[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 152 (Monday, August 8, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52407-52418]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18738]


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

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; issuance of an incidental take authorization (IHA).

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with regulations implementing the Marine Mammal 
Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that 
NMFS has issued an IHA to Fairweather, LLC (Fairweather) to take, by 
harassment, small numbers of 12 species of marine mammals incidental to 
an anchor retrieval program in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, Alaska, 
during the open-water season of 2016.

DATES: This authorization is effective from July 1, 2016 through 
October 31, 2016.

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.''
    Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process 
by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization 
to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment. 
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA establishes a 45-day time limit for 
NMFS's review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and 
comment period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental 
harassment of small numbers of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the 
close of the public comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny the 
authorization.
    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 determined the IHA application adequate and 
complete on February 8, 2016. NMFS published a notice making 
preliminary determinations and proposing to issue an IHA on May 19, 
2016 (81 FR 31594). The notice initiated a 30-day comment period.
    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

    A detailed description of the Fairweather's anchor retrieval 
program is provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA 
(81 FR 31594; May 19, 2016). Since that time, no changes have been made 
to the proposed construction activities. Therefore, a detailed 
description is not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register 
notice for the description of the specific activity.

Comments and Responses

    A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA to Fairweather was 
published in the Federal Register on May 19, 2016 (81 FR 31594). That 
notice described, in detail, Fairweather's activity, the marine mammal 
species and subsistence activities that may be affected by the proposed 
anchor retrieval program, and the anticipated effects on marine mammals 
and subsistence activities. During the 30-day public comment period, 
NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission) 
and the Alaska Oil and Gas Association (AOGA). Specific comments and 
responses are provided below.
    Comment 1: The Commission states that since anchor handling would 
take 7 days at each site, and there are 5 sites,

[[Page 52408]]

thus marine mammal takes should be based on a total of 35 days, instead 
of an average of 3.5 days per site with a total of 17.5 days.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with the Commission's assessment. As 
stated in Fairweather's IHA application and the Federal Register notice 
for the proposed IHA (81 FR 31594; May 19, 2016), anchor handling at 
each site takes 2-7 days, with machinery operating at full power 
capacity only part of these days. Therefore, our analysis used an 
average of 3.5 days per site for anchor handling at each site. We 
consider this to be a more realistic scenario. In addition, because 
some of these days the shipboard machinery (including dynamic 
positioning thruster) will not be operating at full power, the 120-dB 
ensonified area is expected to be much smaller than expected. 
Therefore, we believe using a total of 17.5 days based on averaged 
operation days of 3.5 days per site provides better take estimates of 
marine mammals.
    Comment 2: The Commission states that the method used to estimate 
the numbers of takes, which sums fractions of takes for each species 
across days, does not account for NMFS's 24-hour reset policy. The 
Commission argues that although this approach is more accurate in a 
pure mathematical sense, it ultimately negates the intent of a 24-hour 
reset. The Commission states that instead of summing fractions of takes 
across days and then rounding to estimate total takes, NMFS should have 
calculated a daily take estimate (determined by multiplying the 
estimated density of marine mammals in the area by the daily ensonified 
area) and then rounding that to a whole number before multiplying it by 
the number of days that activities would occur. Thus, the Commission 
recommends that NMFS (1) follow its policy of a 24-hour reset for 
enumerating the number of each species that could be taken, (2) apply 
standard rounding rules before summing the numbers of estimated takes 
across days, and (3) for species that have the potential to be taken 
but model-estimated or calculated takes round to zero, use group size 
to inform the take estimates--these methods should be used consistently 
for all future incidental take authorizations.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with the Commission's assessment and 
recommendation. While for certain projects NMFS has rounded to the 
whole number for daily takes, the circumstance for projects like this 
one when the objective of take estimation is to provide more accurate 
assessments for potential impacts to marine mammals for the entire 
project, the rounding in the middle of calculation will introduce large 
errors into the process. In addition, while NMFS uses a 24-hour reset 
for its take calculation in impact assessments, there is no need for 
daily (24-hour) rounding in this case because there is no daily limit 
of takes, so long as total authorized takes of marine mammal are not 
exceeded.
    Comment 3: The Commission recommends that NMFS incorporate the 
peer-review panel's recommendations into the authorization.
    Response: NMFS convened a peer-review panel to review Fairweather's 
marine mammal monitoring and mitigation measure. The peer-review panel 
met in March and provided its report to NMFS in mid-April. The peer-
review panel report contains recommendations applicable to 
Fairweather's monitoring plans. Specifically, the panel recommended 
that Fairweather employ passive acoustic monitoring (PAM) in the 
vicinity of the proposed anchor handling activities to collect better 
data on the presence, calling behavior and possible impacts to marine 
mammals for all the locations where anchors are deployed. In addition, 
the peer-review panel recommends that Fairweather coordinate closely 
with the communities nearest to each of the locations where it plans to 
retrieve anchors to avoid the peak of marine mammals' presence and 
subsistence hunting.
    NMFS discussed the recommendations with Fairweather and determined 
that the deployment of PAM devices in the vicinity of the anchor 
handling activities is not feasible because the anchor retrieval 
activity at each site would only take an average of 3.5 days, and none 
of the anchor retrieval vessels or the support vessel could be used to 
serve as a PAM platform during the operation. Deployment of bottom-
mounted sensors for such a short duration would incur unreasonable 
expenses to such a small project. Nevertheless, Fairweather agreed and 
is required to coordinate closely with the subsistence communities 
nearest to each of the project site where it plans to retrieve anchors 
to ensure no unmitigable impact to subsistence use of marine mammals by 
these communities. A detailed description of the peer-review process 
and the panel's recommendation is presented in the Monitoring Measure 
Peer Review section below.
    Comment 4: AOGA objects to the proposed vessel movement mitigation 
measures that will protect the North Pacific right whale and its 
critical habitat. These measures require Fairweather to (1) avoid 
transits within designated North Pacific right whale critical habitat; 
(2) if transit within North Pacific right whale critical habitat cannot 
be avoided, vessel operators are requested to observe the 10 kt (18.52 
km/h) vessel speed restriction while with in North Pacific right whale 
habitat; and (3) within the North Pacific right whale critical habitat, 
all vessels keep a distance of 2,625 ft (800 m) away from any observed 
North Pacific right whales and avoid approaching whales head-on. AOGA 
reasons that in order for NMFS to require this mitigation measure there 
must be a reasonable expectation of take, and that existing measures 
for vessels transits, plus decades of activity transits have not 
resulted in vessel strikes of North Pacific right whales (NPRW).
    Response: Although the density of NPRW is very low, even in its 
critical habitat, the additional measures will ensure that a lethal 
take of this species can be completely avoided. Fairweather voluntarily 
included those mitigation measures in its proposed action as a 
precautionary move to minimize the risk of a vessel strike. Regardless 
of how small the risk of a strike may be, Fairweather's decision 
reflects the potentially severe consequences to an already very small 
population should a strike occur. NMFS discussed this measure with 
Fairweather, and the company is committed to the measures that afford 
additional protection to this critically endangered species. Therefore, 
these measures are reflected in the IHA issued to Fairweather.

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.

[[Page 52409]]



        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                     155,000
                                                                    offshore 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 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 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 are generally 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

[[Page 52410]]

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/pdf/alaska2015_final.pdf.

Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals

    The effects of the stressors associated with the specified activity 
(e.g., acoustic effects of anchor retrieval, which include noises from 
dynamic positioning, winch operations, and other machinery operations) 
have the potential to result in harassment of marine mammals. The 
Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (81 FR 31594, May 19, 
2016) included a discussion of the effects of acoustic stimuli on 
marine mammals. That information is not repeated here. No instances of 
injury, serious injury, or mortality (Level A take) are expected as a 
result of the anchor retrieval activities, nor are any Level A take 
authorized by this IHA.

Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat

    The environmental effects of Fairweather's proposed anchor 
retrieval activity, which includes noise exposure to marine mammal prey 
species and physical disturbances of project locations, are discussed 
in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (81 FR 31594, May 
19, 2016). Therefore, that information is not repeated here.

Mitigation Measures

    In order to issue an incidental take authorization under section 
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods 
of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the 
least practicable adverse impact on such species or stock and its 
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and 
areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species 
or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses.
    For the planned Fairweather open-water anchor retrieval operations 
in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, Fairweather is required to implement 
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.

(a) Establishing and Monitoring Exclusion Zone for Anchor Retrieval and 
Ice Management

    (1) Protected species observers (PSO) 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 100 m from the source.
    (2) When the vessel is positioned on-site, the PSOs will `clear' 
the area by observing the 500m 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 
high-frequency sonar used for locating anchors, at Fairweather's 
suggestion the following mitigation and monitoring measures related to 
sonar operations will 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 100 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 NPRW critical 
habitat. If transit within NPRW 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 NPRW critical habitat, 
all vessels shall keep 2,625 ft (800 m) away from any observed NPRW 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 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

[[Page 52411]]

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, NMFS 
has 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. 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).

Monitoring and Reporting Measures

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

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 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 
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:

[[Page 52412]]

     100 percent 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 an 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 it dives and if this happens, PSO will 
stop focal follow observation.
    For large groups of marine mammals where it is difficult to monitor 
each animal, one or more focal animals, (e.g., cow/calf pair, sub-adult 
female, adult male, etc.) will be chosen to monitor until it is 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.

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; and
     A clear comparison of authorized takes and the level of 
actual estimated takes.
    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);

[[Page 52413]]

     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 necessary actions 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.

Monitoring Plan Peer Review

    The MMPA requires that monitoring plans be independently peer 
reviewed ``where the proposed activity may affect the availability of a 
species or stock for taking for subsistence uses'' (16 U.S.C. 
1371(a)(5)(D)(ii)(III)). Regarding this requirement, NMFS' implementing 
regulations state, ``Upon receipt of a complete monitoring plan, and at 
its discretion, [NMFS] will either submit the plan to members of a peer 
review panel for review or within 60 days of receipt of the proposed 
monitoring plan, schedule a workshop to review the plan'' (50 CFR 
216.108(d)).
    NMFS convened an independent peer review panel to review 
Fairweather's Marine Mammal Monitoring and Mitigation Plan (4MP) for 
the planned 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 April 2016. The full panel report can be 
viewed online at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/research.htm.
    NMFS provided the panel with Fairweather's IHA application and 
monitoring plan and asked the panel to answer the following questions:
    1. Will the applicant's stated objectives effectively further the 
understanding of the impacts of their activities on marine mammals and 
otherwise accomplish the goals stated above? If not, how should the 
objectives be modified to better accomplish the goals above?
    2. Can the applicant achieve the stated objectives based on the 
methods described in the plan?
    3. Are there technical modifications to the proposed monitoring 
techniques and methodologies proposed by the applicant that should be 
considered to better accomplish their stated objectives?
    4. Are there techniques not proposed by the applicant (i.e., 
additional monitoring techniques or methodologies) that should be 
considered for inclusion in the applicant's monitoring program to 
better accomplish their stated objectives?
    5. What is the best way for an applicant to present their data and 
results (formatting, metrics, graphics, etc.) in the required reports 
that are to be submitted to NMFS (i.e., 90-day report and comprehensive 
report)?
    The peer-review panel report contains recommendations applicable to 
Fairweather's monitoring plans. Specifically, the panel recommended 
that Fairweather employ PAM in the vicinity of the proposed anchor 
handling activities to collect better data on the presence, calling 
behavior and possible impacts to marine mammals for all the locations 
where anchors are deployed. In addition, although not requested, the 
peer-review panel recommends that Fairweather coordinate closely with 
the communities nearest to each of the locations where it plans to 
retrieve anchors to avoid the peak of marine mammals' presence and 
subsistence hunting.
    NMFS discussed the peer review panel report and its recommendation 
of conducting PAM in the vicinity of anchor retrieving sites with 
Fairweather and considers this recommendation is not practicable for 
Fairweather's anchor retrieving operations. As discussed in the Federal 
Register for the proposed IHA (81 FR 31594, May 19, 2016), the duration 
of activities in each area is projected to be only 1-3 days for 
complete anchor recovery (up to 7 as a very conservative estimate), 
with only ~20 minutes per system being the loud ``unseating'' portion. 
At the Sivulliq site, which has the highest number of anchor systems 
(12), the total ``unseating'' time would be 4 hours, occurring in 12 x 
20-minute bursts. Because of this short duration, particularly of the 
sound with the largest potential for impacts to marine mammals, NMFS 
does not think that PAM is warranted. Moreover, deploying and 
recovering PAM equipment for such short durations only prolongs the 
amount of time the vessels are in each project area, thus increasing 
the impacts on the animals. Additionally, deploying PAM equipment for 
only 2 days will not greatly expand the body of knowledge about marine 
mammal acoustics in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, nor will it be 
comparable to previous studies in the area. Lastly, unless PAM 
monitoring is real-time, it is not a useful tool for mitigation. The 
only way for it to be real-time would be to have several smaller 
vessels on the project with the PAM equipment (at which point we would 
employ visual PSOs), but this option is not practical or reasonable for 
the small scale of this project
    For close coordination with subsistence communities near the anchor 
retrieval locations, Fairweather states that it is committed to working 
very closely with the communities surrounding its activities. 
Fairweather has conducted meetings (either via teleconference in-
person) with representatives from Kotzebue, Pt. Hope, Pt. Lay, 
Wainwright, Barrow, Nuiqsut, and Kaktovik. Fairweather will have 
experienced Inupiat Communicators/Observers (ICOs) onboard each of the 
vessels as liaisons to the communities from all communities. As part of 
the pre-season planning and safety seminar, whaling captains and 
members of Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission will be presenting

[[Page 52414]]

on their culture and traditional knowledge to Fairweather.

Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment

    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the 
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or 
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or 
marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the 
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not 
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or 
sheltering (Level B harassment).
    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 19 log R, resulting in a 
radius of 14,000 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 assumes 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 
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\

[[Page 52415]]

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 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 by 
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 percent of the combined population and the 
Beaufort Sea Stock is considered to represent 91.4 percent of the same. 
Therefore, the estimated takes of each beluga stock were based on the 
proportion of these stocks, with 8.6 percent account for the Eastern 
Chukchi Sea Stock, and 91.4 percent 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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                          % of stock or
                            Species                                Chukchi Sea      Beaufort Sea        Abundance           Total          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                 5              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

[[Page 52416]]

 
Ringed seal...................................................          5,586.67          1,308.58           249,000             6,895              2.77
Bearded seal..................................................            186.68             43.73           155,000               231              0.15
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 percent in all cases (Table 4). 
The highest percent of population estimated to be taken is 3.37 percent 
by Level B harassment of the bowhead whale.

Analysis and 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 of 
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.
    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 consequences.
    Of the 12 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.
    Fairweather's proposed activities overlap 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, 
Fairweather's proposed anchor retrieving operation would only occur in 
5 locations totaling a maximum of 10 days. As discussed earlier, the 
Level B behavioral harassment of marine mammals from the proposed 
activity is expected to be in the form of brief startling reactions and 
animals temporarily vacating 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 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 authorized takes represent less than 3.37 percent of all 
populations or stocks potentially impacted (see Table 4 in this 
document). The number of marine mammals authorized to be taken are 
small in proportion to the total 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 
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;
     Placing physical barriers between the marine mammals and 
the subsistence users; and

[[Page 52417]]

     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 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

[[Page 52418]]

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 25, 2016 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 engaged in 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. In May 2016, NMFS issued a Biological Opinion concluding 
that the issuance of the IHA associated with Fairweather's anchor 
retrieval operations in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas during the 2016 
open-water season is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence 
of the endangered bowhead, humpback, and fin whales. No critical 
habitat has been designated for these species, therefore none will be 
affected.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    NMFS prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) that includes an 
analysis of potential environmental effects associated with NMFS' 
issuance of an IHA to Fairweather to take marine mammals incidental to 
conducting anchor retrieval operations in the Chukchi and Beaufort 
seas. The draft EA was available to the public for a 30-day comment 
period before it was finalized. Based on the EA, NMFS made a Finding of 
No Significant Impact (FONSI) for this action. The FONSI was signed on 
June 30, 2016, prior to this issuance of the IHA. Therefore, 
preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement is not necessary.

Authorization

    As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an IHA to 
Fairweather for the take of marine mammals, by Level B harassment, 
incidental to conducting anchor retrieval operations in the Chukchi and 
Beaufort seas during the 2016 open-water season, which also includes 
the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements described in 
this Notice.

    Dated: August 3, 2016.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-18738 Filed 8-5-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P