[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 22, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36121-36124]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-12352]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[I.D. 060804F]


Endangered Fish and Wildlife; National Environmental Policy Act; 
Right Whale Ship Strike Reduction Strategy Notice of Intent to Prepare 
an Environmental Impact Statement and Conduct Public Scoping

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

ACTION: Notice of intent; request for written comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS intends to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement 
(EIS) to analyze the potential impacts of implementing the operational 
measures in NOAA's Right Whale Ship Strike Reduction Strategy 
(Strategy). This notice describes the proposed action and possible 
alternatives intended to reduce the likelihood and threat of right 
whale deaths as a result of collisions with vessels.

DATES: Written or electronic comments must be received no later than 5 
p.m., eastern standard time, on July 22, 2005. At this time there are 
no scheduled scoping meetings.

ADDRESSES: Written comments, or requests to be added to the mailing 
list for this project, should be submitted to: P. Michael Payne, Chief, 
Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Conservation Division, Attn: Right Whale 
Ship Strike EIS, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West 
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Comments may also be submitted via 
fax to (301) 427-2522, Attn: Right Whale Ship Strike EIS, or by e-mail 
to: [email protected]. Include in the subject line the 
following identifier: I.D. 060804F.
    Additional information including the Environmental Assessment (EA) 
and the economic analysis report used in the preparation of the EA are 
available on the NMFS website at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/shipstrike/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Silber, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910; 
telephone (301) 713-2322, e-mail [email protected]; or Barb Zoodsma, 
Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13\th\ Avenue South, St. 
Petersburg, FL 33701; telephone (904) 321-2806, e-mail 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The abundance of North Atlantic right whales is believed to be 
fewer than 300 individuals despite protection for half a century. The 
North Atlantic right whale is also considered one of the most 
endangered large whale populations in the world. Recent modeling 
exercises suggest that the loss of even an individual animal has 
measurable effects that may contribute to the extinction of the species 
(Caswell et al., 1999). The models also suggests that preventing the 
mortality of one adult female a year significantly alters the projected 
outcome.
    The two most significant human-caused threats and sources of 
mortality to right whales are entanglements in fishing gear and 
collisions with ships (Knowlton and Kraus, 2001; Jensen and Silber, 
2003). Collisions with ships (referred to as ship strikes) account for 
more confirmed right whale mortalities than any other human-related 
activity. Ship strikes are responsible for over 50 percent of known 
human-related right whale mortalities and are considered one of the 
principal causes for the lack of recovery in this population. Right 
whales are located in, or adjacent to, several major shipping corridors 
on the eastern U.S. and southeastern Canadian coasts.
    NMFS has implemented conservation measures to reduce the likelihood 
of mortalities as a result of ship strikes. These activities include 
the use of aerial surveys to notify mariners of right whale sighting 
locations, interagency collaboration with the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) 
which issues periodic notices to mariners regarding ship strikes, joint 
operation with the USCG of Mandatory Ship Reporting (MSR) systems to 
provide information to mariners entering right whale habitat, support 
of regional Right Whale Recovery Plan Implementation Teams, support of 
shipping industry liaisons, and consultations with other Federal 
agencies regarding the effects of their activities on right whales 
(under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act). However, right whales 
continue to sustain mortalities as a result of collisions with vessels 
despite the efforts of these programs.
    NMFS recognizes that this complex problem requires the 
implementation of additional proactive measures to reduce or eliminate 
the threat of ship strikes to right whales. The goal of the Strategy is 
to reduce, to the extent practicable, the distributional overlap 
between ships and right whales. The Strategy allows for regional 
implementation and accommodates differences in oceanography, commercial 
ship traffic patterns, navigational concerns, and right whale use. 
Implementation of the Strategy will require proposed and final 
rulemaking to be taken.

Purpose of this Action

    NEPA requires Federal agencies to conduct an environmental analysis 
of their proposed actions to determine if the actions may significantly 
affect the human environment. NMFS is considering a variety of 
measures, including regulatory and non-regulatory initiatives. NMFS may 
implement the operational measures of the Strategy through its 
rulemaking authority pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act 
(MMPA). Under MMPA section 112(a) (16 U.S.C. 1382(a)), NMFS has 
authority, in consultation with other Federal agencies to the extent 
other agencies may be affected, to ``prescribe such regulations as are 
necessary and appropriate to carry out the purposes of [the MMPA].'' In 
addition, NMFS has authority under the Endangered Species Act to 
promote conservation, implement recovery measures, and enhance 
enforcement to protect right whales. NMFS is seeking public input on 
the scope of the required National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
analysis, including the range of reasonable alternatives, associated 
impacts of any alternatives, and suitable mitigation measures.
    On June 1, 2004, NMFS published an Advanced Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (ANPR) (69 FR 30857) and announced its intent to prepare a 
draft EA to address the potential impacts of implementing the Strategy. 
The EA considered the context and intensity of the factors identified 
in NOAA's NEPA guidelines and regulations, along with short- and long-
term, and cumulative effects of a No Action Alternative and the 
proposed action (see ADDRESSES). The analysis concluded that the 
effects of the proposed action on the human environment are likely to 
be highly controversial. This finding was based on the controversial 
nature of the Strategy on the human environment and the possible 
cumulative effects of the proposed action on certain sectors within the 
maritime industry. The major controversy concerns the potential

[[Page 36122]]

economic impacts on the commercial shipping industry. Further, the EA 
concluded that individual impacts of the proposed action may be 
insignificant but the cumulative impacts on the shipping industry may 
be significant. As a result, the cumulative effects on the environment 
as a result of implementing this action, including the alternatives 
proposed by this action, are considered significant. Therefore, an EIS 
is the appropriate level of environmental analysis for the proposed 
action under NEPA, not an EA. This is consistent with NEPA regulations 
at section 1501.4(c). This notice announces NMFS's intent to prepare an 
EIS expanded from the EA to analyze the potential impacts of 
implementing the operational measures in NOAA's Right Whale Ship Strike 
Reduction Strategy. This notice describes the proposed action and 
several possible alternatives intended to reduce the likelihood and 
threat of mortalities caused by ship strikes.

Scope of the Action

    The Draft EIS is expected to identify and evaluate all relevant 
impacts and issues associated with implementing the Strategy, in 
accordance with Council on Environmental Quality's Regulations at 40 
CFR parts 1500, 1508, and NOAA's procedures for implementing NEPA found 
in NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6, Environmental Policy Act, 
dated May 20, 1999.
    NMFS is proposing to implement the operational measures in the 
Strategy within each of three broad regions: (a) the southeastern 
Atlantic coast of the U.S., (b) the Mid-Atlantic coastal region, and 
(c) the northeastern Atlantic coast of the U.S.
    The implementation of operational measures, and the specific times 
and areas (with boundaries) in which the measures would be in effect, 
are expected to vary within and between each region. However, each 
region would contain specific elements to reduce the threat of ship 
strikes to right whales. The operational measures proposed in the 
alternatives apply to non-sovereign vessels 65 ft (19.8 m) and greater 
in length. The operational measures do not apply to vessels operated by 
Federal agencies or the military. Any potential effects of Federal 
vessel activities, and mitigation, will be evaluated through the 
Endangered Species Act section 7 consultation process for all 
alternatives. A more detailed description of the operational measures 
proposed for each region are in the ANPR (June 1, 2004; 69 FR 30857).
    That notice describes the proposed action and possible alternatives 
intended to reduce the likelihood and threat of mortalities caused by 
ship strikes pursuant to requirements under NEPA. In particular, the 
Draft EIS is intended to identify potential impacts to human activities 
that occur as a result of the proposed action and its alternatives.
    The areas of interest for evaluation of environmental and 
socioeconomic effects will include the territorial sea and the 
Exclusive Economic Zone off the east coast of the U.S. and 
international waters in the North Atlantic Ocean.

Public Involvement and the Scoping Process

    Public participation in the Strategy has been encouraged through 
several methods including soliciting public comments on the ANPR and 
holding public meetings, industry stakeholder meetings, and other focus 
group meetings. NMFS has been working with state and other Federal 
agencies, concerned citizens and citizens groups, environmental 
organizations, and the shipping industry to address the ongoing threat 
of ship strikes to right whales. NMFS' intent is to encourage the 
public and interest groups to participate in the NEPA process, 
including interested citizens and environmental organizations, affected 
low-income or minority populations or affected local, state and Federal 
agencies, and any other agencies with jurisdiction or special 
expertise.
    NMFS published the ANPR for Right Whale Ship Strike Reduction in 
the Federal Register on June 1, 2004 (69 FR 30857) and provided a 
comment period to determine the issues of concern with respect to the 
practical considerations involved in implementing the Strategy and to 
determine whether NMFS was considering the appropriate range of 
alternatives. Comments were received from over 5,250 governmental 
entities, individuals, and organizations, and can be accessed at the 
NMFS website (see ADDRESSES). These comments were in the form of e-
mail, letters, website submissions, correspondence from action 
campaigns (e-mail and U.S. postal mail), faxes, and a phone call.
    NMFS extended the comment period to November 15, 2004 (September 
13, 2004; 69 FR 55135) to provide for an extended series of public 
meetings on the ANPR and this topic in general. Five public meetings on 
the ANPR were held in the following locations: Boston, MA, at the Tip 
O'Neill Federal Building (July 20, 2004); New York/New Jersey at the 
Newport Courtyard Marriot (July 21, 2004); Wilmington, NC, at the 
Hilton Riverside Wilmington (July 26, 2004); Jacksonville, FL, at the 
Radisson Riverwalk Hotel (July 27, 2004); and Silver Spring, MD, at 
NOAA Headquarters Science Center (August 3, 2004). Public comments were 
requested at these meetings and transcribed for the public record. 
Also, nine industry stakeholder meetings were held to explain the ANPR 
at the following locations: Boston, MA (September 30, 2004); Portland, 
ME (October 1, 2004); Norfolk, VA (October 4, 2004); Morehead City, NC 
(October 6, 2004); Jacksonville, FL (October 13, 2004); Savannah, GA 
(October 14, 2004); New London, CT (October 20, 2004); Newark, NJ 
(October 25, 2004); and Baltimore, MD/Washington, DC (October 27, 
2004). A summary report of these meetings and a list of the attendees 
are posted on the internet at http://www.nero.noaa.gov/shipstrike.
    NMFS also held two focus group discussion meetings with 
participants from non-governmental organizations, academia, and Federal 
and state government agencies. The first meeting was held in Silver 
Spring, MD on September 26, 2004, and the second meeting was in New 
Bedford, MA on November 5, 2004.
    The comments on the ANPR focused primarily on several broad topics 
including: speed restrictions, vessel size and operations, speed and 
routing issues specific to regions, routing restrictions (Port Access 
Routes Study [PARS] and Areas To Be Avoided [ATBA]), safety of 
navigation, suggestions for alternative or expanded dates for 
operational measures, military and sovereign vessel exemptions, 
enforcement, and compliance.

Alternatives

    NMFS will evaluate a range of alternatives in the Draft EIS for 
developing a final Strategy to reduce mortality to right whales due to 
ship strikes based on a suite of possible mitigative measures contained 
in each of the elements of the overall Strategy. The following 
alternatives are being considered based on comments received on the 
ANPR and during the public meetings: Alternative 1, a no-action 
alternative; Alternative 2, Use of Dynamic Management Areas (DMAs); 
Alternative 3, Speed Restrictions in Designated Areas; Alternative 4, 
Use of Designated or Mandatory Routes; Alternative 5, Combination of 
Alternatives 1, 2, 3 and 4; and Alternative 6, NOAA Ship Strike 
Strategy.
    For all speed restrictions being considered under an alternative, 
NMFS

[[Page 36123]]

expects to consider 10, 12, and 14 knots in the analyses. Other 
variations or additional alternatives may be developed based on 
significant issues raised during this public scoping period. The 
probable environmental, biological, cultural, social and economic 
consequences of the alternatives and those activities that may 
cumulatively impact the environment are expected to be considered in 
the Draft EIS.
    Alternative 1 - No Action (Status Quo): Under this alternative NMFS 
would continue to implement existing measures and programs, largely 
non-regulatory, to reduce the likelihood of mortality from ship 
strikes. Research would continue and existing technologies would be 
used to determine whale locations and pass this information on to 
mariners. Ongoing activities under this alternative would include the 
use of aerial surveys to notify mariners of right whale sighting 
locations; the operation of Mandatory Ship Reporting Systems; support 
of Recovery Plan Implementation Teams; education and outreach programs 
for mariners; and ongoing research on technological solutions. The 
development, enhancement, and implementation of the draft Education and 
Outreach Strategy would continue in coordination with the Recovery Plan 
Implementation Teams. The alternative would also rely on Endangered 
Species Act section 7 consultations to address, and mitigate the 
potential effects of, the activities of vessels operated by government 
agencies. Additionally, efforts will continue to identify technologies 
that will mitigate or prevent ship strikes to right whales but that 
would impose minimal or no environmental impacts.
    Alternative 2 - Use of DMAs: A second alternative under 
consideration would incorporate the elements of Alternative 1 with 
additional measures to implement DMAs. The DMA component of this 
alternative would be implemented ONLY when right whale sightings occur.
    Under this alternative there would need to be a commitment to 
continuing aircraft surveillance coverage. If confirmed right whale 
sightings occur, a DMA would be specified and mariners would have the 
option of either routing around the DMA or to proceed within the DMA at 
restricted speeds. NMFS is considering various models for whale density 
required to trigger a DMA action; the current default is the same 
criteria used for the Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction Plan (ALWTRP) 
Dynamic Area Management fishing restrictions. Consecutive DMAs would be 
imposed if trigger thresholds persist. If subsequent flights confirm 
the whales are no longer aggregated in this location, the DMA would be 
lifted.
    Alternative 3 - Speed Restrictions in Designated Areas: This 
alternative includes all elements of Alternative 1 and implements 
large-scale speed restrictions throughout the range of northern right 
whales. Restrictions would apply as follows:
    1. Speed restrictions year round off the northeast U.S. coast. This 
area would include either (1) all waters bounded on the east by the 
U.S. coastline, the west by 68[deg] W longitude, the north by the U.S./
Canadian border and the south by 41[deg]30' N latitude, or (2) all 
waters in the area used by Seasonal Area Management (SAM) zones as 
designated in the ALWTRP;
    2. Speed restrictions from October 1 through April 30 off the U.S. 
mid-Atlantic coast. This area would include all waters extended from 
U.S. coastline out 25 nm from Providence/New London (Block Island 
Sound) south to Savannah, Georgia.
    3. Speed restrictions from December 1 through March 31 off the 
Southeast U.S. This area would include all waters within the MSR 
WHALESSOUTH reporting area and the presently designated right whale 
critical habitat.
    Alternative 4 - Use of Designated or Mandatory Routes: This 
alternative includes all the elements of Alternative 1 and relies on 
altering current vessel patterns to move vessels away from areas where 
whales are known to aggregate in order to reduce the likelihood of a 
mortality due to a ship strike.
    This alternative also creates an ATBA in the Great South Channel as 
described in NOAA's ANPR, and considers recommendations of a PARS by 
the USCG. At present the PARS analysis is assessing possible lane 
changes in Cape Cod Bay and waters off the Southeast U.S. The 
alternative also will analyze the possibility of moving the Traffic 
Separation Scheme into/out of Boston to avoid high density aggregations 
of whales at the northern end of Cape Cod Bay and Stellwagen Bank.
    Alternative 5 - Combination of Alternatives: This alternative 
includes all elements of Alternatives 1 - 4. The cumulative effects of 
Alternative 5 would be the additive effects of each of the previous 
alternatives.
    Alternative 6 - NOAA Ship Strike Strategy: This alternative 
includes all the operational measures identified in the NOAA Ship 
Strike Strategy. The principal difference between Alternative 5 and 6 
is that Alternative 6 does not include large-scale speed restrictions 
(as identified in Alternative 3) but instead relies on speed 
restrictions in much smaller Seasonally Managed Areas as identified in 
the NOAA Ship Strike Strategy.

Comments Requested

    NMFS provides this notice to: advise the public and other agencies 
of the NOAA's intentions, and obtain suggestions and information on the 
scope of issues to include in the EIS. Comments and suggestions are 
invited from all interested parties to ensure that the full range of 
issues related to this proposed action and all significant issues are 
identified. NMFS requests that comments be as specific as possible. In 
particular, the agency requests information regarding: the potential 
direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts resulting from the proposed 
action on the human environment. The human environment could include 
air quality, water quality, underwater noise levels, socioeconomic 
resources, and environmental justice.
    Comments concerning this environmental review process should be 
directed to NMFS (see ADDRESSES). See FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
for questions. All comments and material received, including names and 
addresses, will become part of the administrative record and may be 
released to the public.

Authority

    The environmental review of the Ship Strike Strategy will be 
conducted under the authority and in accordance with the requirements 
of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 
4321 et seq.), National Environmental Policy Act Regulations (40 CFR 
1500-1508), other appropriate Federal laws and regulations, and 
policies and procedures of the Services for compliance with those 
regulations.

Literature Cited

    Caswell, H., M. Fujiwara, and S. Brault. 1999. Declining survival 
probability threatens the North Atlantic right whale. Proc. Nat. Acad. 
Sci. 96:3308 3313.
    Jensen, A.S., and G.K. Silber. 2003. Large whale ship strike 
database. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/OPR 25, 
37 p.
    Knowlton, A.R., and S.D. Kraus. 2001. Mortality and serious injury 
of northern right whales (Eubalaena glacialis) in the western North 
Atlantic Ocean. Jour. Cetacean Res. and Manag. (Special Issue) 2:193 
208. Russell, B.A. 2001.


[[Page 36124]]


    Dated: June 16, 2005.
P. Michael Payne
Chief, Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Conservation Division, Office of 
Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05-12352 Filed 6-21-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S