). The estimate of abundance for 
dwarf and pygmy sperm whales in oceanic waters is 809 (CV=0.33)(Mullin 
and Fulling, in prep), which is the best available abundance estimate 
for these species in the northern GOM. Separate estimates of abundance 
cannot be made due to uncertainty of species identification (NMFS, 
2003). Dwarf and pygmy sperm whales have a high percentage of 
strandings relative to percent population of all cetaceans (Mullin et 
al., 1994).
    Impacts to Marine Mammals
    Potential impacts to marine mammals from the detonation of the PSWs 
and SDBs include both lethal and non-lethal injury, as well as Level B 
behavioral harassment. Although unlikely due to the extensive 
mitigation measures proposed by Eglin AFB, marine mammals have the 
potential to be killed or injured as a result of a blast due to the 
response of air cavities in the body, such as the lungs and bubbles in 
the intestines. Effects are likely to be most severe in near surface 
waters where the reflected shock wave creates a region of negative 
pressure called ``cavitation.'' This is a region of near total physical 
trauma within which no animals would be expected to survive. A second 
criterion used by NMFS for categorizing taking by mortality is the 
onset of extensive lung hemorrhage. Extensive lung hemorrhage is 
considered to be debilitating and thereby potentially fatal. 
Suffocation caused by lung hemorrhage is likely to be the major cause 
of marine mammal death from underwater shock waves.
    For the acoustic analysis, the exploding charge is characterized as 
a point source. The impact thresholds used for marine mammals relate to 
potential effects on hearing from underwater noise from detonations. 
For the explosives in question, actual detonation heights would range 
from 0 to 25 ft (7.6 m) above the water surface. Detonation depths 
would range from 0 to 80 ft (73.2 m) below the surface. To bracket the 
range of possibilities, detonation scenarios just above and below the 
surface were used to analyze bombs set to detonate on contact with the 
target barge. Potentially, the barge may interact with the propagation 
of noise into the water. However, barge effects on the propagation of 
noise into the water column cannot be determined without in-water noise 
monitoring at the time of detonation.
    Potential exposure of a sensitive species to detonation noise could 
theoretically occur at the surface or at

[[Page 21819]]

any number of depths with differing consequences. As a conservative 
measure a mid-depth scenario was selected to ensure the greatest direct 
path for the harassment ranges, and to give the greatest impact range 
for the injury thresholds.

Explosive Criteria and Thresholds for Impact of Noise on Marine Mammals

    Criteria and thresholds that are the basis of the analysis of PSW 
noise impacts to cetaceans were initially used in U.S. Navy's 
environmental impact statements (EISs) for ship shock trials of the 
SEAWOLF submarine and the USS WINSTON S. CHURCHILL vessel (DoN, 1998; 
DoN, 2001) and accepted by NMFS as representing the best science 
available (see 66 FR 22450, May 4, 2001). NMFS continues to believe 
that this represents the best science available. The following sections 
summarize the information contained in those actions.

Criteria and Thresholds: Lethality

    The criterion for mortality for marine mammals used in the 
CHURCHILL Final EIS is 'onset of severe lung injury.' This is 
conservative in that it corresponds to a 1 percent chance of mortal 
injury, and yet any animal experiencing onset severe lung injury is 
counted as a lethal take. The threshold is stated in terms of the 
Goertner (1982) modified positive impulse with value ``indexed to 31 
psi-ms.'' Since the Goertner approach depends on propagation, source/
animal depths, and animal mass in a complex way, the actual impulse 
value corresponding to the 31-psi index is a complicated calculation. 
The acoustic threshold is derived from:
    I1% = 42.9 (M/34)\1/3\ psi-ms,
    where M is animal mass in kg. Again, to be conservative, CHURCHILL 
used the mass of a calf dolphin (at 12.2 kg), so that the threshold 
index is 30.5 psi-ms.

Criteria and Thresholds: Injury (Level A Harassment)

    Non-lethal injurious impacts are defined in this document as 
eardrum rupture (i.e., tympanic-membrane (TM) rupture) and the onset of 
slight lung injury. These are considered indicative of the onset of 
injury. The threshold for TM rupture corresponds to a 50 percent rate 
of rupture (i.e., 50 percent of animals exposed to the level are 
expected to suffer TM rupture); this is stated in terms of an energy 
flux density (EFD) value of 1.17 in-lb/in\2\, which is about 205 dB re 
1 microPa2-s. (Note: EFD is the time integral of the squared pressure 
divided by the impedance in values of dB re 1 microPa2-s.) This 
recognizes that TM rupture is not necessarily a life-threatening 
injury, but is a useful index of possible injury that is well-
correlated with measures of permanent hearing impairment (e.g., Ketten 
(1998) indicates a 30 percent incidence of permanent threshold shift 
(PTS) at the same threshold).

Criteria and Thresholds: Non-injurious Impacts (Level B Harassment)

    Marine mammals may also be harassed due to noise from PSW missions 
involving high explosive detonations in the EGTTR. The CHURCHILL 
criterion for non-injurious harassment, as established through NMFS' 
incidental take rulemaking (see 66 FR 22450, May 4, 2001), is temporary 
(auditory) threshold shift (TTS), which is a slight, recoverable loss 
of hearing sensitivity (DoN, 2001). The criterion for TTS used in this 
document is 182 dB re 1 mPa2-s maximum EFD level in any 1/3-octave band 
at frequencies above 100 Hz for all toothed whales (e.g., sperm whales, 
beaked whales, dolphins). (Note: 1/3-octave band is the EFD in a 1/3-
octave frequency band; the 1/3 octave selected is the hearing range at 
which the affected species' hearing is believed to be most sensitive.) 
A 1/3-octave band above 10 Hz is used for impact assessments on all 
baleen whales, but those species do not inhabit the affected 
environment of this project.
    The CHURCHILL rulemaking also established a second criterion for 
estimating TTS threshold: 12 psi. The appropriate application of this 
second TTS criterion is currently under debate, as this 12 psi 
criterion was originally established for estimating the impact of a 
10,000-lb (4536-kg) explosive to be employed for the Navy's shock 
trial. It was introduced to provide a more conservative safety zone for 
TTS when the explosive or the animal approaches the sea surface (for 
which cases the explosive energy is reduced but the peak pressure is 
not).
    For large explosives (2000 to 10,000 pounds) and explosives/ 
animals not too close to the surface, the TTS impact zones for these 
two TTS criteria are approximately the same. However, for small 
detonations, some acousticians contend the ranges for the two TTS 
thresholds may be quite different, with ranges for the peak pressure 
threshold several times greater than those for energy. Eglin AFB 
endorses an approach, currently being developed by the Navy, for 
appropriately ``scaling'' the peak pressure threshold, in order to more 
accurately estimate TTS for small shots while preserving the safety 
feature provided by the peak pressure threshold. As such, Eglin AFB 
believes the energy based criterion for TTS, 182 dB re 1 microPa\2\-s 
(maximum EFD level in any 1/3-octave band), used alone, conservatively 
estimates the zone in which non-injurious harassment of marine mammals 
may occur. NMFS acousticians are currently reviewing the scientific 
basis for this DOD proposal and will make a determination on whether 
scaling is appropriate. If NMFS determines that scaling is not 
appropriate, it will require Eglin AFB to provide revised estimated 
harassment take levels prior to its decision on issuance of an IHA.

Criteria and Thresholds: Behavioral Modification (Sub-TTS)

    No strictly sub-TTS behavioral responses (i.e., Level B harassment) 
are anticipated with the JASSM and SBD test activities because there 
are no successive detonations (the 2 SBD explosions occur almost 
simultaneously) which could provide causation for a behavioral response 
in the absence of a Level B response due to TTS. Also, repetitive 
exposures (below TTS) to the same resident animals are highly unlikely 
due to the infrequent JASSM and SBD test events, the potential 
variability in target locations, and the continuous movement of marine 
mammals in the northern GOM.

Incidental Take Estimation

    For Eglin AFB's PSW exercises, three key sources of information are 
necessary for estimating potential take levels from noise on marine 
mammals: (1) The zone of influence (ZOI) for noise exposure; (2) The 
number of distinct firing or test events; and (3) the density of 
animals that potentially reside within the ZOI.
    Noise ZOIs were calculated for depth detonation scenarios of 1 ft 
(0.3 m) and 20 ft (6.1 m) for lethality and for harassment (both Level 
A and Level B). To estimate the number of potential ``takes'' or 
animals affected, the adjusted data on cetacean population information 
from ship and aerial surveys was applied to the various impact zones.
    Table 6-2 in Eglin's application gives the estimated impact ranges 
for various explosive weights for summer and wintertime scenarios. For 
the JASSM, this range, in winter, extends to 320 m (1050 ft), 590 m 
(1936 ft) and 3250 m (10663 ft), for potential mortality (31 psi-ms), 
injury (205 dB re 1 microPa\2\ -s) and TTS (182 dB re 1 microPa\2\-s) 
zones, respectively. SDB scenarios are for in-air detonations at 
heights of 1.5 m (5 ft) and 7.6 m (25 ft) at both locations. JASSM 
detonations were modeled for near surface (i.e., 1-ft (0.3-m) depth) 
and below surface 20-ft depth (6.1- m)).

[[Page 21820]]

 To account for ``double'' (2 nearly simultaneous) events, the charge 
weights are added (doubled) when modeling for the determination of 
energy estimates (since energy is proportional to weight). Pressure 
estimates only utilize the single charge weights for these estimates.
    Applying the lethality (31 psi) and harassment (182 and 205 dB) 
impact ranges in Eglin AFB's Table 6-2 to the calculated species 
densities, the number of animals potentially occurring within the ZOIs 
absent mitigation was estimated. These results are presented in Tables 
1, 2, and 3 in this document and in Tables 6-3, 6-4, and 6-5 in Eglin 
AFB's application. In summary, without any mitigation, a remote 
possibility exists for one each of both the bottlenose and the Atlantic 
spotted dolphins to be exposed to noise levels sufficient to cause 
mortality. Additionally, nearly 3 cetaceans could be exposed to 
injurious Level A harassment noise levels (205 dB re 1 microPa\2\-s), 
and as few as 3 or as many as 103 cetaceans (depending on the season 
and water depth) would potentially be exposed (annually) to a non-
injurious (TTS) Level B harassment noise level (182 dB re 1 microPa\2\-
s). None of these impact estimates consider mitigation measures that 
will be employed by Eglin AFB to minimize potential impacts to 
protected species. These mitigation measures are described next and are 
anticipated to greatly reduce potential impacts to marine mammals, in 
both numbers and degree of severity.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S

[[Page 21821]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AP04.000


[[Page 21822]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AP04.001

BILLING CODE 3510-22-C

Mitigation and Monitoring

    Prior to the planned detonation, trained observers aboard two 
helicopters will survey (visually monitor) the test area, a very 
effective method for detecting sea turtles and cetaceans. The area to 
be surveyed will be 1.75 nm (3.2 km) in every direction from the target 
(this is approximately the size of the largest harassment ZOI). The 
helicopters fly approximately 250 ft (0.5 m) above the sea surface to 
allow observers to scan a large distance. Using 25X power ``Big-eye'' 
binoculars, surface observation would be effective out to several 
kilometers. In addition, another trained observer aboard a surface 
support vessel will conduct ship-based monitoring for non-participating 
vessels as well as protected species. Weather that supports the ability 
to sight small marine life (e.g., sea turtles) is required to 
effectively mitigate impacts on marine life (DoN, 1998). Wind, 
visibility, and surface conditions in the GOM are the most critical 
factors affecting mitigation operations. Higher winds typically 
increase wave height and create ``white cap'' conditions, both of which 
limit an observer's ability to locate surfacing marine mammals and sea 
turtles. PSW missions would be delayed if the Beaufort scale sea state 
were greater than 3. This would maximize detection of marine mammals 
and sea turtles.
    Visibility is also a critical factor for flight safety issues. A 
minimum ceiling of 305 m (1000 ft) and visibility of 5.6 km (3 nm) is 
required to support mitigation and safety-of-flight concerns (DoN, 
2001).

Aerial Survey/Monitoring Team

    Eglin AFB has agreed to train personnel to conduct aerial surveys 
for protected species. The aerial survey/monitoring team would consist 
of two observers and a pilot familiar with flying marine mammal/turtle 
surveys. A helicopter provides a preferable viewing platform for 
detection of protected marine species. Each aerial observer would be 
experienced in marine mammal surveying and be familiar with species 
that may occur in the area. Each aircraft would have a data recorder 
who would be responsible for relaying the location (latitude and 
longitude), the species, and the number of animals sighted. The aerial 
monitoring team would also identify large schools of fish, jellyfish 
aggregations, and any large accumulation of Sargassum that could 
potentially drift into the ZOI. Standard line transect aerial surveying 
methods, as developed by NMFS (Blaylock and Hoggard, 1994; Buckland et 
al., 1993) would be used. Aerial observers are expected to have above 
average to excellent sighting conditions at sunrise to 1.85 km (1 nm) 
on either side of the aircraft within the weather limitation noted 
previously. Observed marine mammals and sea turtles would be identified 
to species or the lowest possible taxonomic level and the relative 
position recorded. Mission activity would occur no earlier than 3 hours 
after sunrise and no later than 3 hours prior to sunset to ensure 
adequate daylight and pre- and post-mission monitoring.

Shipboard Monitoring Team

    Eglin AFB has agreed to conduct shipboard monitoring to reduce 
impacts to protected species. The monitoring would be staged from the 
highest point possible on a mission ship. Observers would be 
experienced in shipboard surveys and be familiar with the marine life 
of the area. The observer on the vessel must be equipped with optical 
equipment with sufficient magnification (e.g., 25X power ``Big-Eye'' 
binoculars, as these have been successfully used in monitoring 
activities from ships), which should allow the observer to sight 
surfacing mammals from as far as 11.6 km (6.3 nm) and provide 
overlapping coverage from the aerial team. A team leader would be 
responsible for reporting sighting locations, which would be based on 
bearing and distance.
    The aerial and shipboard monitoring teams would have proper lines 
of communication to avoid communication deficiencies. The observers 
from the aerial team and operations vessel will have direct 
communication with the lead scientist aboard the operations vessel. The 
lead scientist reviews the range conditions and recommends a Go/No-Go 
decision from the test director. The test director recommends the Go/
No-Go decision to the Officer in Tactical Command, who makes the final 
Go/No-Go decision.

Mitigation Procedures Plan

    Stepwise mitigation procedures for PSW missions are outlined here. 
All zones (mortality, injury, TTS, and safety zones) are monitored.
    Pre-mission Monitoring: The purposes of pre-mission monitoring are 
to (1)

[[Page 21823]]

evaluate the test site for environmental suitability of the mission 
(e.g., relatively low numbers of marine mammals and turtles, few or no 
patches of Sargassum, etc.) and (2) verify that the ZOI is free of 
visually detectable marine mammals, sea turtles, large schools of fish, 
large flocks of birds, large Sargassum mats, and large concentrations 
of jellyfish (both are possible indicators of turtle presence). On the 
morning of the test, the lead scientist would confirm that the test 
sites can still support the mission and that the weather is adequate to 
support mitigation.
    (a) Five Hours Prior to Mission: Approximately 5 hours prior to the 
mission, or at daybreak, the appropriate vessel(s) would be on-site in 
the primary test site near the location of the earliest planned mission 
point. Observers onboard the vessel will assess the suitability of the 
test site, based on visual observation of marine mammals and sea 
turtles, the presence of large Sargassum mats, and overall 
environmental conditions (visibility, sea state, etc.). This 
information will be relayed to the lead scientist.
    (b) Two Hours Prior to Mission: Two hours prior to the mission, 
aerial monitoring would commence within the test site to evaluate the 
test site for environmental suitability. Monitoring would commence at 
the same end of the test site that the mission ship would be entering. 
Evaluation of the entire test site would take approximately one hour. 
Shipboard observers would monitor the area around the ship, and the 
lead scientist would enter all marine mammals and sea turtle sightings, 
including time of sighting, into a marine animal tracking and sighting 
database.
    (c) Forty Minutes Prior to Mission: Forty minutes prior to the 
mission, the aerial monitoring team would begin monitoring the 12.56 
nm2 safety buffer around the target area. The shipboard monitoring and 
acoustic monitoring teams would combine with the aerial team to monitor 
the area immediately around the mission area including both the ZOIs 
and buffer zone.
    (d) Fifteen Minutes Prior to Detonation: Aerial and shipboard 
viewers would be instructed to leave the area and remain outside the 
safety area (over 2 nm (3.7 km) from impact). Visual monitoring would 
continue to document any missed animals that may have gone undetected 
during the past two hours.
    (e) Go/No-Go Decision Process: The lead scientist would plot and 
record sightings and bearing for all marine animals detected. This 
would depict animal sightings relative the to the mission area. The 
lead scientist would have the authority to declare the range fouled and 
recommend a hold until monitoring indicates that the ZOI is and will 
remain clear of detectable animals. The ZOI (for preventing TTS (182 dB 
re 1 mPa2-s)) is estimated for the specific charge weight being used, 
the depth of blast, and the season. For example, for the JASSM, this 
range, in winter, would extend to 3250 m (10663 ft), for potential TTS.
    The mission would be postponed if:
    (1) Any marine mammal or sea turtle is visually detected within the 
ZOI. The delay would continue until the marine mammal or sea turtle 
that caused the postponement is confirmed to be outside of the ZOI due 
to the animal swimming out of the range.
    (2) Any marine mammal or sea turtle is detected in a monitoring 
zone of 2-nm (3.7-km) radius and subsequently cannot be reacquired. The 
mission would not continue until the last verified location is outside 
of the ZOI and the animal is moving away from the mission area.
    (3) Large Sargassum rafts or large concentrations of jellyfish are 
observed within the ZOI. The delay would continue until the Sargassum 
rafts or jellyfish that caused the postponement are confirmed to be 
outside of the ZOI either due to the current and/or wind moving them 
out of the mission area.
    (4) Large schools of fish are observed in the water within 1 nm 
(1.8 km) of the mission area. The delay would continue until the large 
fish schools are confirmed to be more than 1 nm outside the ZOI.
    In the event of a postponement, pre-mission monitoring would 
continue as long as weather and daylight hours allow. Aerial monitoring 
is limited by fuel and the on-station time of the monitoring aircraft. 
If a live warhead failed to explode, operations would attempt to 
recognize and solve the problem while continuing with all mitigation 
measures in place. The probability of this occurring is very remote but 
it exists. Should a weapon fail to explode, the activity sponsor would 
attempt to identify the problem and detonate the charge with all marine 
mammal and sea turtle mitigation measures in place as described.
    Post-mission monitoring: Post-mission monitoring is designed to 
determine the effectiveness of pre-mission mitigation by reporting any 
sightings of dead or injured marine mammals or sea turtles. Post-
detonation monitoring would commence immediately following each 
detonation. The vessel could be assisted by aerial surveys over the 
same time period. The helicopter would resume transects in the area of 
the detonation and continue monitoring for at least two hours, 
concentrating on the area down current of the test site. Aerial and 
shipboard monitoring is intended to locate and identify dead and 
injured animals.
    Although it is highly unlikely that marine mammals or sea turtles 
would be killed or seriously injured by this activity, marine mammals 
or sea turtles killed by an explosion would likely suffer lung rupture, 
which would cause them to float to the surface immediately due to air 
in the blood stream. Animals that were not killed instantly but were 
mortally wounded would likely resurface within a few days, though this 
would depend on the size and type of animal, fat stores, depth, and 
water temperature (DoN, 2001). The monitoring team would attempt to 
document any marine mammals or turtles that were killed or injured as a 
result of the test and, if practicable, recover and examine any dead 
animals. The species, number, location, and behavior of any animals 
observed by the observation teams would be documented and reported to 
the lead scientist.
    Post-mission monitoring activities could include coordination with 
marine animal stranding networks. NMFS maintains stranding networks 
along coasts to collect and circulate information about marine mammal 
and sea turtle standings. Local coordinators report stranding data to 
state and regional coordinators. Any observed dead or injured marine 
mammal or sea turtle would be reported to the appropriate coordinator.

Summary of Mitigation Plan

    Should human safety concerns arise or protected species are sighted 
within the noise impact zones, the test would be postponed. The area to 
be monitored will be 2.00 nm (1.75 km) in every direction from the 
target (approximately the size of the largest harassment ZOI). The 
total area to be monitored for marine mammals and sea turtles is 12.56 
nm2. If a protected species is observed within this area, the test will 
be stopped or postponed until the area is clear of the animals. The 
survey vessels and aircraft will leave the safety footprint immediately 
prior to weapons launch. This will be no more than 15 minutes prior to 
impact of the weapons at the target area.
    Avoidance of impacts to schools of cetaceans will most likely be 
realized through these measures since groups of dolphins are relatively 
easy to spot with the survey distances and methods that will be 
employed. Typically solitary marine mammals such as dwarf/pygmy

[[Page 21824]]

sperm whales and sea turtles, while more challenging to detect, will 
also be afforded substantial protection through pre-test monitoring.
    One helicopter and vessel(s) would conduct post-mission monitoring 
for two hours after each mission. The monitoring team would attempt to 
document any marine mammals or turtles that were killed or injured as a 
result of the test and, if practicable, recover and examine any dead 
animals. Post-mission monitoring activities could include coordination 
with marine animal stranding networks.
    Hardbottom habitats and artificial reefs would be avoided to 
alleviate any potential impacts to protected habitat. PSW testing would 
be delayed if large Sargassum mats were found in the ZOI. Testing would 
resume only when the mats move outside of the largest ZOI. The PSW 
mission team will make every effort to recover surface debris, from the 
target or the weapons following test activities.

Conservative Estimates of Marine Mammal Densities

    By using conservative mathematic calculations, conservative density 
estimates can serve as a respectable mitigation technique for take 
estimates. Marine mammal densities used to calculate takes were based 
on the most current and comprehensive GOM surveys available (GulfCet 
II). The densities are adjusted for the time the animals are submerged, 
and further adjusted by applying standard deviations to provide an 
approximately 99 percent confidence level. As an example, the density 
estimates for bottlenose dolphins range from 0.06 to 0.15 animals/km\2\ 
in GulfCet II aerial surveys of the shelf and slope. However, the final 
adjusted density used in take calculations is 0.81 animals/km\2\.

Reporting

    NMFS proposes to require Eglin AFB to submit an annual report on 
the results of the monitoring requirements mentioned previously in this 
document. This annual report will be due within 120 days of the 
expiration of the IHA. This report will include a discussion on the 
effectiveness of the mitigation in addition to the following 
information: (1) Date and time of each of the detonations; (2) a 
detailed description of the pre-test and post-test activities related 
to mitigating and monitoring the effects of explosives detonation on 
marine mammals and their populations; (3) the results of the monitoring 
program, including numbers by species/stock of any marine mammals noted 
injured or killed as a result of the detonations and numbers that may 
have been harassed due to undetected presence within the safety zone; 
and (4) results of coordination with coastal marine mammal/sea turtle 
stranding networks.

Research

    Although Eglin AFB does not currently conduct independent Air Force 
monitoring efforts, Eglin AFB's Natural Resources Branch does 
participate in marine animal tagging and monitoring programs lead by 
other agencies. Additionally, the Natural Resources Branch also 
supports participation in annual surveys of marine mammals in the GOM 
with NOAA Fisheries. From 1999 to 2002, Eglin AFB's Natural Resources 
Branch has, through a contract representative, participated in summer 
cetacean monitoring and research opportunities. The contractor 
participated in visual surveys in 1999 for cetaceans in GOM, 
photographic identification of sperm whales in the northeastern Gulf in 
2001, and as a visual observer during the 2000 Sperm Whale Pilot Study 
and the 2002 sperm whale Satellite-tag (S-tag) cruise. Support for 
these research efforts is anticipated to continue.
    Eglin AFB conducts other research efforts that utilize marine 
mammal stranding information as a means of ascertaining the 
effectiveness of mitigation techniques. Stranding data is collected and 
maintained for the Florida panhandle and Gulf-wide areas. This is 
undertaken through the establishment and maintenance of contacts with 
local, state, and regional stranding networks. Eglin AFB assists with 
stranding data collection by maintaining its own team of stranding 
personnel. In addition to simply collecting stranding data, various 
analyses are performed. Stranding events are tracked by year, season, 
and NOAA Fisheries statistical zone, both Gulf-wide and on the 
coastline in proximity to Eglin AFB. Stranding data is combined with 
records of EGTTR mission activity in each water range and analyzed for 
any possible correlation. In addition to being used as a measure of the 
effectiveness of mission mitigation, stranding data can yield insight 
into the species composition of cetaceans in the region.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    Eglin AFB requested consultation with NMFS on February 4, 2004. 
Because the proposed issuance of an IHA to Eglin AFB is a federal 
action, NMFS has also begun consultation on the proposed issuance of 
IHAs and/or LOAs under section 101(a)(5)(A) and 101(a)(5)(D) of the 
MMPA for this activity. Consultation will be concluded prior to a 
determination on whether or not to issue an IHA.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    In December, 2003, Eglin AFB released draft EA on this proposed 
activity. NMFS is reviewing this EA and will either adopt it or prepare 
its own NEPA document before making a determination on the issuance of 
an IHA and rulemaking. A copy of the Eglin AFB EA for this activity is 
available by contacting either Eglin AFB or NMFS (see ADDRESSES).

Conclusions

    Preliminarily, NMFS has determined that this action is expected to 
have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks of marine 
mammals in the GOM. No take by serious injury and/or death is 
anticipated, and the potential for temporary or permanent hearing 
impairment is low and will be avoided through the incorporation of the 
mitigation measures mentioned in this document. The information 
contained in Eglin's EA and incidental take application support the 
preliminary finding that these impacts will be mitigated by 
implementing a conservative safety range for marine mammal exclusion, 
incorporating aerial and shipboard survey monitoring efforts in the 
program both prior to, and after, detonation of explosives, and 
provided detonations are not conducted whenever marine mammals are 
either detected within the safety zone, or may enter the safety zone at 
the time of detonation, or if weather and sea conditions preclude 
adequate aerial surveillance. Since the taking will not result in more 
than the incidental harassment of certain species of marine mammals, 
will have only a negligible impact on these stocks, will not have an 
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of these stocks for 
subsistence uses, and, through implementation of required mitigation 
and monitoring measures, will result in the least practicable adverse 
impact on the affected marine mammal stocks, NMFS has preliminarily 
determined that the requirements of section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 
have been met and the IHA can be issued.

Information Solicited

    NMFS requests interested persons to submit comments and information 
concerning this proposed IHA and the application for regulations 
request (see ADDRESSES).


[[Page 21825]]


    Dated: April 16, 2004.
Phil Williams,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 04-9145 Filed 4-21-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9145-22-S