[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 97 (Thursday, May 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31594-31612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11799]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XE473


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to an Anchor Retrieval Program in the 
Chukchi and Beaufort Seas

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

ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request 
for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS has received an application from Fairweather, LLC 
(Fairweather) for an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take 
marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to an anchor retrieval

[[Page 31595]]

program in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, Alaska, during the open-water 
season of 2016. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), 
NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an IHA to 
Fairweather to incidentally take, by Level B Harassments, marine 
mammals during the specified activity.

DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than June 20, 
2016.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed to Jolie 
Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, 
Silver Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox address for providing email 
comments is [email protected]. Comments sent via email, including all 
attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. NMFS is not 
responsible for comments sent to addresses other than those provided 
here.
    Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record 
and will generally be posted to http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.html without change. All Personal Identifying Information 
(for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the 
commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential 
Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
    An electronic copy of the application 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.html. The following associated 
documents are also available at the same internet address: Plan of 
Cooperation. Documents cited in this notice may also be viewed, by 
appointment, during regular business hours, at the aforementioned 
address.
    NMFS is also preparing draft Environmental Assessment (EA) in 
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and will 
consider comments submitted in response to this notice as part of that 
process. The draft EA will be posted at the foregoing internet site.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

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

Summary of Request

    On February 2, 2016, NMFS received an application from Fairweather 
for the taking of marine mammals incidental to conducting anchor 
retrieval activities in the U.S. Chukchi and Beaufort seas. After 
receiving NMFS comments, Fairweather made revisions and updated its IHA 
application and marine mammal mitigation and monitoring plan on 
February 8, 2016. NMFS considers the IHA application complete as of 
February 8, 2016.
    Fairweather proposes to retrieve anchor equipment left by Shell 
Offshore, Inc. (Shell) during its 2012 and 2015 exploration drilling 
programs in the U.S. Chukchi and Beaufort seas. The proposed activity 
would occur between July 1 and October 31, 2016. Noise generated from 
anchor handling activities and vessel's dynamic positioning thrusters 
could impact marine mammals in the vicinity of the activities. Take, by 
Level B harassments, of individuals of eight species of marine mammals 
may result from the specified activity.

Description of the Specified Activity

Dates and Duration

    Fairweather's proposed anchor retrieval activity is planned for the 
2016 open-water season (July through October, 2016). Vessels will 
mobilize from Dutch Harbor in late June to arrive in Kotzebue area by 
early July to start the anchor retrieval program. Fairweather 
anticipates operations will be complete by late August with all vessels 
out of the theater, with the exception of the Norseman II, which would 
remain in the area for final data collection until October.
    At each site, active anchor retrieval activities with the use of 
thrusters are expected to occur within two to seven days with the 
thrusters operating only part of the time; unseating typically takes 
less than half an hour for each anchor. Additionally, locating anchors 
using high-frequency sonar are expected to take one to three days at 
each site before and after anchor retrieval, although take of marine 
mammals is not expected to result from exposure to these high frequency 
sources. Therefore, operations that may result in incidental harassment 
to marine mammals would occur over approximately 10 days total on each 
site throughout the season with the noise sources operating only part 
of the time over those days.

Specified Geographic Region

    Fairweather will retrieve mooring systems that were left as part of 
Shell's exploration program at five locations (Figure 1 of the IHA 
application): (1) Good Hope Bay in Kotzebue Sound, (2) Burger A site in 
the Chukchi Sea, (3) Burger V site in the Chukchi Sea, (4) Kakapo in 
the Chukchi Sea, and (5) Sivulliq site in the Beaufort Sea. Using four 
specialized Anchor Handling Towing Supply Vessels (AHTSVs), the mooring 
systems are scheduled for retrieval in the open water season of 2016 
(July through September). AHTSVs will mobilize from Dutch Harbor in 
late June to arrive in Kotzebue area by early July. Multiple retrieval 
scenarios have been developed to retrieve all of the systems within one 
season; actual timing of retrieval at each of the sites will depend on 
vessel configuration, ice, weather, and timing of subsistence 
activities in Kotzebue and Beaufort Sea.
    The Kotzebue location is approximately 20 kilometers (km, 12 miles 
[mi]) offshore of the village of Kotzebue, on the northwest coast of

[[Page 31596]]

Alaska. The average depth in the Kotzebue project area is approximately 
9 meters (m, 29 feet [ft]). The Burger A and Burger V locations are 
approximately 100 km (64 mi) offshore and approximately 126 km (78 mi) 
northwest of the closest village of Wainwright. Water depths in the 
Burger prospect area average 40-48 m (130-157 ft). The Kakapo location 
is approximately 110 km (68 mi) offshore to the northwest of the 
village of Point Lay, also on the northwest coast of Alaska. Water 
depths in the Kakapo area are similar to Burger, averaging 40 m (130 
ft). The Sivulliq location is approximately 25 km (15 mi) offshore of 
the North Slope of Alaska in between Prudhoe Bay to the west and 
Kaktovik to the east. The average water depth at the Sivulliq project 
area is approximately 30-35 m (98-115 ft).

Detailed Description of Activities

I. Anchor Retrieval
    The goal of the retrieval program will be to complete operations 
efficiently and safely within one season, taking into consideration 
ice, weather, and subsistence harvest activities. Preliminary 
calculations indicate the vessels will have sufficient fuel onboard to 
have endurance to remain offshore with minimal fuel transfers at sea. 
The number of crew changes and vessel resupply will depend on the 
progress of the retrieval program, but, if necessary, will take place 
in Kotzebue, Wainwright, or Prudhoe Bay. Through the Olgoonik 
Fairweather, LLC joint venture, Fairweather has provided crew change 
and logistic support for multiple vessels in all three locations since 
2008. A small, flat-bottom crew change vessel is available at each 
location to transfer personnel, equipment, and groceries from shore to 
the AHTSV. Helicopters will not be used in this program, unless in an 
emergency situation.
    Vessels will mobilize from Dutch Harbor in late June to arrive in 
Kotzebue area by early July. Delmar (the owners of some of the mooring 
systems and onboard anchor handling technicians) and Fairweather have 
developed multiple scenarios to retrieve all of the systems within one 
season. Each AHTSV vessel is a different size and each will hold 
different amounts of equipment depending on deck space, storage reel 
space, chain locker space, storage location, and equipment type to meet 
stability requirements. If subsistence harvest activities are taking 
place, Fairweather will not retrieve anchors until cleared (by the 
communities) to do so. The vessels will move into the Chukchi Sea to 
retrieve the Burger and Kakapo anchors, depending on ice presence. As 
soon as the passage to Barrow around Point Barrow is ice free and safe 
for passage to the Beaufort Sea, two of the four vessels will 
immediately transit to the Sivulliq site. Typically, this occurs in 
late July/early August. Retrieval operations will be completed and 
vessels out of the Beaufort prior to the August 25th commencement for 
the Nuiqsut/Kaktovik bowhead whale harvest. Once the Sivulliq anchors 
are retrieved, the two vessels will return to the Chukchi Sea to 
complete any remaining operations.
    Once on site, the retrieval of each anchor and associated mooring 
system typically takes approximately four hours to complete. There is 
typically one to two vessels onsite, only one of which will be 
retrieving an anchor. Depending on weather and number of the mooring 
lines/anchors, one site is expected be completed between two and seven 
days. Anchors will be retrieved in one of two ways. The first is by 
locating the float rope connected to each of the mooring systems with 
the remotely operated vehicle (ROV) and retrieving the anchor from the 
opposite side of the anchor, working towards the anchor itself. The 
second method will be employed if the float rope cannot be located, or 
the vessel retrieving does not have an ROV. A grappling hook will be 
deployed and to grasp the mooring chain along the anchoring system. 
From that point, the anchor system will be pulled on the back deck with 
retrieval on the non-anchor side first, then the anchor side, and all 
the way to the anchor.
    Over this period, the anchor winch and thrusters will used to pull 
to unseat and retrieve anchors from the seafloor. Depending on water 
depth and anchors depth, this typically takes 15-20 minutes per anchor. 
Thruster usage while maintaining station using Dynamic Positioning (DP) 
will vary depending on weather and sea conditions. Thruster percentages 
are automatically increased and decreased based on the sea state and 
weather. If weather conditions are poor, the thrusters will need to 
work harder to maintain position. Anchors at Burger A and Kakapo 
locations are wet stored (they were not seated deeply in place) and 
will not require unseating.
    It has been reported that during anchor handling, noises from 
operating vessels' dynamic positioning thrusters, coupled with other 
machinery noises generated from anchor deployments and retrieving using 
winch and steel cables, were the loudest among all activities in the 
Arctic (LGL, et al. 2014). Although noise levels from anchor handling 
operations are not expected to cause hearing impairments or injury to 
marine mammals, these noise levels are high enough to cause behavioral 
harassment to marine mammals in the vicinity. These noises sources are 
non-impulsive, and are considered ``continuous'' in current NMFS noise 
analysis.
2. Use of Sonar Equipment
    If necessary, Fairweather proposes to use a geo-referenced 
interferometric sonar or multi-beam sonar with magnetometer to provide 
accurate imagery of the anchors and associated gear prior to retrieval 
and after the retrieval to confirm removal of anchor equipment. The 
device is mounted in a towfish towed by the Norseman II (just below the 
sea surface, or deep-towed). The sound frequencies used in sonar 
usually range from 100 to 500 kiloHertz (kHz); higher frequencies yield 
better resolution but less range. The actual device has not been 
decided, but the following systems would be representative of what 
would be used:
     A multi-beam echosounder operates at an rms source level 
of a maximum of 220 dB re 1 [mu]Pa @1m. The multi beam echosounder 
emits high frequency (240 kHz) energy in a fan-shaped pattern of 
equidistant or equiangular beam spacing. The beam width of the emitted 
sound energy in the along-track direction is 1.5 degrees, while the 
across track beam width is 1.8 degrees. (Teledyne Benthos Geophysical 
2008; Konsberg 2014).
     A single-beam echosounder operates at an rms source level 
of approximately 220 dB re 1 [mu]Pa @1m. The transducer selected uses a 
frequency of 210 kHz. The transducer's beam width is approximately 3 
degrees. (Teledyne Benthos Geophysical 2008; Konsberg 2014).
     A dual frequency sonar system will operate at about 400 
kHz and 900 kHz. The rms source level is 215 dB re 1[mu]Pa @1m. The 
sound energy is emitted in a narrow fan-shaped pattern, with a 
horizontal beam width of 0.45 degrees for 400 kHz and 0.25 degrees at 
900 kHz, with a vertical beam width of 50 degrees. (Teledyne Benthos 
Geophysical 2008; Konsberg 2014).
    In the 2013 Shell 90-day report (Bisson et al., 2013), JASCO 
measured all the various sources associated with the seismic survey 
program, including sonar. They measured the distance to the 160 dB 
threshold to be 130 m, resulting in an ensonified area of 0.053 km\2\. 
More importantly, available evidence suggests that marine mammals do 
not hear at frequencies above 180-200 kHz, and therefore we do not

[[Page 31597]]

believe that take is likely to result from exposure to these sources.
3. Ice Forecasting and Ice Management
    The anchor retrieval program is located in an area characterized by 
active sea ice movement, ice scouring, and storm surges. In 
anticipation of potential ice hazards that may be encountered, we will 
utilize real-time ice and weather forecasting to identify conditions 
that could put operations at risk, allowing the vessels to modify their 
activities accordingly. These observations will be made by experienced 
ice and weather specialists whose sole duty is to provide information 
and provide advice on any ice-related threats. These observers and 
advisors will be based in Anchorage. This real-time ice and weather 
forecasting will be available to personnel for planning purposes and as 
a tool to alert the fleet of impending hazardous ice and weather 
conditions. Potential data sources for ice forecasting and tracking 
include:
     Potential unmanned aerial support operated by Tulugaq II 
LLC from vessels for ice scouting.
     Radarsat Data Synthetic Aperture Radar--provides all-
weather imagery of ice conditions with very high resolution.
     Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS)--a 
satellite providing lower resolution visual and near infrared imagery.
     Other publically available remote sensing satellite data 
such as Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite, Oceansat-2 
Scatterometer, and Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer.
     Reports from Ice Specialists on the ice management vessel 
and anchor handler and from the Ice Observer on the vessels.
     Information from the NOAA ice centers and potentially the 
University of Colorado.
    The proposed 2016 anchor handling fleet will consist of two ice-
classed vessels. The only time ice management is likely for this 
project is around Point Barrow. The goal of the project is to transit 
into the Beaufort Sea as soon as ice conditions allow, which is 
typically in late July. If vessels transit into the area and ice moves 
in, they may be required to manage ice floes. Fairweather does not 
anticipate active ice management except for a few days near Point 
Barrow during the transit. Therefore, we have analyzed potential 
impacts of ice management for two days in the Barrow area.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity

    The Chukchi and Beaufort Seas support a diverse assemblage of 
marine mammals. Table 2 lists the 12 marine mammal species under NMFS 
jurisdiction with confirmed or possible occurrence in the proposed 
project area.

        Table 2--Marine Mammal Species With Confirmed or Possible Occurrence in the Proposed Action Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Population
             Species/stocks                  Conservation status               Habitat               estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas)--   ESA--Not Listed...........  Offshore, coastal, ice                3,710
 Eastern Chukchi Stock.                                               edges.
Beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas)--   ESA--Not Listed...........  Offshore, coastal, ice               32,453
 Beaufort Stock.                                                      edges.
Killer whale (Orcinus orca)............  ESA--Not Listed...........  Widely distributed........            2,084
Harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena)--    ESA--Not Listed...........  Coastal, inland waters,              48,215
 Bering Sea Stock.                                                    shallow offshore waters.
Bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus)--     ESA--Endangered...........  Pack ice, coastal.........           13,796
 Western Arctic Stock.
Gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus)--     ESA--Not Listed...........  Coastal, lagoons, shallow            19,126
 Eastern Pacific Stock.                                               offshore waters.
Minke whale (Balaenoptera                ESA--Not Listed...........  Shelf, coastal............              810
 acutorostrata).
Humpback whale (Megaptera                ESA--Endangered...........  Shelf slope, mostly            6,000-14,000
 novaeangliae)--Western North Pacific                                 pelagic.
 Stock.
Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus)--      ESA--Endangered...........  Shelf, coastal............            1,368
 Northeast Pacific Stock.
Bearded seal (Erignathus barbatus).....  ESA--Not listed...........  Pack ice, shallow offshore          155,000
                                                                      waters.
Spotted seal (Phoca largha)............  ESA--(Arctic DPS Not        Pack ice, coastal haul              391,000
                                          Listed).                    outs, offshore.
Ringed seal (Pusa hispida).............  ESA--Not listed...........  Land-fast & pack ice,               300,000
                                                                      offshore.
Ribbon seal (Histriophoca fasciata)....  ESA--Not Listed...........  Pack ice, offshore........   90,000-100,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Among these species, bowhead, humpback, and fin whales are listed 
as endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act 
(ESA). In addition, walrus and the polar bear could also occur in the 
U.S. Chukchi and Beaufort seas; however, these species are managed by 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and are not considered in 
this Notice of Proposed IHA.
    Of all these species, bowhead and beluga whales and ringed, 
bearded, and spotted seals are the species most frequently sighted in 
the proposed activity area. The proposed action area in Chukchi and 
Beaufort seas also include areas that have been identified as important 
for bowhead whale reproduction during summer and fall and for beluga 
whale feeding and reproduction in summer.
    Most spring-migrating bowhead whales would likely pass through the 
Chukchi Sea prior to the start of the planned anchor handling 
activities. However, a few whales that may remain in the Chukchi Sea 
during the summer could be encountered during the anchor handling 
activities or by transiting vessels. More encounters with bowhead 
whales would be likely to occur during the westward fall migration in 
late September through October. Most bowheads migrating in September 
and October appear to transit across the northern portion of the 
Chukchi Sea to the Chukotka coast before heading south toward the 
Bering Sea (Quakenbush et al. 2009). Some of these whales have traveled 
well north of the planned operations, but others have passed near to, 
or through, the proposed project area.
    Two stocks of beluga whales occur in the proposed anchor retrieving 
project areas: The Eastern Chukchi stock and the Beaufort Sea stock. 
The Eastern Chukchi Sea belugas move into coastal areas, including 
Kasegaluk Lagoon, in late June and animals are sighted in the area 
until about mid-July (Frost et al. 1993). This movement indicated some 
overlap in distribution with the Beaufort Sea beluga whale stock during 
late summer. Summer densities of beluga whales in offshore waters are 
expected

[[Page 31598]]

to be low, with somewhat higher densities in ice-margin and nearshore 
areas. If belugas are present during the summer, they are more likely 
to occur in or near the ice edge or close to shore during their 
northward migration. In the fall, beluga whale densities offshore in 
the Chukchi Sea are expected to be somewhat higher than in the summer 
because individuals of the eastern Chukchi Sea stock and the Beaufort 
Sea stock will be migrating south to their wintering grounds in the 
Bering Sea (Allen and Angliss 2014).
    Ringed seals are year-round residents in the Bering Sea, Norton and 
Kotzebue Sounds, and throughout the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas and are 
the most frequently encountered seal in the area (Allen and Angliss 
2015). They occur as far south as Bristol Bay in years of extensive ice 
coverage but generally are not abundant south of Norton Sound except in 
nearshore areas (Frost 1985). Ringed seals will likely be the most 
abundant marine mammal species encountered in the Chukchi Sea during 
anchor retrieval operations.
    During spring when pupping, breeding, and molting occur, spotted 
seals are found along the southern edge of the sea ice in the Okhotsk 
and Bering seas (Quakenbush 1988; Rugh et al. 1997). In late April and 
early May, adult spotted seals are often seen on the ice in female-pup 
or male-female pairs, or in male-female-pup triads. Sub-adults may be 
seen in larger groups of up to 200 animals. During the summer, spotted 
seals are found primarily in the Bering and Chukchi seas, but some 
range into the Beaufort Sea (Rugh et al. 1997; Lowry et al. 1998) from 
July until September. Spotted seals are expected to occur near the 
planned anchor handling activities in the Chukchi Sea, but they will 
likely be fewer in number than ringed seals.
    Bearded seals occur over the continental shelves of the Bering, 
Chukchi, and Beaufort seas (Burns 1981b). During the summer period, 
bearded seals occur mainly in relatively shallow areas because they are 
predominantly benthic feeders (Burns 1981b). During winter, most 
bearded seals in Alaskan waters are found in the Bering Sea. From mid-
April to June as the ice recedes, some of the bearded seals that 
overwinter in the Bering Sea migrate northward through the Bering 
Strait. During the summer they are found near the widely fragmented 
margin of sea ice covering the continental shelf of the Chukchi Sea and 
in nearshore areas of the central and western Beaufort Sea (Allen and 
Angliss 2015). Bearded seals are likely to be encountered during anchor 
handling activities, and greater numbers of bearded seals are likely to 
be encountered if the ice edge occurs nearby.
    Further information on the biology and local distribution of these 
species can be found in Fairweather's application (see ADDRESSES) and 
the NMFS Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Reports, which are available 
online at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/species.html.

Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals

    This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that the 
types of stressors associated with the specified activity (e.g., 
operation of dynamic positioning thrusters) have been observed to or 
are thought to impact marine mammals. The discussion may also include 
reactions that we consider to rise to the level of a take and those 
that we do not consider to rise to the level of a take (for example, 
with acoustics, we may include a discussion of studies that showed 
animals not reacting at all to sound or exhibiting barely measurable 
avoidance). This section is intended as a background of potential 
effects and does not consider either the specific manner in which this 
activity will be carried out or the mitigation that will be implemented 
or how either of those will shape the anticipated impacts from this 
specific activity. The ``Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment'' 
section later in this document will include a quantitative analysis of 
the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by this 
activity. The ``Negligible Impact Analysis'' section will include the 
analysis of how this specific activity will impact marine mammals and 
will consider the content of this section, the ``Estimated Take by 
Incidental Harassment'' section, the ``Proposed Mitigation'' section, 
and the ``Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat'' section to 
draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of this activity on the 
reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and from that on 
the affected marine mammal populations or stocks.
    When considering the influence of various kinds of sound on the 
marine environment, it is necessary to understand that different kinds 
of marine life are sensitive to different frequencies of sound. Based 
on available behavioral data, audiograms have been derived using 
auditory evoked potentials, anatomical modeling, and other data. 
Southall et al. (2007) designate ``functional hearing groups'' for 
marine mammals and estimate the lower and upper frequencies of 
functional hearing of the groups. The functional groups and the 
associated frequencies are indicated below (though animals are less 
sensitive to sounds at the outer edge of their functional range and 
most sensitive to sounds of frequencies within a smaller range 
somewhere in the middle of their functional hearing range):
     Low frequency cetaceans (13 species of mysticetes): 
Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 Hz and 
25 kHz;
     Mid-frequency cetaceans (32 species of dolphins, six 
species of larger toothed whales, and 19 species of beaked and 
bottlenose whales): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between 
approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;
     High frequency cetaceans (eight species of true porpoises, 
six species of river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana, and four species 
of cephalorhynchids): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between 
approximately 200 Hz and 180 kHz;
     Phocid pinnipeds (true seals): Functional hearing is 
estimated between 75 Hz to 100 kHz; and
     Otariid pinnipeds (sea lions and fur seals): Functional 
hearing is estimated between 100 Hz to 48 kHz.
    Species found in the vicinity of Fairweather anchor retrieval 
operation area include four low-frequency cetacean species (Bowhead 
whale, gray whale, humpback whale, and fin whale), two mid-frequency 
cetacean species (beluga whale and killer whale), one high-frequency 
cetacean species (harbor porpoise), and four pinniped species (ringed 
seal, spotted seal, bearded seal, and ribbon seal).
    The proposed Fairweather anchor retrieving operation could 
adversely affect marine mammal species and stocks by exposing them to 
elevated noise levels in the vicinity of the activity area. Noise 
sources that could potentially cause harassment include anchor 
retrieving activity and limited ice management.
    Exposure to high intensity sound for a sufficient duration may 
result in auditory effects such as a noise-induced threshold shift--an 
increase in the auditory threshold after exposure to noise (Finneran et 
al., 2005). Factors that influence the amount of threshold shift 
include the amplitude, duration, frequency content, temporal pattern, 
and energy distribution of noise exposure. The magnitude of hearing 
threshold shift normally decreases over time following cessation of the 
noise exposure. The amount of threshold shift just after exposure is 
the initial

[[Page 31599]]

threshold shift. If the threshold shift eventually returns to zero 
(i.e., the threshold returns to the pre-exposure value), it is a 
temporary threshold shift (Southall et al., 2007).
    Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of hearing)--When animals 
exhibit reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds must be louder for an 
animal to detect them) following exposure to an intense sound or sound 
for long duration, it is referred to as a noise-induced threshold shift 
(TS). An animal can experience temporary threshold shift (TTS) or 
permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS can last from minutes or hours to 
days (i.e., there is complete recovery), can occur in specific 
frequency ranges (i.e., an animal might only have a temporary loss of 
hearing sensitivity between the frequencies of 1 and 10 kHz), and can 
be of varying amounts (for example, an animal's hearing sensitivity 
might be reduced initially by only 6 dB or reduced by 30 dB). PTS is 
permanent, but some recovery is possible. PTS can also occur in a 
specific frequency range and amount as mentioned above for TTS.
    The following physiological mechanisms are thought to play a role 
in inducing auditory TS: Effects to sensory hair cells in the inner ear 
that reduce their sensitivity, modification of the chemical environment 
within the sensory cells, residual muscular activity in the middle ear, 
displacement of certain inner ear membranes, increased blood flow, and 
post-stimulatory reduction in both efferent and sensory neural output 
(Southall et al., 2007). The amplitude, duration, frequency, temporal 
pattern, and energy distribution of sound exposure all can affect the 
amount of associated TS and the frequency range in which it occurs. As 
amplitude and duration of sound exposure increase, so, generally, does 
the amount of TS, along with the recovery time. For intermittent 
sounds, less TS could occur than compared to a continuous exposure with 
the same energy (some recovery could occur between intermittent 
exposures depending on the duty cycle between sounds) (Kryter et al., 
1966; Ward, 1997). For example, one short but loud (higher SPL) sound 
exposure may induce the same impairment as one longer but softer sound, 
which in turn may cause more impairment than a series of several 
intermittent softer sounds with the same total energy (Ward, 1997). 
Additionally, though TTS is temporary, prolonged exposure to sounds 
strong enough to elicit TTS, or shorter-term exposure to sound levels 
well above the TTS threshold, can cause PTS, at least in terrestrial 
mammals (Kryter, 1985). Although in the case of Fairweather's anchor 
retrieving program, NMFS does not expect that animals would experience 
levels high enough or durations long enough to result in TS given that 
the noise levels from the operation is a very low.
    For marine mammals, published data are limited to the captive 
bottlenose dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and Yangtze finless 
porpoise (Finneran et al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a, 2010b; 
Finneran and Schlundt, 2010; Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a, 
2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b; Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et 
al., 2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For pinnipeds in water, data 
are limited to measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an elephant seal, 
and California sea lions (Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et al., 
2012b).
    Lucke et al. (2009) found a threshold shift (TS) of a harbor 
porpoise after exposing it to airgun noise with a received sound 
pressure level (SPL) at 200.2 dB (peak-to-peak) re: 1 [mu]Pa, which 
corresponds to a sound exposure level of 164.5 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa\2\ s 
after integrating exposure. NMFS currently uses the root-mean-square 
(rms) of received SPL at 180 dB and 190 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa as the 
threshold above which permanent threshold shift (PTS) could occur for 
cetaceans and pinnipeds, respectively. Because the airgun noise is a 
broadband impulse, one cannot directly determine the equivalent of rms 
SPL from the reported peak-to-peak SPLs. However, applying a 
conservative conversion factor of 16 dB for broadband signals from 
seismic surveys (McCauley, et al., 2000) to correct for the difference 
between peak-to-peak levels reported in Lucke et al. (2009) and rms 
SPLs, the rms SPL for TTS would be approximately 184 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa, 
and the received levels associated with PTS (Level A harassment) would 
be higher. This is still above NMFS' current 180 dB rms re: 1 [mu]Pa 
threshold for injury. However, NMFS recognizes that TTS of harbor 
porpoises is lower than other cetacean species empirically tested 
(Finneran & Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et al., 2002; Kastelein and 
Jennings, 2012).
    Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with 
conspecifics, and interpretation of environmental cues for purposes 
such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree 
(elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and 
frequency range of TTS, and the context in which it is experienced, TTS 
can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to serious 
(similar to those discussed in auditory masking, below). For example, a 
marine mammal may be able to readily compensate for a brief, relatively 
small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency range that occurs 
during a time where ambient noise is lower and there are not as many 
competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and longer 
duration of TTS sustained during time when communication is critical 
for successful mother/calf interactions could have more serious 
impacts. Also, depending on the degree and frequency range, the effects 
of PTS on an animal could range in severity, although it is considered 
generally more serious because it is a permanent condition. Of note, 
reduced hearing sensitivity as a simple function of aging has been 
observed in marine mammals, as well as humans and other taxa (Southall 
et al., 2007), so one can infer that strategies exist for coping with 
this condition to some degree, though likely not without cost.
    In addition, chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-
intensity, noise could cause masking at particular frequencies for 
marine mammals that utilize sound for vital biological functions (Clark 
et al. 2009). Acoustic masking is when other noises such as from human 
sources interfere with animal detection of acoustic signals such as 
communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental sounds 
important to marine mammals. Under certain circumstances, masking of 
important acoustic cues for marine mammals could inhibit their ability 
to maximize feeding or breeding opportunities, potentially effecting 
important vital rates that could translate to effects on survival and 
reproduction.
    Masking occurs at the frequency band which the animals utilize. 
Therefore, since noise generated from vessels dynamic positioning 
activity is mostly concentrated at low frequency ranges, it may have 
less effect on high frequency echolocation sounds by odontocetes 
(toothed whales). However, lower frequency man-made noises are more 
likely to affect detection of communication calls and other potentially 
important natural sounds such as surf and prey noise. It may also 
affect communication signals when they occur near the noise band and 
thus reduce the communication space of animals (e.g., Clark et al. 
2009) and cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote et al. 2004; Holt 
et al. 2009).
    Unlike TS, masking, which can occur over large temporal and spatial 
scales, can potentially affect the species at population, community, or 
even ecosystem levels, as well as individual levels. Masking affects 
both senders and

[[Page 31600]]

receivers of the signals and could have long-term chronic effects on 
marine mammal species and populations. Recent science suggests that low 
frequency ambient sound levels have increased by as much as 20 dB (more 
than 3 times in terms of sound pressure level (SPL)) in the world's 
ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of these increases are from 
distant shipping (Hildebrand 2009). All anthropogenic noise sources, 
such as those from vessel traffic and anchor retrieving contribute to 
the elevated ambient noise levels, thus increasing potential for or 
severity of masking.
    Finally, exposure of marine mammals to certain sounds could lead to 
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al. 1995), such as: Changing 
durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or 
moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities; 
changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as 
socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive 
behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of 
areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g., 
pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).
    The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise 
depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and 
their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, 
experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et 
al. 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received level of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa 
(rms) to predict the onset of behavioral harassment from impulse noises 
(such as impact pile driving), and 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for 
continuous noises (such as operating DP thrusters). No impulse noise is 
expected from the Fairweather's anchor retrieval operation. For the 
Fairweather's anchor retrieval operation, the 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) 
threshold is considered because only continuous noise sources would be 
generated.
    The biological significance of many of these behavioral 
disturbances is difficult to predict. However, the consequences of 
behavioral modification could be biologically significant if the change 
affects growth, survival, and/or reproduction, which depends on the 
severity, duration, and context of the effects.

Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat

    Project activities that could potentially impact marine mammal 
habitats by causing acoustical injury to prey resources and disturbing 
benthic habitat from anchor retrieving. Regarding the former, however, 
acoustical injury from thruster noise is unlikely. Previous noise 
studies (e.g., Greenlaw et al. 1988, Davis et al. 1998, Christian et 
al. 2004) with cod, crab, and schooling fish found little or no injury 
to adults, larvae, or eggs when exposed to impulsive noises exceeding 
220 dB. Continuous noise levels from ship thrusters are generally below 
180 dB, and do not create great enough pressures to cause tissue or 
organ injury. However, the elevated noise levels could cause temporary 
habitat abandoning by prey species.
    Retrieving of the anchors will result in some seafloor disturbance 
and temporary increases in water column turbidity. Previous drilling 
units were held in place during operations with systems of six-eight 
anchors for each unit. The embedment type anchors were designed to 
embed into the seafloor thereby providing the required resistance. The 
anchors generally penetrated the seafloor on contact. Both the anchor 
and anchor chain will disturb sediments during the retrieval process, 
creating a trench or depression with surrounding berms where the 
displaced sediment is mounded. Some sediment will be suspended in the 
water column during the removal of the anchors. The depression with 
associated berm, collectively known as an anchor scar, remains when the 
anchor is removed. Shell estimated that each anchor would impact a 
seafloor area of up to about 233 m\2\ (2,510 ft\2\). We assume the 
retrieval process will result in disturbance of this area, but the 
anchors will be removed and the area will most likely be recolonized.
    Over time the anchor scars will be filled due to natural movement 
of sediment. The duration of the scars depends upon the energy of the 
system, water depth, ice scour, and sediment type. Anchor scars were 
visible under low energy conditions in the North Sea for five to ten 
years after retrieval. Scars typically do not form or persist in sandy 
mud or sand sediments but may last for nine years in hard clays 
(Centaur Associates, Inc. 1984). The energy regime, plus possible 
effects of ice gouge in the Arctic Ocean, suggests that anchor scars 
will be refilled faster than in the North Sea.

Proposed Mitigation

    In order to issue an incidental take authorization (ITA) 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 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 (where relevant). NMFS 
implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(11) require incidental 
take applications to include information about the availability and 
feasibility of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting the 
activity and other means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, and on 
their availability for subsistence uses.
    For the proposed Fairweather open-water anchor retrieval operations 
in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, Fairweather and its contractor worked 
with NMFS to propose the following mitigation measures to minimize the 
potential impacts to marine mammals in the project vicinity as a result 
of the activities. The primary purpose of these mitigation measures is 
to detect marine mammals and avoid vessel interactions during the 
anchor retrieval operation. The following are mitigation measures 
proposed to be included in the IHA (if issued).
(a) Establishing and Monitoring Exclusion Zone for Anchor Retrieval and 
Ice Management
    (1) Protected species observers (PSOs) would establish and monitor 
a safety zone of 500 m for anchor retrieval activity and ice 
management. The modeled safety zone for anchor retrieval is 220 m from 
the source.
    (2) When the vessel is positioned on-site, the PSOs will `clear' 
the area by observing the 500 m safety zone for 30 minutes; if no 
marine mammals are observed within those 30 minutes, anchor retrieval 
or ice management will commence.
    (3) If a marine mammal(s) is observed within the 500 m of the 
anchor retrieval and/or ice management safety zone during the clearing, 
the PSOs will continue to watch until the animal(s) is gone and has not 
returned for 15 minutes if the sighting was a pinniped, or 30 minutes 
if it was a cetacean.
    (4) Once the PSOs have cleared the area, anchor retrieval or ice 
management operations may commence.
    (5) Should a marine mammal(s) be observed within or approaching the 
500-m safety zone during the retrieval or ice management operations, 
the PSOs will monitor and carefully record any reactions observed.
(b) Establishing and Monitoring Exclusion Zone for Sonar Activity
    Although NMFS does not expect marine mammals would be taken by

[[Page 31601]]

high-frequency sonar used for locating anchors, Fairweather requests 
that the following mitigation and monitoring measures related to sonar 
operations be implemented
    (1) PSOs would establish and monitor an exclusion zone of 500 m for 
sonar activity. The modeled exclusion zone for sonar activity is 220 m 
from the source.
    (2) Prior to starting the sonar activity, the PSOs will `clear' the 
area by observing the 500 m exclusion zone for 30 minutes; if no marine 
mammals are observed within those 30 minutes, sonar activity will 
commence.
    (3) If a marine mammal(s) is observed within the 500-m exclusion 
zone during the clearing, the PSOs will continue to watch until the 
animal(s) is gone and has not returned for 15 minutes if the sighting 
was a pinniped, or 30 minutes if it was a cetacean.
    (4) Once the PSOs have cleared the area, sonar activity may 
commence.
(c) Establishing Zones of Influence (ZOIs)
    PSOs would establish and monitor ZOIs where the received level is 
120 dB during Fairweather's anchor retrieval operation and where the 
received level is 160 dB during sonar activity.
(d) Vessel Speed or Course Measures
    If a marine mammal is detected outside the 500 m sonar exclusion 
zone for sonar activities or during transit between sites, based on its 
position and the relative motion, is likely to enter those zones, the 
vessel's speed and/or direct course may, when practical and safe, be 
changed. The marine mammal activities and movements relative to the 
vessels shall be closely monitored to ensure that the marine mammal 
does not approach within either zone. If the mammal appears likely to 
enter the respective zone, further mitigation actions will be taken, 
i.e., either further course alterations or shut down in the case of the 
sonar. During actual anchor handling, the vessel is stationary on site.
    In addition, the vessel shall reduce its speed to 5 kt (9.26 km/h) 
or lower when within 900 ft (274 m) of cetaceans or pinnipeds. Further, 
Fairweather shall avoid transits within designated North Pacific right 
whale critical habitat. If transit within North Pacific right whale 
critical habitat cannot be avoided, vessel operators are requested to 
exercise extreme caution and observe the of 10 kt (18.52 km/h) vessel 
speed restriction while within North Pacific right whale critical 
habitat. Within the North Pacific right whale critical habitat, all 
vessels shall keep 2,625 ft (800 m) away from any observed North 
Pacific right whales and avoid approaching whales head-on consistent 
with vessel safety.
(e) Shutdown Measures
    If an animal enters or is approaching the 500 m exclusion zone, 
sonar will be shut down immediately. Sonar activity will not resume 
until the marine mammal has cleared the exclusion zone. PSOs will also 
collect behavioral information on marine mammals beyond the exclusion 
zone.

Mitigation Conclusions

    NMFS has carefully evaluated Fairweather's proposed 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 measures are 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.
    Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS should be able to 
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on 
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of 
the general goals listed below:
    1. Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals 
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).
    2. A reduction in the numbers of marine mammals (total number or 
number at biologically important time or location) exposed to received 
levels of activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals 
(this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing harassment takes 
only).
    3. A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at 
biologically important time or location) individuals would be exposed 
to received levels of activities expected to result in the take of 
marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing 
harassment takes only).
    4. A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number 
or number at biologically important time or location) to received 
levels of activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals 
(this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing the severity of 
harassment takes only).
    5. Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal 
habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that 
block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas, 
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/disturbance 
of habitat during a biologically important time.
    6. For monitoring directly related to mitigation--an increase in 
the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more 
effective implementation of the mitigation.
    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as 
well as other measures. considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily 
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of 
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammals species or 
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, 
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance. Proposed measures to 
ensure availability of such species or stock for taking for certain 
subsistence uses are discussed later in this document (see ``Impact on 
Availability of Affected Species or Stock for Taking for Subsistence 
Uses'' section).

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting

    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 
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. 
Fairweather submitted a marine mammal monitoring plan as part of the 
IHA application. The plan may be modified or supplemented based on 
comments or new information received from the public during the public 
comment period or from the peer review panel (see the ``Monitoring Plan 
Peer Review'' section later in this document).
    Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should accomplish one or 
more of the following general goals:
    1. An increase in our understanding of the likely occurrence of 
marine mammal species in the vicinity of the action, i.e., presence, 
abundance, distribution, and/or density of species.

[[Page 31602]]

    2. An increase in our understanding of the nature, scope, or 
context of the likely exposure of marine mammal species to any of the 
potential stressor(s) associated with the action (e.g. sound or visual 
stimuli), through better understanding of one or more of the following: 
The action itself and its environment (e.g. sound source 
characterization, propagation, and ambient noise levels); the affected 
species (e.g. life history or dive pattern); the likely co-occurrence 
of marine mammal species with the action (in whole or part) associated 
with specific adverse effects; and/or the likely biological or 
behavioral context of exposure to the stressor for the marine mammal 
(e.g. age class of exposed animals or known pupping, calving or feeding 
areas).
    3. An increase in our understanding of how individual marine 
mammals respond (behaviorally or physiologically) to the specific 
stressors associated with the action (in specific contexts, where 
possible, e.g., at what distance or received level).
    4. An increase in our understanding of how anticipated individual 
responses, to individual stressors or anticipated combinations of 
stressors, may impact either: The long-term fitness and survival of an 
individual; or the population, species, or stock (e.g. through effects 
on annual rates of recruitment or survival).
    5. An increase in our understanding of how the activity affects 
marine mammal habitat, such as through effects on prey sources or 
acoustic habitat (e.g., through characterization of longer-term 
contributions of multiple sound sources to rising ambient noise levels 
and assessment of the potential chronic effects on marine mammals).
    6. An increase in understanding of the impacts of the activity on 
marine mammals in combination with the impacts of other anthropogenic 
activities or natural factors occurring in the region.
    7. An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of 
mitigation and monitoring measures.
    8. An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals 
(through improved technology or methodology), both specifically within 
the safety zone (thus allowing for more effective implementation of the 
mitigation) and in general, to better achieve the above goals.

Proposed Monitoring Measures

    Monitoring will provide information on the numbers of marine 
mammals potentially affected by the anchor retrieval operation and 
facilitate real-time mitigation to prevent injury of marine mammals by 
vessel traffic. These goals will be accomplished in the Chukchi and 
Beaufort seas during 2016 by conducting vessel-based monitoring to 
document marine mammal presence and distribution in the vicinity of the 
operation area.
    Visual monitoring by Protected Species Observers (PSOs) during 
anchor retrieval operation, and periods when the operation is not 
occurring, will provide information on the numbers of marine mammals 
potentially affected by the activity. Vessel-based PSOs onboard the 
vessels will record the numbers and species of marine mammals observed 
in the area and any observable reaction of marine mammals to the anchor 
retrieval operation in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas.

Visual-Based PSOs

    Vessel-based monitoring for marine mammals would be done by trained 
protected species observers (PSOs) throughout the period of anchor 
retrieval operation. The observers would monitor the occurrence of 
marine mammals onboard vessels during all daylight periods during 
operation. PSO duties would include watching for and identifying marine 
mammals; recording their numbers, distances, and reactions to the 
survey operations; and documenting ``take by harassment.''
    A sufficient number of PSOs would be required onboard each survey 
vessel to meet the following criteria:
     100% monitoring coverage during all periods of anchor 
retrieval operations in daylight;
     Maximum of 4 consecutive hours on watch per PSO; and
     Maximum of 12 hours of watch time per day per PSO.
    PSO teams will consist of Inupiat observers and experienced field 
biologists. Each vessel will have an experienced field crew leader to 
supervise the PSO team. The total number of PSOs may decrease later in 
the season as the duration of daylight decreases.
(1) PSOs Qualification and Training
    Lead PSOs and most PSOs would be individuals with experience as 
observers during marine mammal monitoring projects in Alaska or other 
offshore areas in recent years. New or inexperienced PSOs would be 
paired with an experienced PSO or experienced field biologist so that 
the quality of marine mammal observations and data recording is kept 
consistent.
    Resumes for candidate PSOs would be provided to NMFS for review and 
acceptance of their qualifications. Inupiat observers would be 
experienced in the region and familiar with the marine mammals of the 
area. All observers would complete a NMFS-approved observer training 
course designed to familiarize individuals with monitoring and data 
collection procedures.
(2) Specialized Field Equipment
    The PSOs shall be provided with Fujinon 7 X 50 or equivalent 
binoculars for visual based monitoring onboard all vessels.
    Laser range finders (Leica LRF 1200 laser rangefinder or 
equivalent) would be available to assist with distance estimation.

Marine Mammal Behavioral Response to Vessel Disturbance Study

    As part of the Chukchi Sea Environmental Studies Program (CSESP), 
marine mammal biologists collected behavioral response data on walruses 
and seals to the vessel. The objectives of the observer on the CSESP 
program were to collect information on marine mammal distribution and 
density estimates using standard line-transect theory; in other words, 
the program was not a mitigation program for any particular seismic 
activity. Because the vessels in this program will be transiting a 
large portion of the time, Fairweather proposes to utilize this 
opportunity to collect information on responses of marine mammals, 
particularly walruses and seals, to vessel disturbance.
    As part of the standard Fairweather's observation protocol, 
observers will record the initial and subsequent behaviors of marine 
mammals, a methodology they refer to as `focal following'. Marine 
mammals will be monitored and observed until they disappear from the 
PSO's view (PSOs may have to follow the marine mammals by moving to new 
locations in order to keep the marine mammals in constant view). 
Observers will also record any perceived reactions that marine mammals 
may have in response to the vessel. When following the animal observers 
will use either a notebook or voice recorder to note any changes in 
behavior and the time when these changes occur. Time of first 
observation, time of changes in behavior, and time last seen will be 
recorded. Behaviors and changes in behaviors of marine mammals will be 
recorded as long as they are in view of the boat. After the animal is 
out of sight, PSOs will summarize the observation in the notes field of 
the electronic data collection platform. It may be difficult to find 
the animal being followed after

[[Page 31603]]

it dives and if this happens, PSO will stop focal follow observation.
    For groups of marine that are too large to monitor each animal one 
or more focal animals, e.g., cow/calf pair, subadult female, adult 
male, etc., will be chosen to monitor until no longer observable. For a 
sighting with more than one animal, the most common behavior of the 
group will be recorded. Focal animals will be chosen without bias in 
relation to age and sex, but as observations accumulate and specific 
age/sex categories are underrepresented, focal animals may be chosen 
from those underrepresented categories if possible.
    A separate section in the 90-day report (see below) will be 
provided with a summary of results of vessel disturbance, with the 
ultimate goal of a peer-reviewed publication.

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 has established an independent peer review panel to review 
Fairweather's 4MP for the proposed anchor retrieval operation in the 
Chukchi and Beaufort seas. The panel met via web conference in early 
March 2016, and provided comments to NMFS in mid-April 2016. NMFS is 
currently working with Fairweather on recommendations made by the 
panel, and will incorporate appropriate changes into the monitoring 
requirements of the IHA (if issued).

Reporting Measures

(1) Monitoring Reports
    The results of Fairweather's anchor retrieval program monitoring 
reports would be presented in weekly, monthly, and 90-day reports, as 
required by NMFS under the proposed IHA. The initial final reports are 
due to NMFS within 90 days after the expiration of the IHA (if issued). 
The reports will include:
     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);
     Summaries that represent an initial level of 
interpretation of the efficacy, measurements, and observations, rather 
than raw data, fully processed analyses, or a summary of operations and 
important observations;
     Information on distances marine mammals are sighted from 
operations and the associated noise isopleth for active sound sources 
(i.e., anchor retrieval, ice management, side scan sonar);
     Analyses of the effects of various factors influencing 
detectability of marine mammals (e.g., sea state, number of observers, 
and fog/glare);
     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;
     Estimates of uncertainty in all take estimates, with 
uncertainty expressed by the presentation of confidence limits, a 
minimum-maximum, posterior probability distribution, or another 
applicable method, with the exact approach to be selected based on the 
sampling method and data available;
     A clear comparison of authorized takes and the level of 
actual estimated takes; and
    The ``90-day'' reports will be subject to review and comment by 
NMFS. Any recommendations made by NMFS must be addressed in the final 
report prior to acceptance by NMFS.
(2) Notification of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
    In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly 
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the IHA, 
such as a serious injury, or mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear 
interaction, and/or entanglement), Fairweather would immediately cease 
the specified activities and immediately report the incident to the 
Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, and the Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinators. The 
report would include the following information:
     Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the 
incident;
     Name and type of vessel involved;
     Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
     Description of the incident;
     Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding 
the incident;
     Water depth;
     Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, 
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
     Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 
hours preceding the incident;
     Species identification or description of the animal(s) 
involved;
     Fate of the animal(s); and
     Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if 
equipment is available).
    Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the 
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS would work with Fairweather 
to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further 
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Fairweather would not be 
able to resume its activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, 
or telephone.
    In the event that Fairweather discovers a dead marine mammal, and 
the lead PSO determines that the cause of the 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), Fairweather would 
immediately report the incident to the Chief of the Permits and 
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the 
NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline and/or by email to the Alaska Regional 
Stranding Coordinators. The report would include the same information 
identified in the paragraph above. Activities would be able to continue 
while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS would work 
with Fairweather to determine whether modifications in the activities 
are appropriate.
    In the event that Fairweather discovers a dead marine mammal, and 
the lead PSO determines that the death is not associated with or 
related to the activities authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously 
wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced decomposition, or 
scavenger damage), Fairweather would report the incident to the Chief 
of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, and the NMFS Alaska Stranding Hotline and/or by email 
to the Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinators, within 24 hours of the 
discovery. Fairweather would provide photographs or video footage (if 
available) or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to 
NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. Fairweather 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

[[Page 31604]]

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].
    Takes by Level B harassments of some species are anticipated as a 
result of Fairweather's proposed anchor retrieval operation. NMFS 
expects marine mammal takes could result from noise propagation from 
anchor retrieving activities, which includes the operation of dynamic 
thrusters and other machinery noises generated from anchor retrieving 
using winch and steel cables. NMFS does not expect marine mammals would 
be taken by collision with vessels, because the vessels will be moving 
at low speeds, and PSOs on the vessels will be monitoring for marine 
mammals and will be able to alert the vessels to avoid any marine 
mammals in the area.
    For non-impulse sounds, such as those produced by the dynamic 
positioning thrusters and anchor handling during Fairweather's anchor 
retrieval operation, NMFS uses the 180 and 190 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa 
isopleth to indicate the onset of Level A harassment for cetaceans and 
pinnipeds, respectively; and the 120 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa isopleth for 
Level B harassment of all marine mammals.
    The estimates of the numbers of each species of marine mammal that 
could potentially be exposed to sound associated with the anchor 
retrieval activity are calculated by multiplying the area of ensonified 
areas by animal densities. Specifically, the ensonified area for anchor 
retrieving activities is the area where received noise levels are above 
120 dB, during the periods when these activities would be occurring. 
For the 2015 IHA application for Shell's exploration drilling in the 
Chukchi Sea (Shell 2015), JASCO modeled the anchor handling activity 
using their estimated distance to 120 dB isopleths at 14,000 m (JASCO 
2013). This yields an estimated 120 dB ensonified area of 615 km\2\.
    The duration of sound-producing activity was calculated for each 
site. Although each anchor site has different configurations and 
numbers of anchors, Fairweather assumes it would take up to seven days 
per site to remove all anchors. Because the vessels will not be 
operating at full power during the entire time, Fairweather assumes 
half of the time (3.5 days) will be exceeding 120 dB. With five (5) 
anchor sites, this results in 17.5 days of anchor handling activity 
that may result in disturbance.

Description of the Sound Sources

    Anchor Retrieving: During Shell's 2012 exploratory program in the 
Beaufort and Chukchi seas, sound source verifications (SSVs) were 
conducted of all activities conducted near both Burger and Sivulliq 
during the open water season (LGL et al. 2014). Detailed descriptions 
of the sound measurements and analysis methods can be found in Chapter 
3 of the Shell 2012 90-day report to NMFS (Austin et al. 2013). Anchor 
handling activities were measured at 143 dB at 860 m, the loudest 
activity was when ``seating'' the anchors (LGL et al. 2014). It is 
assumed that the unseating of anchors will be similar in power needed 
from the vessel, so this source is suitable to estimate area 
ensonified. In the report, JASCO extrapolated the distance to the 120 
dB threshold using a simple spreading loss of 20 log R, resulting in a 
radius of 12,000 m. This radius was used to estimate the area 
ensonified for this application.
    Each anchor site has different configurations and numbers of 
anchors, but Fairweather assume it will take up to seven (7) days per 
site to remove all anchors. Because the vessels will not be operating 
at full power during the entire time, Fairweather assumed half of the 
time (3.5 days) will be utilizing the high power to unseat anchors. 
With five (5) anchor sites, this results in 17.5 days of anchor 
handling activity that may result in disturbance.
    Ice Management: Although highly unlikely, it may be necessary for 
ice management near Point Barrow while transiting to the Sivulliq site. 
During exploration drilling operations on the Burger Prospect in 2012, 
encroachment of sea ice required the Discoverer to temporarily depart 
the drill site. While it was standing by to the south, ice management 
vessels remained at the drill site to protect buoys that were attached 
to the anchors. Sounds produced by vessels managing the ice were 
recorded and the distance to the 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa rms threshold was 
calculated to occur at 9.6 km (JASCO et al. 2014). The total calculated 
ensonified area would be 290 km\2\.
    Fairweather assumes that it could take place over a two (2) day 
period near Point Barrow.

Estimates of Marine Mammal Densities

    The densities of marine mammals per species were calculated using 
2009-2014 Aerial Surveys of Arctic Marine Mammals (ASAMM) data (http://www.afsc.noaa.gov/nmml/cetacean/bwasp/index.php) for bowhead, beluga, 
and gray whales in the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas and the Shell 2015 IHA 
application (Shell 2015) for all other species. The ASAMM density data 
are separated by depth, month, year, and location. The maximum 
calculated density with the depth strata in which the anchor system is 
located, the month (based on project activity timing), year (maximum of 
2009-2014), and location (Chukchi vs. Beaufort) was used. For example, 
anchor handling only occurs in the summer, so density data from July 
and August were used; side scan sonar may occur at the beginning and 
end of the project, so density data were separated into summer and 
fall. The Shell 2015 IHA included average and maximum density estimates 
for area, month, and location. The maximum calculated density was used 
in take estimates for these other species, regardless of area, month, 
or location.
Bowhead Whale
    The bowhead whale density estimate is separated into the Chukchi 
Sea and Beaufort Seas based on the ASAMM study areas for aerial data 
collected 2008-2014. For each depth stratum, the maximum density 
estimate was used for summer and fall (Table 3). The bowhead whale 
densities in the Chukchi Sea range up to 0.0145 whales/km\2\ in the 
summer and up to 0.1813 whales/km\2\ in the fall, with the highest 
density for both seasons in the 50-200 m north region. The bowhead 
whale densities in the Beaufort Sea range up to 0.2883 whales/km\2\ in 
the summer and up to 0.1310 whales/km\2\ in the fall, both in the east 
21-50 m region.
Beluga Whale
    The beluga whale density estimate is separated into the Chukchi Sea 
and Beaufort Seas based on the ASAMM study areas for aerial data 
collected 2008-2014. For each depth stratum, the maximum density 
estimate was used for summer and fall (Table 3). The beluga whale 
densities in the Chukchi Sea range up to 0.1633 whales/km\2\ in the 
summer in the 0-35 m north region and up to 0.0495 whales/km\2\ in the 
fall in the 50-200 m north region. The beluga whale densities in the 
Beaufort Sea range up to 0.7924 whales/km\2\ in the summer and up to 
0.1425 whales/km\2\ in the fall, both in the east 51-200 m east region.
Gray Whale
    The gray whale density estimate is only in the Chukchi Sea based on 
the ASAMM study areas for aerial data collected 2008-2014. For each 
depth

[[Page 31605]]

stratum, the maximum density estimate was used for summer and fall 
(Table 3). The gray whale densities in the Chukchi Sea range up to 
0.2594 whales/km\2\ in the summer and up to 0.1732 whales/km\2\ in the 
fall, with the highest density for both seasons in the 50-200 m south 
region.
Other Cetaceans
    Shell (2015) derived average and maximum density estimates for 
summer and fall from all available open water research and monitoring 
data. For the purposes of this project, the maximum of the density 
estimates were used, regardless of whether the density was for summer 
or fall (Table 3). The maximum density is 0.0044 whales/km\2\ for the 
harbor porpoise; 0.0004 whales/km\2\ for the fin, humpback, and killer 
whale; and 0.0006 whales/km\2\ for the minke whale.
Seals
    Shell (2015) derived average and maximum density estimates for 
summer and fall from all available open water research and monitoring 
data. For the purposes of this project, the maximum of the density 
estimates were used, regardless of whether the density was for summer 
or fall (Table 3). The maximum density is 0.6075 seals/km\2\ for the 
ringed seal; 0.0203 seals/km\2\ for the bearded seal; and 0.0122 seals/
km\2\ for the spotted seal.

            Table 3--Expected Densities of Whales and Seals in Area of the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Density (#/km\2\)
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                     Species                                Chukchi Sea                    Beaufort Sea
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Summer           Fall           Summer           Fall
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bowhead whale...................................          0.0145          0.1813          0.2883          0.1310
Beluga whale....................................          0.1633          0.0495          0.7924          0.1425
Gray whale......................................          0.2594          0.1732              NA              NA
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
Fin whale.......................................              0.0004
                                                                 0
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale..................................                              0.0004
Minke whale.....................................                              0.0006
Harbor porpoise.................................                              0.0044
Killer whale....................................                              0.0004
Ringed seal.....................................                              0.6075
Bearded seal....................................                              0.0203
Spotted seal....................................                              0.0122
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Calculation of Exposures

    The estimates of the numbers of each marine mammal species that 
could potentially be exposed to sound associated with the anchor 
retrieval program, specifically the unseating of anchors, potential 
side scan sonar survey, and potential ice management, were estimated 
using multiplying the following three variables: (1) The area (in 
km\2\) of ensonification for disturbance for each activity, (2) the 
duration (in days) of the sound activity, and (3) the density (# of 
marine mammals/km\2\) as summarized in Table 3. It is important to note 
that these estimates are based on worst-case (and unlikely) sound 
levels and duration, and the maximum reported density estimates that do 
not account for the movement of animals near the anchor site during 
retrieval activities.
    Since the two stocks occur in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas and one 
cannot distinguish them visually, the pooled densities in different 
seasons represent the presence of both stocks. The current abundance 
estimate for the Eastern Chukchi Sea Stock is 3,710 individuals and the 
abundance estimate for the Beaufort Sea Stock is 39,258 individuals 
(Allen and Angliss 2014), resulting in a combined total estimate of 
42,968 individuals. The Eastern Chukchi Sea Stock is, therefore, 
considered to represent 8.6% of the combined population and the 
Beaufort Sea Stock is considered to represent 91.4% of the same. 
Therefore, the estimated takes of each beluga stock were based on the 
proportion of these stocks, with 8.6% account for the Eastern Chukchi 
Sea Stock, and 91.4% account for the Beaufort Sea Stock for both summer 
and fall.
    A summary of the total number of estimated exposures per species, 
per sea, and per season is provided in Table 4.

             Table 4--Summary of Number of Marine Mammals Potentially Exposed to Level B Harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Percent of
             Species                Chukchi Sea    Beaufort Sea      Abundance         Total         stock or
                                                                                                    population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bowhead whale...................           37.41          620.51          19,534             658            3.37
Gray whale......................          197.41               0          20,990             197            0.94
Beluga whale (E. Chukchi stock).           33.55           19.98           3,710              54            1.47
Beluga whale (Beaufort stock)...          356.56          212.38          39,258             569            1.45
Fin whale.......................            3.68               0          10,103               4            0.04
Humpback whale..................            3.68            0.86           1,652               4            0.27
Minke whale.....................            5.52            1.29           1,233               7            0.55
Harbor porpoise.................           40.46            9.48          48,215              50            0.10
Killer whale....................            3.68            0.86           2,347               4            0.19
Ringed seal.....................        5,586.67        1,308.58         249,000           6,895            2.77
Bearded seal....................          186.68           43.73         155,000             230            0.15

[[Page 31606]]

 
Spotted seal....................          112.19           26.28         460,268             138            0.03
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The estimated Level B harassment takes as a percentage of the 
marine mammal stock are less than 3.37% in all cases (Table 4). The 
highest percent of population estimated to be taken is 3.37% by Level B 
harassment of the bowhead whale.

Analysis and Preliminary Determinations

Negligible Impact

    Negligible impact is ``an impact resulting from the specified 
activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably 
likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on 
annual rates of recruitment or survival'' (50 CFR 216.103). A 
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of Level B harassment takes, 
alone, is not enough information on which to base an impact 
determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of 
marine mammals that might be ``taken'' through behavioral harassment, 
NMFS must consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any 
responses (their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any 
responses (critical reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), as 
well as the number and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, 
the number of estimated mortalities, effects on habitat, and the status 
of the species.
    To avoid repetition, this discussion of our analyses generally 
applies to all the species listed in Table 4, given that the 
anticipated effects of Fairweather's anchor retrieving operation on 
marine mammals (taking into account the proposed mitigation) are 
expected to be relatively similar in nature. Where there are meaningful 
differences between species or stocks, or groups of species, in 
anticipated individual responses to activities, impact of expected take 
on the population due to differences in population status, or impacts 
on habitat, they are pointed out below.
    No injuries or mortalities are anticipated to occur as a result 
Fairweather's anchor retrieving operation, and none are proposed to be 
authorized. Additionally, animals in the area are not expected to incur 
hearing impairment (i.e., TTS or PTS) or non-auditory physiological 
effects. The takes that are anticipated and authorized are expected to 
be limited to short-term Level B behavioral harassment in the form of 
brief startling reaction and/or temporarily vacating the area.
    Any effects on marine mammals are generally expected to be 
restricted to avoidance of a limited area around Fairweather's proposed 
activities and short-term changes in behavior, falling within the MMPA 
definition of ``Level B harassment.'' Mitigation measures, such as 
controlled vessel speed and dedicated marine mammal observers, will 
ensure that takes are within the level being analyzed. In all cases, 
the effects are expected to be short-term, with no lasting biological 
consequence.
    Of the 11 marine mammal species likely to occur in the proposed 
anchor retrieving area, bowhead, humpback, and fin whales are listed as 
endangered or threatened under the ESA. These species are also 
designated as ``depleted'' under the MMPA. 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.
    The project area of the Fairweather's proposed activities is within 
areas that have been identified as biologically important areas (BIAs) 
for feeding for the gray and bowhead whales and for reproduction for 
gray whale during the summer and fall months (Clarke et al. 2015). In 
addition, the coastal Beaufort Sea also serves as a migratory corridor 
during bowhead whale spring migration, as well as for their feeding and 
breeding activities. Additionally, the coastal area of Chukchi and 
Beaufort seas also serve as BIAs for beluga whales for their feeding 
and migration. However, the Fairweather's proposed anchor retrieving 
operation would only occur in 5 locations totaling maximum 10 days. As 
discussed earlier, the Level B behavioral harassment on marine mammals 
from the proposed activity is expected to be brief startling reaction 
and temporary vacating of the area. No long-term biologically 
significant impacts to marine mammals are expected from the proposed 
anchor retrieving activity.
    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 proposed monitoring and 
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine 
mammal take from Fairweather's proposed anchor retrieving operation in 
the Chukchi and Beaufort seas is not expected to adversely affect the 
affected species or stocks through impacts on annual rates of 
recruitment or survival, and therefore will have a negligible impact on 
the affected marine mammal species or stocks.

Small Numbers

    The requested takes represent less than 3.37% of all populations or 
stocks potentially impacted (see Table 4 in this document). These take 
estimates represent the percentage of each species or stock that could 
be taken by Level B behavioral harassment. The numbers of marine 
mammals estimated to be taken are small in proportion to the total 
populations of the affected species or stocks.
    Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the 
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, NMFS finds that 
small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the 
populations of the affected species or stocks.

Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence 
Uses

    Subsistence hunting is an essential aspect of I[ntilde]upiat life, 
especially in rural coastal villages. The I[ntilde]upiat participate in 
subsistence hunting activities in and around the Chukchi and Beaufort 
Seas. The animals taken for subsistence provide a significant portion 
of the food that will last the community through the year. Marine 
mammals represent on the order of 60-80 percent of the total 
subsistence harvest. Along with the nourishment necessary for survival, 
the subsistence activities strengthen bonds within the culture, provide 
a means for educating the younger generation, provide supplies for 
artistic expression, and allow for important celebratory events.
    The MMPA requires that any harassment not result in an unmitigable

[[Page 31607]]

adverse impact on the availability of species or stocks for taking 
(101(a)(5)(D)(i)(II)). Unmitigable adverse impact is defined as (50 CFR 
216.103):
     An impact resulting from the specified activity that is 
likely to reduce the availability of the species to a level 
insufficient for a harvest to meet subsistence needs by:
     Causing marine mammals to abandon or avoid hunting areas;
     Directly displacing subsistence users; or,
     Placing physical barriers between the marine mammals and 
the subsistence users; and
     Cannot be sufficiently mitigated by other measures to 
increase the availability of marine mammals to allow subsistence needs 
to be met.
    In the following sub-sections, the major animals used for 
subsistence by villages of the upper-west and north coast of Alaska are 
discussed (bowhead whale, beluga whale, and all three common species of 
seals [ringed, spotted, and bearded seals]).

Bowhead Whale

    Anchor handling-related vessel traffic may traverse some areas used 
during bowhead harvests by Chukchi and Beaufort villages. Bowhead hunts 
by residents of Wainwright, Point Hope, and Point Lay take place almost 
exclusively in the spring prior to the date on which the vessels would 
commence the proposed anchor handling program. From 1984 through 2009, 
all bowhead harvests by these Chukchi Sea villages occurred only 
between April 14 and June 24 (George and Tarpley 1986; George et al. 
1987, 1988, 1990, 1992, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000; Philo et al. 1994; 
Suydam et al. 1995a,b, 1996, 1997, 2001a,b, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005a,b, 
2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010), while vessels will not enter the Bering 
Sea (northbound) prior to July 1. However, fall whaling by some of 
these Chukchi Sea villages has occurred since 2010 and is likely to 
occur in the future, particularly if bowhead quotas are not completely 
filled during the spring hunt, and fall weather is accommodating. A 
Wainwright whaling crew harvested the first fall bowhead for these 
villages in 90 years or more on October 7, 2010, and another in October 
of 2011 (Suydam et al. 2011, 2012, 2013). No bowhead whales were 
harvested during fall in 2012, but 3 were harvested by Wainwright in 
fall 2013.
    Barrow crews have traditionally hunted bowheads during both spring 
and fall; however, spring whaling by Barrow crews is normally finished 
before the date on which anchor handling operations would commence. 
From 1984 through 2011 whales were harvested in the spring by Barrow 
crews only between April 23 and June 15 (George and Tarpley 1986; 
George et al. 1987, 1988, 1990, 1992, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000; Philo et 
al. 1994; Suydam et al. 1995 a, b, 1996, 1997, 2001a, 2002, 2003, 2004, 
2005a,b, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013). Fall whaling 
by Barrow crews does take place during the time period when anchor 
handling activities would be completed, with vessels out of the Chukchi 
Sea by the end of August. From 1984 through 2011, whales were harvested 
in the fall by Barrow crews between August 31 and October 30, 
indicating that there is potential for vessel traffic to affect these 
hunts. Most fall whaling by Barrow crews, however, takes place east of 
Barrow along the Beaufort Sea coast therefore providing little 
opportunity for the anchor handling program to affect them. For 
example, Suydam et al. (2008) reported that in the previous 35 years, 
Barrow whaling crews harvested almost all their whales in the Beaufort 
Sea to the east of Point Barrow. As all anchor sites are over 100 miles 
from Barrow, NMFS does not anticipate any conflict with Barrow harvest. 
In the event the sonar survey for Sivulliq is taking place as Barrow is 
harvesting, the Norseman II will traverse 50 mi offshore around Barrow.
    Nuiqsut and Kaktovik crews traditionally hunt during the fall, 
harvesting in late August through September. The Alaska Eskimo Whaling 
Commission (AEWC) requires that all industry activities cease working 
east of 150[deg] W. by August 25th for the start of whaling for those 
communities. The anchor handling vessels will enter the Beaufort Sea as 
soon as ice at Point Barrow allows for safe passage and will complete 
the Sivulliq anchor retrieval well before August 25th. If a sonar 
survey is required on this site, it will take place after the 
completion of the fall hunt and has been cleared by both communities.

Beluga Whales

    Beluga whales typically do not represent a large proportion of the 
subsistence harvests by weight in the communities of Wainwright and 
Barrow, the nearest communities to the planned anchor handling project 
area. Barrow residents hunt beluga in the spring (normally after the 
bowhead hunt) in leads between Point Barrow and Skull Cliffs in the 
Chukchi Sea, primarily in April-June and later in the summer (July-
August) on both sides of the barrier island in Elson Lagoon/Beaufort 
Sea (Minerals Management Service [MMS] 2008), but harvest rates 
indicate the hunts are not frequent. Wainwright residents hunt beluga 
in April-June in the spring lead system, but this hunt typically occurs 
only if there are no bowheads in the area. Communal hunts for beluga 
are conducted along the coastal lagoon system later in July-August.
    Belugas typically represent a much greater proportion of the 
subsistence harvest in Kotzebue, Point Lay, and Point Hope. Point Lay's 
primary beluga hunt occurs from mid-June through mid-July, but can 
sometimes continue into August if early success is not sufficient. 
Point Hope residents hunt beluga primarily in the lead system during 
the spring (late March to early June), but also in open water along the 
coastline in July and August. Belugas are harvested in spring mid-June 
through mid-July in Kotzebue, but the timing can vary based on beluga 
movement. Belugas are harvested in coastal waters near these villages, 
generally within a few miles from shore. In the Chukchi, the anchor 
retrieval sites are located more than 60 mi (97 km) offshore, therefore 
proposed anchor handling in the project area would have no or minimal 
impacts on beluga hunts.
    The retrieval of anchors around Kotzebue is located nearshore and 
has the most potential for disturbance to beluga harvest. Fairweather 
will be required to communicate with the Kotzebue Whaling Commission, 
AEWC, and Com Center (if established) during operations in this area to 
avoid any conflict. Vessels will move offshore if Fairweather is not 
cleared to conduct activities.
    Disturbance associated with vessel traffic could potentially affect 
beluga hunts. However, all of the beluga hunt by Barrow residents in 
the Chukchi Sea, and much of the hunt by Wainwright residents would 
likely be completed before anchor handling activities would commence. 
Additionally, vessel traffic associated with the anchor handling 
program will be restricted under normal conditions to designated 
corridors that remain onshore or proceed directly offshore thereby 
minimizing the amount of traffic in coastal waters where beluga hunts 
take place. The designated vessel traffic corridors do not traverse 
areas indicated in recent mapping as utilized by Point Lay or Point 
Hope for beluga hunts, and avoids important beluga hunting areas in 
Kasegaluk Lagoon that are used by Wainwright.

Seals

    Seals are an important subsistence resource and ringed seals make 
up the bulk of the seal harvest. Most ringed and

[[Page 31608]]

bearded seals are harvested in the winter or in the spring before the 
anchor handling program would commence, but some harvest continues 
during open water and could possibly be affected by the planned 
activities. Spotted seals are also harvested during the summer. Most 
seals are harvested in coastal waters, with available maps of recent 
and past subsistence use areas indicating seal harvests have occurred 
only within 48-64 km (30-40 mi) of the coastline. The anchor handling 
retrieval sites are located more than 103 km (64 mi) offshore, so 
activities are thought to possibly have an impact on subsistence 
hunting for seals. Since most seal hunting is done during the winter 
and spring when the anchor handling program is not operational, NMFS 
considers that the potential effects to seal hunting are largely 
avoided.
    Mitigation measures to be implemented include participation in 
operational Com Centers (below). With these mitigation measures and the 
nature of the proposed action, we are confident that any harassment of 
seals resulting from the 2016 anchor handling program will not have an 
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of seals to be taken for 
subsistence uses.

Plan of Cooperation or Measures To Minimize Impacts to Subsistence 
Hunts

    Regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(12) require IHA applicants for 
activities that take place in Arctic waters to provide a Plan of 
Cooperation (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.
    Fairweather has prepared a draft POC, which was developed by 
identifying and evaluating any potential effects the proposed anchor 
retrieving operation might have on seasonal abundance that is relied 
upon for subsistence use.
    Specifically, Fairweather will take important time periods into 
consideration when planning its anchor retrieving operation, including 
the beluga whale subsistence activities near Kotzebue and in the 
Chukchi Sea, and bowhead whale subsistence activities in the Chukchi 
and Beaufort seas. Fairweather plans to enter the Beaufort Sea as soon 
as Point Barrow is ice-free and be finished at the Sivulliq location 
well before the August 25th commencement date of bowhead whaling. 
Although not anticipated with the proposed schedule, if crew changes 
are needed, they will occur at either Wainwright or Prudhoe Bay 
depending on the location of the vessel. Fairweather will work with the 
community of Wainwright through its joint venture with Olgoonik 
Corporation. Through the establishment of village liaisons and onboard 
PSOs, Fairweather will ensure there are no conflicts with subsistence 
activities.
    Fairweather has developed a Communication Plan and will implement 
this plan before initiating the anchor handling program. The Plan will 
help coordinate activities with local Com Centers and thus subsistence 
users, minimize the risk of interfering with subsistence hunting 
activities, and keep current as to the timing and status of the bowhead 
whale hunt and other subsistence hunts. The Communication Plan includes 
procedures for coordination with Com Centers to be located in coastal 
villages along the Chukchi Sea during the proposed anchor handling 
activities.
    Fairweather attended the AEWC meeting in Barrow from February 3-5 
and presented the project components and developing mechanisms to work 
with the communities to present consistent and concise information 
regarding the planned anchor handling program. Fairweather intends to 
sign a Conflict Avoidance Agreement (CAA).
    Throughout 2016, Fairweather will continue its engagement with the 
marine mammal commissions and committees active in the subsistence 
harvests and marine mammal research.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

    Within the project area, the bowhead, humpback, and fin whales are 
listed as endangered under the ESA. NMFS' Permits and Conservation 
Division has initiated consultation with staff in NMFS' Alaska Region 
Protected Resources Division under section 7 of the ESA on the issuance 
of an IHA to Fairweather under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for 
this activity. Consultation will be concluded prior to a determination 
on the issuance of an IHA.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    NMFS is preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA), pursuant to 
NEPA, to determine whether the issuance of an IHA to Fairweather for 
its anchor retrieval operation in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas during 
the 2016 Arctic open-water season may have a significant impact on the 
human environment. NMFS has released a draft of the EA for public 
comment along with this proposed IHA.

Proposed Authorization

    As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to 
issue an IHA to Fairweather for anchor retrieval operation in the 
Chukchi and Beaufort seas during the 2016 Arctic open-water season, 
provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting 
requirements are incorporated. The proposed IHA language is provided 
next.
    This section contains a draft of the IHA itself. The wording 
contained in this section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if 
issued).
    (1) This Authorization is valid from July 1, 2016, through October 
31, 2016.
    (2) This Authorization is valid only for activities associated with 
anchor retrieval related activities in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. 
The specific areas where Fairweather's operations will be conducted are 
within the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, Alaska, as shown in Figure 1 of 
Fairweather's IHA application.
    (3)(a) The species authorized for incidental harassment takings by 
Level B harassment are: Beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas); bowhead 
whales (Balaena mysticetus); gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus), 
humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), fin whale (Balaenoptera 
physalus), killer whale, (Orcinus orca), harbor porpoise (Phocoena 
phocoena), ringed seal (Phoca hispida), bearded seals (Erignathus 
barbatus); spotted seals (P. largha); and ribbon seals (Histriophoca 
fasciata).
    (3)(b) The authorization for taking by harassment is limited to the 
following acoustic sources and from the following activities:
    (i) Anchor retrieval operation; and
    (ii) Vessel activities related to anchor retrieval operation, such 
as ice management.
    (3)(c) The taking of any marine mammal in a manner prohibited under 
this Authorization must be reported within 24 hours of the taking to 
the Alaska Regional Administrator (907-586-7221) or his designee in 
Anchorage (907-271-3023), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and 
the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, at (301) 427-8401, or her designee (301-427-8418).
    (4) The holder of this Authorization must notify the Chief of the 
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 
least 48 hours prior to the start of anchor retrieval activities 
(unless constrained by the date of issuance of this Authorization in 
which case notification shall be made as soon as possible).
    (5) Prohibitions.
    (a) The taking, by incidental harassment only, is limited to the

[[Page 31609]]

species listed under condition 3(a) above and by the numbers listed in 
[Table 6 of this Notice]. The taking by serious injury or death of 
these species or the taking by harassment, injury or death of any other 
species of marine mammal is prohibited and may result in the 
modification, suspension, or revocation of this Authorization.
    (b) The taking of any marine mammal is prohibited whenever the 
required source vessel protected species observers (PSOs), required by 
condition 7(a)(i), are not onboard in conformance with condition 
7(a)(i) of this Authorization.
    (6) Mitigation.
    (a) Establishing Safety and Exclusion Zones.
    (i) Establish a 500-m safety zone for anchor retrieving and ice 
management (although Level A takes are not expected when a marine 
mammal occur in this zone).
    (ii) Establish a 500-m exclusion zone for sonar operations.
    (b) Clearing Marine Mammals for Safety Zone before Anchor Retrieval 
or Ice Management Activities:
    (i) When the vessel is positioned on-site, the protected species 
observers (PSOs) will `clear' the area by observing the 500-m safety 
zone for 30 minutes; if no marine mammals are observed within those 30 
minutes, anchor retrieval and/or ice management will commence.
    (ii) If a marine mammal(s) is observed within the 500-m safety zone 
during the clearing, the PSO will continue to watch until the animal(s) 
is gone and has not returned for 15 minutes if the sighting was a 
pinniped, or 30 minutes if it was a cetacean.
    (iii) Once the PSO has cleared the area, anchor retrieval and/or 
ice management operations may commence.
    (iv) Should a marine mammal(s) be observed within the 500-m safety 
zone during the retrieval operations, the PSO will monitor and 
carefully record any reactions observed. PSOs will also collect 
behavioral information on marine mammals beyond the safety zone.
    (c) Safety Zones Related to Sonar Operations.
    (i) Prior to starting the sonar activity, the PSO will `clear' the 
area by observing the 500-m exclusion zone for 30 minutes; if no marine 
mammals are observed within those 30 minutes, sonar activity will 
commence.
    (ii) If a marine mammal(s) is observed within the 500-m exclusion 
zone during the clearing, the PSO will continue to watch until the 
animal(s) is gone and has not returned for 15 minutes if the sighting 
was a pinniped, or 30 minutes if it was a cetacean.
    (iii) Once the PSO has cleared the area, sonar activity may 
commence.
    (iv) If an animal enters the 500-m exclusion zone, sonar will be 
shut down immediately. Sonar activity will not resume until the marine 
mammal has cleared the exclusion zone. PSOs will also collect 
behavioral information on marine mammals beyond the exclusion zone.
    (d) Vessel Movement Mitigation:
    (i) If a marine mammal is detected outside the 500-m safety zone 
for anchor handling or the 500-m exclusion zone for sonar activities 
and, based on its position and the relative motion, is likely to enter 
those zones, the vessel's speed and/or direct course may, when 
practical and safe, be changed.
    (ii) The marine mammal activities and movements relative to the 
vessels will be closely monitored to ensure that the marine mammal does 
not approach within either zone. If the mammal appears likely to enter 
the respective zone, further mitigative actions will be taken, i.e., 
either further course alterations or shut down in the case of the 
sonar.
    (iii) Vessel shall reduce its speed to 5 kt (9.26 km/h) or lower 
when within 900 ft (274 m) of cetaceans or pinnipeds.
    (iv) Fairweather shall avoid transits within designated North 
Pacific right whale critical habitat. If transit within North Pacific 
right whale critical habitat cannot be avoided, vessel operators are 
requested to exercise extreme caution and observe the of 10 kt (18.52 
km/h) vessel speed restriction while within North Pacific right whale 
critical habitat.
    (v) Within the North Pacific right whale critical habitat, all 
vessels shall keep 2,625 ft (800 m) away from any observed North 
Pacific right whales and avoid approaching whales head-on consistent 
with vessel safety.
    (e) Mitigation Measures for Subsistence Activities:
    (i) For the purposes of reducing or eliminating conflicts between 
subsistence whaling activities and Fairweather's anchor retrieval 
program, Fairweather shall develop and implement a communication plan 
with subsistence communities.
    (ii) Fairweather will prepare a daily report of project activities, 
sea conditions, and subsistence interactions, and send to all 
interested community leaders.
    (iii) The daily reports will include a contact address and phone 
number where interested community leaders can convey any subsistence 
concerns.
    (iv) Fairweather shall monitor the positions of all of its vessels 
and exercise due care in avoiding any areas where subsistence activity 
is active.
    (v) Vessel transiting:
    (A) The vessels will enter the Bering Strait and continue to the 
Chukchi Sea on or after 1 July, minimizing effects on marine mammals 
that frequent open leads and minimizing effects on spring and early 
summer bowhead whale hunting.
     The transit route for the vessels will avoid known 
protected ecosystems such as the Ledyard Bay Critical Habitat Unit 
(LBCHU), and will include coordination through Com Centers.
     PSOs will be aboard vessels.
     When within 805 m of whales, vessels will reduce speed, 
avoid separating members from a group and avoid multiple changes of 
direction.
     Vessel speed will be reduced during inclement weather 
conditions in order to avoid collisions with marine mammals.
     Personnel will communicate and coordinate with the Com 
Centers regarding all vessel transit.
     Vessels transiting in the Beaufort Sea east of Bullen 
Point to the Canadian border shall remain at least 5 miles offshore 
during transit along the coast, provided ice and sea conditions allow. 
During transit in the Chukchi Sea, vessels shall remain as far offshore 
as weather and ice conditions allow, and at all times at least 5 miles 
offshore.
    (B) From August 31 to October 31, transiting vessels in the Chukchi 
Sea or Beaufort Sea shall remain at least 20 miles offshore of the 
coast of Alaska from Icy Cape in the Chukchi Sea to Pitt Point on the 
east side of Smith Bay in the Beaufort Sea, unless ice conditions or an 
emergency that threatens the safety of the vessel or crew prevents 
compliance with this requirement. This condition shall not apply to 
vessels actively engaged in transit to or from a coastal community to 
conduct crew changes or logistical support operations.
    (C) Vessels shall be operated at speeds necessary to ensure no 
physical contact with whales occurs, and to make any other potential 
conflicts with bowheads or whalers unlikely. Vessel speeds shall be 
less than 10 knots in the proximity of feeding whales or whale 
aggregations (6 or more whales).
    (D) If any vessel inadvertently approaches within 1.6 kilometers (1 
mile) of observed bowhead whales, except when providing emergency 
assistance to whalers or in other emergency situations, the vessel 
operator will take reasonable precautions to avoid potential 
interaction with the bowhead whales by

[[Page 31610]]

taking one or more of the following actions, as appropriate:
     Reducing vessel speed to less than 5 knots within 900 feet 
of the whale(s);
     Steering around the whale(s) if possible;
     Operating the vessel(s) in such a way as to avoid 
separating members of a group of whales from other members of the 
group;
     Operating the vessel(s) to avoid causing a whale to make 
multiple changes in direction; and
     Checking the waters immediately adjacent to the vessel(s) 
to ensure that no whales will be injured when the propellers are 
engaged.
    (vii) Fairweather shall complete operations in time to allow such 
vessels to complete transit through the Bering Strait to a point south 
of 59 degrees North latitude no later than November 15, 2016. Any 
vessel that encounters weather or ice that will prevent compliance with 
this date shall coordinate its transit through the Bering Strait to a 
point south of 59 degrees North latitude with the appropriate Com-
Centers. Fairweather vessels shall, weather and ice permitting, transit 
east of St. Lawrence Island and no closer than 10 miles from the shore 
of St. Lawrence Island.
    (7) Monitoring:
    (a) Vessel-based Visual Monitoring:
    (i) Vessel-based visual monitoring for marine mammals shall be 
conducted by NMFS-approved protected species observers (PSOs) 
throughout the period of survey activities.
    (ii) PSOs shall be stationed aboard the operating vessels through 
the duration of the anchor retrieval operation.
    (iii) A sufficient number of PSOs shall be onboard the survey 
vessel to meet the following criteria:
    (A) 100% monitoring coverage during all periods of survey 
operations in daylight;
    (B) maximum of 4 consecutive hours on watch per PSO; and
    (C) maximum of 12 hours of watch time per day per PSO.
    (iv) The vessel-based marine mammal monitoring shall provide the 
basis for real-time mitigation measures as described in (6)(b) above.
    (v) Results of the vessel-based marine mammal monitoring shall be 
used to calculate the estimation of the number of ``takes'' from the 
marine surveys and equipment recovery and maintenance program.
    (b) Protected Species Observers and Training.
    (i) PSO teams shall consist of Inupiat observers and NMFS-approved 
field biologists.
    (ii) Experienced field crew leaders shall supervise the PSO teams 
in the field. New PSOs shall be paired with experienced observers to 
avoid situations where lack of experience impairs the quality of 
observations.
    (iii) Crew leaders and most other biologists serving as observers 
in 2016 shall be individuals with experience as observers during recent 
marine mammal monitoring projects in Alaska, the Canadian Beaufort Sea, 
or other offshore areas in recent years.
    (iv) Resumes for PSO candidates shall be provided to NMFS for 
review and acceptance of their qualifications. Inupiat observers shall 
be experienced in the region and familiar with the marine mammals of 
the area.
    (v) All observers shall complete an observer training course 
designed to familiarize individuals with monitoring and data collection 
procedures. The training course shall be completed before the 
anticipated start of the 2016 open-water season. The training 
session(s) shall be conducted by qualified marine mammalogists with 
extensive crew-leader experience during previous vessel-based 
monitoring programs.
    (vi) Training for both Alaska native PSOs and biologist PSOs shall 
be conducted at the same time in the same room. There shall not be 
separate training courses for the different PSOs.
    (vii) Crew members should not be used as primary PSOs because they 
have other duties and generally do not have the same level of 
expertise, experience, or training as PSOs, 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 power-down or shutdown if 
a marine mammal enters the safety zone (or exclusion zone).
    (viii) If crew members are to be used as PSOs, they shall go 
through some basic training consistent with the functions they will be 
asked to perform. The best approach would be for crew members and PSOs 
to go through the same training together.
    (ix) PSOs shall 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.
    (x) Fairweather shall train its PSOs to follow a scanning schedule 
that consistently distributes scanning effort according to the purpose 
and need for observations. All PSOs should follow the same schedule to 
ensure consistency in their scanning efforts.
    (xi) PSOs shall be trained in documenting the behaviors of marine 
mammals. PSOs should 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.
    (c) Marine Mammal Observation Protocol.
    (i) PSOs shall watch for marine mammals from the best available 
vantage point on the survey vessels, typically the bridge.
    (ii) PSOs shall scan systematically with the unaided eye and 7 x 50 
reticle binoculars, and night-vision equipment when needed.
    (iii) Personnel on the bridge shall assist the marine mammal 
observer(s) in watching for marine mammals.
    (iv) Monitoring shall consist of recording of the following 
information:
    (A) The species, group size, age/size/sex categories (if 
determinable), the general behavioral activity, heading (if 
consistent), bearing and distance from vessel, sighting cue, behavioral 
pace, and apparent reaction of all marine mammals seen near the vessel 
(e.g., none, avoidance, approach, paralleling, etc.);
    (B) The time, location, heading, speed, and activity of the vessel, 
along with sea state, visibility, cloud cover and sun glare at (I) any 
time a marine mammal is sighted, (II) at the start and end of each 
watch, and (III) during a watch (whenever there is a change in one or 
more variable);
    (C) The identification of all vessels that are visible within 5 km 
of the vessel from which observation is conducted whenever a marine 
mammal is sighted and the time observed;
    (D) Any identifiable marine mammal behavioral response (sighting 
data should be collected in a manner that will not detract from the 
PSO's ability to detect marine mammals);
    (E) Any adjustments made to operating procedures; and
    (F) Visibility during observation periods so that total estimates 
of take can be corrected accordingly.
    (vii) Distances to nearby marine mammals will be estimated with 
binoculars (7 x 50 binoculars) containing a reticle to measure the 
vertical angle of the line of sight to the animal relative to the 
horizon. Observers may use a laser rangefinder to test and improve 
their abilities for visually estimating distances to objects in the 
water.
    (viii) PSOs shall 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 shall note any 
information that might aid in the identification of the marine mammal 
sighted. For example, for an

[[Page 31611]]

unidentified mysticete whale, the observers should record whether the 
animal had a dorsal fin.
    (ix) Additional details about unidentified marine mammal sightings, 
such as ``blow only,'' mysticete with (or without) a dorsal fin, ``seal 
splash,'' etc., shall be recorded.
    (x) Fairweather shall use the best available technology to improve 
detection capability during periods of fog and other types of inclement 
weather. Such technology might include night-vision goggles or 
binoculars as well as other instruments that incorporate infrared 
technology.
    (d) Field Data-Recording and Verification.
    (i) PSOs shall utilize a standardized format to record all marine 
mammal observations.
    (ii) Information collected during marine mammal observations shall 
include the following:
    (A) Vessel speed, position, and activity.
    (B) Date, time, and location of each marine mammal sighting.
    (C) Number of marine mammals observed, and group size, sex, and age 
categories.
    (D) Observer's name and contact information.
    (E) Weather, visibility, and ice conditions at the time of 
observation.
    (F) Estimated distance of marine mammals at closest approach.
    (G) Activity at the time of observation, including possible 
attractants present.
    (H) Animal behavior.
    (I) Description of the encounter.
    (J) Duration of encounter.
    (K) Mitigation action taken.
    (iii) Data shall be recorded directly into handheld computers or as 
a back-up, transferred from hard-copy data sheets into an electronic 
database.
    (iv) A system for quality control and verification of data shall be 
facilitated by the pre-season training, supervision by the lead PSOs, 
and in-season data checks, and shall be built into the software.
    (v) Computerized data validity checks shall also be conducted, and 
the data shall be managed in such a way that it is easily summarized 
during and after the field program and transferred into statistical, 
graphical, or other programs for further processing.
    (e) Marine Mammal Behavioral Response Study.
    (i) PSOs will collect behavioral response data to the presence of 
vessels during transit on walruses and seals or during its anchor 
retrieving operations.
    (ii) PSOs will record the initial and subsequent behaviors of 
marine mammals using a focal following approach. Marine mammals will be 
observed until they disappear from the PSO's view. Observers will also 
record any behaviors that marine mammals may have in response to the 
vessel.
    (9) Reporting:
    (a) The results of Fairweather's anchor retrieval program 
monitoring reports will be presented in weekly and monthly reports and 
a 90-day final report. The initial final reports are due to NMFS within 
90 days after the expiration of the IHA. The reports will include
    (i) Summaries of monitoring effort (e.g., total hours, total 
distances, and marine mammal distribution through the project period, 
accounting for sea state and other factors affecting visibility and 
detectability of marine mammals);
    (ii) Summaries that represent an initial level of interpretation of 
the efficacy, measurements, and observations, rather than raw data, 
fully processed analyses, or a summary of operations and important 
observations;
    (iii) Information on distances marine mammals are sighted from 
operations and the associated noise isopleth for active sound sources 
(i.e., anchor retrieval, ice management, side scan sonar);
    (vi) Analyses of the effects of various factors influencing 
detectability of marine mammals (e.g., sea state, number of observers, 
and fog/glare);
    (v) 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;
    (vi) Estimates of uncertainty in all take estimates, with 
uncertainty expressed by the presentation of confidence limits, a 
minimum-maximum, posterior probability distribution, or another 
applicable method, with the exact approach to be selected based on the 
sampling method and data available; and
    (vii) A clear comparison of authorized takes and the level of 
actual estimated takes.
    (b) The draft report shall be subject to review and comment by 
NMFS. Any recommendations made by NMFS must be addressed in the final 
report prior to acceptance by NMFS. The draft report will be considered 
the final report for this activity under this Authorization if NMFS has 
not provided comments and recommendations within 90 days of receipt of 
the draft report.
    (c) In the unanticipated event that the construction activities 
clearly cause the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by 
this Authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury, or 
mortality, Fairweather shall immediately cease all operations and 
immediately report the incident to the Chief, Permits and Conservation 
Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Alaska Regional 
Stranding Coordinators. The report must include the following 
information:
    (i) Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
    (ii) Description of the incident;
    (iii) Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding the 
incident;
    (iv) Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, sea 
state, cloud cover, visibility, and water depth);
    (v) Description of marine mammal observations in the 24 hours 
preceding the incident;
    (vi) Species identification or description of the animal(s) 
involved;
    (vii) The fate of the animal(s); and
    (viii) 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 Fairweather 
to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further 
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Fairweather may not resume 
their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or 
telephone.
    (d) In the event that Fairweather 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), Fairweather will immediately report the incident to the 
Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, and the Alaska Regional Stranding Coordinators. The 
report must include the same information identified above. Activities 
may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS 
will work with Fairweather to determine whether modifications in the 
activities are appropriate.
    (e) In the event that Fairweather 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 the IHA 
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced 
decomposition, or scavenger damage), Fairweather shall report the 
incident to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of 
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Alaska Regional Stranding 
Coordinators,

[[Page 31612]]

within 24 hours of the discovery. Fairweather shall provide photographs 
or video footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded 
animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. 
Fairweather can continue its operations under such a case.
    (10) Activities related to the monitoring described in this 
Authorization do not require a separate scientific research permit 
issued under section 104 of the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
    (11) The Plan of Cooperation outlining the steps that will be taken 
to cooperate and communicate with the native communities to ensure the 
availability of marine mammals for subsistence uses, must be 
implemented.
    (12) This Authorization may be modified, suspended, or withdrawn if 
the holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if the 
authorized taking is having more than a negligible impact on the 
species or stock of affected marine mammals, or if there is an 
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or 
stocks for subsistence uses.
    (13) A copy of this Authorization and the Incidental Take Statement 
must be in the possession of each vessel operator taking marine mammals 
under the authority of this Incidental Harassment Authorization.
    (14) Fairweather is required to comply with the Terms and 
Conditions of the Incidental Take Statement corresponding to NMFS' 
Biological Opinion.

Request for Public Comments

    NMFS requests comment on our analysis, the draft authorization, and 
any other aspect of the Notice of Proposed IHA for Fairweather's 
proposed anchor retrieval operation in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. 
Please include with your comments any supporting data or literature 
citations to help inform our final decision on Fairweather's request 
for an MMPA authorization.

    Dated: May 16, 2016.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-11799 Filed 5-18-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P