[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 130 (Friday, July 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40007-40023]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16584]



[[Page 40007]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XY11


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Marine Seismic Survey in the 
Beaufort Sea, Alaska

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

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental take authorization.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) 
regulations, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an 
Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to BP Exploration (Alaska), 
Inc. (BP) to take, by harassment, small numbers of 10 species of marine 
mammals incidental to ocean bottom cable (OBC) seismic surveys in the 
Simpson Lagoon area of the Beaufort Sea, Alaska, during the 2012 Arctic 
open-water season.

DATES: Effective July 1, 2011, through October 15, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Inquiry for information on the incidental take authorization 
should be addressed to P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits and 
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. A 
copy of the application containing a list of the references used in 
this document, NMFS' Environmental Assessment (EA), Finding of No 
Significant Impact (FONSI), and the IHA may be obtained by writing to 
the address specified above, telephoning the contact listed below (see 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or visiting the Internet at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications.
    Documents cited in this notice may be viewed, by appointment, 
during regular business hours, at the aforementioned address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401 or Brad Smith, NMFS, Alaska Region, 
(907) 271-3023.

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 (Secretary) to allow, upon request, 
the incidental, but not intentional taking 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.
    Authorization shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will 
have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an 
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or 
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible 
methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, 
monitoring and reporting of such taking 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 U.S. can apply for an authorization to 
incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment. Except 
with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines 
``harassment'' as:

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

    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

    NMFS received an application on December 20, 2011, from BP for the 
taking, by harassment, of marine mammals incidental to a 3D OBC seismic 
survey in the Simpson Lagoon area of the Alaskan Beaufort Sea during 
the open water season of 2012.

Description of the Specified Activity

    The proposed seismic survey utilizes receivers (hydrophones and 
geophones) connected to a cable that would be deployed from a vessel to 
the seabed or would be inserted in the seabed in very shallow water 
areas near the shoreline. The generation of 3D seismic images requires 
the deployment of many parallel cables spaced close together over the 
area of interest. Therefore, OBC seismic surveys require the use of 
multiple vessels for cable deployment and recovery, data recording, 
airgun operation, re-supply, and support. The proposed 3D OBC seismic 
survey in Simpson Lagoon would be conducted by CGGVeritas.

Seismic Source Arrays

    A total of three seismic source vessels (two main source vessels 
and one mini source vessel) would be used during the proposed survey. 
The sources would be arrays of sleeve airguns. Each main source vessel 
would carry an array that consists of two sub-arrays. Each sub-array 
contains eight 40 in\3\ airguns, totaling 16 guns per main source 
vessel with a total discharge volume of 2 x 320 in\3\, or 640 in\3\. 
This 640 in\3\ array has an estimated source level of ~223 dB re 1 
[mu]Pa (rms). The mini source vessel would contain one array with eight 
40 in\3\ airguns for a total discharge volume of 320 in\3\. The 
estimated source level of this 320 in\3\ array is 212 dB re 1 [mu]Pa 
(rms).
    The arrays of the main source vessels would be towed at a distance 
of ~30 feet (ft, or 10 m) from the stern at 6 ft (2 m) depth, which is 
remotely adjustable if needed. The array of the mini source vessel 
would be towed at a distance of ~20 ft (7 m) from the stern at 3 ft (1 
m) depth, also remotely adjustable when needed. The source vessels will 
travel along pre-determined lines with a speed varying from ~1 to 5 
knots, mainly depending on the water depth. To limit the duration of 
the total survey, the source vessels would be operating in a flip-flop 
mode, with the operating source vessels alternating shots; this means 
that one vessel discharges airguns when the other vessel is recharging. 
Outside the barrier islands, the two main source vessels would be 
operating with expected shot intervals of 8 to 10 seconds, resulting in 
a shot every 4 to 5 seconds due to the flip-flop mode of operation. 
Inside the barrier islands all three vessels (the two main source 
vessels and the mini vessel) may be operating at the same time in this 
manner. The exact shot intervals would depend on the compressor 
capacity, which determines the time needed for the airguns to be 
recharged. Seismic data acquisition would be conducted 24 hours per 
day.

[[Page 40008]]

Receivers and Recording Units

    The survey area in Simpson Lagoon has water depths of 0 to 9 ft (0 
to 3 m) between the shore and barrier islands and 3 to 45 ft (1 to 15 
m) depths north of the barrier islands. Because different types of 
receivers would be used for different habitats, the survey area is 
categorized by the terms onshore, islands, surf-zone and offshore. 
Onshore is the area from the coastline inland. Islands are the barrier 
islands. Surf zone is the 0 to 6 ft (0 to 2 m) water depths along the 
onshore coastline. Offshore is defined as depths of 3 ft (1 m) or more. 
There is a zone between 3 and 6 ft (1 and 2 m) which may be categorized 
both as surf zone and as offshore.
    The receivers that would be deployed in water consist of multiple 
hydrophones and recorder units (Field Digitizing Units or FDUs) placed 
on Sercel ULS cables. Approximately 5,000 hydrophones would be 
connected to the ULS cable at a minimum of 82.5 ft (27.5 m) intervals 
and secured to the ocean bottom cable. Surface markers and acoustic 
pingers will be attached to the cable at various intervals to ensure 
that the battery packs can be located and retrieved when needed and to 
determine exact positions for the hydrophones. This equipment would be 
deployed and retrieved with cable boats. The data received at each FDU 
would be transmitted through the cables to a recorder for further 
processing. This recorder will be installed on a boat-barge combination 
and positioned close to the area where data are being acquired. While 
recording, the boat- barge combination is stationary and expected to 
utilize a two or four point anchoring system.
    In the surf-zone, receivers (hydrophones or geophones) would be 
bored or flushed up to 12 ft (4 m) below the seabed. These receivers 
will transmit data through a cable (as described above) and have an 
attached line to facilitate retrieval after recording is completed.
    Autonomous recorders (nodes) would be used onshore and on the 
islands. The node is located on the ground and its geophone would be 
inserted into the ground by hand with the use of a planting pole. 
Deployment of the autonomous receiver units would be done by a lay-out 
crew on the ground using helicopters for personnel and equipment 
transport and/or approved summer travel vehicles (onshore) and a 
support boat (for the islands). Data from nodes can be remotely 
retrieved from a distance (up to a kilometer). Retrieval of data may be 
from a boat or a helicopter. Equipment would be picked up after 
recording is complete.

Survey Design

    The total area of the proposed seismic survey is approximately 110 
mi\2\, which includes onshore, surf-zone, barrier islands, and offshore 
(see Figure 1.2 of the BP's IHA application). For the proposed survey, 
the receiver cables with hydrophones and recording units would be 
oriented in an east-west direction. A total of approximately 44 
receiver lines would be deployed at the seafloor with 1,100-1,650 ft 
(367-550 m) line spacing. Total receiver line length would be 
approximately 500 miles (825 km). The source vessel would travel 
perpendicular over the offshore receiver cables along lines oriented in 
a north-south direction. These lines would have a length of 
approximately 3.75 miles (6.2 km) and a minimum spacing of 660 ft (220 
m). The total length of all source lines is approximately 4,000 miles 
(6,600 km), including line turns.
    The position of each receiver deployed onshore, in the surf zone 
and on the barrier islands will be determined using Global Positioning 
System (GPS) positioning units. Due to the variable bathymetry of the 
survey area, determining positions of receivers deployed in water may 
require more than one technique. A combination of Ocean Bottom Receiver 
Location (OBRL), GPS and acoustic pingers will be used. For OBRL, the 
source vessel fires a precisely positioned single energy source 
multiple times along either side of the receiver cables. Production 
data may also be used instead of dedicated OBRL acquisition. Multiple 
energy sources are used to triangulate a given receiver position. In 
addition, Sonardyne acoustical pingers would be located at 
predetermined intervals on the receiver lines. The pingers are located 
on the ULS cables and transmit a signal to a transponder mounted on a 
vessel. This allows for an interpolation of the receiver locations 
between the acoustical pingers on the ULS cable and also serves as a 
verification of the OBRL method. The Sonardyne pingers transmit at 19-
36 kHz and have a source level of 188-193 dB re [mu]Pa at 1m.

Vessels and Other Equipment

    The proposed Simpson Lagoon OBC seismic survey would involve 14 to 
16 vessels, as listed in Table 1 below.

    Table 1--Summary of Number and Type of Vessels Involved in the Proposed Simpson Lagoon OBC Seismic Survey
                                    [The dimensions provided are approximate]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Vessel type               Number         Dimensions            Main activity            Frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Vessel: Main.............            2  71 x 20 ft.........  Seismic data acquisition  24-hr operation.
                                                                     inside and outside
                                                                     barrier islands.
Source Vessel: Mini.............            1  55 x 15 ft.........  Seismic data acquisition  24-hr operation.
                                                                     inside barrier islands.
Recorder barge with tug boat....            1  116.5 x 24 ft        Seismic data recording..  24-hr operation.
                                                (barge); 23 x 15
                                                ft (tug).
Cable boats.....................          5-6  42.6 x 13 ft.......  Deploy and retrieve       24-hr operation.
                                                                     receiver cables (with
                                                                     hydrophones/geophones).
Crew transport vessels..........            2  44 x 14 ft.........  Transport crew and        Intermittently,
                                                                     supplies to and from      minimum every 8
                                                                     the working vessels.      hours.
Shallow water crew and support            2-3  34 x 10.5 ft.......  Transport 2-5 people and  Intermittently.
 boats.                                                              small amounts of gear
                                                                     for the boats operating
                                                                     in the shallower parts
                                                                     of the survey area.
HSSE vessel.....................            1  38 x 15 ft.........  Support SSV               As required.
                                                                     measurements, HSSE
                                                                     (health, safety,
                                                                     security, and
                                                                     environmental)
                                                                     compliance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 40009]]

    To deploy and retrieve receivers in water depths less than those 
accessible by the cable boats (surf-zone), equipment such as airboats, 
buggies or an Arktos (amphibious craft) and/or Jon boats may be used. 
Helicopters and/or approved tundra travel vehicles would be used for 
deployment of receiver units onshore as well on the barrier islands. In 
the case of helicopters being used, the flight altitude would be at 
1,500 feet for 3 to 6 times each day during gear deployment and 
retrieval on barrier islands and on shore (i.e., for about 14 days in 
late July and early August for deployment and for about 14 days 
probably after the Cross Island hunt, which typically ends around 
September 10).
    Vessels and other equipment would be transported to the North Slope 
in late May/early June by trucks. Equipment would be staged at the 
CGGVeritas pad for preparation. Vessel preparation would include 
assembly of navigation and source equipment, cable deployment and 
retrieval systems and safety equipment. Once assembled, vessels would 
be launched at either West Dock or Milne Point. Deployment, retrieval, 
navigation and source systems will then be tested near West Dock or in 
the project area prior to commencement of operations.

Crew Housing and Transfer

    The total number of people that would be involved is about 220, 
including crew on boats, camp personnel, mechanics, and management. 
There are no accommodations available on the source vessels or cable 
boats for the crew directly involved in the seismic operations, so 
crews would be changed out every 8 to 12 hours. Two vessels would be 
used for crew transfers.
    The recorder barge/boat (M/V Alaganik and Hook Point) may 
accommodate up to 10 people. The barge portion is dedicated to 
recording and staging of cables, hydrophones and batteries and fuelling 
operations.
    Refueling of vessels would be via other vessels at sea, and from 
land based sources located at West Dock and Milne Point Unit following 
approved U.S. Coast Guard procedures. Sea states and the vessel's 
function will be the determining factors on which method is used.

Dates, Duration and Action Area

    BP seeks an incidental harassment authorization for the period July 
1 to October 15, 2012. Anticipated duration of seismic data acquisition 
is approximately 50 days, depending on weather and other circumstances. 
Transportation of vessels to West Dock would occur by road in late May/
early June. It is not anticipated that vessels would need to transit by 
sea; however, in case this does occur the transit would take place when 
ice conditions allow and in consideration of the spring beluga and 
bowhead hunt in the Chukchi Sea.
    The project area encompasses 110 mi\2\ in Simpson Lagoon, Beaufort 
Sea, Alaska. The approximate boundaries of the total surface area are 
between 70[deg]28' N and 70[deg]39' N and between 149[deg]24' W and 
149[deg]55' W (Figure 1.2 of BP's IHA application). About 46 mi\2\ 
(41.8%) of the survey area is located inside the barrier islands in 
water depths of 0 to 9 ft (0 to 3 m), and 36 mi\2\ (32.7%) outside the 
barrier islands in water depths of 3 to 45 ft (1 to 15 m). The 
remaining 28 mi\2\ (25.5%) of the survey area is located on land 
(onshore and barrier islands), which is solely being used for 
deployment of the receivers. The planned start date of seismic data 
acquisition offshore of the barrier islands is July 1, 2012, depending 
on the presence of ice. Open water seismic operations can only start 
when the project area is ice free (i.e. < 10% ice coverage), which in 
this area normally occurs around mid-July ( 14 days). 
However, BP will not start seismic surveys with airgun operations 
within the barrier islands before July 25, 2012. Limited layout of 
receiver cables might be possible on land and barrier islands before 
the ice has cleared. To limit potential impacts to the bowhead whale 
migration and the subsistence hunt, no airgun operations would take 
place in the area north of the barrier islands after August 25, 2012. 
Surf zone geophone retrieval may continue for a brief period after 
airgun operations are complete.

Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA to BP was published in 
the Federal Register on May 1, 2012 (77 FR 25830). That notice 
described, in detail, BP's proposed activity, the marine mammal species 
that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated effects on 
marine mammals and the availability of marine mammals for subsistence 
uses. During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS received three 
comment letters from the following: The Marine Mammal Commission 
(Commission), the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission (AEWC), and ten 
private citizens, and a petition letter requesting denial of BP's IHA 
application.
    Any comments specific to BP's application that address the 
statutory and regulatory requirements or findings NMFS must make to 
issue an IHA are addressed in this section of the Federal Register 
notice.
    Comment 1: The Commission and AEWC recommended that NMFS continue 
to include proposed incidental harassment authorization language at the 
end of Federal Register notices but ensure that the language is 
consistent with that referenced in the main body of the Federal 
Register notice.
    Response: NMFS agrees that this is a good recommendation and will 
try to include proposed incidental harassment authorization language at 
the end of Federal Register notices if there is sufficient time 
allowing for drafting the IHA language before the proposed IHA Federal 
Register notice is issued. NMFS will also try to ensure that the 
language is consistent with that referenced in the main body of the 
Federal Register notice.
    Comment 2: The Commission recommends NMFS use species-specific 
maximum density estimates or average estimates adjusted by a 
precautionary correction factor as a basis for (1) estimating the 
expected number of takes and (2) making its determination regarding 
whether the total taking would have a negligible impact on the species 
or stocks. Further, the Commission points out that NMFS used Brandon et 
al. (2011) data for bowhead whale density estimates but not for belugas 
summer density of 0.0018 whales/km\2\. The Commission questions why 
NMFS uses the summer density estimate for belugas of 0.0008 whales/
km\2\, which was derived from aerial surveys conducted in 1982 to 1986 
(Moore et al. 2000).
    Response: To provide some allowance for the uncertainties, BP 
calculated both ``maximum estimates'' as well as ``average estimates'' 
of the numbers of marine mammals that could potentially be affected. 
For a few marine mammal species, several density estimates were 
available, and in those cases the mean and maximum estimates were 
determined from the survey data. In other cases, no applicable estimate 
(or perhaps a single estimate) was available, so adjustments were used 
to arrive at ``average'' and ``maximum'' estimates. The species-
specific estimation of these numbers is provided in the Federal 
Register notice for the proposed IHA (77 FR 25830; May 1, 2012). NMFS 
has determined that the average density data of marine mammal 
populations will be used to calculate estimated take numbers because 
these numbers are based on surveys and monitoring of marine mammals in 
the vicinity of the proposed project area. For several species whose 
average densities are too low to yield a take number due to extra-

[[Page 40010]]

limital distribution in the vicinity of the proposed Beaufort Sea 
survey area, but whose chance occurrence has been documented in the 
past, such as gray and killer whales and harbor porpoises, NMFS 
allotted a few numbers of these species to allow unexpected takes of 
these species.
    The determination regarding whether the total taking would have a 
negligible impact on the species or stocks is based on the species-
specific average density, or based on allotted number from past chance 
occurrence, as described above and in the proposed Federal Register 
notice for the proposed IHA (77 FR 25830).
    Regarding the reason for using older data for beluga whales summer 
density, there were several reasons for using the data reported in 
Moore et al. (2000):
    (1) It has been common practice to use data published in peer 
reviewed journals if these are available for the area and time period 
of the proposed activity.
    (2) Since the Simpson Lagoon seismic survey data will take place 
mainly in water depths of <=10 m, the data from 11,985 km of effort 
collected in water depths of <=50 m (Moore et al. 2000) was thought to 
be the most representative.
    Comment 3: The Commission requested NMFS provide additional 
justification for its preliminary determination that the proposed 
monitoring program will be sufficient to detect, with a high level of 
confidence, all marine mammals within or entering the identified 
exclusion and disturbance zones.
    Response: The proposed visual monitoring measures for open water 
seismic and geophysical surveys is a standard mitigation method used by 
industry and research institutes to reduce potential impacts to marine 
mammals that might be present in the vicinity of the action area. 
However, as noted in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA, 
there is no guarantee that all marine mammals within or entering the 
identified exclusion and disturbance zones would be immediately 
detected. Monitoring reports from the past have indicated that 
individual marine mammals have been found within the exclusion zone 
during the survey, which prompted timely power-down and shut down of 
seismic airguns. Other means to reduce marine mammal injury and TTS 
include pre-activity ramp-up and restricting cold start during darkness 
and inclement weather when the entire 180-dB zone is not visible 
without using night vision devices (NVDs) and/or forward looking 
infrared (FLIR). Therefore, although there is no guarantee that all 
marine mammals within or entering the identified exclusion zones would 
be immediately detected, NMFS is confident that it is very unlikely a 
marine mammal could be injured or receive TTS from exposure to a 
seismic impulse.
    Comment 4: The Commission recommends NMFS restrict the commencement 
of ramp-up from a full shut-down at night or in periods of poor 
visibility, regardless of whether the entire 180-dB re 1 [mu]Pa 
exclusion zone is visible. The Commission states that it is questioning 
the effectiveness of using vessel lights, night vision devices, and/or 
forward looking infrared to monitor the exclusion zones prior to ramp-
up procedures at night or in periods of poor visibility.
    Response: NMFS agrees with the Commission's recommendation that no 
ramp-up from a full shut-down should occur at night or in periods of 
poor visibility. NMFS further clarified with the Commission that if the 
entire 180-dB exclusion zone is not visible without using vessel 
lights, night vision devices, and/or forward looking infrared, then BP 
should not ramp up from a full shut-down. However, if the entire 180-dB 
zone is visible without using these devices, then a ramp-up from the 
full shut-down can be commenced.
    Comment 5: The Commission recommends that NMFS specify reduced 
vessel speeds of 9 knots or less when whales are within 300 m or when 
weather conditions reduce visibility.
    Response: NMFS agrees with the Commission's recommendation that 
vessels should reduce speed to 9 knots or less when weather conditions 
reduce visibility. NMFS has specified this additional condition in the 
final IHA issued to BP. Consistent with the proposed IHA, NMFS is also 
requiring BP to reduce vessel speed to less than 5 knots within 300 
yards (900 feet or 274 m) of any whale(s).
    Comment 6: The Commission recommends that NMFS require BP to report 
injured and dead marine mammals to NMFS and local stranding network 
using NMFS' phased approach to reporting, as outlined in the proposed 
incidental harassment authorization language at the end of the Federal 
Register notice for the proposed IHA (77 FR 25830; May 1, 2012).
    Response: NMFS agrees with and is implementing the Commission's 
recommendation.
    Comment 7: The AEWC states that it is not clear on the limitation 
on geophysical activity inside the barrier islands prior to July 25th. 
The AEWC states that the activities proposed by BP are governed by 
Section 502(a)(2)(A) of the Conflict Avoidance Agreement (CAA), and 
that BP is not to conduct geophysical activity inside the barrier 
islands prior to July 25, 2012. However, the AEWC points out that the 
Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (77 FR 25830; May 1, 2012) 
only poses restrictions on BP's seismic activities after August 25, 
2012, outside the barrier islands.
    Response: After clarifying with BP, NMFS confirmed that BP will not 
conduct seismic surveys using airguns within the barrier islands prior 
to July 25, 2012, as agreed in the CAA. NMFS has included this 
additional condition in the final IHA issued to BP.
    Comment 8: The AEWC recommends NMFS consider incorporating an 
alternative based off of the CAA process into the final Effects of Oil 
and Gas Activities in the Arctic Ocean Environmental Impact Statement 
(EIS) on the effects of oil and gas activities in the Arctic Ocean, as 
they requested in their comments, and this IHA provides an example of 
how the process can and should function properly to the benefit of the 
local community, offshore operators, and the federal government.
    Response: This recommendation is not directly related to the 
issuance of the IHA to BP for the take of marine mammals incidental to 
its OBC seismic survey in the Simpson Lagoon area of the Beaufort Sea. 
However, NMFS will continue to work with the AEWC, other Alaska Native 
marine mammal commissions, and other stakeholders on this issue and 
others during preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement.
    Comment 9: The AEWC states that NMFS's preliminary decision of not 
requiring BP to have PAM is questionable because the issue of acoustic 
monitoring has been on the table for many years. AEWC supports the peer 
review recommendation that PAM needs to be included to monitor for 
calling marine mammals, and to evaluate calling rates relative to 
seismic operations or received levels of seismic sounds.
    Response: NMFS does not agree with the AEWC's recommendation. The 
Simpson Lagoon project was designed to avoid the use of airguns outside 
of the barrier islands during the bowhead whale migration. Because 
airgun use will be restricted to areas inside the barrier islands 
during the bowhead migration north of Simpson Lagoon, and because the 
barrier islands block much of the sound from airguns and the depths 
inside the barrier islands are not sufficient to efficiently carry the 
long wavelength (low frequency) sounds that dominate airgun spectra, 
sounds above 120 dB are not expected to reach the

[[Page 40011]]

migration corridor when whales are present. While methods using 
directional hydrophones to localize whale calls can offer a powerful 
means of detecting subtle changes in whale call distributions related 
to industrial activities, the sounds being introduced by the Simpson 
Lagoon project during the migration will be weak and the number of days 
of exposure will be small. With that in mind, operations such as that 
at Simpson Lagoon would be very unlikely to add anything to our 
understanding of bowhead whale responses to industrial sounds. Other 
work that has already been completed (such as the work at Northstar 
Island for sounds associated with production and the work done by Shell 
and others to assess responses to airgun sounds) have the capacity to 
add to our understanding of bowhead whale responses to industrial 
sounds, but the circumstances surrounding the Simpson Lagoon project 
suggest that it would fail to produce meaningful (statistically 
significant) results.
    Because of doubts regarding the value of an acoustic localization 
study undertaken in association with the Simpson Lagoon project, and 
because timing would have made study design and implementation 
challenging, BP explored other opportunities to contribute to our 
collective understanding of potential acoustic impacts in the Beaufort 
Sea. Although BP measured sound field propagation through barrier 
islands during its 2008 Liberty seismic operation, the company proposed 
to undertake recordings that will yield more data regarding propagation 
of airgun sounds in the presence of barrier islands and shallow water. 
That work is currently planned to occur during the Simpson Lagoon 
seismic operation.
    Comment 10: Five private citizens requested NMFS deny BP's IHA 
application due to concerns about the potential for an oil spill.
    Response: As described in detail in the Federal Resister notice for 
the proposed IHA (77 FR 28530; May 1, 2012), BP's proposed Simpson 
Lagoon project would only involve OBC seismic surveys using airguns and 
ocean bottom recorders. There will be no oil and gas related drilling 
or production.
    Comment 11: Six private citizens request NMFS deny BP's IHA 
application because they think seismic impulse would kill marine 
mammals in the area.
    Response: As described in detail in the Federal Resister notice for 
the proposed IHA (77 FR 28530; May 1, 2012), as well as in this 
document, NMFS does not believe that BP's Simpson Lagoon OBC seismic 
surveys would cause injury or mortality to marine mammals. The required 
monitoring and mitigation measures being implemented would further 
reduce the adverse effect on marine mammals to the lowest levels 
practicable. Therefore, NMFS expects that only a small number of marine 
mammals would be taken by Level B harassment in the forms of temporary 
behavioral modification and displacement from the survey area. No 
injury and/or mortality of marine mammals is expected, and none was 
authorized.
    Comment 12: One private citizen requested NMFS deny BP's IHA 
application for fear that intensive sound could cause mortality to 
cephalopods and other invertebrates, which are important prey for 
marine mammals. Citing Andre et al. (2011), this person states that 
immediately following exposure to low frequency sound, the cephalopods 
showed hair cell damage within the statocysts. Overy time, nerve fibers 
became swollen and, eventually, large holes appeared.
    Response: NMFS is aware of the paper by Andre et al. (2011), which 
was published in the journal Frontier of Ecology and the Environment. 
However, NMFS does not believe the results of the study represent what 
would happen in a natural environment. In their experiment, Andre et 
al. (2011) used 50-400 Hz sinusoidal wave sweeps with 100% duty cycle 
and 1-second sweep period for 2 hours in either a 2.000-liter 
fiberglass reinforced plastic tank or a 200-liter (glass-walled) tank 
occupied by one individual of one of the four cephalopod species. The 
sweep was produced and amplified through an in-air loudspeaker, while 
the level received was measured by a calibrated B&K 8106 hydrophone 
(received sound pressure level: 157  5 dB re 1 [mu]Pa, with 
peak levels at 175 dB re 1 [mu]Pa). Therefore, the cephalopod in the 
small tank was exposed to a long-lasting intensive standing wave, 
instead of propagating waves from short airgun impulses in a free 
field. In addition, there was no mention of the total sound exposure 
level (SEL) over the 2-hour exposure period. For these reasons, NMFS 
did not consider this study in the analysis of acoustic impacts to 
marine mammal habitat, including prey species.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity

    The marine mammal species under NMFS jurisdiction most likely to 
occur in the seismic survey area include three cetacean species, beluga 
(Delphinapterus leucas), bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus), and gray 
whales (Eschrichtius robustus), and three pinniped species, ringed 
(Phoca hispida), spotted (P. largha), and bearded seals (Erignathus 
barbatus).
    Four additional cetacean species and one pinniped species: Harbor 
porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), killer whale (Orcinus orca), humpback 
whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) and minke whale (Balaenoptera 
acutorostrata), and Ribbon seals (Histriophoca fasciata) could also 
occur in the project area. Though their occurrence is considered 
extralimital.
    The bowhead and humpback whales are listed as ``endangered'' under 
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and as depleted under the MMPA. 
Certain stocks or populations of gray and beluga whales and spotted 
seals are listed as endangered or proposed for listing under the ESA; 
however, none of those stocks or populations occur in the proposed 
activity area. Additionally, the ribbon seal is considered a ``species 
of concern'', meaning that NMFS has some concerns regarding status and 
threats to this species, but for which insufficient information is 
available to indicate a need to list the species under the ESA. Bearded 
and ringed seals are ``candidate species'' under the ESA, meaning they 
are currently being considered for listing.
    BP's application contains information on the status, distribution, 
seasonal distribution, and abundance of each of the species under NMFS' 
jurisdiction mentioned. Please refer to the application for that 
information (see ADDRESSES). Additional information can also be found 
in the NMFS Stock Assessment Reports (SAR). The Alaska 2011 SAR is 
available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/ak2011.pdf.

Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals

    Operating active acoustic sources such as airgun arrays, pinger 
systems, and vessel activities have the potential for adverse effects 
on marine mammals.

Potential Effects of Airgun Sounds on Marine Mammals

    The effects of sounds from airgun pulses might include one or more 
of the following: Tolerance, masking of natural sounds, behavioral 
disturbance, and temporary or permanent hearing impairment or non-
auditory effects (Richardson et al. 1995). As outlined in previous NMFS 
documents, the effects of noise on marine mammals are highly variable. 
The Notice of Proposed IHA (77 FR 28530; May 1, 2012) included a 
discussion of the effects of airguns on

[[Page 40012]]

marine mammals, which is not repeated here. That discussion did not 
take into consideration the monitoring and mitigation measures proposed 
by BP and NMFS. No cases of temporary threshold shift (TTS) are 
expected as a result of BP's activities given the small size of the 
source, the strong likelihood that baleen whales (especially migrating 
bowheads) would avoid the approaching airguns (or vessel) before being 
exposed to levels high enough for there to be any possibility of TTS, 
and the mitigation measures required to be implemented during the 
survey described later in this document. Based on the fact that the 
sounds produced by BP's operations are unlikely to cause TTS in marine 
mammals, it is extremely unlikely that permanent hearing impairment 
would result. No injuries or mortalities are anticipated as a result of 
BP's operations, and none are authorized to occur. Only Level B 
harassment is anticipated as a result of BP's activities.

Potential Effects of Pinger Signals

    A pinger system (Sonardyne Acoustical Pingers) and acoustic 
releases/transponders would be used for BP's 2012 open water OBC 
seismic survey in the Beaufort Sea. The specifications of this pinger 
system (source levels and frequency ranges) were provided in the Notice 
of Proposed IHA (77 FR 28530; May 1, 2012). The source levels of the 
pinger are much lower than those of the airguns, which are discussed 
above. It is unlikely that the pinger produces pulse levels strong 
enough to cause temporary hearing impairment or (especially) physical 
injuries even in an animal that is (briefly) in a position near the 
source.

Anticipated Effects on Habitat

    The primary potential impacts to marine mammals and other marine 
species are associated with elevated sound levels produced by airguns 
and other active acoustic sources. However, other potential impacts to 
the surrounding habitat from physical disturbance are also possible.

Potential Impacts on Prey Species

    With regard to fish as a prey source for cetaceans and pinnipeds, 
fish are known to hear and react to sounds and to use sound to 
communicate (Tavolga et al. 1981) and possibly avoid predators (Wilson 
and Dill 2002). Experiments have shown that fish can sense both the 
strength and direction of sound (Hawkins 1981). Primary factors 
determining whether a fish can sense a sound signal, and potentially 
react to it, are the frequency of the signal and the strength of the 
signal in relation to the natural background noise level.
    The level of sound at which a fish will react or alter its behavior 
is usually well above the detection level. Fish have been found to 
react to sounds when the sound level increased to about 20 dB above the 
detection level of 120 dB (Ona 1988); however, the response threshold 
can depend on the time of year and the fish's physiological condition 
(Engas et al. 1993). In general, fish react more strongly to pulses of 
sound rather than a continuous signal (Blaxter et al. 1981), and a 
quicker alarm response is elicited when the sound signal intensity 
rises rapidly compared to sound rising more slowly to the same level.
    Investigations of fish behavior in relation to vessel noise (Olsen 
et al. 1983; Ona 1988; Ona and Godo 1990) have shown that fish react 
when the sound from the engines and propeller exceeds a certain level. 
Avoidance reactions have been observed in fish such as cod and herring 
when vessels approached close enough that received sound levels are 110 
dB to 130 dB (Nakken 1992; Olsen 1979; Ona and Godo 1990; Ona and 
Toresen 1988). However, other researchers have found that fish such as 
polar cod, herring, and capelin are often attracted to vessels 
(apparently by the noise) and swim toward the vessel (Rostad et al. 
2006). Typical sound source levels of vessel noise in the audible range 
for fish are 150 dB to 170 dB (Richardson et al. 1995).
    Some mysticetes, including bowhead whales, feed on concentrations 
of zooplankton. Some feeding bowhead whales may occur in the Alaskan 
Beaufort Sea in July and August, and others feed intermittently during 
their westward migration in September and October (Richardson and 
Thomson [eds.] 2002; Lowry et al. 2004). However, by the time most 
bowhead whales reach the Chukchi Sea (October), they will likely no 
longer be feeding, or if it occurs it will be very limited. A reaction 
by zooplankton to a seismic impulse would only be relevant to whales if 
it caused concentrations of zooplankton to scatter. Pressure changes of 
sufficient magnitude to cause that type of reaction would probably 
occur only very close to the source. Impacts on zooplankton behavior 
are predicted to be negligible, and that would translate into 
negligible impacts on feeding mysticetes. Thus, the activity is not 
expected to have any habitat-related effects that could cause 
significant or long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or 
their populations.

Potential Impacts on Availability of Affected Species or Stock for 
Taking for Subsistence Uses

    Seismic surveys have the potential to impact marine mammals hunted 
by Native Alaskans. In the case of cetaceans, the most common reaction 
to anthropogenic sounds (as noted previously in this document) is 
avoidance of the ensonified area. In the case of bowhead whales, this 
often means that the animals could divert from their normal migratory 
path by up several kilometers. Additionally, general vessel presence in 
the vicinity of traditional hunting areas could negatively impact a 
hunt.
    In the case of subsistence hunts for bowhead whales in the Beaufort 
Sea, there could be an adverse impact on the hunt if the whales were 
deflected seaward (further from shore) in traditional hunting areas. 
The impact would be that whaling crews would have to travel greater 
distances to intercept westward migrating whales, thereby creating a 
safety hazard for whaling crews and/or limiting chances of successfully 
striking and landing bowheads.
    The proposed seismic survey would take place between July and 
September. The project area is located approximately 35 miles northeast 
from Nuiqsut, 35 miles west from Cross Island, 150 miles west from 
Kaktovik and 180 miles east from Barrow. Potential impact from the 
planned activities is expected mainly from sounds generated by the 
vessel and during active airgun deployment. Due to the timing of the 
project and the distance from the surrounding communities, it is 
anticipated to have no effects on spring harvesting and little or no 
effects on the occasional summer harvest of beluga whale, subsistence 
seal hunts (ringed and spotted seals are primarily harvested in winter 
while bearded seals are hunted during July-September in the Beaufort 
Sea), or the fall bowhead hunt. The community of Nuiqsut may begin fall 
whaling activities in late August to early September from Cross Island 
(east of the survey area), and their efforts are typically focused on 
whales approaching Cross Island so that any harvest would occur before 
whales approached the survey area. As part of the planned mitigation 
measures (see below), BP will not start airgun operations within the 
barrier islands before July 25, 2012, and plans to complete those 
portions of the survey area outside of the barrier islands prior to 
August 25, 2012. All seismic activities after this date would take

[[Page 40013]]

place inshore of the barrier islands, thus avoiding the subsistence 
bowhead hunt in the area.
    Finally, BP has signed a Conflict Avoidance Agreement (CAA), and 
prepared a Plan of Cooperation (POC) under 50 CFR 216.104 to address 
potential impacts on subsistence hunting activities. The CAA identifies 
what measures have been or will be taken to minimize adverse impacts of 
the planned activities on subsistence harvesting. BP met with the AEWC 
and communities' Whaling Captains' Associations as part of the CAA 
development, and established avoidance guidelines and other mitigation 
measures to be followed where the activities may have an impact on 
subsistence.

Mitigation Measures

    In order to issue an incidental take authorization under Section 
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods 
of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the 
least practicable adverse impact on such species or stock and its 
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and 
areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species 
or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses.
    For the BP open-water seismic survey in the Beaufort Sea, NMFS is 
requiring BP to implement the following mitigation measures to minimize 
the potential impacts to marine mammals in the project vicinity as a 
result of the marine seismic survey activities.
    The mitigation measures are divided into the following major 
groups: (1) Sound source measurements, (2) Establishing exclusion and 
disturbance zones, (3) Vessel and helicopter related mitigation 
measures, and (4) Mitigation measures for airgun operations. The 
primary purpose of these mitigation measures is to detect marine 
mammals within, or about to enter designated exclusion zones and to 
initiate immediate shutdown or power down of the airgun(s), therefore 
it's very unlikely potential injury or TTS to marine mammals would 
occur, and Level B behavioral of marine mammals would be reduced to the 
lowest level practicable.

(1) Sound Source Measurements

    The acoustic monitoring program has two objectives: (1) To verify 
the modeled distances to the exclusion and disturbance zones from the 
640 in\3\ and 320 in\3\ airgun arrays and to provide corrected 
distances to the PSOs; and (2) to measure vessel sounds (i.e., received 
levels referenced to 1 m from the sound source) of each representative 
vessel of the seismic fleet, to obtain information on the sounds 
produced by these vessels.

Verification and Establishment of Exclusion and Disturbance Zones

    Acoustic measurements to calculate received sound levels as a 
function of distance from the airgun sound source will be conducted 
within 72 hours of initiation of the seismic survey. These measurements 
will be conducted according to a standard protocol for the 640-in\3\ 
array, the 320-in\3\ array and the 40-in\3\ gun, both inside and 
outside the barrier islands.
    The results of these acoustic measurements will be used to re-
define, if needed, the distances to received levels of 190, 180, 160 
and 120 dB. The distances of the received levels as a function of the 
different sound sources (varying discharge volumes) will be used to 
guide power-down and ramp-up procedures. A preliminary report 
describing the methodology and results of the verification for at least 
the 190 dB and 180 dB (rms) exclusion zones will be submitted to NMFS 
within 14 days of completion of the measurements.

Measurements of Vessel Sounds

    BP intends to measure vessel sounds of each representative vessel. 
The exact scope of the source level measurements (back-calculated as 
received levels at 1 m from the source) will follow a pre-defined 
protocol to eliminate the complex interplay of factors that underlie 
such measurements, such as bathymetry, vessel activity, location, 
season, etc. Where possible and practical the monitoring protocol will 
be developed in alignment with other existing vessel source level 
measurements.

(2) Establishing Exclusion and Disturbance Zones

    Under current NMFS guidelines, the ``exclusion zone'' for marine 
mammal exposure to impulse sources is customarily defined as the area 
within which received sound levels are >=180 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for 
cetaceans and >=190 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for pinnipeds. These safety 
criteria are based on an assumption that SPL received at levels lower 
than these will not injure these animals or impair their hearing 
abilities, but that at higher levels might have some such effects. 
Disturbance or behavioral effects to marine mammals from underwater 
sound may occur after exposure to sound at distances greater than the 
exclusion zones (Richarcdson et al. 1995).
    An acoustic propagation model, i.e., JASCO's Marine Operations 
Noise Model (MONM), was used to estimate the distances to received 
sound levels of 190, 180, 170, 160, and 120 dB re 1[mu]Pa (rms) for 
pulsed sounds from the 640-in\3\ and 320-in\3\ airgun arrays. Modeling 
methodology and results are described in detail in the appendix of the 
BP's IHA application (Warner and Hipsey 2011). Table 2 summarizes the 
distances from the source to specific received sound levels based on 
MONM modeling.

   Table 2--Estimated Distances to Specified Received SPL (rms) From Airgun Arrays With a Total Discharge Volume of 640-in\3\, 320-in\3\, and 40-in\3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Distance in meters (inside barrier islands)         Distance in meters  (outside
                                                               ------------------------------------------------------          barrier islands)
             Received Levels (dB re 1 [mu]Pa rms)                                                                    -----------------------------------
                                                                    640-in\3\         320-in\3\         40-in\3\          640-in\3\         40-in\3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
190...........................................................               310               160                16               120               <50
180...........................................................               750               480                59               950               <50
170...........................................................             1,200               930               300             2,500               120
160...........................................................             1,800             1,500               700             5,500               810
120...........................................................             6,400             5,700             3,700            44,000            16,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Values are based on 2 m-tow depth for the 640-in\3\ and 40-in\3\ array, and a 1 m-tow depth for the 320-in\3\ array.

    The distances to received sound levels of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) 
of the 640-in\3\ airgun array were used to calculate the numbers of 
marine mammals potentially harassed by the activities. The distances to 
received

[[Page 40014]]

levels of 180 dB and 190 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) are mainly relevant as 
exclusion radii to avoid level A harassment of marine mammals through 
implementation of shut down and power down measures (see details 
below).

(3) Vessel and Helicopter Related Mitigation Measures

    This proposed mitigation measures apply to all vessels that are 
part of the Simpson Lagoon seismic survey, including crew transfer 
vessels.

 Vessel operators shall avoid concentrations or groups of 
whales and vessels shall not be operated in a way that separates 
members of a group. In proximity of feeding whales or aggregations, 
vessel speed shall be less than 10 knots.
 When within 900 feet (300 m) of whales vessel operators shall 
take every effort and precaution to avoid harassment of these animals 
by:
    [cir] Reducing speed to 5 knots or less when within 300 yards of 
whales and steering around (groups of) whales if circumstances allow, 
but never cutting off a whale's travel path;
    [cir] Avoiding multiple changes in direction and speed.
 Vessel operators shall check the waters immediately adjacent 
to a vessel to ensure that no marine mammals will be injured when the 
vessel's propellers (or screws) are engaged.
 To minimize collision risk with marine mammals, vessels shall 
not be operated at speeds that would make collisions with whales 
likely. When weather conditions require, such as when visibility drops, 
vessels shall reduce speed to 9 knots or below to avoid the likelihood 
of injury to whales.
 Sightings of dead marine mammals would be reported immediately 
to the BP representative. BP is responsible for ensuring reporting of 
the sightings according to the guidelines provided by NMFS.
 In the event that any aircraft (such as helicopters) are used 
to support the planned survey, the mitigation measures below would 
apply:
    [cir] Under no circumstances, other than an emergency, shall 
aircraft be operated at an altitude lower than 1,000 feet above sea 
level (ASL) when within 0.3 mile (0.5 km) of groups of whales.
    [cir] Helicopters shall not hover or circle above or within 0.3 
mile (0.5 km) of groups of whales.

(4) Mitigation Measures for Airgun Operations

    The primary role for airgun mitigation during seismic survey is to 
monitor marine mammals near the seismic source vessel during all 
daylight airgun operations and during any nighttime start-up of the 
airguns. During the seismic survey PSOs will monitor the pre-
established exclusion zones for the presence of marine mammals. When 
marine mammals are observed within, or about to enter, designated 
safety zones, PSOs have the authority to call for immediate power down 
(or shutdown) of airgun operations as required by the situation. A 
summary of the procedures associated with each mitigation measure is 
provided below.

Ramp Up Procedure

    Ramp up procedures for an airgun array involve a step-wise increase 
in the number of operating airguns until the required discharge volume 
is achieved. The purpose of a ramp up (sometimes also referred to as 
soft start) is to provide marine mammals in the vicinity of the 
activity the opportunity to leave the area and thus avoid any potential 
injury or impairment of their hearing abilities.
    The rate of ramp up shall be no more than 6 dB of source level per 
5-min period.
    A common procedure is to double the number of operating airguns at 
5-min intervals, starting with the smallest gun in the array. BP states 
that it intends to double the number of airguns operating at 5 minute 
intervals during ramp up. For the 640-cu-in airgun array of the Simpson 
Lagoon seismic survey this is estimated to take 20 minutes, and for the 
320-in\3\ array 15 minutes. During ramp up, the safety zone for the 
full airgun array will be observed.
    The ramp up procedures will be applied as follows:
     A ramp up, following a cold start, can be applied if the 
exclusion zone has been free of marine mammals for a consecutive 30-
minute period. The entire exclusion zone must have been visible during 
these 30 minutes. If the entire exclusion zone is not visible, then 
ramp up from a cold start cannot begin.
     Ramp up procedures from a cold start will be delayed if a 
marine mammal is sighted within the exclusion zone during the 30-minute 
period prior to the ramp up. The delay will last until the marine 
mammal(s) has been observed to leave the exclusion zone or until the 
animal(s) is not sighted for at least 15 or 30 minutes. The 15 minutes 
applies to small toothed whales and pinnipeds, while a 30 minute 
observation period applies to baleen whales and large toothed whales.
     A ramp up, following a shutdown, can be applied if the 
marine mammal(s) for which the shutdown occurred has been observed to 
leave the exclusion zone or until the animal(s) is not sighted for at 
least 15 minutes (small toothed whales and pinnipeds) or 30 minutes 
(baleen whales and large toothed whales). This assumes there was a 
continuous observation effort prior to the shutdown and the entire 
exclusion zone is visible.
     If, for any reason, electrical power to the airgun array 
has been discontinued for a period of 10 minutes or more, ramp-up 
procedures need to be implemented. Only if the PSO watch has been 
suspended, a 30-minute clearance of the exclusion zone is required 
prior to commencing ramp-up. Discontinuation of airgun activity for 
less than 10 minutes does not require a ramp-up.
     The seismic operator and PSOs will maintain records of the 
times when ramp-ups start and when the airgun arrays reach full power.

Power-Down Procedures

    A power down is the immediate reduction in the number of operating 
airguns such that the radii of the 190 dB and 180 dB (rms) zones are 
decreased to the extent that an observed marine mammal is not in the 
applicable safety zone of the full array. During a power down, one 
airgun (or some other number of airguns less than the full airgun 
array) continues firing. The continued operation of one airgun is 
intended to (a) alert marine mammals to the presence of airgun 
activity, and (b) retain the option of initiating a ramp up to full 
operations under poor visibility conditions.
     The airgun array shall be immediately powered down 
whenever a marine mammal is sighted approaching close to or within the 
applicable exclusion zone of the full array, but is outside the 
applicable exclusion zone of the single mitigation airgun.
     If a marine mammal is already within the exclusion zone 
when first detected, the airguns will be powered down immediately.
     Following a power-down, ramp up to the full airgun array 
will not resume until the marine mammal has cleared the exclusion zone. 
The animal will be considered to have cleared the exclusion zone if it 
is visually observed to have left the exclusion zone of the full array, 
or has not been seen within the zone for 15 minutes (pinnipeds or small 
toothed whales) or 30 minutes (baleen whales or large toothed whales).

[[Page 40015]]

Shutdown Procedures

     The operating airgun(s) will be shutdown completely if a 
marine mammal approaches or enters the 190 or 180 dB (rms) exclusion 
zone of the smallest airgun.
     Airgun activity will not resume until the marine mammal 
has cleared the exclusion zone of the full array. The animal will be 
considered to have cleared the exclusion zone as described above under 
ramp up procedures.

Poor Visibility Conditions

    BP plans to conduct 24-hour operations. PSOs will not be on duty 
during ongoing seismic operations during darkness, given the very 
limited effectiveness of visual observation at night (there will be no 
periods of darkness in the survey area until mid-August). The proposed 
provisions associated with operations at night or in periods of poor 
visibility include the following:
     If during foggy conditions, heavy snow or rain, or 
darkness (which may be encountered starting in late August), the full 
180 dB exclusion zone is not visible without using vessel lights, night 
vision devices, and/or forward looking infrared, the airguns cannot 
commence a ramp-up procedure from a full shut-down.
     If one or more airguns have been operational before 
nightfall or before the onset of poor visibility conditions, they can 
remain operational throughout the night or poor visibility conditions. 
In this case ramp-up procedures can be initiated, even though the 
exclusion zone may not be visible, on the assumption that marine 
mammals will be alerted by the sounds from the single airgun and have 
moved away.
    In addition, airguns shall not be fired during long transits when 
exploration activities are not occurring, including the common firing 
of one airgun (also referred to as the ``mitigation gun'' in past 
IHAs). This does not apply to turns when starting a new track line. 
Keeping an airgun firing unnecessarily for long periods of time would 
only introduce more noise into the water.

Mitigation Measures for Subsistence Activities

(1) Subsistence Mitigation Measures
    To limit potential impacts to the bowhead whale migration and the 
subsistence hunt, BP would not conduct airgun operations inside the 
barrier islands before July 25, and will not conduct airgun operations 
in the area north of the barrier islands after 25 August.
(2) Plan of Cooperation (POC) and Conflict Avoidance Agreement (CAA)
    Regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(12) require IHA applicants for 
activities that take place in Arctic waters to provide a POC or 
information that identifies what measures have been taken and/or will 
be taken to minimize adverse effects on the availability of marine 
mammals for subsistence purposes.
    BP has signed a Conflict Avoidance Agreement (CAA) with the Alaska 
Eskimo Whaling Commission (AEWC) and communities' Whaling Captains' 
Associations for the proposed 2012 Simpson Lagoon OBV seismic survey. 
The main purpose of the CAA is to provide (1) equipment and procedures 
for communications between subsistence participants and industry 
participants; (2) avoidance guidelines and other mitigation measures to 
be followed by the industry participants working in or transiting in 
the vicinity of active subsistence hunters, in areas where subsistence 
hunters anticipate hunting, or in areas that are in sufficient 
proximity to areas expected to be used for subsistence hunting that the 
planned activities could potentially adversely affect the subsistence 
bowhead whale hunt through effects on bowhead whales; and (3) measures 
to be taken in the event of an emergency occurring during the term of 
the CAA.
    In the CAA, BP agrees to employ a Marine Mammal Observer/Inupiat 
Communitor (MMO/IC) on board each primary sound source vessel owned or 
operated by BP in the Beaufort Sea, and that native residents of the 
eleven villages represented by the AEWC shall be given preference in 
hiring for MMO/IC positions.
    The CAA states that all vessels (operated by BP) shall report to 
the appropriate Communication Center (Com-Center) at least once every 
six hours commencing with a call at approximately 06:00 hours. The 
appropriate Com-Center shall be notified if there is any significant 
change in plans, such as an unannounced start-up of operations or 
significant deviations from announced course, and such Com-Center shall 
notify all whalers of such changes.
    The CAA further states that each Com-Center shall have an Inupiat 
operator (``Com-Center operator'') on duty 24 hours per day from August 
15, or one week before the start of the fall bowhead whale hunt in each 
respective village, until the end of the bowhead whale subsistence 
hunt.
    The CAA also states that following the end of the fall 2012 bowhead 
whale subsistence hunt and prior to the 2013 pre-season introduction 
meetings, the industry participant that establishes the Deadhorse and 
Kaktovik Com Center will offer to the AEWC Chairman to host a joint 
meeting with all whaling captains of the villages of Nuiqsut, Kaktovik, 
and Barrow, the Marine Mammal Observer/Inupiat Communicators stationed 
on the industry participants' vessels in the Beaufort Sea, and with the 
Chairman and Exective Director of the AEWC, at a mutually agreed upon 
time and place on North Slope of Alaska, to review the results of the 
2012 Beaufort Sea open water season.
    In addition, BP has developed a ``Plan of Cooperation'' (POC) for 
the proposed 2012 seismic survey in the Simpson Lagoon of the Alaskan 
Beaufort Sea in consultation with representatives of Nuiqsut Community 
on the Beaufort Sea coast on issues related to subsistence seal 
hunting. Mitigation measures similar to those listed in the CAA have 
been identified in the POC, and a final POC has been delivered to NMFS.

Mitigation Conclusions

    NMFS has carefully evaluated these mitigation measures and 
considered a range of other measures in the context of ensuring that 
NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least practicable impact on 
the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat. Our 
evaluation of potential measures included consideration of the 
following factors in relation to one another:
     The manner in which, and the degree to which, the 
successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize 
adverse impacts to marine mammals;
     The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to 
minimize adverse impacts as planned; and
     The practicability of the measure for applicant 
implementation.
    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as 
well as other measures considered by NMFS and proposed by the 
independent peer review panel, NMFS has determined that the proposed 
mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least 
practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their 
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and 
areas of similar significance.

Monitoring and Reporting Measures

    In order to issue an ITA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of 
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth ``requirements pertaining to 
the monitoring and reporting of such taking''. The MMPA implementing

[[Page 40016]]

regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for ITAs 
must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary 
monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the 
species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine 
mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area.

Monitoring Measures

(1) Monitoring Measures
    The following monitoring measures are required for BP's 2012 open-
water seismic survey in the Beaufort Sea.
    There will be two vessel-based monitoring programs during the 
Simpson Lagoon OBC seismic survey. One program involves the presence of 
protected species observers (PSOs) on the seismic source vessels during 
the entire seismic survey period. The other vessel-based program 
involves two PSOs on a monitoring vessel outside the barrier islands 
after 25 August.

Visual Monitoring From Source Vessels

    Two PSOs will be present on each seismic source vessel. Of these 
two PSOs, one will be on watch at all times during daylight hours to 
monitor the 190 and 180 dB exclusion zones for the presence of marine 
mammals during airgun operations. During the fall bowhead whale 
migration season the 160 dB disturbance zone will also be monitored for 
the presence of groups of 12 or more baleen whales. The 120 dB 
disturbance zone for bowhead cow/calf pairs will be monitored from 
another vessel (see section ``Visual Monitoring Outside the Barrier 
Islands''). The main objectives of the vessel-based marine mammal 
monitoring program from the source vessels are as follows:
     To implement mitigation measures during seismic operations 
(e.g. course alteration, airgun power-down, shut-down and ramp-up);
     To record all marine mammal data needed to estimate the 
number of marine mammals potentially affected, which must be reported 
to NMFS within 90 days after the survey;
     To compare the distance and distribution of marine mammals 
relative to the source vessel at times with and without seismic 
activity; and
     To obtain data on the behavior and movement patterns of 
marine mammals observed and compare those at times with and without 
seismic activity.

Marine Mammal Observer Protocol

    BP intends to work with experienced PSOs that have had previous 
experience working on seismic survey vessels, which will be especially 
important for the lead PSO on the source vessels. At least one Alaska 
Native resident, who is knowledgeable about Arctic marine mammals and 
the subsistence hunt, is expected to be included as one of the team 
members aboard the vessels. Before the start of the seismic survey the 
crew of the seismic source vessels will be briefed on the function of 
the PSOs, their monitoring protocol, and mitigation measures to be 
implemented. They will also be aware of the monitoring objectives of 
the dedicated monitoring vessel, and how their observations can affect 
the operations.
    On all source vessels, at least one observer will monitor for 
marine mammals at any time during daylight hours (there will be no 
periods of total darkness until mid-August). PSOs will be on duty in 
shifts of a maximum of 4 hours at a time, although the exact shift 
schedule will be established by the lead PSO in consultation with the 
other PSOs.
    The three source vessels will offer suitable platforms for PSOs. 
Observations will be made from locations where PSOs have the best view 
around the vessel. During daytime, the PSO(s) will scan the area around 
the vessel systematically with reticle binoculars (e.g., 7x50 Fujinon) 
and with the naked eye. Laser range-finding binoculars (Leica LRF 1200 
laser rangefinder or equivalent) will be available to assist with 
distance estimation, using other vessels in the area as targets. Laser 
range finding binoculars are generally not useful in measuring 
distances to animals directly.

Communication Procedures

    When marine mammals in the water are detected within or about to 
enter the designated safety zones, the airgun(s) power-down or shut-
down procedures will be implemented immediately. To assure prompt 
implementation of power-downs and shut-downs, multiple channels of 
communication between the PSOs and the airgun technicians will be 
established. During the power-down and shut-down, the PSO(s) will 
continue to maintain watch to determine when the animal(s) are outside 
the safety radius. Airgun operations can be resumed with a ramp-up 
procedure (depending on the extent of the power down) if the observers 
have visually confirmed that the animal(s) moved outside the exclusion 
zone, or if the animal(s) were not observed within the safety zone for 
15 minutes (pinnipeds and small toothed whales) or for 30 minutes (for 
baleen whales and large toothed whales). Direct communication with the 
airgun operator will be maintained throughout these procedures.

Data Recording

    All marine mammal observations and any airgun power-down, shut-down 
and ramp-up will be recorded in a standardized format. Data will be 
entered into a custom database using a notebook computer. The accuracy 
of the data entry will be verified by computerized validity data checks 
as the data are entered and by subsequent manual checking of the 
database after each day. These procedures will allow initial summaries 
of data to be prepared during and shortly after the field program, and 
will facilitate transfer of the data to statistical, graphical, or 
other programs for further processing and archiving.

Visual Monitoring Outside the Barrier Islands

    The main purpose of the PSOs on the monitoring vessel that will 
operate outside the barrier islands is to monitor the 120 dB 
disturbance zone during daylight hours for the presence of four or more 
bowhead cow/calf pairs. The predicted distances to received levels of 
120 dB are 6.4 km for the 640 in\3\ array and 5.7 km for the 320 in\3\ 
array. The distance to the 160 dB disturbance zone is small enough (1.8 
km for the 640 in\3\ and 1.5 km for the 320 in\3\ array) to be covered 
by the PSOs on the source vessels. Of the two PSOs on the monitoring 
vessel, one will be on watch at all times during daylight hours to 
monitor the disturbance zones and to communicate any sightings of four 
bowhead cow/calf pairs to the PSOs on the source vessels. The shift 
schedule and observer protocol will be similar to that of the PSOs on 
the source vessels.
    Channels of communication between the lead PSOs on the source 
vessels and the dedicated monitoring vessel will also be established. 
If four or more bowhead cow/calf pairs are observed within or entering 
the 120 dB disturbance zone the lead PSO on monitoring vessel will 
immediately contact the lead PSO on the source vessel, who will ensure 
prompt implementation of airgun power downs or shutdowns. The lead PSO 
of the monitoring vessel will continue monitoring the 120 dB zone and 
notify the PSO on the source vessel when the cow/calf pairs have left 
the safety zone or when they haven't been observed within the safety 
zone for 30 minutes. Under these conditions ramp-up can be initiated.
    These vessel based surveys outside the barrier islands will be 
conducted up to 3 days per week, weather depending.

[[Page 40017]]

Anticipated start date is August 25, 2012, and these surveys will be 
continuing until the end of the data acquisition period. During this 
period data acquisition will take place only inside the barrier 
islands. The vessel will follow transect lines within the 120 dB zone 
that are designed in such a way that the area ensonified by 120 dB or 
more will be covered. The exact start and end point will depend on the 
area to be covered by the source vessels during that particular day.

Monitoring Plan Peer Review

    The MMPA requires that monitoring plans be independently peer 
reviewed ``where the proposed activity may affect the availability of a 
species or stock for taking for subsistence uses'' (16 U.S.C. 
1371(a)(5)(D)(ii)(III)). Regarding this requirement, NMFS' implementing 
regulations state, ``Upon receipt of a complete monitoring plan, and at 
its discretion, [NMFS] will either submit the plan to members of a peer 
review panel for review or within 60 days of receipt of the proposed 
monitoring plan, schedule a workshop to review the plan'' (50 CFR 
216.108(d)).
    NMFS convened an independent peer review panel to review BP's 
mitigation and monitoring plan in its IHA application for taking marine 
mammals incidental to the proposed OBC seismic survey in the Simpson 
Lagoon of the Alaskan Beaufort Sea, during 2012. The panel met on 
January 5 and 6, 2012, and provided their final report to NMFS on 
February 29, 2012. The full panel report can be viewed at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#applications.
    The peer review panel report contains recommendations that the 
panel members felt were applicable to BP's monitoring plans. 
Specifically the panel commented on issues related to: (1) Vessel-based 
marine mammal observers (MMOs), (2) MMO training, (3) Data recording, 
(4) Data analysis, and (5) Acoustical monitoring.
    NMFS has reviewed the report and evaluated all recommendations made 
by the panel. NMFS has determined that there are several measures that 
BP can incorporate into its 2012 OBC seismic survey. Additionally, 
there are other recommendations that NMFS has determined would also 
result in better data collection, and could potentially be implemented 
by oil and gas industry applicants, but which likely could not be 
implemented for the 2012 open water season due to technical issues (see 
below). While it may not be possible to implement those changes this 
year, NMFS believes that they are worthwhile and appropriate 
suggestions that may require a bit more time to implement, and BP 
should consider incorporating them into future monitoring plans should 
BP decide to apply for IHAs in the future.
    The following subsections lay out measures that NMFS is requiring 
BP to implement as part of its 2012 OBC seismic survey and measures for 
future implementation.

To Be Implemented for Inclusion in the 2012 Monitoring Plan

(1) Vessel-Based Marine Mammal Observers
     Utilize crew members to assist the MMOs. Crew members 
should not be used as primary MMOs because they have other duties and 
generally do not have the same level of expertise, experience, or 
training as MMOs, but they could be stationed on the fantail of the 
vessel to observe the near field, especially the area around the airgun 
array and implement a rampdown or shutdown if a marine mammal enters 
the safety zone (or exclusion zone).
     If crew members are to be used as MMOs, they should go 
through some basic training consistent with the functions they will be 
asked to perform. The best approach would be for crew members and MMOs 
to go through the same training together.
     As BP plans to have a marine mammal survey vessel outside 
the barrier islands after 25 August, the panel recommends BP use MMOs 
on the vessel to monitor for the presence and behavior of marine 
mammals in the offshore area projected to be exposed to seismic sounds.
(2) MMO Training
     BP could improve its MMO training by implementing panel 
recommendations from previous years (on other seismic survey programs). 
These recommendations include:
    [cir] Observers should be trained using visual aids (e.g., videos, 
photos), to help them identify the species that they are likely to 
encounter in the conditions under which the animals will likely be 
seen.
    [cir] Observer teams should include Alaska Natives, and all 
observers should be trained together. Whenever possible, new observers 
should be paired with experienced observers to avoid situations where 
lack of experience impairs the quality of observations.
    [cir] Observers should understand the importance of classifying 
marine mammals as ``unknown'' or ``unidentified'' if they cannot 
identify the animals to species with confidence. In those cases, they 
should note any information that might aid in the identification of the 
marine mammal sighted. For example, for an unidentified mysticete 
whale, the observers should record whether the animal had a dorsal fin.
    [cir] Observers should use the best possible positions for 
observing (e.g., outside and as high on the vessel as possible), taking 
into account weather and other working conditions.
     BP should train its MMOs to follow a scanning schedule 
that consistently distributes scanning effort according to the purpose 
and need for observations. For example, the schedule might call for 60 
percent of scanning effort to be directed toward the near field and 40 
percent at the far field. All MMOs should follow the same schedule to 
ensure consistency in their scanning efforts.
     MMOs also need training in documenting the behaviors of 
marine mammals. MMOs should simply record the primary behavioral state 
(i.e., traveling, socializing, feeding, resting, approaching or moving 
away from vessels) and relative location of the observed marine 
mammals.
(3) Data Recording
     MMOs should record observations of marine mammals hauled 
out on barrier islands. Because of the location of BP's proposed 
survey, most (if not all) of the marine mammals observed in the lagoon 
will be pinnipeds. It is feasible that the surveys may alter the 
hauling out patterns of pinnipeds, so observations of them should be 
recorded.
     BP should work with its observers to develop a means for 
recording data that does not reduce observation time significantly. 
Possible options include the use of a voice recorder during 
observations followed by later transcriptions, or well- designed 
software programs that minimize the time required to enter data. Other 
techniques also may be suitable.
(4) Data Analysis and Presentation of Data in Reports
     Estimation of potential takes or exposures should be 
improved for times with low visibility (such as during fog or darkness) 
through interpolation or possibly using a probability approach. For 
instance, for periods of fog or darkness one could use marine mammal 
observations obtained during a specified period of time before or after 
the time when visibility was restricted. Those data could be used to 
interpolate possible takes during periods of restricted visibility.

[[Page 40018]]

     Simpson Lagoon is relatively shallow, and marine mammal 
distribution likely will be closely linked to water depth. To account 
for this confounding factor, depth should be continuously recorded by 
the vessel and for each marine mammal sighting. Water depth should be 
accounted for in the analysis of take estimates.
     BP should be very clear in their report about what periods 
are considered ``non-seismic'' for analyses.
     BP should examine data from BWASP and other such programs 
to assess possible impacts from their seismic survey.
     The panel states that it believes the best ways to present 
data and results are described in peer-review reports from previous 
years. These recommendations include:
    [cir] To better assess impacts to marine mammals, data analysis 
should be separated into periods when a seismic airgun array (or a 
single mitigation airgun) is operating and when it is not. Final and 
comprehensive reports to NMFS should summarize and plot:
    [ssquf] Data for periods when a seismic array is active and when it 
is not; and
    [ssquf] The respective predicted received sound conditions over 
fairly large areas (tens of km) around operations.
    [cir] To help evaluate the effectiveness of MMOs and more 
effectively estimate take, reports should include sightability curves 
(detection functions) for distance-based analyses.
    [cir] To better understand the potential effects of oil and gas 
activities on marine mammals and to facilitate integration among 
companies and other researchers, the following data should be obtained 
and provided electronically in the 90- day report:
    [ssquf] The location and time of each aerial or vessel-based 
sighting or acoustic detection;
    [ssquf] Position of the sighting or acoustic detection relative to 
ongoing operations (i.e., distance from sightings to seismic operation, 
drilling ship, support ship, etc.), if known;
    [ssquf] The nature of activities at the time (e.g., seismic on/
off);
    [ssquf] Any identifiable marine mammal behavioral response 
(sighting data should be collected in a manner that will not detract 
from the MMO's ability to detect marine mammals); and
    [ssquf] Adjustments made to operating procedures.
     BP should improve take estimates and statistical inference 
into effects of the activities by incorporating the following measures:
    [ssquf] Reported results from all hypothesis tests should include 
estimates of the associated statistical power.
    [ssquf] Estimate and report uncertainty in all take estimates. 
Uncertainty could be expressed by the presentation of confidence 
limits, a minimum-maximum, posterior probability distribution, etc.; 
the exact approach would be selected based on the sampling method and 
data available.
(5) Acoustical Monitoring
     BP should also use the offshore vessel to monitor 
(periodically) the propagation of airgun sounds from within the lagoon 
into offshore areas during its marine mammal survey using a dipping 
hydrophone.
     To help verify the propagation model results, the panel 
also recommends additional acoustic monitoring with bottom mounted 
recorders. Recorders should be deployed throughout the seismic survey. 
One suggestion is to deploy instruments including: One at the cut, or 
break, between Leavitt and Spy islands at about the 5 m isobath; one 
north of the center of Leavitt Island at the 10 m isobath; and one off 
the east end of Pingok Island at the 10 m isobath.

Recommendations To Be Considered for Future Monitoring Plans

    In addition, the panelists recommended that (1) BP continue to 
develop and test observational aids to assist with visibility during 
night, poor light conditions, inclement weather, etc.; and (2) BP 
conduct additional acoustic monitoring with bottom mounted recorders to 
monitor for calling marine mammals. It may be possible to evaluate 
calling rates relative to seismic operations or received levels of 
seismic sounds. Additionally, Shell will have several acoustic arrays 
in the general area. Those arrays will provide a basis for determining 
locations of calling marine mammals. NMFS should encourage BP to 
request data from Shell to help examine impacts of the seismic survey 
on the distribution of calling bowheads and other marine mammals.
    After discussion with BP, NMFS decided not to implement these two 
recommendations for BP's 2012 OBC seismic survey because most of BP's 
survey would occur during the time when there will be very short low-
light hours. As for the second recommendation, NMFS realized that given 
the complexity in marine mammal passive acoustic localization, BP will 
not have the time to implement this recommendation for its 2012 survey.

(2) Reporting Measures

Sound Source Verification Reports

    A report on the preliminary results of the sound source 
verification measurements, including the measured 190, 180, 160, and 
120 dB (rms) radii of the airgun sources, shall be submitted within 14 
days after collection of those measurements at the start of the field 
season. This report will specify the distances of the exclusion zones 
that were adopted for the survey.

Technical Reports

    The results of BP's 2012 vessel-based monitoring, including 
estimates of ``take'' by harassment, shall be presented in the ``90-
day'' and Final Technical reports. The Technical Reports should be 
submitted to NMFS within 90 days after the end of the seismic survey. 
The Technical Reports will include:
    (a) Summaries of monitoring effort (e.g., total hours, total 
distances, and marine mammal distribution through the study period, 
accounting for sea state and other factors affecting visibility and 
detectability of marine mammals);
    (b) Analyses of the effects of various factors influencing 
detectability of marine mammals (e.g., sea state, number of observers, 
and fog/glare);
    (c) Species composition, occurrence, and distribution of marine 
mammal sightings, including date, water depth, numbers, age/size/gender 
categories (if determinable), group sizes, and ice cover;
    (d) To better assess impacts to marine mammals, data analysis 
should be separated into periods when a seismic airgun array (or a 
single mitigation airgun) is operating and when it is not. Final and 
comprehensive reports to NMFS should summarize and plot:
     Data for periods when a seismic array is active and when 
it is not; and
     The respective predicted received sound conditions over 
fairly large areas (tens of km) around operations;
    (e) Sighting rates of marine mammals during periods with and 
without airgun activities (and other variables that could affect 
detectability), such as:
     Initial sighting distances versus airgun activity state;
     Closest point of approach versus airgun activity state;
     Observed behaviors and types of movements versus airgun 
activity state;
     Numbers of sightings/individuals seen versus airgun 
activity state;
     Distribution around the survey vessel versus airgun 
activity state; and
     Estimates of take by harassment;
    (f) Reported results from all hypothesis tests should include

[[Page 40019]]

estimates of the associated statistical power when practicable;
    (g) Estimate and report uncertainty in all take estimates. 
Uncertainty could be expressed by the presentation of confidence 
limits, a minimum-maximum, posterior probability distribution, etc.; 
the exact approach would be selected based on the sampling method and 
data available;
    (h) The report should clearly compare authorized takes to the level 
of actual estimated takes; and

Notification of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals

    In the unanticipated event that survey operations clearly cause the 
take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by this Authorization, 
such as an injury (Level A harassment), serious injury or mortality 
(e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction, and/or entanglement), BP shall 
immediately cease survey operations and immediately report the incident 
to NMFS and the Alaska Regional Stranding coordinators. The report must 
include the following information: (1) Time, date, and location 
(latitude/longitude) of the incident; (2) the name and type of vessel 
involved; (3) the vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident; 
(4) description of the incident; (5) status of all sound source use in 
the 24 hours preceding the incident; (6) water depth; (7) environmental 
conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea state, cloud 
cover, and visibility); (8) description of marine mammal observations 
in the 24 hours preceding the incident; (9) species identification or 
description of the animal(s) involved; (10) the fate of the animal(s); 
and (11) photographs or video footage of the animal (if equipment is 
available).
    Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the 
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS shall work with BP to 
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further 
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. BP may not resume their 
activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone.
    In the event that BP discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, 
and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or death is 
unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than a 
moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph), BP 
shall immediately report the incident to NMFS and the NMFS Alaska 
Stranding Hotline and/or by email to the Alaska Regional Stranding 
Coordinators, within 24 hours of the discovery. The report must include 
the same information identified above. Activities may continue while 
NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS will work with BP 
to determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.
    In the event that BP discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, 
and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not associated 
with or related to the activities authorized in IHA (e.g., previously 
wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced decomposition, or 
scavenger damage), BP shall report the incident to NMFS and the NMFS 
Alaska Stranding Hotline and/or by email to the Alaska Regional 
Stranding Coordinators, within 24 hours of the discovery. BP shall 
provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other 
documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine 
Mammal Stranding Network. BP can continue its operations under such a 
case.

Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment

    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the 
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: any act of pursuit, torment, or 
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or 
marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the 
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not 
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or 
sheltering [Level B harassment]. Only take by Level B behavioral 
harassment is anticipated as a result of the proposed open-water marine 
survey program. Anticipated impacts to marine mammals are associated 
with noise propagation from the survey airgun(s) used in the OBC 
seismic survey.
    The full suite of potential impacts to marine mammals was described 
in detail in the ``Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on 
Marine Mammals'' section found in the Notice of Proposed IHA (77 FR 
28530; May 1, 2012). The potential effects of sound from the open-water 
seismic survey might include one or more of the following: Tolerance; 
masking of natural sounds; behavioral disturbance; non-auditory 
physical effects; and, at least in theory, temporary or permanent 
hearing impairment (Richardson et al. 1995). As discussed earlier in 
this document, the most common impact will likely be from behavioral 
disturbance, including avoidance of the ensonified area or changes in 
speed, direction, and/or diving profile of the animal. For reasons 
discussed previously in this document, hearing impairment (TTS and PTS) 
is highly unlikely to occur based on the required mitigation and 
monitoring measures that would preclude marine mammals being exposed to 
noise levels high enough to cause hearing impairment.
    For impulse sounds, such as those produced by airgun(s) used in the 
shallow hazards survey, NMFS uses the 160 dBrms re 1 [mu]Pa 
isopleth to indicate the onset of Level
    B harassment. BP provided calculations for the 160- and 120-dB 
isopleths produced by these activities and then used those isopleths to 
estimate takes by harassment. NMFS used the calculations to make the 
necessary MMPA findings. BP provided a full description of the 
methodology used to estimate takes by harassment in its IHA application 
(see ADDRESSES), which was also provided in the Notice of Proposed IHA 
(77 FR 28530; May 1, 2012). A summary of that information is provided 
here, as it has not changed from the proposed notice.
    BP has requested an authorization to take 11 marine mammal species 
by Level B harassment. These 11 marine mammal species are: beluga whale 
(Delphinapterus leucas), killer whale (Orcinus orca), harbor porpoise 
(Phocoena phocoena), bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus), gray whale 
(Eschrichtius robustus), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), minke 
whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), bearded seal (Erignathus barbatus), 
ringed seal (Phoca hispida), spotted seal (P. largha), and ribbon seal 
(Histriophoca fasciata). However, due to the extralimital distribution 
of humpback whales, NMFS considers that the occurrence of this species 
in the vicinity of BP's seismic survey area is unlikely.

Basis for Estimating ``Take by Harassment''

    As stated previously, it is current NMFS policy to estimate take by 
Level B harassment for impulse sounds at a received level of 160 
dBrms re 1[mu]Pa. However, not all animals react to sounds 
at this low level, and many will not show strong reactions (and in some 
cases any reaction) until sounds are much stronger. Southall et al. 
(2007) provide a severity scale for ranking observed behavioral 
responses of both free-ranging marine mammals and laboratory subjects 
to various types of anthropogenic sound (see Table 4 in Southall et al. 
(2007)). Tables 7, 9, and 11 in Southall et al. (2007) outline the 
numbers of low-frequency cetaceans, mid-frequency cetaceans, and 
pinnipeds in water, respectively, reported as

[[Page 40020]]

having behavioral responses to multi-pulses in 10-dB received level 
increments. These tables illustrate that for the studies summarized the 
more severe reactions did not occur until sounds were much higher than 
160 dBrms re 1[mu]Pa.
    As described earlier in the document, two main source vessels and a 
mini source vessel would be used to conduct the OBC seismic surveys in 
the Simpson Lagoon. Each of the main source vessels would be equipped 
with two subarrays containing eight 40 in\3\ airguns, with a total 
volume displacement of 640 in\3\. The mini source vessel would be 
equipped with one subarray containing eight 40 in\3\ airguns, with a 
total displacement volume of 320 in\3\. Modeling results show that the 
160 dB isopleths for the 640 in\3\, 320 in\3\, and 40 in\3\ airgun 
arrays inside the barrier islands are approximately 1,800 m, 1,500 m, 
and 700 m from the source, respectively; the 160 dB isopleths for the 
640 in\3\ and 40 in\3\ airgun arrays outside the barrier islands are 
approximately 5,500 m and 810 m fromthe source, respectively (Please 
see above for detailed description of the exclusion and disturbance 
zones).
    The radii associated with received sound levels of 160 dB re 1 
[mu]Pa (rms) or higher are used to calculate the number of potential 
marine mammal ``exposures'' to airgun sounds. The potential number of 
each species that might be exposed to received pulsed sound levels of 
>=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) is calculated by multiplying the expected 
species density with the anticipated area to be ensonified to that 
level during airgun operations. Bowhead and beluga whales are migrating 
through the area, so every encounter likely involves a new individual. 
Although seal species are also known to cover large distances, they are 
expected to linger longer within a certain area, and so one individual 
might be exposed multiple times.
    The area expected to be ensonified was determined by entering the 
seismic survey lines into a MapInfo Geographic Information System 
(GIS). GIS was then used to identify the relevant areas by ``drawing'' 
the applicable 160-dB buffer of the 640-in\3\ array around each seismic 
source line and calculating the total area within the buffers. This was 
done for the survey area outside the barrier islands and inside the 
barrier islands separately. The area ensonified with pulsed sound 
levels of >=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) from airgun operations outside the 
barrier islands is estimated as 197.5 mi\2\ (512 km\2\) and from airgun 
operations inside the barrier islands 105 mi\2\ (272 km\2\).
    Summer density (see below) estimates of marine mammals will be 
applied to all (100%) survey effort outside the barrier islands and to 
60% survey effort inside the barrier islands. Fall densities are not 
applied to the outside barrier islands survey effort, since no survey 
effort is planned after August 25. Fall densities are applied to 100% 
survey effort inside the barrier islands activity, because some of the 
source lines will be rerun in order to image the full fold area 
adequately.

Marine Mammal Density Estimates

    Because most cetacean species show a distinct seasonal 
distribution, density estimates for the central Beaufort Sea have been 
derived for the summer period (covering July and August) and the fall 
period (covering September and October). Animal densities encountered 
in the Beaufort Sea during both of these time periods will further 
depend on the presence of ice. However, if ice cover within or close to 
the seismic survey area is more than approximately 10%, seismic survey 
activities may not start or be halted. Cetacean and pinniped densities 
related to ice conditions are therefore not included in BP's IHA 
application. Pinniped species in the Beaufort Sea do not show a 
distinct seasonal distribution during the period July-early-October and 
as such density estimates derived for seal species are used for both 
the summer and fall periods.
    In addition to seasonal variation in densities, spatial 
differentiation is an important factor for marine mammal densities, 
both in latitudinal and longitudinal gradient. Taking into account the 
size and location of the proposed seismic survey area and the 
associated area of influence, only the nearshore zone (defined as the 
area between the shoreline and the 50 m [164 ft] bathymetry line) of 
the Beaufort Sea was considered to be relevant for the calculation of 
densities.
    Density estimates are based on best available scientific data. In 
cases where the best available data were collected in regions, 
habitats, or seasons that differ from the proposed survey activities, 
information from monitoring results collected in similar habitats, 
regions or seasons was used. Some sources from which densities were 
used include correction factors to account for perception and 
availability bias in the reported densities. Perception bias is 
associated with diminishing probability of sighting with increasing 
lateral distance from the trackline, where an animal is present at the 
surface but could be missed. Availability bias refers to the fact that 
the animal might be present but is not available at the surface. The 
uncorrected number of marine mammals observed is therefore always lower 
than the actual numbers present. Unfortunately, for most marine mammals 
not enough information is available to calculate these two correction 
factors. The density estimates provided in the BP's IHA request are 
therefore based on uncorrected data, unless mentioned otherwise.
    Because the available density data is not always representative for 
the area of interest, and correction factors were not always known, 
there is some uncertainty in the data and assumptions used in the 
density calculations. To provide allowance for these uncertainties, 
maximum density estimates have been provided in addition to average 
density estimates. The marine mammal densities presented are believed 
to be close to, and in most cases higher than, the densities that are 
expected to be encountered during the proposed survey.
    Detailed density information of marine mammal species present in 
the vicinity of BP's OBC seismic area is described in detail in the 
Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (77 FR 28530; May 1, 
2012). Table 3 is the summary of the marine mammal density used to 
calculate estimated takes.

   Table 3--Expected Densities of Marine Mammals in the Simpson Lagoon
                               Survey Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Summer       Autumn
                                                 densities    densities
                    Species                     (/  (/
                                                   km\2\)       km\2\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bowhead whale.................................       0.0065       0.1226
Beluga whale..................................       0.0008       0.0136
Ringed seal...................................       0.1680       0.1680
Bearded seal..................................       0.0124       0.0124
Spotted seal..................................       0.0020       0.0020
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Potential Number of Takes by Harassment

    Numbers of marine mammals that might be present and potentially 
taken are summarized in Table 4 based on available data about mammal 
distribution and densities at different locations and times of the year 
as described above.
    Some of the animals estimated to be exposed, particularly migrating 
bowhead whales, might show avoidance reactions before being exposed to 
>=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms). Thus, these calculations actually estimate 
the number of individuals potentially exposed to >=160 dB (rms) that 
would

[[Page 40021]]

occur if there were no avoidance of the area ensonified to that level.
    For beluga whales and spotted seals that may form groups, 
additional takes were requested on top of the density-based take 
calculation in the event a large group is encountered during the 
survey. For marine mammal species that are extralimital and for which 
no density estimates are available in the vicinity of the proposed 
project area (such as gray, minke, and killer whales, harbor porpoise, 
and ribbon seal), a small number of takes have been requested in case 
they are encountered (Table 4).

Table 4--Estimates of the Possible Numbers of Marine Mammals Taken by Level B Harassment (Exposed to >=160 dB re
          1 [mu]Pa (rms)) During BP's Proposed Seismic Program in the Beaufort Seas, July-October 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Outside barrier        Inside barrier islands
                                               islands     ------------------------------------  Total estimated
                 Species                 ------------------                                           takes
                                               Summer            Summer            Autumn
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bowhead whale...........................                 3                 1                33                37
Beluga whale............................                 0                 0                 4              50 *
Gray whale..............................  ................  ................  ................                 3
Minke whale.............................  ................  ................  ................                 2
Killer whale............................  ................  ................  ................                 3
Harbor porpoise.........................  ................  ................  ................                 3
Ringed seal.............................                60                19                32               111
Bearded seal............................                 9                 3                 5                17
Spotted seal............................                 1                 0                 1              20 *
Ribbon seal.............................  ................  ................  ................                 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Additional takes were requested in the event that a large group of beluga whales and spotted seals is
  encountered.

Estimated Take Conclusions

    Cetaceans--Effects on cetaceans are generally expected to be 
restricted to avoidance of an area around the seismic survey and short-
term changes in behavior, falling within the MMPA definition of ``Level 
B harassment''.
    Using the 160 dB criterion, the average estimates of the numbers of 
individual cetaceans exposed to sounds = 160 dB (rms) re 1 
[mu]Pa represent varying proportions of the populations of each species 
in the Beaufort Sea and adjacent waters. For species listed as 
``Endangered'' under the ESA, the estimates include approximately 37 
bowheads. This number is approximately 0.24% of the Bering-Chukchi-
Beaufort population of over 15,232 assuming 3.4% annual population 
growth from the estimate of over 10,545 animals in 2001 (Zeh and Punt 
2005). For other cetaceans that might occur in the vicinity of the 
Simpson Lagoon survey area, they also represent a very small proportion 
of their respective populations. The average estimates of the number of 
belugas (with additional takes to account for a chance encounter of a 
large group) that might be exposed to 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa is 50, which 
represents 0.13% of the Beaufort Sea population (or 1.35% of the 
Eastern Chukchi Sea population, or a mix between these two populations) 
of the beluga whales. In addition, the average estimates of gray, 
minke, and killer whales, and harbor porpoise that might be exposed to 
=160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa are 3, 2, 3, and 3. These numbers 
represent 0.02%, 0.20%, 0.96%, and 0.0062% of these species of their 
respective populations in the proposed action area.
    Although humpback whales are not likely to be encountered in BP's 
proposed seismic survey area, NMFS has analyzed the possibility of an 
occasional exposure of up to 2 humpback whales to received noise levels 
by Level B behavioral harassment. This would represent 0.21% of the 
Western North Pacific stock of approximately 938 humpback whales in the 
proposed action area. Based on the analysis, NMFS has determined that 
such level of take will have negligible impacts to the humpback whales. 
Since analysis conducted by NMFS' Alaska Regional Office (AKRO) on 
section 7 consultation on ESA-listed species showed that humpback 
whales would not be affected, no humpback whale take is authorized by 
AKRO, therefore, the final IHA does not include takes of humpback whale 
as well.
    Seals--A few seal species are likely to be encountered in the study 
area, but ringed seal is by far the most abundant in this area. The 
average estimates of the numbers of individuals exposed to sounds at 
received levels =160 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa during the 
proposed shallow hazards survey are as follows: ringed seals (111), 
bearded seals (17), spotted seals (20, with additional takes to count 
for chance encounter of a group), and ribbon seals (2). These numbers 
represent 0.05%, 0.01%, 0.03%, and 0.0033% of Alaska stocks of ringed, 
bearded, spotted, and ribbon seals, respectively.

Negligible Impact and Small Numbers Analysis and Determination

    NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as ``* * * 
an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be 
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely 
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of 
recruitment or survival.'' In making a negligible impact determination, 
NMFS considers a variety of factors, including but not limited to: (1) 
The number of anticipated mortalities; (2) the number and nature of 
anticipated injuries; (3) the number, nature, intensity, and duration 
of Level B harassment; and (4) the context in which the takes occur.
    No injuries or mortalities are anticipated to occur as a result of 
BP's 2012 OBC seismic survey in the Simpson Lagoon of the Alaskan 
Beaufort Sea, and none are authorized. In addition, these surveys will 
use relatively small 640 in\3\ airgun arrays, which have much less 
acoustic power outputs compared to conventional airgun arrays with 
displacement volume in the range of thousands cubic inches. 
Additionally, the survey areas are in shallow waters, with 
approximately 42% of the survey area located inside the barrier islands 
(depth: 0-9 ft, or 0-3 m) and 33% located outside the barrier islands 
(depth: 3-45 ft, or 1-15 m), where horizontal sound propagation of low 
frequency airgun pulses is severely limited. For the seismic survey 
inside the barrier islands, the islands provide a natural barrier that 
would effectively reduce sound propagation out to the open ocean, if 
not completely

[[Page 40022]]

eliminate its propagation. The modeled isopleths at 160 dB within the 
barrier islands is expected to be approximately 1.8 km, and 5.5 km 
outside barrier islands, from an airgun array of 640 in\3\ (see 
discussion earlier). Additionally, animals in the area are not expected 
to incur hearing impairment (i.e., TTS or PTS) or non-auditory 
physiological effects. Takes will be limited to Level B behavioral 
harassment. Although it is possible that some individuals of marine 
mammals may be exposed to sounds from the proposed seismic survey 
activities more than once, the expanse of these multi-exposures are 
expected to be less extensive since both the animals and the survey 
vessels will be moving constantly in and out of the survey areas.
    Most of the bowhead whales encountered during the summer will 
likely show overt disturbance (avoidance) only if they receive airgun 
sounds with levels >= 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa. Odontocete reactions to 
seismic energy pulses are usually assumed to be limited to shorter 
distances from the airgun(s) than are those of mysticetes, probably in 
part because odontocete low-frequency hearing is assumed to be less 
sensitive than that of mysticetes. However, at least when in the 
Canadian Beaufort Sea in summer, belugas appear to be fairly responsive 
to seismic energy, with few being sighted within 6-12 mi (10-20 km) of 
seismic vessels during aerial surveys (Miller et al. 2005). Belugas 
will likely occur in small numbers in the Beaufort Sea during the 
survey period and few will likely be affected by the survey activity. 
In addition, due to the constant moving of the survey vessel, the 
duration of the noise exposure by cetaceans to seismic impulse would be 
brief. For the same reason, it is unlikely that any individual animal 
would be exposed to high received levels multiple times.
    Taking into account the mitigation measures that are planned, 
effects on cetaceans are generally expected to be restricted to 
avoidance of a limited area around the survey operation and short-term 
changes in behavior, falling within the MMPA definition of ``Level B 
harassment''. The many reported cases of apparent tolerance by 
cetaceans of seismic exploration, vessel traffic, and some other human 
activities show that co-existence is possible. Mitigation measures such 
as controlled vessel speed, dedicated marine mammal observers, non-
pursuit, and shut downs or power downs when marine mammals are seen 
within defined ranges will further reduce short-term reactions and 
minimize any effects on hearing sensitivity. In all cases, the effects 
are expected to be short-term, with no lasting biological consequence.
    Of the eleven marine mammal species with possible occurrence in the 
proposed marine survey area, only the bowhead and humpback whales are 
listed as endangered under the ESA. These species are also designated 
as ``depleted'' under the MMPA. Despite these designations, the Bering-
Chukchi-Beaufort stock of bowheads has been increasing at a rate of 3.4 
percent annually for nearly a decade (Allen and Angliss 2010). 
Additionally, during the 2001 census, 121 calves were counted, which 
was the highest yet recorded. The calf count provides corroborating 
evidence for a healthy and increasing population (Allen and Angliss 
2010). The occurrence of humpback whales in the proposed marine survey 
areas is considered extralimital, and therefore no takes are included 
in the IHA. There is no critical habitat designated in the U.S. Arctic 
for the bowhead and humpback whale. The Alaska stock of bearded seals, 
part of the Beringia distinct population segment (DPS), and the Arctic 
stock of ringed seals, have been proposed by NMFS for listing as 
threatened under the ESA (bearded seals: 75 FR 77496; December 10, 
2011; ringed seal: 75 FR 77476; December 10, 2011). None of the other 
species that may occur in the project area are listed as threatened or 
endangered under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA.
    Potential impacts to marine mammal habitat were discussed 
previously in this document (see the ``Anticipated Effects on Habitat'' 
section). Although some disturbance is possible to food sources of 
marine mammals, the impacts are anticipated to be minor enough as to 
not affect rates of recruitment or survival of marine mammals in the 
area. Based on the vast size of the Arctic Ocean where feeding by 
marine mammals occurs versus the localized area of the marine survey 
activities, any missed feeding opportunities in the direct project area 
would be minor based on the fact that other feeding areas exist 
elsewhere.
    The authorized takes represent 0.13% of the Beaufort Sea population 
of approximately 39,258 beluga whales (or 1.35% of the Eastern Chukchi 
Sea population of approximately 3,710 beluga whales, or a mix of each 
population; Allen and Angliss 2010), 1.59% of Aleutian Island and 
Bering Sea stock of approximately 314 killer whales, 0.004% of Bering 
Sea stock of approximately 48,215 harbor porpoises, 0.02% of the 
Eastern North Pacific stock of approximately 19,126 gray whales, 0.24% 
of the Bering-Chukchi-Beaufort population of 15,232 bowhead whales 
assuming 3.4 percent annual population growth from the estimate of 
10,545 animals (Zeh and Punt, 2005), and 0.20% of the Alaska stock of 
approximately 1,003 minke whales. The take estimates presented for 
bearded, ringed, spotted, and ribbon seals represent 0.01, 0.05, 0.03, 
and 0.0033% of U.S. Arctic stocks of each species, respectively. These 
take numbers represent the percentage of each species or stock that 
could be taken by Level B behavioral harassment if each animal is taken 
only once. In addition, the mitigation and monitoring measures 
(described previously in this document) that are included in the IHA 
(if issued) are expected to reduce even further any potential 
disturbance to marine mammals.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the 
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into 
consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring 
measures, NMFS finds that BP's proposed 2012 OBC seismic survey in the 
Simpson Lagoon of the Alaskan Beaufort Sea may result in the incidental 
take of small numbers of marine mammals, by Level B harassment only, 
and that the total taking from the marine surveys will have a 
negligible impact on the affected species or stocks.

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

    NMFS has determined that BP's proposed 2012 OBC seismic survey in 
the Beaufort Sea will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the 
availability of species or stocks for taking for subsistence uses. This 
determination is supported by information contained in this document 
and BP's CAA and draft POC. BP has adopted a spatial and temporal 
strategy for its Simpson Lagoon operations that should minimize impacts 
to subsistence hunters. Specifically, BP's Simpson Lagoon OBC seismic 
survey would occur during the July to October open water season, would 
not start its airgun operations within the barrier islands before July 
25, and will terminate its operations outside the barrier islands after 
August 25 before the fall bowhead whale hunt. Due to the timing of the 
project and the distance from the surrounding communities 
(approximately 35 miles northeast from Nuiqsut, 35 miles west from 
Cross Island, 150 miles west from Kaktovik and 180 miles east from 
Barrow), it is anticipated to have no effects on spring harvesting and 
little or no effects on the occasional summer harvest of beluga

[[Page 40023]]

whale, subsistence seal hunts (ringed and spotted seals are primarily 
harvested in winter while bearded seals are hunted during July-
September in the Beaufort Sea), or the fall bowhead hunt.
    In addition, based on the measures described in BP's POC and CAA, 
the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures (described earlier in 
this document), and the project design itself, NMFS has determined that 
there will not be an unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence uses 
from BP's OBC seismic survey in the Simpson Lagoon of the Beaufort Sea.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    There are two marine mammal species listed as endangered under the 
ESA with confirmed or possible occurrence in the project area: The 
bowhead and humpback whales. In addition, there are two marine mammal 
species that are currently being proposed for listing under the ESA 
with confirmed occurrence in the proposed project area: Ringed and 
bearded seals. NMFS' Permits and Conservation Division consulted with 
NMFS' Alaska Regional Office Division of Protected Resources under 
section 7 of the ESA on the issuance of an IHA to BP under section 
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for this activity. A Biological Opinion was 
issued on June 21, 2012, which concludes that issuance of the IHA is 
not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the ESA-listed 
marine mammal species and species proposed for ESA-listing. In 
addition, analysis by NMFS AKRO showed that humpback whale will not be 
affected, therefore, no take was authorized. NMFS will issue an 
Incidental Take Statement under this Biological Opinion which contains 
reasonable and prudent measures with implementing terms and conditions 
to minimize the effects of take of listed species.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    NMFS prepared an EA that includes an analysis of potential 
environmental effects associated with NMFS' issuance of an IHA to BP to 
take marine mammals incidental to conducting its OBC seismic survey in 
the Simpson Lagoon area of the Beaufort Sea during the 2012 open water 
season. NMFS has finalized the EA and prepared a FONSI for this action. 
Therefore, preparation of an EIS is not necessary.

Authorization

    As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an IHA to BP 
to take marine mammals incidental to its 2012 OBC open-water seismic 
survey in the Simpson Lagoon area of the Beaufort Sea, Alaska, provided 
the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 
requirements are incorporated.

    Dated: June 29, 2012.
Helen M. Golde,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-16584 Filed 7-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P