[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 38 (Monday, March 1, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12019-12028]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04081]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2020-0131; FXES111401000000, 212, FF01E00000]


Marine Mammals; Incidental Take During Specified Activities; 
Proposed Incidental Harassment Authorization for Northern Sea Otters in 
the Northeast Pacific Ocean

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of application and proposed incidental 
harassment authorization; availability of draft environmental 
assessment; and request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) received a 
request from the National Science Foundation (NSF) for authorization to 
take a small number of northern sea otters by harassment incidental to 
a marine geophysical survey in the northeast Pacific Ocean. Pursuant to 
the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA), the 
Service is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an incidental 
harassment authorization (IHA) to NSF for certain activities during the 
period between May 1 and June 30, 2021. This proposed IHA, if 
finalized, will be for take by Level A and Level B harassment. We

[[Page 12020]]

anticipate no take by death and include none in this proposed 
authorization. The Service has prepared a draft environmental 
assessment (EA) addressing the proposed IHA and is soliciting public 
comments on both documents.

DATES: Comments on the proposed IHA request and the draft EA will be 
accepted on or before March 31, 2021.

ADDRESSES:
    Document availability: The proposed IHA request, the draft EA, and 
the list of references cited herein are available for viewing at http://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2020-0131 and at http://www.fws.gov/wafwo. NSF's associated environmental assessments can be 
found at https://www.nsf.gov/geo/oce/envcomp/.
    Comment Submission: You may submit comments on this proposed 
authorization by one of the following methods:
     U.S Mail: Public Comments Processing, Attn: Docket No. 
FWS-R1-ES-2020-0131, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg 
Pike, MS: PRB/3W, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; or
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments to Docket No. FWS-R1-
ES-2020-0131.
    We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. You may 
request that we withhold personal identifying information from public 
review; however, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. See 
Request for Public Comments for more information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brad Thompson, State Supervisor, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, 510 
Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102, Lacey, WA 98503-1273 (telephone 360-753-
9440).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, 
as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361, et seq.), authorizes the Secretary of 
the Interior 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 region during a period of not more than 1 year. 
Incidental take may be authorized only if statutory and regulatory 
procedures are followed and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
(hereafter, ``the Service'' or ``we'') makes the following findings: 
(i) The take is of a small number of marine mammals; (ii) the take will 
have a negligible impact on the species or stock; and (iii) take will 
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the 
species or stock for subsistence uses by coastal-dwelling Alaska 
Natives. As part of the authorization process, we prescribe permissible 
methods of taking and other means of affecting the least practicable 
impact on the species or stock and its habitat and prescribe 
requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such 
takings.
    The term ``take,'' as defined by the MMPA, means to harass, hunt, 
capture, or kill, or to attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any 
marine mammal (16 U.S.C. 1362(13)). Harassment, as defined by the MMPA, 
means ``any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the 
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 
(the MMPA refers to this impact as 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 (the MMPA refers to these impacts as Level B harassment) 
(See 16 U.S.C. 1362(18)).
    The terms ``negligible impact,'' ``small numbers,'' and 
``unmitigable adverse impact'' are defined in the Code of Federal 
Regulations at 50 CFR 18.27, the Service's regulations governing take 
of small numbers of marine mammals incidental to specified activities. 
``Negligible impact'' is defined 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. ``Small numbers'' 
is defined as a portion of a marine mammal species or stock whose 
taking would have a negligible impact on that species or stock. 
However, we do not rely on that definition as it conflates the terms 
``small numbers'' and ``negligible impact,'' which we recognize as two 
separate and distinct requirements (see Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. 
v. Evans, 232 F. Supp. 2d 1003, 1025 (N.D. Cal. 2003)). Instead, in our 
small numbers determination, we evaluate whether the number of marine 
mammals likely to be taken is small relative to the size of the overall 
population. ``Unmitigable adverse impact'' is defined as an impact 
resulting from the specified activity (1) that is likely to reduce the 
availability of the species to a level insufficient for a harvest to 
meet subsistence needs by (i) causing the marine mammals to abandon or 
avoid hunting areas, (ii) directly displacing subsistence users, or 
(iii) placing physical barriers between the marine mammals and the 
subsistence hunters; and (2) that cannot be sufficiently mitigated by 
other measures to increase the availability of marine mammals to allow 
subsistence needs to be met. The subsistence provision does not apply 
to northern sea otters in Washington and Oregon.
    If the requisite findings are made, we will issue an IHA, which 
sets forth the following: (i) Permissible methods of taking; (ii) other 
means of effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammals and 
their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating 
grounds, and areas of similar significance; and (iii) requirements for 
monitoring and reporting take.

Summary of Request

    On December 19, 2019, the Service received an application from the 
National Science Foundation (hereafter ``NSF'' or ``the applicant'') 
for authorization to take the northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris 
kenyoni, hereafter ``sea otters'' or ``otters'' unless another 
subspecies is specified) by unintentional harassment incidental to a 
marine geophysical survey of the Cascadia Subduction Zone off the 
coasts of Washington, Oregon, and British Columbia, Canada. The NSF 
subsequently postponed the project until 2021.

Description of the Activities and Specified Geographic Region

    The specified activity (the ``project'') consists of Lamont-Doherty 
Earth Observatory's (L-DEO) 2020 Marine Geophysical Surveys by the 
Research Vessel Marcus G. Langseth (R/V Langseth) in the Northeast 
Pacific Ocean between May 1 and June 31, 2021. The high-energy, two-
dimensional (2-D) seismic surveys are expected to last for a total of 
40 (nonconsecutive) days, including approximately 37 days of seismic 
operations, 2 days of equipment deployment/retrieval, and 1 day of 
transit. A maximum of 6,890 km (4,281 mi) of transect lines would be 
surveyed in marine waters adjacent to Oregon, Washington, and British 
Columbia from 41[deg] N to 50[deg] N latitude and -124 N and -130 W 
longitude, of which approximately 6,600 km (4,101 mi) would be in the 
U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and 295 km (183 mi) in Canadian 
territorial waters. The Service cannot authorize the incidental take of 
marine mammals in waters not under the jurisdiction of the United 
States, and the Washington stock of the northern sea otter is not found 
within Canadian territorial waters. Therefore, the

[[Page 12021]]

Service's calculation of estimated incidental take is limited to the 
specified activity occurring in United States jurisdictional waters 
within the stock's range.
    The survey would include several strike lines, parallel (including 
one continuous line along the continental shelf) and perpendicular to 
the coast. The R/V Langseth will tow 4 strings containing an array of 
36 airguns at a depth of 12 m (39 ft), creating a discharge volume of 
approximately 6,600 cubic inches (in\3\) or 0.11 cubic meter (m\3\) at 
a shot interval of 37.5 m (123 ft). The 36-airgun array could operate 
24 hours a day, except during mitigation shutdowns, for the entirety of 
the 37 days of survey. The energy produced by the seismic array is 
broadband and ranges from a few hertz (Hz) to kilohertz (kHz); however, 
all but a small fraction of the energy is focused in the 10-300 Hz 
range (Tolstoy et al. 2009). The receiving system would consist of one 
15-km (9.3-mi) long hydrophone streamer, Ocean Bottom Seismometers 
(OBSs), and Ocean Bottom Nodes (OBNs) deployed within the survey area. 
In addition to the operations of the airgun array, a multibeam 
echosounder, a single-beam dual-frequency echosounder (4 and 12 kHz), a 
sub-bottom profiler (SBP), and an Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler 
(ADCP) would be operated. Further information and technical 
specifications can be found in NSF's IHA application and the Service's 
draft EA available at: http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FWS-R1-
ES-2020-2012;0131.

Description of Northern Sea Otters in the Specified Activity Area

    The proposed area of specified activity occurs within the range of 
the Washington stock of the northern sea otter, a portion of the 
species' range that is not listed under the Endangered Species Act of 
1973, as amended (ESA). This stock primarily occurs along the 
Washington coast between Cape Flattery and Grays Harbor, but small 
groups have been reported in the Straits of Juan de Fuca and individual 
sea otters have been reported in Puget Sound and along the Oregon coast 
as far south as Cape Blanco (Jeffries et al. 2019, USFWS 2018, 
unpublished observations J. Rice OSU). Among the largest members of the 
family Mustelidae but one of the smallest of marine mammals, northern 
sea otters exhibit limited sexual dimorphism (males are larger than 
females) and can attain weights and lengths up to 40 kg (110 lb) and 
1.4 m (4.6 ft), respectively. They have a typical life span of 11-15 
years (Riedman and Estes 1990). Unlike most other marine mammals, sea 
otters have little subcutaneous fat. They depend on their clean, dense, 
water-resistant fur for insulation against the cold and maintain a high 
level of internal heat production to compensate for their lack of 
blubber. Consequently, their energetic requirements are high, and they 
consume an amount of food equivalent to approximately 23 to 33 percent 
of their body weight per day (Riedman and Estes 1990).
    Northern sea otters forage in both rocky and soft-sediment 
communities in water depths of 40 m (131 ft) or less (Laidre et al. 
2009), although otters have been documented along the Washington coast 
as far as 58 km (36 mi) offshore in waters deeper than 200 m (656 ft) 
(Pearson 2019; supplemental data provided to USFWS). They tend to be 
found closer to shore during storms, but they venture farther out 
during good weather and calm seas (Kenyon 1975). Sea otters 
occasionally make dives of up to 100 m (328 ft) (Newby 1975), but the 
vast majority of feeding dives (more than 95 percent) occur in waters 
less than 40 m (131 ft) in depth (Tinker et al. 2006). Therefore, sea 
otter habitat is typically defined by the 40-m (131-ft) depth contour 
(Laidre et al. 2011).
    The number of sea otters in this stock, for the purposes of this 
analysis, was estimated to be approximately 3,000, based on survey 
count data and projections for areas not surveyed. The estimated 
minimum abundance of the stock, based on survey count data, was 2,785 
sea otters within the area between Cape Flattery and Grays Harbor, 
Washington, between shore and the 40-m (131-ft) depth contour (Jeffries 
et al. 2019). While systematic surveys farther offshore have not been 
conducted in Washington or Oregon, otters have been documented farther 
offshore (Pearson 2019). Surveys conducted in Southeast Alaska found 95 
percent of northern sea otters were found in areas shallower than 40-m 
(131 ft) and 5 percent farther offshore (Tinker et al. 2019). 
Therefore, assuming a similar proportion of sea otters in Washington 
occur offshore, we added 5 percent (139 sea otters) to the minimum 
abundance to account for otters farther offshore than 40-m (131-ft) 
depth contour, to get a total population estimate of 2,924 for the area 
between Cape Flattery and Grays Harbor. Based on best professional 
judgment and limited anecdotal observations, we estimate two sea otters 
would be somewhere along the coast between Grays Harbor and the 
Washington/Oregon border and two sea otters would be somewhere along 
the Oregon coast.
    Otter densities were calculated for the area between Cape Flattery 
and Grays Harbor, broken down to north and south of the Quillayute 
River. Surveys indicate the otter population is not evenly distributed 
throughout the area surveyed (Jeffries et al. 2019), and the 
distribution of the population during the proposed project is likely to 
be similar to that detected during surveys, as work will occur during 
the same time of year as the surveys were conducted. (See Table 2 for 
density estimations). A density was not estimated for the area between 
Grays Harbor and the southern end of the project; rather, we assumed 
that the four sea otters estimated to occur there would be exposed.
    Further biological information on this stock can be found in the 
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Periodic Status Review 
(Sato 2018) and Recovery Plan (Lance et al. 2004). The sea otters in 
this stock have no regulatory status under the ESA. The potential 
biological removal (PBR) for this stock is 18 sea otters (USFWS 2018). 
PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not 
including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal 
stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum 
sustainable population. While no mortality is anticipated or authorized 
here, PBR is included as a gross indicator of the status of the 
species.

Sea Otter Hearing

    Controlled sound exposure trials on a single older male southern 
sea otter (E. l. nereis) indicate that otters can hear frequencies 
between 125 Hz and 38 kHz with best sensitivity between 1.2 and 27 kHz 
in air and 2 to 26 kHz underwater; however, these thresholds may 
underrepresent best hearing capabilities in younger otters (Ghoul and 
Reichmuth 2014). Aerial and underwater audiograms for a captive adult 
(14-year-old) male southern sea otter in the presence of ambient noise 
suggest the sea otter's hearing was less sensitive to high-frequency 
(greater than 22 kHz) and low-frequency (less than 1 kHz) sound than 
terrestrial mustelids, but was similar to that of a California sea lion 
(Zalophus californianus). However, the subject otter was still able to 
hear low-frequency sounds, and the detection thresholds for sounds 
between 0.125-1 kHz were between 116-101 dB, respectively. Dominant 
frequencies of southern sea otter vocalizations are between 3 and 8 
kHz, with some energy extending above 60 kHz (McShane et al. 1995; 
Ghoul and Reichmuth 2012).

[[Page 12022]]

Potential Impacts of the Proposed Seismic Survey on Northern Sea Otters 
in Washington and Oregon

    This section includes a summary of the ways that components of the 
specified activity may impact sea otters and their habitat. A more in-
depth analysis can be found in the Service's draft EA (USFWS 2020). The 
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment of Sea Otters section later in 
this document includes a quantitative analysis of the number of sea 
otters that are expected to be taken by this activity. The Negligible 
Impact section considers the content of the Estimated Take by 
Incidental Harassment of Sea Otters section, and the Mitigation and 
Monitoring section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of 
these activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of 
individuals and how those impacts on individuals are likely to impact 
sea otters.
    Otters may be impacted while at the surface by the presence of the 
vessels traveling to/from the ports to the transects and operating 
along the transects. Otters underwater may be impacted by the OBS/OBNs 
as they are deployed and the acoustic effects from the airguns, OBS/
SBP/ADCP/echosounders, and ship noise.
    Anthropogenic sounds cover a broad range of frequencies and sound 
levels and can have a range of highly variable impacts on marine life, 
from none or minor to potentially severe responses, depending on signal 
characteristics, received levels, duration of exposure, behavioral 
context, and whether the sea otter is above or below the water surface. 
Underwater sounds are not likely to affect sea otters at the surface, 
due to the pressure release effect. Thus, the susceptibility of sea 
otters from underwater sounds would be restricted to behaviors during 
which the head or body is submerged, such as during foraging dives and 
underwater swimming and, intermittently, during grooming bouts. The 
proposed activities include underwater sound sources that are impulsive 
(airguns) and non-impulsive (OBS/SBP/ADCP/echosounders and ship noise). 
Potential effects from impulsive sound sources can range in severity 
from effects such as behavioral disturbance or tactile perception to 
physical discomfort, slight to severe injury of the internal organs and 
the auditory system, or mortality (Yelverton et al. 1973; Yelverton and 
Richmond 1981; Turnpenny and Nedwell 1994; Turnpenny et al. 1994).
    Marine mammals exposed to high-intensity sound, or to lower-
intensity sound for prolonged periods, can experience a hearing 
threshold shift (TS), which is the loss of hearing sensitivity at 
certain frequency ranges (Finneran 2015). TS can be permanent (PTS), in 
which case there is physical damage to the sound receptors in the ear 
(i.e., tissue damage) and the loss of hearing sensitivity is not fully 
recoverable, or temporary (TTS), in which case there is primarily 
tissue fatigue and the animal's hearing threshold would recover over 
time (Southall et al. 2007). Repeated sound exposure that leads to TTS 
could cause PTS. Temporary or permanent loss of hearing will occur 
almost exclusively for noise within an animal's hearing range. Given 
the longer exposure duration necessary to cause PTS as compared with 
TTS, it is considerably less likely that PTS would occur as a result of 
project activities because a sea otter could remove itself from 
exposure by coming to the surface. However, a sea otter underwater in 
close proximity to the higher level of sound could experience PTS. In 
addition, otters startled by the sound while foraging in deeper waters 
will be underwater longer and potentially be exposed to more acoustic 
sound.
    Behavioral disturbance may include a variety of effects, including 
subtle changes in behavior (e.g., minor or brief avoidance of an area, 
changes in vocalizations, or changes in antipredator response), more 
conspicuous changes in similar behavioral activities, and more 
sustained and/or potentially severe reactions, such as displacement 
from or abandonment of high-quality habitat. Reactions by sea otters to 
anthropogenic noise can be manifested as visible startle responses, 
flight responses (flushing into water from haulouts or ``splash-down'' 
alarm behavior in surface-resting rafts), changes in moving direction 
and/or speed, changes in or cessation of certain behaviors (such as 
grooming, socializing, or feeding), or avoidance of areas where noise 
sources are located. The biological significance of these behavioral 
disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected 
disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral 
modification would be expected to be biologically significant if the 
change affected growth, survival, or reproduction.
    Potentially significant behavioral modifications include 
disturbance of resting sea otters, marked disruption of foraging 
behaviors, separation of mothers from pups, or disruption of spatial 
and social patterns (sexual segregation and male territoriality). 
Foraging is energetically costly to sea otters, more so than other 
marine mammals, because of their buoyancy and swimming style (Yeates et 
al. 2007), thus displacement from or reduction of foraging in high-
quality habitat could result in increased energy expenditures. The 
energy expense and associated physiological effects could ultimately 
lead to reduced survival and reproduction (Gill and Sutherland 2000; 
Frid and Dill 2002).
    Disturbances can also have indirect effects; for example, response 
to noise disturbance is considered a nonlethal stimulus that is similar 
to an antipredator response (Frid and Dill 2002). Sea otters are 
susceptible to predation, particularly from sharks and eagles, and have 
a well-developed antipredator response to perceived threats, which 
includes actively looking above and beneath the water. Although an 
increase in vigilance or a flight response is nonlethal, a tradeoff 
occurs between risk avoidance and energy conservation. An animal's 
reactions to noise disturbance may cause stress and direct an animal's 
energy away from fitness-enhancing activities such as feeding and 
mating (Frid and Dill 2002; Goudie and Jones 2004). For example, 
southern sea otters in areas with heavy recreational boat traffic 
demonstrated changes in behavioral time budgeting showing decreased 
time resting and changes in haul-out patterns and distribution (Benham 
2006; Maldini et al. 2012).
    Chronic stress can also lead to weakened reflexes, lowered learning 
responses (Welch and Welch 1970; van Polanen Petel et al. 2006), 
compromised immune function, decreased body weight, and abnormal 
thyroid function (Seyle 1979). Changes in behavior resulting from 
anthropogenic disturbance can include increased agonistic interactions 
between individuals or temporary or permanent abandonment of an area 
(Barton et al. 1998). The type and extent of response may be influenced 
by intensity of the disturbance (Cevasco et al. 2001), the extent of 
previous exposure to humans (Holcomb et al. 2009), the type of 
disturbance (Andersen et al. 2012), and the age or sex of the 
individuals (Shaughnessy et al. 2008; Holcomb et al. 2009).
    Exposure Thresholds--Although no specific thresholds have been 
developed for sea otters, several alternative behavioral response 
thresholds have been developed for otariid pinnipeds. Otariid pinnipeds 
(e.g., California sea lions [Zalophus californianus]) have a frequency 
range of hearing most similar to that measured in a southern sea otter 
(Ghoul and Reichmuth 2014) and provide the closest related proxy for

[[Page 12023]]

which data are available. Sea otters and pinnipeds share a common 
mammalian aural physiology (Echteler et al. 1994; Solntseva 2007). Both 
are adapted to amphibious hearing, and both use sound in the same way 
(primarily for communication rather than feeding). NMFS criteria for 
Level A harassment represents the best available information for 
predicting injury from exposure to underwater sound among pinnipeds, 
and in the absence of data specific to otters, we assume these criteria 
also represent appropriate exposure thresholds for Level A harassment 
of sea otters.
    For otariid pinnipeds, PTS is predicted to occur at 232 dB peak or 
203 dB SELcum (cumulative sound exposure level) for impulsive sound, or 
219 dB SELcum for non-impulsive (continuous) sound (NMFS 2018). 
Exposure to unmitigated in-water noise levels between 125 Hz and 38 kHz 
that are greater than 232 dB peak or 203 dB SELcum for impulsive sound 
or 219 dB SELcum for non-impulsive (continuous) sound will be 
considered by the Service as Level A harassment. NMFS predicts that 
marine mammals are likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner 
considered Level B harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic 
noise above received levels of 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for continuous 
(e.g., vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa 
(rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or 
intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources (NMFS 2018).
    Thresholds based on TTS can be used as a proxy for Level B 
harassment. Based on studies summarized by Finneran (2015), NMFS (2018) 
has set the TTS threshold for otariid pinnipeds at 188 dB SELcum for 
impulsive sounds and 199 dB SELcum for non-impulsive sounds. Thus, 
using information available for other marine mammals, specifically 
otariid pinnipeds, as a surrogate, and taking into consideration the 
best available information about sea otters, the Service has set the 
received sound level underwater of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) as a 
threshold for Level B harassment for sea otters based on the work of 
Ghoul and Reichmuth (2012), McShane et al. (1995), Riedman (1983), 
Richardson et al. (1995), and others. Exposure to unmitigated impulsive 
in-water noise levels between 125 Hz and 38 kHz that are greater than 
160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) will be considered by the Service as Level B 
harassment.
    Exposure to Project Activities--Based on the studies on sea otters 
in Washington, California, and Alaska, we believe sea otters spend 
between 40 and 60 percent of a 24-hour period with at least a portion 
of their body underwater (foraging, other diving, or grooming behaviors 
that result in the head being underwater) and forage both diurnally and 
nocturnally (Esslinger et al. 2014, Laidre et al. 2009, Yeates et al. 
2007, Tinker et al. 2008). Seismic survey activities can operate 24 
hours/day and otters may be exposed at any time. Any single point along 
the transects could be above thresholds for a maximum of 6.5 hours, 
during which time sea otters in that area would engage in underwater 
behaviors and would be exposed to underwater sound. Some areas along 
the transects will be ensonified more than once.
    Because sea otters spend a considerable portion of their time at 
the surface of the water, they are typically visually aware of 
approaching boats and are able to move away if the vessel is not 
traveling too quickly. The noise of approaching boats provides an 
additional warning, thus otters should be able to detect the vessels 
and paddle away, rather than be startled and go subsurface. Because the 
R/V Langseth would be traveling relatively slowly (4.5 knots) during 
the surveys, it is unlikely that sea otters would suffer injury or 
death from a vessel collision. Otters that may be foraging may be 
startled by the remotely operated vehicle deployed to retrieve OBNs in 
waters >60 m (197 ft) along three transects perpendicular to the Oregon 
coast.
    The potential for exposure to all activities is likely to be 
limited to where the vessel is operating in waters <1,000 m (3,280 ft) 
deep, as we do not anticipate otters to be farther offshore. Off the 
Washington coast, females primarily forage and rest in waters <40 m 
(131 ft), but males spend less time foraging close to shore and rest 
farther offshore than females (Laidre et al. 2009), venturing as far 
offshore as 58 km (36 mi) (Pearson 2019). Within the waters adjacent to 
Washington and northern Oregon (to Tillamook Head), the ensonified zone 
would not penetrate the waters between shore and the 40-m (131-ft) 
depth contour, thus sea otters that may be exposed are more likely to 
be the males that occur farther offshore. The otters along the Oregon 
coast are presumed to be males, based on stranding data (FWS 
unpublished data).
    NSF and L-DEO have proposed measures to minimize the chances of sea 
otter exposure to the seismic surveys. Along the Washington coast in 
waters <200 m (656 ft) deep, the airgun array would operate only during 
daylight hours. The airgun startup would be ramped in order to alert 
otters that are underwater, in the hope they would move away. Prior to 
airgun startup and during airgun operations, visual observers would be 
employed during daylight hours, in order to establish a 500-m (1,640 
ft) exclusion zone. Any sea otter observed in this zone would lead to a 
shutdown of the airgun array. However, there will be gaps in the visual 
coverage, in particular during nighttime operations in Oregon and 
beyond 200 m (656 ft) in Washington. In addition, under poor weather 
conditions and some good weather conditions, observers cannot be 100 
percent effective and may not detect a sea otter in, or about to enter, 
the exclusion zone. Further, visual observations cannot cover the 
entirety of the area with sound levels that may cause behavioral 
changes. The lack of ability to fully monitor the ensonified area means 
an otter(s) may go unobserved and be exposed to underwater noise that 
results in Level A and/or Level B harassment.

Potential Effects of the Proposed Activity on Northern Sea Otter 
Habitat

    Physical and biological features of habitat essential to the 
conservation of sea otters include the benthic invertebrates (crabs, 
urchins, mussels, clams, etc.) eaten by otters and the shallow rocky 
areas and kelp beds that provide cover from predators. Important sea 
otter habitat areas of significance in the NSF and L-DEO project area 
include coastal areas within the 40-m (131-ft) depth contour where high 
densities of otters have been detected, although deeper waters may be 
important for male sea otters. A number of recent reviews and empirical 
studies have addressed the effects of noise on invertebrates (Carroll 
et al. 2017), sea otter prey, with some studies showing little or no 
effects and others indicating deleterious effects from exposure to 
increased sound levels. Given the short-term duration of sounds 
produced by each component of the proposed project, it is unlikely that 
noises generated by survey activities will have any lasting effect on 
sea otter prey (see the Service's draft EA (USFWS 2020) for further 
information). The MMPA allows the Service to identify avoidance and 
minimization measures for affecting the least practicable impact of the 
specified activity on important habitats. Although sea otters within 
this important habitat may be impacted by geophysical surveys conducted 
by NSF and L-DEO, the project, as currently proposed, is not likely to 
cause lasting effects to habitat.

Potential Impacts of the Proposed Activity on Subsistence Needs

    The subsistence provision of the MMPA does not apply to northern 
sea otters in Washington and Oregon.

[[Page 12024]]

Mitigation and Monitoring

    In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 
the Service must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant 
to the activity, and other means of affecting the least practicable 
impact on the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular 
attention to habitat areas of significance and the availability of sea 
otters for subsistence uses by coastal-dwelling Alaska Natives, 
although this factor is not applicable for this action.
    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to 
ensure the least practicable impact on species or stocks and their 
habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we carefully 
consider two primary factors:
    (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful 
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to 
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat. 
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being 
mitigated (i.e., likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the 
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented 
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as 
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability 
implemented as planned); and
    (2) The practicability of the measures for applicant 
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on 
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity, 
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the 
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
    To reduce the potential for disturbance to marine mammals caused by 
acoustic stimuli associated with IHA activities, NSF has proposed to 
implement mitigation measures for the northern sea otter including, but 
not limited to, the following:
     Development of marine mammal monitoring and mitigation 
plans;
     Reduced survey transect lines and daylight-only operations 
in area of highest sea otter densities;
     Establishment of shutdown and monitoring zones;
     Vessel-based visual mitigation monitoring by Protected 
Species Observers;
     Site clearing before start-up;
     Soft-start and shutdown procedures.
    The specific methods to be implemented are further specified in the 
Service's draft EA (USFWS 2020) available at: http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2020-0131.

Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment of Northern Sea Otters

    In a previous section, we discussed the components of the project 
activities that have the potential to affect sea otters and the 
physiological and behavioral effects that can be expected. Here, we 
discuss how the Service characterizes these effects under the MMPA.
    An individual sea otter's reaction to human activity will depend on 
the otter's prior exposure to the activity, its need to be in the 
particular area, its physiological status, or other intrinsic factors. 
The location, timing, frequency, intensity, and duration of the 
encounter are among the external factors that will also influence the 
animal's response. Intermediate reactions that disrupt biologically 
significant behaviors are considered Level B harassment under the MMPA. 
The Service has identified the following sea otter behaviors as 
indicating possible Level B harassment:
     Swimming away at a fast pace on belly (i.e., porpoising);
     Repeatedly raising the head vertically above the water to 
get a better view (spy hopping) while apparently agitated or while 
swimming away;
     In the case of a pup, repeatedly spy hopping while hiding 
behind and holding onto its mother's head;
     Abandoning prey or feeding area;
     Ceasing to nurse and/or rest (applies to dependent pups);
     Ceasing to rest (applies to independent animals);
     Ceasing to use movement corridors along the shoreline;
     Ceasing mating behaviors;
     Shifting/jostling/agitation in a raft so that the raft 
disperses;
     Sudden diving of an entire raft; or
     Flushing animals off of a haulout.
    This list is not meant to encompass all possible behaviors; other 
situations may also indicate Level B harassment.
    Reactions capable of causing injury are characterized as Level A 
harassment events. However, it is also important to note that, 
depending on the duration and severity of the above-described Level B 
behaviors, such responses could constitute take by Level A harassment. 
For example, while a single flushing event would likely indicate Level 
B harassment, repeatedly flushing sea otters from a haulout may 
constitute Level A harassment.

Calculating Estimate of Takes

    In the sections below, we estimate take by harassment of the 
numbers of sea otters from the Washington stock (in Oregon and 
Washington) that are likely to be affected during the proposed 
activities. We assumed all animals exposed to underwater sound levels 
that meet the acoustic exposure criteria would experience Level A (>232 
dBRMS) or Level B (160-232 dBRMS) harassment. To 
determine the number of otters that may be exposed to these sound 
levels, we created spatially explicit zones of ensonification using the 
proposed reduced survey transect lines and determined the number of 
otters present in the ensonification zones using density information 
generated from minimum population estimates in Jeffries et al. (2019), 
which subdivides the surveyed area into Cape Flattery to La Push and La 
Push to north entrance of Grays Harbor. An in-depth explanation of the 
process used can be found in the Service's draft EA (USFWS 2020) 
available at: http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2020-
0131.
    The Level A and Level B underwater sound thresholds were used to 
create spatially explicit ensonification zones surrounding the proposed 
project transects. We created a buffer with a 46-m (151-ft) width 
around the proposed project transects to account for the Level A 
ensonified area on either side of the 24-m-wide (79-ft-wide) airgun 
array. To determine the Level B ensonified area, we placed a 12,650-m 
(7.9-mi) buffer around transects in water <100 m (328 ft) deep, and a 
9,468-m (5.9-mi) buffer around transects in water 100-1,000 m (328-
3,280 ft) deep.
    The minimum population estimate from Jeffries et al. (2019) can be 
specifically applied to the surveyed area, which included the 
Washington coastline between Cape Flattery and Grays Harbor in the 
nearshore areas less than 25-m (82-ft) depth contour. Sea otters are 
overwhelmingly observed (95 percent) within the 40-m (131-ft) depth 
contour (Laidre et al. 2009; Tinker et al. 2019), thus for the purposes 
of this analysis, the population estimated by Jeffries et al. (2019) is 
assumed to apply to the 40-m (131-ft) depth contour for the waters 
between Grays Harbor and Cape Flattery. The minimum abundance estimates 
from Jeffries et al. (2019) were divided north and south of the 
Quillayute River, thus for this analysis habitat was divided into 
subregions, Cape Flattery south to Quillayute River (subregion north) 
and Quillayute River to Grays Harbor (subregion mid). Density estimates 
for the north and mid subregions were calculated by dividing the 
population estimate for that subregion (Jeffries et al. 2019) by the 
area from shore to the 40-m (131-ft) depth contour. See Table 1 for 
projected sea otter abundance and density estimates.

[[Page 12025]]

    Sea otter abundances outside of the area covered by surveys were 
inferred/estimated as follows.
     North and Mid subregions 40-100-m (131-328-ft) depth 
contour: While 95 percent of sea otters are observed within the 40-m 
(131-ft) depth contour, otters do occur farther off shore (see Pearson 
2019 for specific instances off Washington coast), thus lower density 
otter habitat was delineated between the 40- and 100-m (131- and 328-
ft) depth contours. To calculate the density of otters in lower density 
(40-10-m or 131-328-ft) habitat, we multiplied the density of the 
adjacent high-density habitat by 0.05.
     North and Mid subregions 100-m (328-ft) depth 
contour: Pearson (2019) observed two sea otters (1 in 2017 and 1 in 
2018) in waters >100-m (328-ft) depth contour in the Mid subregion. We 
do not have a reasonable method for determining the density of otters 
in the waters this deep and far offshore, thus for the purposes of 
calculating the number of otters that may be exposed, we assumed 2 
otters could be in the waters >100-m (328-ft) depth contour in the Mid 
subregion.
     South subregion: Includes the area from Grays Harbor south 
to Oregon/California border. This subregion was further divided into 
three areas because of the differences in transects and sea otter 
observations: Grays Harbor to Washington/Oregon border, Northern 
Oregon, Southern Oregon. There are no systematic surveys conducted 
south of Grays Harbor, but there are consistent reports of individuals 
as far south as Cape Blanco, Oregon (unpublished FWS data; Jim Rice, 
Oregon State University, pers. comm). We do not have data to inform a 
density estimate for these areas; however, in our best professional 
judgment we estimated that a minimum of four sea otters may be in the 
south subregion at the time of the project. Pearson (2019) observed one 
sea otter in waters >100-m (328-ft) depth contour in the South 
subregion. We do not have a reasonable method for determining the 
density of otters in the waters this deep and far offshore, thus for 
the purposes of calculating the number of otters that may be exposed in 
the Grays Harbor to WA/OR border, we assumed two sea otters could be at 
any depth. In Oregon, we assumed one otter in each of the two areas, 
which could be at any depth.

                   Table 1--Estimated Sea Otter Abundance and Densities for the Analysis Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            High density  (<40 m)                Lower density  (40-100 m)
                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Subregion               Abundance       Area                   Abundance       Area
                                      estimate     (km\2\)      Density      estimate     (km\2\)      Density
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North.............................          549          456          1.2           27          556         0.05
Mid...............................        2,236        1,434         1.56          112        2,060         0.05
South.............................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The area impacted in each subregion and depth contour was 
multiplied by the estimated otter density to determine the number of 
otters that would experience Level A and Level B sound levels (Tables 2 
and 3). The total number of takes was predicted by estimating the 
projected days of activity in each subregion and depth contour using 
the reduced transects supplied by NSF. In several areas, the length and 
direction of the proposed survey transect lines make it highly unlikely 
that impacts will occur on only 1 day. In these instances, we estimated 
the days of disturbance based on the number of passes of the survey 
transect lines.
    The following assumptions were pertinent to our estimate of 
harassment take (see above for specific rationale):
     No otters will occur >100-m (328-ft) depth contour in 
North subregion.
     Visual observers will not be able to see sea otters in 
poor weather conditions and will not be observing at night. When visual 
observers are not able to effectively observe sea otters, there would 
be no mitigation (shutdown) applied.
     When visual observers are not able to observe sea otters 
they could be exposed to harassment that has the potential to injure 
(Level A) or disturb by causing disruption of behavioral patterns 
(Level B). For the purposes of this analysis, we applied our best 
professional judgment and erred on the side of the species, attributing 
the harassment to Level A. In the areas where a density estimate cannot 
be used to differentiate the number of otters exposed to Level A or 
Level B, we attributed the harassment to Level A.
     During the project, only two sea otters will be in the 
waters offshore of Southwest Washington between Grays Harbor and 
Washington/Oregon border. These two sea otters may be in waters >100 m 
(328 ft), thus harassment was assigned at Level A conditions.
     During the project, only two sea otters will be in the 
waters offshore of Oregon. These two sea otters may be in waters at any 
depth contour, thus harassment was assigned at Level A conditions.

       Table 2--Estimated Number of Northern Sea Otters Ensonified by Sound Levels Greater Than 232 dBRMS (Level A) Due to the Proposed Activities
 Take was calculated by multiplying the area ensonified in each subregion by that subregion's sea otter density or specific estimate, then multiplied by
                                                          the projected days of ensonification]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                          Area                   Projected    Estimated
               Subregion                        Habitat type             Density  (otters/km\2\)        impacted    Estimated     days of       survey
                                                                                                        (km\2\)      take/day       take     total takes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North..................................  High (<40m)...............  1.2............................            0            0  ...........            0
                                         Low (40-100 m)............  .05............................            0            0  ...........            0
                                         Offshore (>100 m).........  0..............................  ...........  ...........  ...........            0
Mid....................................  High (<40 m)..............  1.56...........................            0            0  ...........            0
                                         Low (40-100 m)............  0.05...........................            0            0  ...........            0
                                         Offshore (>100 m).........  2 otters.......................  ...........            2            2            4

[[Page 12026]]

 
Grays Harbor-WA/OR border..............  ..........................  2 otter........................  ...........            2            2            4
N Oregon...............................  ..........................  1 otter........................  ...........            1            2            2
S Oregon...............................  ..........................  1 otter........................  ...........            1            3            3
                                                                                                     ---------------------------------------------------
    Total..............................  ..........................  ...............................  ...........            5  ...........           13
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Stock Total..................  ..........................  ...............................  ...........  ...........  ...........        2,928
Percentage of Stock....................  ..........................  ...............................  ...........  ...........  ...........         0.44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


       Table 3--Estimated Number of Northern Sea Otters Ensonified by Sound Levels Greater Than 160 dBRMS (Level B) Due to the Proposed Activities
[Take was calculated by multiplying the area ensonified in each subregion by that subregion's sea otter density or specific estimate, then multiplied by
                                                          the projected days of ensonification]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                          Area                   Projected    Estimated
               Subregion                        Habitat type             Density  (otters/km\2\)        impacted    Estimated     days of       survey
                                                                                                        (km\2\)      take/day       take     total takes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North..................................  High (<40 m)..............  1.2............................            0            0            0            0
                                         Low (40-100 m)............  .05............................            0            0            1            0
                                         Low (40-100 m)............  .05............................            0            0            2            0
                                         Offshore (>00 m)..........  0..............................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
Mid....................................  High (<40 m)..............  1.56...........................            0            0  ...........            0
                                         Low (40-100 m)............  0.05...........................            0            0            2            0
                                                                                                     ---------------------------------------------------
                                         Offshore (>100 m).........  2 otters.......................               Accounted for in Level A.
Grays Harbor-WA/OR border..............  ..........................  2 otters.......................               Accounted for in Level A.
N Oregon...............................  ..........................  1 otter........................               Accounted for in Level A.
S Oregon...............................  ..........................  1 otter........................               Accounted for in Level A.
                                                                                                     ---------------------------------------------------
    Total..............................  ..........................  ...............................  ...........            0  ...........            0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Stock Total..................  ..........................  ...............................  ...........  ...........  ...........        2,928
Percentage of Stock....................  ..........................  ...............................  ...........  ...........  ...........         0.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We expect that up to 13 sea otters may experience Level A and/or 
Level B take due to harassment by noise (Tables 2 and 3). While sea 
otters in these areas are most likely to be exposed to Level B 
harassment, during times when sea otters cannot be observed, we are 
erring on the side of the species and attributing the potential 
harassment to Level A, thus the total number of otters harassed is 
accounted for under Level A. The revised transects provided by NSF 
resulted in the area of ensonification being beyond the 100-m (328-ft) 
depth contour for the entire coast of Washington; therefore, no otters 
in waters less than 100 m (328 ft) deep are anticipated to be harassed 
by the activities. The total number of incidental takes of sea otters 
is expected to be less than 13. Take from sources other than noise is 
not expected.

Findings

    The Service proposes the following findings regarding this action:

Small Numbers Determination

    The statute and legislative history do not expressly require a 
specific type of numerical analysis for the small take evaluation, 
leaving the determination of ``small'' to the agency's discretion. In 
this case, we propose a finding that the NSF and L-DEO project may 
result in incidental take of up to 13 otters from the Washington sea 
otter stock. This represents less than 1 percent of the stock. 
Predicted levels of take were determined based on estimated density of 
sea otters in the project area and an ensonification zone developed 
using empirical evidence from the same geographic area and corrected 
for the methodology proposed by NSF and L-DEO for this project. Based 
on these numbers, we propose a finding that the NSF and L-DEO project 
will take only a small number of marine mammals.

Negligible Impact

    We propose a finding that any incidental take by harassment 
resulting from the proposed activity cannot be reasonably expected to, 
and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the sea otter through 
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival and will, therefore, 
have no more than a negligible impact on the species or stocks. In 
making this finding, we considered the best available scientific 
information, including: (1) The biological and behavioral 
characteristics of the species; (2) the most recent information on 
species distribution and abundance within the area of the specified 
activity; (3) the current and expected future status of the stock 
(including existing and foreseeable human and natural stressors); (4) 
the potential sources of disturbance caused

[[Page 12027]]

by the project; and (5) the potential responses of marine mammals to 
this disturbance. In addition, we reviewed applicant-provided material, 
information in our files and datasets, published reference materials, 
and input from experts on the sea otter.
    The Service does not anticipate that mortality of affected otters 
would occur as a result of NSF and L-DEO's planned survey. Thus, 
mortality is not authorized. We are proposing to authorize Level A and 
Level B harassment of 13 sea otters. The effects to these individuals 
are unknown, and lasting effects to survival and reproduction for these 
otters are possible. However, we believe that any PTS incurred as a 
result of the planned activity would be in the form of only a small 
degree of PTS, not total deafness, and would be unlikely to affect the 
fitness of any individuals for the following reasons: (1) The constant 
movement of the R/V Langseth means the vessel is not expected to remain 
in any one area in which individual otters may spend an extended period 
of time (i.e., since the duration of exposure to loud sounds will be 
relatively short); and (2) we expect that sea otters would be likely to 
move away from a sound source that represents an aversive stimulus, 
especially at levels that would be expected to result in PTS, given 
sufficient notice of the R/V Langseth's approach due to the vessel's 
relatively low speed when conducting seismic surveys.
    We expect that the majority of takes would be in the form of short-
term behavioral harassment in the form of temporary avoidance of the 
area or ceasing/decreased foraging (if such activity were occurring). 
Reactions to this type of harassment could have significant biological 
impacts for affected individuals but are not likely to result in 
measurable changes in their survival or reproduction. The otters 
subject to short-term behavioral harassment would be the same otters 
that may be subject to Level A harassment.
    The total number of animals affected and severity of impact is not 
sufficient to change the current population dynamics of the sea otter 
at the subregion or stock scales. Although the specified activities may 
result in the take of up to 13 sea otters from the Washington stock, we 
do not expect this level of harassment to affect annual rates of 
recruitment or survival or result in adverse effects on the species or 
stock as all of the projected takes occur outside of the areas used by 
females and are most likely to be males.
    With implementation of the proposed project, sea otter habitat may 
be impacted by elevated sound levels, but these impacts would be 
temporary and are not anticipated to result in detrimental impacts to 
sea otter prey species. Because of the temporary nature of the 
disturbance, the impacts to sea otters and the food sources they 
utilize are not expected to cause significant or long-term consequences 
for individual sea otters or their population.
    The proposed mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number 
and/or severity of take events by allowing for detection of sea otters 
in the vicinity of the vessel by visual observers, and by minimizing 
the severity of any potential exposures via shutdowns of the airgun 
array. These measures, and the monitoring and reporting procedures, are 
required for the validity of our finding and are a necessary component 
of the proposed IHA. For these reasons, we propose a finding that the 
2021 NSF and L-DEO project will have a negligible impact on sea otters.

Impact on Subsistence

    The subsistence provision of the MMPA does not apply to northern 
sea otters in Washington and Oregon.

Required Determinations

Endangered Species Act

    The Service's proposed take authorization has no effect on any 
species listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA. The proposed 
NSF Seismic Survey is a Federal action currently undergoing separate 
interagency consultation with the Service pursuant to the ESA. As ESA-
listed species or critical habitat will not be impacted by the 
Service's proposed take authorization, intra-agency consultation for 
the permit action is not required.

National Environmental Policy Act

    We have prepared a draft EA (USFWS 2020) addressing the proposed 
MMPA take authorization in accordance with the requirements of NEPA (42 
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Based on the findings presented in the EA, we 
have preliminarily concluded that approval and issuance of the 
authorization for the nonlethal, incidental, unintentional take by 
Level A and Level B harassment of small numbers of the Washington stock 
of the northern sea otter caused by activities conducted by the 
applicant would not significantly affect the quality of the human 
environment, and that the preparation of an environmental impact 
statement for this action is not required by section 102(2) of NEPA or 
its implementing regulations. We are accepting comments on the draft EA 
as described above in ADDRESSES.

Government-to-Government Relations With Native American Tribal 
Governments

    In accordance with: The President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments'' (59 FR 22951); the Native American Policy of the Service 
(January 20, 2016); Executive Order 13175 (November 6, 2000); and the 
Department of the Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge 
our responsibility to communicate meaningfully with Federally 
recognized Tribes on a Government-to-Government basis. We have 
evaluated possible effects of the proposed MMPA take authorization on 
federally recognized Indian Tribes and have determined that there are 
no effects.

Proposed Authorization

    We propose to issue an IHA to NSF for incidental takes by Level A 
and Level B harassment of up to 13 sea otters from the Washington stock 
of the northern sea otter. The final authorization would incorporate 
the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures as described below 
and fully detailed in the draft EA. The taking of sea otters whenever 
the required conditions, mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures 
are not fully implemented as required by the IHA will be prohibited. 
Failure to follow these measures may result in the modification, 
suspension, or revocation of the IHA. Authorized take will be limited 
to PTS and disruption of behavioral patterns that may be caused by 
geophysical surveys and support activities conducted by NSF and L-DEO 
in Washington and Oregon from May 1 to June 30, 2021. We anticipate no 
take in the form of death of northern sea otters resulting from these 
surveys.
    If take exceeds the level or type identified in the proposed 
authorization (e.g., greater than 13 incidents of take of sea otters), 
the IHA will be invalidated and the Service will reevaluate its 
findings. If project activities cause unauthorized take, the applicant 
must take the following actions: (i) Cease its activities immediately 
(or reduce activities to the minimum level necessary to maintain 
safety); (ii) report the details of the incident to the Service's 
Washington Fish and Wildlife Office within 48 hours; and (iii) suspend 
further activities until the Service has reviewed the circumstances,

[[Page 12028]]

determined whether additional mitigation measures are necessary to 
avoid further unauthorized taking, and notified the applicant that they 
may resume project activities.
    All operations managers and vessel operators must possess a copy of 
the IHA and maintain access to it for reference at all times during 
project work. These personnel must understand, be fully aware of, and 
be capable of implementing the conditions of the IHA at all times 
during project work.
    The IHA will apply to activities associated with the proposed 
project as described in this document, the draft EA, and in the 
applicant's amended application and environmental assessments. Changes 
to the proposed project without prior Service authorization may 
invalidate the IHA.
    Operators shall allow Service personnel or the Service's designated 
representative to visit project work sites to monitor impacts to sea 
otters at any time throughout project activities so long as it is safe 
to do so. ``Operators'' are all personnel operating under the 
applicant's authority, including all contractors and subcontractors.
    A final report will be submitted by NSF to the Service within 90 
days after completion of work or expiration of the IHA. The report will 
describe the operations that were conducted and document sightings of 
sea otters near the operations. The report will provide full 
documentation of methods, results, and interpretation pertaining to all 
monitoring, including factors influencing visibility and detectability 
of sea otters. The final report will summarize the dates and locations 
of seismic operations, and all northern sea otter sightings (dates, 
times, locations, activities, associated seismic survey activities). 
The report will also include estimates of the number and nature of 
exposures, if any, that occurred above the harassment threshold based 
on Protected Species Observer (PSO) observations and including an 
estimate of those that were not detected.
    The report shall also include geo-referenced time-stamped vessel 
transect lines for all time periods during which airguns were 
operating. Transect lines should include points recording any change in 
airgun status (e.g., when the airguns began operating, when they were 
turned off, or when they changed from a full array to a single gun or 
vice versa). GIS files shall be provided in ESRI shapefile format and 
include the UTC date and time, latitude in decimal degrees, and 
longitude in decimal degrees. All coordinates shall be referenced to 
the GCS_North_American_1983 geographic coordinate system. In addition 
to the report, all raw observational data shall be made available to 
the Service. The report will be accompanied by a certification from the 
lead PSO as to the accuracy of the report, and the lead PSO may submit 
directly to the Service a statement concerning implementation and 
effectiveness of the required mitigation and monitoring.

References

    A list of the references cited in this notice is available at 
www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2020-0131.

Request for Public Comments

    If you wish to comment on this proposed authorization or the 
associated draft EA, or both, you may submit your comments by any of 
the methods described in ADDRESSES. Please identify if you are 
commenting on the proposed IHA, draft EA, or both. Please make your 
comments as specific as possible, confine them to issues pertinent to 
the proposed authorization, and explain the reason for any changes you 
recommend. Where possible, your comments should reference the specific 
section or paragraph that you are addressing. The Service will consider 
all comments that are received before the close of the comment period 
(see DATES above).
    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or 
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be 
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying 
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can 
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.

    Dated: February 23, 2021.
Hugh Morrison,
Deputy Regional Director, Interior Regions 9 and 12.
[FR Doc. 2021-04081 Filed 2-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P