Composite Training Unit Exercises and Joint Task ... - Govsupport.us

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalCOMPOSITE TRAINING UNIT EXERCISES AND JOINT TASKFORCE EXERCISESENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/OVERSEASENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTFINALFORCommander, U.S. Pacific FleetCommander, THIRD FleetFebruary 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalThis Page Intentionally Left Blank

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalCOMPOSITE TRAINING UNIT EXERCISE (COMPTUEX) AND JOINT TASK FORCEEXERCISES (JTFEX) OPERATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/OVERSEASENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA/OEA)TABLE OF CONTENTSACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.................................................................................... ixEXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... ES-1CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION............................ 1-11.1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................1-11.2 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................1-21.3 PROPOSED ACTION .................................................................................................................1-51.4 OVERVIEW OF COMPTUEX AND JTFEX..............................................................................1-51.5 PURPOSE AND NEED ...............................................................................................................1-61.6 SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE EA/OEA .................................................................................1-61.7 RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS .............................................................................1-71.8 PUBLIC COMMENT..................................................................................................................1-7CHAPTER 2 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES . 2-12.1 COMPTUEX AND JTFEX TRAINING AREAS.........................................................................2-12.1.1 Description of the Proposal.....................................................................................2-42.1.2 Offshore and Nearshore Ranges..............................................................................2-52.1.3 Onshore Ranges ......................................................................................................2-62.2 COMPTUEX AND JTFEX OVERVIEW AND TRAINING COMPONENTS...................................2-62.2.1 COMPTUEX/JTFEX Vessels, Aircraft, and Personnel..........................................2-72.2.2 COMPTUEX and JTFEX Exercise Events.............................................................2-72.3 OPERATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH A COMPTUEX OR JTFEX...............................................2-112.3.1 At-Sea Training Operations ..................................................................................2-112.3.2 Air Operations.......................................................................................................2-192.3.3 Ground Operations................................................................................................2-262.3.4 Combat Training Operations.................................................................................2-302.4 DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES ......................................................................................2-312.4.1 Alternatives Considered ........................................................................................2-312.4.2 Evaluation Factors/Screening Criteria ..................................................................2-322.4.3 Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration...........................................2-32CHAPTER 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ................................................................ 3-13.1 AIR QUALITY..........................................................................................................................3-13.1.1 Air Quality Classifications......................................................................................3-43.1.2 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area) ...............................................3-43.1.3 Land Areas ..............................................................................................................3-43.1.4 De Minimis Levels ..................................................................................................3-43.2 WATER RESOURCES ...............................................................................................................3-53.2.1 Federal Requirements..............................................................................................3-53.2.2 State Requirements..................................................................................................3-53.2.3 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area) ...............................................3-6i February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinal3.2.4 Land Areas ..............................................................................................................3-73.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .......................................................................................................3-73.3.1 Regulatory Framework............................................................................................3-73.3.2 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area) .............................................3-103.3.3 Land Areas ............................................................................................................3-643.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES........................................................................................................3-673.4.1 Federal Requirements............................................................................................3-683.4.2 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area) .............................................3-683.4.3 Land Areas ............................................................................................................3-693.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTES...............................................................................3-703.5.1 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area) .............................................3-703.5.2 Land Areas ............................................................................................................3-713.6 SOCIOECONOMICS ................................................................................................................3-723.6.1 Southern California Operating Area .....................................................................3-733.6.2 Land Areas ............................................................................................................3-743.7 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN................................................3-753.7.1 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area) .............................................3-753.7.2 Land Areas ............................................................................................................3-763.8 TRANSPORTATION ................................................................................................................3-763.8.1 Ocean Traffic ........................................................................................................3-763.8.2 Air Traffic .............................................................................................................3-773.8.3 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area) .............................................3-783.8.4 Land Areas ............................................................................................................3-793.9 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY ..............................................................................................3-793.9.1 Range Operations..................................................................................................3-793.9.2 Lasers ....................................................................................................................3-793.9.3 Aircraft ..................................................................................................................3-803.9.4 Submarines............................................................................................................3-803.9.5 Ships......................................................................................................................3-803.9.6 Munitions ..............................................................................................................3-803.9.7 Missiles .................................................................................................................3-803.9.8 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area) .............................................3-803.9.9 Land Areas ............................................................................................................3-81CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES............................................... 4-14.1 AIR QUALITY..........................................................................................................................4-14.1.1 Aircraft Operations..................................................................................................4-24.1.2 Surface Ship Operations..........................................................................................4-24.1.3 Alternatives .............................................................................................................4-34.1.4 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area).................................................4-54.1.5 Land Areas ..............................................................................................................4-64.2 WATER RESOURCES ...............................................................................................................4-74.2.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area).................................................4-74.2.2 Land Areas ............................................................................................................4-104.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .....................................................................................................4-114.3.1 Marine Resources..................................................................................................4-114.3.2 Terrestrial Resources.............................................................................................4-80February 2007ii

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinal4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES........................................................................................................4-834.4.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)...............................................4-834.4.2 Land Areas ............................................................................................................4-834.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTES...............................................................................4-844.5.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)...............................................4-854.5.2 Land Areas ............................................................................................................4-854.6 SOCIOECONOMICS ................................................................................................................4-864.6.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)...............................................4-864.6.2 Land Areas ............................................................................................................4-874.7 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN ...............................................4-884.7.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)...............................................4-884.7.2 Land Areas ............................................................................................................4-884.8 TRANSPORTATION ................................................................................................................4-884.8.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)...............................................4-894.8.2 Land Areas ............................................................................................................4-894.9 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY ..............................................................................................4-894.9.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)...............................................4-904.9.2 Land Areas ............................................................................................................4-90CHAPTER 5 PROTECTIVE MEASURES Related to Acoustic Effects..................... 5-15.1 MID-FREQUENCY ACTIVE SONAR OPERATIONS ....................................................................5-15.1.1 General Maritime Protective Measures: Personnel Training .................................5-15.1.2 General Maritime Protective Measures: Lookout and WatchstanderResponsibilities .......................................................................................................5-15.1.3 Operating Procedures..............................................................................................5-25.1.4 Coordination and Reporting....................................................................................5-45.1.5 Alternative Protective Measures Considered but Eliminated..................................5-55.1.6 Conservation Measures ...........................................................................................5-85.2 UNDERWATER DETONATIONS ................................................................................................5-85.2.1 Demolition and Ship MCM Operations (up to 20 lbs)............................................5-95.2.2 SINKEX and ASM Site Selection...........................................................................5-95.3 CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE BIOLOGICAL OPINION ...............................................5-11CHAPTER 6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ...................................................................... 6-16.1 LAND AREA CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ......................................................................................6-16.2 AIR QUALITY IMPACTS...........................................................................................................6-16.3 OTHER PAST, PRESENT, AND REASONABLY FORESEEABLE FUTURE ACTIVITIES..................6-26.3.1 Commercial Fishing................................................................................................6-26.3.2 Vessel Traffic..........................................................................................................6-26.3.3 Coastal Development Activities..............................................................................6-36.3.4 Environmental Contamination and Biotoxins.........................................................6-36.3.5 Other Navy Training Activities at Sea ....................................................................6-36.4 MARINE FISH CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ....................................................................................6-66.5 MARINE MAMMAL CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ...........................................................................6-6iii February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalCHAPTER 7 POSSIBLE CONFLICTS BETWEEN THE ACTION AND THEOBJECTIVES OF FEDERAL, REGIONAL, STATE, AND LOCAL PLANS,POLICIES, AND CONTROLS ................................................................................................ 7-1CHAPTER 8OTHER NEPA CONSIDERATIONS......................................................8-18.1 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF NATURAL OR DEPLETABLERESOURCES..........................................................................................................................................8-18.2 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN’S ENVIRONMENT ANDMAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTIVITY..........................8-1CHAPTER 9CHAPTER 10PREPARERS..............................................................................................9-1REFERENCES.........................................................................................10-1February 2007iv

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalLIST OF APPENDICESA Marine Mammal Density Estimates............................................................................ A-1B Estimated Marine Mammal Exposures During Active Sonar Activities ................ B-1C Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to SUBOPS Activity ............... C-1D Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to ASW Operation Activity ... D-1E Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to Tracking Operation AIRActivity........................................................................................................................... E-1F Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to Tracking OperationSURFACE SHIP (AN/SQS 53)Activity........................................................................F-1G Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to Tracking OperationSURFACE SHIP (AN/SQS 56) Activity......................................................................G-1H Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to Tracking OperationSUB Activity ..................................................................................................................H-1I Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to SINKEX Activity................. I-1J Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to SMCM OperationActivity............................................................................................................................J-1K Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to Mining OperationActivity...........................................................................................................................K-1L Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to DEMO Activity................... L-1M Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals Exposed to ASM Operation Activity... M-1N Estimated Zones of Influence (ZOI) for Marine Mammals During UnderwaterDetonations .................................................................................................................... N-1O Federal Consistenty with Coastal Zone Management Act.......................................O-1v February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalList of FiguresFigure 1.2-1. The Fleet Readiness Training Plan......................................................................................1-3Figure 1.2-2. Training Ranges and Operating Areas for COMPTUEX/JTFEX Training ........................1-4Figure 4.3-1. Summary of the Acoustic Effect Framework....................................................................4-22Figure 4.3-2. Hypothetical Temporary and Permanent Threshold Shifts ...............................................4-23List of TablesTable ES-1. Summary of Potential Impacts........................................................................................... ES-4Table 2.1-1. Ranges and Operating Areas of COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs...............................................2-1Table 2.2-1. Representative COMPTUEX and JTFEX Activities, Locations, and Events ......................2-8Table 3.1-1. Ambient Air Quality Standards ............................................................................................3-3Table 3.1-2. De Minimis Levels for Determination of Applicability of General Conformity Rule..........3-5Table 3.3-1. Relative Abundance of Fish in Nearshore Waters of SCI ..................................................3-17Table 3.3-2. Fish per Acre within Kelp Beds in the Southern California Bight .....................................3-18Table 3.3-3. Species Characteristic of Shallow and Deep Rock Reef Habitats without Kelp in the SCBand Species Found in All Rock Habitats at SCI.................................................................3-20Table 3.3-4. Species Characteristic of Sandy Beach Open Coast, Nearshore, and Offshore Soft Substratesin the SCB ..........................................................................................................................3-21Table 3.3-5. EFH Designated Fish & Invertebrate Species in the SOCAL OPAREA and Vicinity ......3-25Table 3.3-6. Best Hearing Thresholds for Various Species of Fish........................................................3-27Table 3.3-7. Summary of Marine Mammal Species Found in Southern California Waters ...................3-30Table 3.3-8. Seasonal Activities of Pinnipeds and Otarids in and Near the SOCAL OPAREA ............3-64Table 3.7-1. Population and Ethnicity for San Diego County ................................................................3-76Table 4.1-1. Summary of Annual Air Emissions Within 3 nm of Shore – South Coast Air Basin ..........4-4Table 4.1-2. Summary of Annual Air Emissions Within 3 nm of Shore – San Diego Air Basin.............4-5Table 4.1-3. Summary of Annual Air Emissions Within U.S. Territory ..................................................4-6Table 4.1-4. Summary of Annual Air Emissions Outside U.S. Territory.................................................4-6Table 4.3-1. Maximum Fish-Effects Ranges ..........................................................................................4-13Table 4.3-2. Harassment Levels for Active Sonar - Cetaceans...............................................................4-24Table 4.3-3. Harassment Levels for Active Sonar - Pinnipeds...............................................................4-24Table 4.3-4. Underwater Detonations – Pinnipeds and Cetaceans .........................................................4-25Table 4.3-5. Energy Flux Density and Sound Pressure Levels...............................................................4-26Table 4.3-6. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Sub-TTS Marine Mammal Exposures for TrainingUsing Mid-Frequency Active Sonar ..................................................................................4-46Table 4.3-7. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of TTS and PTS Marine Mammal Exposures forTraining Using Mid-Frequency Active Sonar....................................................................4-47Table 4.3-8. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Marine Mammal Exposures for Training UsingUnderwater Explosives ......................................................................................................4-51Table 4.3-9. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Bryde’s Whale ....................................................4-52Table 4.3-10. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Gray Whale.......................................................4-53Table 4.3-11. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Minke Whale ....................................................4-54Table 4.3-12. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Baird’s Beaked Whale ......................................4-55Table 4.3-13. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Bottlenose Dolphin...........................................4-56Table 4.3-14. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Common Dolphin (Long-beaked and Shortbeaked)...............................................................................................................................4-57Table 4.3-15. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Cuvier’s Beaked Whale ....................................4-58February 2007vi

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalTable 4.3-16. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Dall’s Porpoise .................................................4-59Table 4.3-17. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Dwarf Sperm Whale .........................................4-59Table 4.3-18. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of False Killer Whale............................................4-60Table 4.3-19. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Killer Whale .....................................................4-61Table 4.3-20. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Mesoplodon spp. Beaked Whale.......................4-62Table 4.3-21. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Northern Right Whale Dolphin ........................4-62Table 4.3-22. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Pacific White-sided Dolphin ............................4-63Table 4.3-23. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Pantropical Spotted Dolphin.............................4-64Table 4.3-24. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Pygmy Sperm Whale ........................................4-65Table 4.3-25. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Risso’s Dolphin ................................................4-66Table 4.3-26. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Rough-toothed Dolphin ....................................4-67Table 4.3-27. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Short-finned Pilot Whale ..................................4-67Table 4.3-28. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Striped Dolphin.................................................4-68Table 4.3-29. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Ziphiid Beaked Whale ......................................4-69Table 4.3-30. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Northern Elephant Seal.....................................4-70Table 4.3-31. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Pacific Harbor Seal...........................................4-71Table 4.3-32. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of California Sea Lion...........................................4-72Table 4.3-33. Raw Acoustic Model Output of Blue Whale Exposures during Training Exercises........4-73Table 4.3-34. Raw Acoustic Model Output of Fin Whale Exposures during Training Exercises ..........4-73Table 4.3-35. Raw Acoustic Model Output of Humpback Whale Exposures during TrainingExercises ............................................................................................................................4-75Table 4.3-36. Raw Acoustic Model Output of Sei Whale Exposures during Training Exercises ..........4-76Table 4.3-37. Raw Acoustic Model Output of Sperm Whale Exposures During Training Exercises ....4-77Table 4.3-38. Total Annual Harassment Incidents (for Sonar and Underwater Detonations) ................4-78Table 6.3-1. Navy Training Operations ....................................................................................................6-4Table 6.3-2. Major Range Events .............................................................................................................6-6Table 7-1. Possible Conflicts Between the Action and Objectives of Federal, State, and Local Land UsePlans , Policies, and Controls...............................................................................................7-1vii February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007viii

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalAAAAAVAAMAASAAVAAWacACECADADEQAEAFBAFFTCAICUZAIROPSALTRVSAMCMAMPHIBARARGARPAARTCCASHOREASMASWATCAAAZGFDBASHBDUBLMBMGR-WBnBOQBSTRCBUD/SC2XC3FCAACAAQSCADDISCAECAMMSCARBCASCAXCBCCCCCACCAPCCCCDFGCEQCERCLACFFCCFFCINSTAssault AmphibianAdvanced Amphibious Assault VehicleAir-to-Air MissileAssault Amphibian SchoolAmphibious Assault VehicleAnti-Aircraft WarfareAcreAreas of Critical Environmental ConcernAir DefenseArizona Department of Environmental QualityAcoustic EnergyAir Force BaseAir Force Flight Test CenterAir Installation Compatible Use ZoneAircraft Operations SupportAltitude ReservationsAirborne Mine CountermeasuresAmphibiousAerial Refueling RouteAmphibious Readiness GroupArchaeological Resources Protection ActAir Route Traffic Control CenterCommand and ControlAir-to-Surface Missile/BombAnti-Submarine WarfareAir Traffic Control Assigned AirspaceArizona Game and Fish DepartmentBird-Aircraft Strike HazardBomb Dummy UnitBureau of Land ManagementBarry M. Goldwater Range WestBattalionBachelor Officer’s QuartersBob Stump Training Range ComplexBasic Underwater Demolition/SEALsCommand and Control WarfareCommander, THIRD FleetClean Air Act orCollection Accumulation AreaCalifornia Ambient Air Quality StandardsCetacean Acoustic Detection andDive Interval StudiesControlled Area ExtensionCalifornia Marine Mammal SurveyCalifornia Air Resource BoardClose Air SupportCombined Arms OperationConstruction Battalion CenterCalifornia CurrentCalifornia Coastal ActConsolidated Collection Accumulation PointCalifornia Coastal CommissionCalifornia Department of Fish and GameCouncil on Environmental QualityComprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation, and Liability ActCommander, United States FleetForces CommandCommander, Fleet ForcesCommand InstructionAcronyms and AbbreviationsC.F.R.Code of Federal RegulationsCGCruiserCINMS Channel Islands National Marine SanctuaryCIWSClose-In Weapon SystemCMAGR Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery RangeCMOCCivil-Military Operations CenterCNELCommunity Noise Equivalent LevelCNOChief of Naval OperationsCNPSCalifornia Native Plant SocietyCNRSWCommander, Navy Region SouthwestCOCarbon MonoxideCOMPACFLTCommander, U.S. Pacific FleetCOMPTUEX Composite Training Unit ExerciseCPAAA Camp Pendleton Amphibious Assault AreaCPAVA Camp Pendleton Amphibious Vehicle AreaCPSCoastal Pelagic SpeciesCQCarrier QualificationCRISCultural Resources Information SystemCRMPCultural Resources Management PlanCRRCCombat Rubber Raiding CraftCRWQCBCalifornia Regional Water QualityControl BoardCSARCombat Search and RescueCSGCarrier Strike GroupCSOFCounter Special Operations ForceCSPCalifornia State ParksCSWRCBCalifornia State Water ResourcesControl BoardCVCoefficient of Variation orCorrelation of VarianceCVNAircraft Carrier, Nuclear poweredCWAClean Water ActCWCCalifornia Water CodeCZMACoastal Zone Management ActdBDecibeldBAA-Weighted Sound LevelDDGDestroyer, Guided MissileDEISDraft Environmental Impact StatementDEMODemolitionDLQDeck Launch QualificationDNWRDesert National Wildlife RangeDOCDepartment of CommerceDoDDepartment of DefenseDONDepartment of the NavyDPSDistinct Population SegmentEAEnvironmental AssessmentEAFExpeditionary AirfieldEEZExclusive Economic ZoneEFExpeditionary FiresEFHEssential Fish HabitatEISEnvironmental Impact StatementELEnergy Flux Density LevelEMRElectromagnetic RadiationEOExecutive OrderEODExplosive Ordnance DisposalEPCRAEmergency Planning and CommunityRight-to-Know ActESAEndangered Species ActESGExpeditionary Strike GroupESIEnvironmental Sensitivity Indexix February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalESQDExplosives Safety Quantity-DistanceETPEastern Tropical PacificEWElectronic WarfareFAAFederal Aviation AdministrationFACSFAC Fleet Area Control and Surveillance FacilityFARFederal Aviation RegulationFBPFinal Battle ProblemFCLPFleet Carrier Landing PracticeFIACFast Inshore Assault CraftFLEETEXFleet ExerciseFMPFishery Management PlanFONSIFinding of No Significant ImpactFRTCFallon Range Training ComplexFRPFleet Response PlanFRTPFleet Readiness Training PlanFSAFire Support AreaftFeetFTSFleet Training StrategyFYFiscal YearGWOTGlobal War on TerrorismhaHectareHA/DR Humanitarian Assistance/Disaster ReliefHARP Historical and Archaeological Resources PlanHAZMARTHazardous Materials PharmacyHCHydrocarbonHICEASHawaiian Islands Cetacean andEcosystem Assessment SurveyHMAHorse Management AreaHMMCCHazardous Material ManagementControl CenterHMSHighly Migratory SpeciesHSMS Hazardous Substance Management SystemHSMST High Speed Maneuverable Surface TargetHVBSS Helicopter Visit, Board, Search, and SeizureHWMPHazardous Waste Management PlanHzHertzI-5 Interstate 5IBImperial BeachICOP Integrated Contingency and Operations PlanICUZInstallation Compatible Use ZoneIDRCInterdeployment Readiness CycleIEERImproved Extended Echo RangingIFRInstrument Flight RulesIHAIncidental Harassment AuthorizationINRMP Integrated Natural Resources Management PlanISTTImproved Surface Tow TargetJECGJoint Exercise Control GroupJLUSJoint Land Use StudyJPPBJoint Policy and Planning BoardJTFEXJoint Task Force ExercisekgKilogramkmKilometerlbPoundLCACLanding Craft Air CushionLCULanding Craft, UtilityL eqEquivalent Noise LevelLFLive-FireLFALow-Frequency ActiveLGTRLaser Guided Training RoundLHA or LHDAmphibious Assault ShipLLGRLeach Lake Gunnery RangeLOFList of FisheriesmMeterMAGTFTCMarine Air Ground Task ForceTraining CommandMBTAMigratory Bird Treaty ActMCAGCC Marine Corps Air Ground Combat CenterMCASMarine Corps Air StationMCBMarine Corps BaseMCMMine CountermeasuresMCOMarine Corps OrderMEBMarine Expeditionary BrigademiMilemi 2Square MileMIOMaritime Intercept OperationsmmMillimeterMMCMarine Mammal CommissionMMPAMarine Mammal Protection ActMMSMarine Mammal SystemMOAMilitary Operations AreaMOOTWMilitary Operations Other-Than-WarMPAMaritime Protected Area orMaritime Patrol AircraftMPCDMarine Pollution Control DeviceMPRMaritime Patrol and ReconnaissanceMSAMagnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservationand Management ActMSLMean Sea LevelMSOMaritime Security OperationMTRMine Training Ranges orMilitary Training/Transit RouteMWTFMountain Warfare Training FacilityμPaMicro-PascalNAAQS National Ambient Air Quality StandardsNABNaval Amphibious BaseNAFNaval Air FacilityNAGPRA Native American Graves and Repatriation ActNALFNaval Auxiliary Landing FieldNASNaval Air StationNASA National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNASNINaval Air Station North IslandNATOPS Naval Aviation Training and OperationsProcedures StandardizationNAVFAC Naval Facilities Engineering CommandNavyDepartment of the NavyNAWSNaval Air Weapons StationNBNaval BaseNBVCNaval Base Ventura CountyNCAGS Naval Cooperation and Guidance for ShippingNDAANational Defense Authorization ActNDENational Defense ExemptionNEONon-combatant Evacuation OperationNEPANational Environmental Policy ActNEWNet Explosive WeightNHPANational Historic Preservation ActNITSNois-Induced Threshold ShiftnmNautical Milenm 2Square Nautical MileNMFSNational Marine Fisheries ServiceNMSANational Marine Sanctuaries ActNMSPNational Marine Sanctuary ProgramNO 2Nitrogen DioxideNO xOxides of NitrogenNOAANational Oceanic and AtmosphericFebruary 2007x

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalAdministrationNOLFNaval Outlying Landing FieldNOSCNaval Ocean Systems CenterNPSNational Park ServiceNRHPNational Register of Historic PlacesNRWQC National Recommended Water Quality CriteriaNSFSNaval Surface Fire SupportNSGNaval Strike GroupNSWTF Naval Special Warfare Training FacilityNTCNational Training CenterNTTRNevada Test and Training RangeNWNorthwestNWRNational Wildlife RefugeO 3OzoneOEAOverseas Environmental AssessmentOEIS Overseas Environmental Impact StatementOPObservation PostOPAOil Pollution ActOPAREAOperating AreaOPFOROpposition ForceOPAOil Pollution ActOPLATOil PlatformOSTROuter Sea Test RangeOTBOver-the-BeachOTPOperations Training PlanPAHPolycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonsPbLeadPBRPotential Biological RemovalPEACEOPSHumanitarian Assistance/Disaster Relief (HA/DR)PFMCPacific Fishery Management CouncilPGMPrecision-Guided MunitionsPHIBRONAmphibious SquadronPMSRPoint Mugu Sea RangePM 2.5Fine Particulate Matter less than orEqual to 2.5 microns in DiameterPM 10Suspended Particulate Matter less thanor Equal to 10 microns in DiameterPODSPopulation of Delphinus StocksPOLPetroleum, Oils, and LubricantsPOPPlatforms of Opportunity ProgramppmParts per MillionPPMPPollution Prevention Management PlanPPPPollution Prevention PlanPSDPrevention of Significant DeteriorationPSYOPSPsychological OperationsPTSPermanent Threshold ShiftPWCPublic Works CenterRCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery ActRDT&E Research, Development, Testing and EvaluationRECLAIM Regional Clean Air Incentives MarketlRHIBRigid Hull Inflatable BoatROGReactive Organic GasROIRegion of InfluenceRSLReady Service LockerRSORange Safety OfficerRVRecreational VehicleRWQCB Regional Water Quality Control BoardSACSupporting Arms CoordinationSAIASikes Act Improvement ActSAPSatellite Accumulation PointSARStock Assessment ReportSCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management DistrictSCBSouthern California BightSCISan Clemente IslandSCIRCSan Clemente Island Range ComplexSCORESouthern California Offshore RangeSDIASan Diego International AirportSDWASafe Drinking Water ActSEALSea, Air, and LandSELSound Exposure LevelSERE Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and EscapeSINKEXSinking ExerciseSHOBAShore Bombardment AreaSHPOState Historic Preservation OfficeSIPState Implementation PlanSLAMStand-off Land Attack MissileSLAM ERStand-off Land Attack MissleExpanded ResponseSMCMShip Mine CountermeasuresSOARSouthern California Anti-Submarine Warfare RangeSOCSpecial Operations CapableSOCALSouthern CaliforniaSORTS Status of Resources and Training SystemSO 2Sulfur DioxideSPAWARSpace and Naval WarfareSPECWAROPSSpecial Warfare OperationsSPLSound Pressure LevelSRState RouteSSCSea Surface ControlSSMSurface-to-Surface MissileSSTCSilver Strand Training ComplexSSTC-NSilver Strand Training Complex NorthSSTC-SSilver Strand Training Complex SouthSTRIKEAir-to-GroundSTOMShip-to-Objective ManeuverSUASpecial Use AirspaceSUBOPSSubmarine OperationsSURTASS Surveillance Towed Array Sensor SystemSUSSignal Underwater SoundSWFSCSouthwest Fisheries Science CenterSWPPPStormwater Pollution Prevention PlanTALDSTactical Air Launched DecoysTBDTo Be DeterminedTDSTotal Dissolved SolidsTOWTube-Launched, Optically-TrackedWire-Guided MissilesTRAP Tactical Recovery of Aircraft and PersonnelTSCAToxic Substances Control ActTSDFTreatment, Storage, or Disposal FacilityTSThreshold ShiftTSSTime Sensitive StrikeTTSTemporary Threshold ShiftUAVUnmanned Aerial VehiclesUNDSUniform National Discharge StandardsU.S.United StatesUSAU.S. ArmyUSACEU.S. Army Corps of EngineersUSAFU.S. Air ForceU.S.C.United States CodeUSEPAU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyUSFWSU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceUSGSU.S. Geological Surveyxi February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFinalUSMCUSNUUVUWUXOVBSSVFRWWASU.S. Marine CorpsU.S. NavyUnmanned Underwater VehicleUnderwaterUnexploded OrdnanceVisit, Board, Search, and SeizureVisual Flight RulesWarning AreasWar at SeaWCOAAWLTRWSAYPGYTRCZOIWest Coast Offshore Operating AreaWestern Launch and Test RangeWilderness Study AreaYuma Proving GroundYuma Training Range ComplexZone of InfluenceFebruary 2007xii

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Executive SummaryINTRODUCTIONEXECUTIVE SUMMARYThis Environmental Assessment/Overseas Environmental Assessment (EA/OEA) has been prepared bythe Department of the Navy (Navy) in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)of 1969 (42 U.S. Code [U.S.C] § 4321 et seq.); the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulationsfor Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [C.F.R.] §§1500-1508); Department of the Navy Procedures for Implementing NEPA (32 C.F.R. 775); and ExecutiveOrder 12114 (EO 12114), Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions. The NEPA processensures that environmental impacts of proposed major Federal actions are considered in the decisionmakingprocess. EO 12114 requires environmental consideration (e.g., preparation of an OEA) foractions that may significantly harm the environment of the global commons. This EA/OEA satisfies therequirements of both NEPA and EO 12114.BACKGROUNDThe training mission of Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet (COMPACFLT) is to provide fully trained U.S.combat ready forces to Combatant Commanders, as dictated by the National Command Authority. Infurtherance of this mandate and in support of the Navy’s Fleet Readiness Training Plan (FRTP) the U.S.THIRD Fleet (headquartered at Naval Base Point Loma) regularly conducts Composite Training UnitExercises (COMPTUEX) and Joint Task Force Exercises (JTFEX) at military installations and operatingareas in the southwestern United States and offshore of Southern California. These complex,deployment-preparation exercises require varied land, sea, and undersea training environments toproperly demonstrate the full range of capabilities required of deploying naval forces.U. S. Navy ships are normally assigned to and deploy as a package or formation called a Strike Group.Strike Groups are further divided by function into a Carrier Strike Group (CSG) or Expeditionary StrikeGroup (ESG). A CSG is normally formed around an Aircraft Carrier (CVN) with an embarked Air Wing(CVW). A CSG is frequently supported by three to five other types of ships aimed at power projection,and gaining and maintaining sea control. An ESG is formed around an Amphibious Assault Ship (LHAor LHD) with an embarked Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU). An ESG is also normally supported bythree to five other types of ships. An ESG and CSG have certain similar capabilities. However, an ESGis unique in its ability to move embarked MEU elements ashore via helicopter or amphibious-type craft.Thus an ESG will often train to different, expanded warfare capabilities from the sea to land areas.The FRTP is a “stair step” training process that is divided into three, increasingly complex Phases: Basic,Integrated and Sustainment.COMPTUEX is in the Integrated Phase of the FRTP and may involve either a CSG or an ESG. ACOMPTUEX is conducted as a series of scheduled training events that occur according to a given timeschedule against an opposition force. The COMPTUEX provides an opportunity for the Strike Group tobecome proficient in the myriad of required warfare skill sets. Additionally, it stresses the integration orcoordination of the different warfare areas and provides realistic training on in-theater operations. TheCOMPTUEX is normally more structured than the JTFEX, so it is longer in duration.JTFEX is in the Sustainment or Final Phase of the FRTP and may involve either a CSG or an ESG. It isa scenario-driven, at-sea training exercise designed to evaluate the Strike Group’s preparedness forforward deployed contingency and combat operations. JTFEX also utilizes a simulated (mock)opposition force and serves as the venue for U.S. THIRD Fleet to assess the readiness, interoperability,ES-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Executive Summaryand proficiency of naval forces in realistic, free-play scenarios, ranging from military operations otherthan-warto armed conflict. As the final certification event of the FRTP, the Strike Group mustdemonstrate the ability to operate and integrate into a Joint Operations Area under simulated austere,hostile conditions.PURPOSE AND NEEDThe purpose of conducting a COMPTUEX and JTFEX is to provide final certification of readiness priorto forward-deploying forces to Combatant Commanders. The exercise incorporates a multi-dimensional,multi-threat environment that stresses all aspects of joint maritime operations.The need for COMPTUEX and JTFEX major range exercises is derived from the Congressional mandateto organize, train, and equip the military Services (10 U.S.C. 5032). The JTFEX is the certificationcurriculum the Navy uses to meet its responsibility for deploying CSGs and ESGs. The COMPTUEXand JTFEX are needed both to train and evaluate the units and staffs, and to provide an opportunity toevaluate their readiness. The COMPTUEX and JTFEX provide a three-fold evaluation process. First, theStrike Group Commander, the Commander’s staff, and the Commander’s component commanderspractice essential skills to examine and prioritize every potential threat, balance competing demands ofspecific warfare commanders, and apportion limited assets to counter threats and decisively prevail incombat. Second, the Strike Group Commanders and their staffs are evaluated by THIRD Fleet on theirability to accurately analyze and assess the tactical situation, assimilate new information, plan anddevelop courses of tactical action, and effectively conduct military operations. Third, Strike GroupCommanders are evaluated on overall mission accomplishment, interoperability, response to emergenttasking, and force protection. At the conclusion of the COMPTUEX and JTFEX, Commander, THIRDFleet certifies to Commander, Pacific Fleet the readiness of the CSG or ESG to deploy, fulfilling theNavy’s Title 10 responsibilities.COMPTUEX/JTFEX ACTIVITIES AND LOCATIONSThe analysis in this Environmental Assessment (EA)/Overseas Environmental Assessment (OEA) focuseson four offshore and nearshore ranges within the Southern California (SOCAL) Range Complex(Warning Area 291 [W-291], SCIRC, NB Coronado, and offshore MCB Camp Pendleton) and thesouthern portion of the offshore area within the Point Mugu Sea Range. For purposes of analysis in theEA/OEA, these four offshore and near shore training areas within the SOCAL Range Complex arereferred to as the SOCAL Operating Area (SOCAL OPAREA). Bases and ranges used only for supportactivities and certain special warfare training events were omitted from further consideration becausethese are considered routine support activities (e.g., take off/landing from an existing airfield), so are notwithin the operational scope of the EA/OEA.February 2007ES-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Executive SummaryALTERNATIVES CONSIDEREDThe No Action Alternative consists of the individual operations at existing major ranges and facilitiesassociated with COMPTUEX and JTFEX events from February 2007 through January 2009. Under thisalternative, Commander, THIRD Fleet would continue to conduct training operations. These operationswould include three ESG COMPTUEXs, four CSG COMPTUEXs, three ESG JTFEXs, and four CSGJTFEXs, for a total of fourteen exercises in two years in the southwestern United States and SOCALOPAREAS.Under the Proposed Action, Commander, THIRD Fleet would have the option to conduct two concurrent,major range events. While the overall number of major range events depicted in the No ActionAlternative (14 exercises) would not increase, Commander, THIRD Fleet, would have the flexibility toassess two Strike Groups simultaneously, thereby supporting the Fleet Response Plan. Concurrent majorrange events provide: flexibility to respond to surge requirements; valuable opportunities for carrieroperations; and enhanced operational capabilities.SUMMARY OF FINDINGSAs defined in the CEQ regulations, an environmental assessment is a concise public document that brieflyprovides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impactstatement (EIS) or a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). In this case, an EA/OEA is being preparedas part of an ongoing planning process intended to optimize THIRD Fleet COMPTUEX and JTFEXcapabilities and to anticipate changes in exercise requirements or demand. This EA/OEA assesses theenvironmental effects of ongoing exercises at current operational levels and capacity using existingmilitary assets (the No Action Alternative) as well as effects of conducting concurrent major range events(the Proposed Action).Military installations and ranges providing infrastructure support to military units participating inCOMPTUEX and JTFEX have been omitted from further consideration in this EA/OEA. COMPTUEXand JTFEX activities carried forward for analysis include those which are not addressed in current NEPAdocumentation, and occur in offshore and nearshore ranges and operating areas. The EA/OEA analyzesCOMPTUEX/JTFEX major range events for the period of operations from February 2007 to January2009.The analysis conducted in the COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA focused on the following resources: airquality, water resources, noise, biological resources, cultural resources, hazardous materials and wastes,socioeconomics, environmental justice and protection of children, land use, transportation, and publichealth and safety. For biological resources, the COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA includes analysis relatedto mid-frequency active sonar and underwater explosives. The COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA providesan analysis of exposure of marine mammals to mid-frequency active sonar and underwater explosivesduring the COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events for both the No Action Alternative and the ProposedAction.Based on the analysis presented in this EA/OEA (and summarized in Table ES-1), no significant impactson any of the affected environmental resource areas would occur as a result of implementation of the NoAction Alternative or Proposed Action. Based on the results of the impact analysis presented in theEA/OEA, the No Action Alternative does not meaningfully differ from impacts associated with theProposed Action. The impacts are fundamentally the same because:The sum total number and type of training activity is the same for both alternativesES-3 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Executive Summary Two concurrent exercises do not result in an additive effect on resources because the two eventscould occur in geographically separate areas Coordinated COMPTUEX/JTFEX events would rely on resources from separate Strike Groupsworking in tandem to support a shared objective.Cumulative effects associated with implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action incombination with other past, present, or reasonable foreseeable future actions were also analyzed. Basedon this analysis, cumulative impacts would not be significant.Table ES-1. Summary of Potential ImpactsSection Number and Resource AreaNo ActionAlternativeProposedAction4.1 Air Quality 4.2 Water Resources 4.3 Biological Resources 4.4 Cultural Resources 4.5 Hazardous Materials and Waste 4.6 Socioeconomics 4.7 Environmental Justice & Protection of Children 4.8 Transportation 4.9 Public Health and Safety Notes: = Less than significantThe analysis in this EA/OEA concludes that COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities would result in no significantimpacts. Supporting details follow:No significant impacts in accordance with NEPA would occur in any of the resource categoriesevaluated. No significant harm to resources in the global commons would occur under the EO 12114analysis.No effect on historic properties would occur. Consistent with 36 CFR 800.4(a)(1) and 800.2(o),the U.S. Navy has determined that COMPTUEX/JTFEX does not constitute an undertaking in thesense that no new activities are planned.The EA/OEA analyzes potential effects to species listed under the Endangered Species Act(ESA). In accordance with ESA requirements, the Navy completed consultation under Section 7of the ESA with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on the potential thatCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities may affect listed species in the action area. In concluding theSection 7 consultation, NMFS issued a Biological Opinion (BO) (February 9, 2007) finding thatconduct of the JTFEX and COMPTUEX may affect but is not likely to adversely affect the whiteabalone (Haliotis sorenseni), four sea turtle species (loggerhead [Caretta caretta], leatherback[Dermochelys coriacea], eastern Pacific green [Chelonia agassizi], and olive ridley [LepidochelysFebruary 2007ES-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Executive Summaryolivacea]), listed fish (Chinook salmon [Oncorhynchus tshawytscha], steelhead [Oncorhynchusmykiss], and green sturgeon [Acipenser medirostris]), the North Pacific right whale (Eubalaenajaponica) 1 , the Southern Resident killer whale (Orcinus orca), or the Stellar sea lion (Eumetopiasjubatus). The opinion further concludes that conduct of these exercises will not likely result infitness consequences for the blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) and is not likely to jeopardizethe continued existence of the fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus), the sei whale (Balaenopteraborealis), the humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), the sperm whale (Physetermacrocephalus) or the Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi). In addition, NMFS issuedthe Navy an incidental take statement requiring terms and conditions to be implemented in orderto be exempt from the prohibitions of Section 9 of the ESA. In accordance with these terms andconditions the Navy will implement “measures to reduce the probability of exposing” anyendangered mammals, implement a monitoring program in association with COMPTUEX/JTFEXto evaluate assumptions contained in the Biological Opinion, and to provide NMFS with reports(verbal and written) regarding the observed marine mammals during the exercises. Land-basedactivities will be conducted in accordance with existing biological opinions. Based on receipt ofthe BO, the Navy concludes that no significant impacts to Federally-listed species will occur as aresult of COMPTUEX/JTFEX.No adverse effects on the annual rates of recruitment or survival of any marine mammal speciesand stocks, including strategic or depleted stocks, are expected as a result of the estimatedincidents of Level B harassment and limited incidents of potential Level A harassment that mayoccur incidental to the action. In addition, the mitigation measures for acoustic and non-acousticeffects presented in Chapter 5 result in the action having the least practicable adverse impact onmarine mammal species or stocks. Compliance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act(MMPA) for mid-frequency active sonar is satisfied due to the issuance on January 23, 2007, of aNational Defense Exemption (NDE) from the Requirements of the MMPA for Certain DoDMilitary Readiness Activities That Employ Mid-Frequency Active Sonar or Improved ExtendedEcho Ranging Sonobuoys. Incidental harassment of marine mammals associated with underwaterdetonations is not reasonably foreseeable; therefore no MMPA authorization for these events orother COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities is required.In accordance with Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act,COMPTUEX/JTFEX events do not adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat.The U.S. Navy has determined that implementation of the No Action Alternative or ProposedAction would be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies ofthe approved California Coastal Management Program.1 On December 27, 2006, NMFS completed a status review of the northern right whale concluding that right whalesin the northern hemisphere exist as two species: North Pacific right whale (Eubalaena japonica) and North Atlanticright whale (E. glacialis). This document uses E. japonica throughout.ES-5 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Executive SummaryThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007ES-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 1CHAPTER 1PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION1.1 INTRODUCTIONThe training mission of Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet (COMPACFLT) is to provide fully-trained U.S.combat ready forces to the Combatant Commanders as dictated by the National Command Authority. Infurtherance of this mandate, the U.S. Navy’s THIRD Fleet conducts Composite Training Unit Exercises(COMPTUEXs) and Joint Task Force Exercises (JTFEXs) on a recurring basis at military installationsand operation areas in the southwest United States and offshore of Southern California (Figure 1.2-1).These exercises are large, deployment-level exercises, requiring vast and varied land, sea, and underseatraining environments necessary to exercise the full range of capabilities required of deploying navalforces. The THIRD Fleet is proposing to conduct seven Composite Training Unit Exercises(COMPTUEX) and seven Joint Task Force Exercises (JTFEX) from February 2007 through January2009. The major ranges and facilities to be utilized include:U.S. Navy Southern California Operating Areas (SOCAL OPAREAs) (including Warning Area W-291) San Clemente Island Range Complex (SCIRC) Naval Base (NB) Coronado, CA Point Mugu Sea Range (PMSR) (including Warning Area W-289), NB Ventura County, CA. China Lake Range, Naval Air Weapons Station (NAWS) China Lake, CA Fallon Range Training Complex (FRTC), Naval Air Station (NAS) Fallon, NVU.S. Marine Corps Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton, CA Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (MCAGCC), Twentynine Palms, CA Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Miramar, CA Bob Stump Training Range Complex (BSTRC) (including Chocolate Mountain Aerial GunneryRange), CA and AZU.S. Air Force Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), Nellis Air Force Base (AFB), NV Vandenberg AFB, CAU.S. Army National Training Center (NTC), Fort Irwin, CAThis Environmental Assessment (EA)/Overseas EA (OEA) evaluates potential environmental impacts ofseven COMPTUEXs and seven JTFEXs proposed to be conducted during the period February 2007through January 2009, assuming that each exercise will maximize the employment of operational andtraining assets consistent with exercise objectives and scenarios. This EA/OEA analyzes the offshore andnearshore activities occurring during COMPTUEX/JTFEX. Other activities occurring on land-basedareas described above are conducted in accordance with the existing environmental documentationpresented in Chapter 2, Table 2.1-1.This EA/OEA has been prepared by the Department of the Navy (Navy) in compliance with the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S. Code [U.S.C] § 4321 et seq.); the Council onEnvironmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (Title1-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 140 Code of Federal Regulations [C.F.R.] §§ 1500-1508); Department of the Navy Procedures forImplementing NEPA (32 C.F.R. 775); and Executive Order 12114 (EO 12114), Environmental EffectsAbroad of Major Federal Actions. The NEPA process ensures that environmental impacts of proposedmajor Federal actions are considered in the decision-making process. EO 12114 requires environmentalconsideration (e.g., preparation of an OEA) for actions that may significantly harm the environment of theglobal commons. This EA/OEA satisfies the requirements of both NEPA and EO 12114.1.2 BACKGROUNDFor over 70 years, the Navy has conducted critical readiness training operations in the Southern CaliforniaOperating Area (SOCAL OPAREA). Sustaining an integrated network of air, land and undersea ranges,SOCAL OPAREA supports the largest concentration of naval forces in the world. SOCAL OPAREAuniquely supports training requirements in all warfare areas. In fact, there is no other range complex onthe West Coast where a preponderance of military units can simultaneously train in Electronic Warfare(EW), Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW), Mine Warfare (MIW), Command and Control Warfare (C2W),Air Warfare (AW), Surface Warfare (SUW), Strike Warfare (STW), Amphibious Warfare (AMW), NavalSpecial Warfare (NSW), and accomplish Fleet Carrier Landing Practice without having to deploy fromtheir home station. SOCAL’s unique land and undersea geographic features, close proximity to existingnaval bases, and diverse range capabilities, possess elements necessary for effective, integrated trainingfor air, land, sea, and undersea warfare.Historically, major range exercises in the SOCAL OPAREA date back to before World War II. With thetransfer in 1934 of San Clemente Island (SCI) from the Department of Commerce to the Department ofthe Navy, U.S Fleet Landing Exercises consisting of heavy naval gunfire, air strikes and Battalion-sizedamphibious landings occurred in Southern California. In 1937, U.S. Fleet Landing Exercise No. 3consisting of 4700 Navy, Army and Marine Corps forces implemented a coordinated mission to “capture”San Clemente Island.As part of this Fleet Landing Exercise, the mission included providing protection against attack by‘enemy’ submarines. Active sonar systems used during major range activities in SOCAL were tested inSOCAL OPAREA and used effectively against German U-boats during World War II.During the Cold War, sonar technological developments introduced into naval Fleet training were criticalfor tracking more sophisticated Soviet submarines. Since the 1970’s, advances in signal processing havegreatly enhanced the ability to detect targets. However, output from active sonar systems used in SOCALOPAREA and throughout the Navy has remained largely the same for the past 30 years.Current Naval Fleet Training StrategyToday the Navy’s Fleet Training Strategy governs the conduct of training necessary to attain requiredreadiness levels by deploying naval forces, with specific focus on the operational requirements ofoverseas theaters of operations. In order to ensure the availability of naval forces to meet the operationalrequirements, the Navy developed its Fleet Response Plan (FRP) in May 2003. The goal of the FRP is toensure the deployment availability of six Carrier Strike Groups (CSGs) at all times, and the surgecapability to deploy two additional CSGs on very short notice. The FRP articulates the Fleet ResponseTraining Plan (FRTP) to provide a pre-deployment training framework for operational units. The FRTPestablishes a framework for training CSGs and Expeditionary Strike Groups (ESGs). This frameworkinvolves a three-phase training continuum. The first phase includes basic training events. TheCOMPTUEX is conducted in the intermediate phase, while the JTFEX is conducted by the CSG or ESGas the capstone event in the advanced phase of the pre-deployment training cycle.February 2007 1-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 1The FRTP identifies the following readiness certification levels:Emergency Surge Ready - This status is for individual units or groups that have completedminimum training requirements and possess the unit/group level proficiency to be missioncapable. This status normally is attained upon completion of basic phase training.Surge Ready - This status is achieved when units or groups have attained the level ofreadiness (80% of currently available metrics), and have accomplished integrated strike grouptraining. This status typically is attained during integrated phase training (to includeCOMPTUEX). The Status of Resources and Training System (SORTS) communicates thereadiness and capability levels that are defined in qualitative terms and derived throughquantitative criteria. This level indicates the unit possesses the resources and hasaccomplished the training necessary to undertake the bulk of the wartime mission.Routine Deployable - This status is achieved when units or groups are “surge ready” andcomplete specified advanced training, to include JTFEX. This status normally is attainedupon completion of integrated phase training.Sustainment - This status is attained for units or groups that have previously been designatedRoutine Deployable. If the time lapse between being designated Routine Deployable andactual deployment is significant, units will undergo sustainment training which is designed tomaintain their war-fighting skills and Routine Deployable levels.Every ship, submarine, and deployable aircraft squadron in the Navy is part of this 27-month FRTPtraining continuum. Fleet training in the FRTP is essentially in three phases—unit-level, integrated, andsustainment; these can be equated to basic, intermediate, and advanced training levels. The typical FRTPtimeline is depicted in Figure 1.2-1.Unit Level TrainingIntegrated1 2 3 4 56 7 8 9 1011 12SustainmentSustainment Deployment Sustainment13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27MaintenanceFEP/ARPFALLONIAC II & C2XJTFEXTYCOM C2F/C3F C5F/C6F/C7FC2F/C3FNotes: TYCOM = Type Command (e.g., Naval Air Forces Pacific); FEP = Final Evaluation Problem for surface ships; ARP = Advanced Readiness Program for aviationsquadrons; Fallon refers to Air Wing Integrated training at the Strike Warfare Center; C2X=COMPTUEX = Composite Training Unit Exercise; C2F and C3F are thetraining numbered Fleets; and C5F, C6F and C7F are Navy components of Unified Commands.Figure 1.2-1. The Fleet Readiness Training Plan1-3 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 1Figure 1.2-2. Training Ranges and Operating Areas for COMPTUEX/JTFEX TrainingFebruary 2007 1-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 11.3 PROPOSED ACTIONThe EA studies two alternatives, they are: (1) the No Action Alternative (Current Operations); and, (2) theProposed Action (Preferred Alternative). The No Action Alternative consists of the individual operationsat existing major ranges and facilities associated with COMPTUEX and JTFEX events. Under thisalternative, Commander, THIRD Fleet, would continue to conduct training operations from February2007 through January 2009. These operations would include three ESG COMPTUEXs, four CSGCOMPTUEXs, three ESG JTFEXs and four CSG JTFEXs for a total of fourteen exercises in 2 years inthe Southwestern United States and Southern California (SOCAL) Operating Areas (OPAREAS).Under the Proposed Action, Commander, THIRD Fleet would have the option to conduct two concurrentmajor range events. While the overall number of major range events depicted in the No ActionAlternative, to include fourteen exercises, would not increase, Commander, THIRD Fleet would have theflexibility to assess two Strike Groups simultaneously, thereby supporting the Fleet Response Plan. Theability to conduct concurrent major range events provides the operational commander with thesereadiness goals: (1) flexibility to respond to surge requirements; (2) unique opportunity for carrieroperations; and, (3) enhanced operational capabilities.1.4 OVERVIEW OF COMPTUEX AND JTFEXThe training mission of COMPACFLT is to provide fully trained combat-ready forces to CombatantCommanders, as dictated by the National Command Authority. In furtherance of this mandate and insupport of the Navy’s FRTP the U.S. THIRD Fleet (headquartered at Naval Base Point Loma) regularlyconducts COMPTUEX and JTFEX at military installations and operating areas in the southwesternUnited States and offshore of Southern California. These complex, deployment-preparation exercisesrequire varied land, sea, and undersea training environments to properly demonstrate the full range ofcapabilities required of deploying naval forces.U. S. Navy ships are normally assigned to and deploy as a package or formation called a Strike Group.Strike Groups are further divided by function into a CSG or ESG. A CSG is normally formed around anAircraft Carrier (CVN) with an embarked Air Wing (CVW). A CSG is frequently supported by three tofive other types of ships aimed at power projection, and gaining and maintaining sea control. An ESG isformed around an Amphibious Assault Ship (LHA or LHD) with an embarked Marine Expeditionary Unit(MEU). An ESG is also normally supported by three to five other types of ships. An ESG and CSG havecertain similar capabilities. However, an ESG is unique in its ability to move embarked MEU elementsashore via helicopter or amphibious-type craft. Thus an ESG will often train to different, expandedwarfare capabilities from the sea to land areas.The FRTP is a “stair step” training process that is divided into three, increasingly complex Phases: Basic,Integrated and Sustainment.COMPTUEX is in the Integrated Phase of the FRTP and may involve either a CSG or an ESG. ACOMPTUEX is conducted as a series of scheduled training events that occur according to a given timeschedule against an opposition force. The COMPTUEX provides an opportunity for the Strike Group tobecome proficient in the myriad of required warfare skill sets. Additionally, it stresses the integration orcoordination of the different warfare areas and provides realistic training on in-theater operations. TheCOMPTUEX is normally more structured than the JTFEX, so it is longer in duration.JTFEX is in the Sustainment or final Phase of the FRTP and may involve either a CSG or an ESG. It is ascenario-driven, at-sea training exercise designed to evaluate the Strike Group’s preparedness for forward1-5 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 1deployed contingency and combat operations. JTFEX also utilizes a simulated opposition force andserves as the venue for U.S. THIRD Fleet to assess the readiness, interoperability, and proficiency ofnaval forces in realistic, free-play scenarios, ranging from military operations other-than-war to armedconflict. As the final certification event of the FRTP, the Strike Group must demonstrate the ability tooperate and integrate into a Joint Operations Area under simulated austere, hostile conditions.1.5 PURPOSE AND NEEDThe purpose of conducting a COMPTUEX and JTFEX is to provide final certification of readiness priorto forward-deploying forces to Combatant Commanders. The exercise incorporates a multi-dimensional,multi-threat environment that stresses all aspects of joint maritime operations.The need for COMPTUEX and JTFEX major range exercises is derived from the Congressional mandateto organize, train, and equip the military Services (10 U.S.C. 5032). The JTFEX is the certificationcurriculum the Navy uses to meet its responsibility for deploying CSGs and ESGs. The COMPTUEXand JTFEX are needed both to train and evaluate the units and staffs, and to provide an opportunity toevaluate their readiness. The COMPTUEX and JTFEX provide a three-fold evaluation process. First, theStrike Group Commander, the Commander’s staff, and the Commander’s component commanderspractice essential skills to examine and prioritize every potential threat, balance competing demands ofspecific warfare commanders, and apportion limited assets to counter threats and decisively prevail incombat. Second, the Strike Group Commanders and their staffs are evaluated by THIRD Fleet on theirability to accurately analyze and assess the tactical situation, assimilate new information, plan anddevelop courses of tactical action, and effectively conduct military operations. Third, Strike GroupCommanders are evaluated on overall mission accomplishment, interoperability, response to emergenttasking, and force protection. At the conclusion of the COMPTUEX and JTFEX, Commander, THIRDFleet certifies to Commander, Pacific Fleet the readiness of the CSG or ESG to deploy, fulfilling theNavy’s Title 10 responsibilities.The COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities need to occur in the SOCAL OPAREA, as this area is uniquelysituated to support all warfare certification requirements associated with COMPTUEX and JTFEX. Forexample, the only deepwater, instrumented range in the eastern Pacific is located just west of SanClemente Island. In addition, the SOCAL OPAREA is the only location where Naval Surface FireSupport, Military Operations Specialist spotter training, artillery landings, full-mission Sea, Air, Land(SEAL) teams, Close Air Support (CAS), and Long-range Air Strikes can occur as an integrated,coordinated series of activities during JTFEX.1.6 SCOPE AND CONTENT OF THE EA/OEAAs defined in the CEQ regulations, an environmental assessment is a concise public document that brieflyprovides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impactstatement (EIS) or a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). In this case, an EA/OEA is being preparedas part of an ongoing planning process intended to optimize THIRD Fleet COMPTUEX and JTFEXtraining capability and to anticipate changes in training requirements or demand. This EA/OEA assessesthe environmental effects of ongoing training at current operations levels and capacity using existingtraining assets (the No Action Alternative). The findings of this EA/OEA will allow Navy decisionmakersand other interested parties to compare the environmental effects of the proposed surgeCOMPTUEX and JTFEX training to the effects of taking no action (maintaining status quo training).February 2007 1-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 1Military installations and ranges used only for support activities and certain special warfare trainingevents associated with COMPTUEX and JTFEX training have been omitted from further consideration inthis EA/OEA because these activities do not present a potential to impact the environment due to theroutine nature of these activities. Ongoing activities on certain installations and ranges are addressed inenvironmental documents as described below. Based on the availability of improved science andquantitative methodologies to assess effects on marine resources, COMPTUEX and JTFEX trainingcomponents carried forward for analysis are those in the offshore marine environment and on establishedranges in the nearshore environment (see Figure 1.2-1). In addition, certain onshore activities arepresented and their analyses are summarized and incorporated by reference. The period of operations willbe February 2007 through January 2009.1.7 RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTSPreparation of this EA/OEA will rely on an extensive body of previous NEPA analysis pertaining to theactions and facilities used for COMPTUEX and JTFEX training. Many COMPTUEX and JTFEXtraining events are conducted on ranges that have existing NEPA documentation which cover theactivities that are undertaken during these exercises (as well as other activities on those ranges). Previousdocumentation relevant to this EA/OEA will be incorporated by reference in accordance with CEQregulations (40 C.F.R. 1502.21). Table 2.1-1 in Chapter 2 provides a list of documents incorporated byreference within this EA/OEA. In addition, where specific environmental documentation was used for theanalyses, those documents are referenced in that discussion.1.8 PUBLIC COMMENTThe environmental issues analyzed in this EA/OEA have been the subject of public involvement forsimilar Navy training activities. The Navy considered the scope and content of prior public comments toshape the environmental impacts analysis as well as issues identified and studied within in this EA/OEA:The marine mammal mid-frequency active sonar acoustic effect methodology incorporates anapproach developed in coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) forthe proposed Undersea Warfare Training Range (USWTR) Draft Environmental ImpactStatement/Draft Overseas Environmental Impact Statement (U.S. Navy, 2005). Based onpublic comment and additional comment from NMFS received in response to the USWTRDEIS, the methodology for assessing potential non-physiological behavioral effect to marinemammals was substantially revised and described in the EA/OEA and the MMPA IncidentalHarassment Authorization (IHA) for the Navy’s 2006 Rim of the Pacific exercise. (U.S. Navy,2006, NMFS, 2006).A robust description of all aspects of the training exercises, including the use of ordnance forcertain training events, is provided in this EA/OEA in response to public comments receivedon the RIMPAC EA/OEA. In addition, a more detailed analysis of pinnipeds is appropriatehere based on the marine resources present in the Southern California offshore environs.In consideration of public comments raised, in particular during USWTR, a detailed analysisof the potential acoustic effects to fish is analyzed in this EA/OEA. During the USWTRpublic comment process, extensive public comments were received regarding potentialfisheries effects and a substantial portion of these comments related to range access issues.USWTR is a proposed instrumented range; in contrast, the instrumented ranges in thesouthern California range complex have been in existence for decades, and the range1-7 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 1maintains a public website and other public information processes to facilitate coordinatedrange access and use for fishing boats and other range non-military uses. The publiccomments received during USWTR validated a range public information approach such asthat already in place for the Navy’s offshore instrumented ranges in southern California.Review of public comments associated with RIMPAC 2006 indicates that much of the publiccomment and controversy was due to a stranding event investigated by the NMFS for potentialcausal connection to a prior RIMPAC exercise in the same geographic area. No suchcontroversial event exists in the history of major exercises in the Southern CaliforniaOperating Areas and environs analyzed in this EA/OEA. The types and intensity of trainingexercises analyzed here have been ongoing in these geographic areas for decades with noindication of adverse effect to marine mammals, fisheries, coastal resources, sanctuaryresources, water quality or other resources. The operational tempo assessed in this EA/OEA isconsistent with past use, and additionally considers a preferred alternative that allows for theconduct of two major exercises concurrently.Underlying the majority of formal public comments on USWTR and RIMPAC is intensiveinterest in the sufficiency of the Navy’s mitigation measures to provide for protection andstewardship of marine resources during Navy training activities. Based on the fundamentalimportance of protective and mitigative measures, this action includes an extensive set ofmitigation measures related both to underwater detonations and mid-frequency active sonar.The mitigations for mid-frequency active sonar were already in use by Navy and were furtherdeveloped in a coordinated process with National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Thisextended suite of mitigation measures are responsive to public comment while ensuringmilitary readiness, and will be implemented as part of this proposed action, and are detailed inChapter 5 of this EA/OEA.In addition, as a component of the proposed action, the Navy initiated a Federal consistencyprocess under the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) with the California CoastalCommission (CCC). The documentation and analyses considered throughout the CZMAprocess are provided in Appendix O. The coastal consistency determination process, by law,requires public comment and involvement. In this case, much of the public comment receivedrelated to activities for which a consistency determination concurrence was not requested (seeAppendix O and Chapter 4). However, the Navy’s participation in two public hearings andreview of public comments considered by the CCC shaped the coastal effects analyses and thereview of the mitigation measures developed cooperatively with NMFS and included as partof this Proposed Action.Finally, the Navy will use its internal procedures and regulations to ensure that the public has notice ofthe FONSI/FONSH and an opportunity to request a copy of the final EA/OEA.February 2007 1-8

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2CHAPTER 2DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES2.1 COMPTUEX AND JTFEX TRAINING AREASComposite Training Unit Exercise (COMPTUEX) and Joint Task Force Exercise (JTFEX) training occursat-sea and at various locations throughout California, Arizona, and Nevada (Figure 1.2-1). Table 2.1-1summarizes the ranges used for COMPTUEX/JTFEX training; onshore range NEPA compliancedocumentation references are cited in this table. The analysis in this Environmental Assessment(EA)/Overseas Environmental Assessment (OEA) focuses on four offshore and near shore ranges withinthe Southern California (SOCAL) Range Complex (Warning Area 291 [W-291], SCIRC, NB Coronado,and offshore MCB Camp Pendleton) and the southern portion of the offshore area within the Point MuguSea Range (Table 2.1-1). For purposes of analysis in the EA/OEA, these four offshore and near shoretraining areas within the SOCAL Range Complex are referred to as the SOCAL Operating Area (SOCALOPAREA). Bases and ranges used only for support activities and certain special warfare training eventswere omitted from further consideration because these are considered routine support activities (e.g., takeoff/landing from an existing airfield), so are not within the operational scope of the EA/OEA.Table 2.1-1. Ranges and Operating Areas of COMPTUEXs and JTFEXsComponent Area Description COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities NEPA DocumentationSouthern CaliforniaOperating AreaSOCAL offshore training areas andranges, including Warning Area 291(W-291)San Clemente Island RangeComplex (SCIRC) and its onshore,nearshore, and offshore rangesNaval Base Coronado consisting of: Naval Air Station North Island(NASNI) Naval Amphibious Base (NAB)Coronado Silver Strand Training Complex(SSTC)Adjacent waters off Camp Pendletonknown as the Amphibious AssaultArea (CPAAA) and Camp PendletonAmphibious Vehicle Training Area(CPAVA)COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities planned for the SOCALOPAREA include all those activitieslisted in Table 2.2-1 and describedin Sections 2.3.Covered under this EA/OEACovered under this EA/OEACovered under this EA/OEACovered under this EA/OEACovered under this EA/OEACovered under this EA/OEA2-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Table 2.1-1. Ranges and Operating Areas of COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs (continued)Component Area Description COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities NEPA DocumentationPoint Mugu SeaRange (PMSR)China Lake RangeFallon RangeTraining Complex(FRTC)Marine Corps AirGround CombatCenter (MCAGCC)Twentynine PalmsThis consists of Warning Area 289(W-289)Includes Naval Air Weapons Station(NAWS) China Lake and issurrounded by the larger RestrictedAirspace 2508 (R-2508)FRTC consists of ranges associatedwith Naval Air Station (NAS) FallonMCAGCC is divided into severaldistinct training areas, some of whichcontain fixed, numbered ranges.COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities planned for execution onPMSR include Anti-Aircraft Warfare(AAW) Operations, Surface-to-Surface Missile (SSM) Operations,Gunnery Operations, Visit, Board,Search, and Seizure (VBSS)/MineIntercept Operations (MIO)/Helicopter VBSS (HVBSS), NavalCooperation and Guidance forShipping (NCAGS), MaritimeSecurity Operation (MSO)/ OilPlatform (OPLAT), Air-to-Air Missile(AAM) Operations, Air-to-SurfaceMissile (ASM) Operations, SpecialWarfare Operations(SPECWAROPS), and Air Defense(AD) Operations. These activitiesare described in Section 2.3.COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities planned for execution onChina Lake Range include: Air-to-Ground Operations (STRIKE),SPECWAROPS, and DemolitionOperations (DEMO). These activitiesare described in Section 2.3.COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities planned for execution onFRTC include: STRIKE andSPECWAROPS. These activitiesare described in Section 2.3.COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities planned for execution atMCAGCC include: Live-fireOperations and SPECWAROPS.These activities are described inSection 2.3.Only sonar operations associatedwith COMPTUEX/JTFEX activitieswithin PMSR are covered under thisEA/OEA. All other COMPTUEX andJTFEX training activities occurring atPMSR have been analyzed underthe Final Environmental ImpactStatement/Overseas EnvironmentalImpact Statement (EIS/OEIS) for thePoint Mugu Sea Range (March2002).COMPTUEX and JTFEX trainingactivities occurring on the ChinaLake Range have been analyzedunder the Final EnvironmentalImpact Statement (EIS) forProposed Military OperationalIncreases and Implementation ofAssociated Comprehensive LandUse and Integrated NaturalResources Management Plans,Naval Air Weapons Station ChinaLake (2004).COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities occurring on FRTC havebeen analyzed under the Final EIS,Proposed Fallon Training RangeRequirements , Record ofDecision(ROD) (April 2000) and theModification of the Special UseAirspace for the Proposed FRTCRequirements ROD (2000).COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities occurring at MCAGCChave been analyzed under FinalProgrammatic EnvironmentalAssessment (EA) for Ongoing andProposed Training Activities atMarine Corps Air Ground CombatCenter Twentynine Palms, CA(2003).February 2007 2-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Table 2.1-1. Ranges and Operating Areas of COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs (continued)Component Area Description COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities NEPA DocumentationBob Stump TrainingRange Complex(BSTRC)Nevada Test andTraining Range(NTTR)Vandenberg AirForce Base (AFB)This component consists of: MCAS Yuma Chocolate Mountain AerialGunnery Range (CMAGR) Barry M. Goldwater Range,West (BMGR-W) Naval Air Facility (NAF) ElCentro Yuma Proving Ground (YPG)NTTR is part of Nellis AFBVandenberg AFB is home to theWestern Launch and Test Range(WLTR) and the West CoastOffshore Operating Area (WCOOA)COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities planned for execution onBSTRC include: Aircraft OperationsSupport (AIROPS), STRIKE, CloseAir Support (CAS), Urban CAS,Surge Operations, SPECWAROPS,and Combat Search and Rescue(CSAR)/Tactical Recovery of Aircraftand Personnel (TRAP), and DEMO.These activities are described inSection 2.3.COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities planned for execution atNTTR include: STRIKE andSPECWAROPS. These activities aredescribed in Section 2.3.COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities planned for execution atVandenberg AFB include: AIROPS,SPECWAROPS, and Command andControl (ASHORE). These activitiesare described in Section 2.3.COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities occurring at BSTRC havebeen analyzed under the EIS, YumaTraining Range Complex (1997), theSupplemental EIS (2001a), EA forInstallation of a 1,100 yard SniperRange at Camp Billy Machen(2003), and the EA for P-179Special Warfare Desert WarfareTraining Facility (2000).COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities occurring at NTTR havebeen analyzed under the followingNEPA documentation: ResourceManagement Plan (RMP)/ROD) forNTTR and EIS (2004); ExpeditionaryReadiness Training CourseExpansion, EA, Nellis Air ForceBase (2006); Finding of NoSignificant Impact. MilitaryOperations in Urban Terrain TrainingComplex (2202); United States Fishand Wildlife Service (USFWS)Amendment to the ProgrammaticBiological Opinion (BO) for Activitieson the South Range of Nellis AFB,NTTR, and the Nevada TrainingInitiative. Clark and LincolnCounties, Nevada (2004);Programmatic BO for Activities onthe South Range of Nellis AFB,NTTR, and the Nevada TrainingInitiative. Clark and LincolnCounties, Nevada (2003); BO on theReinitiation of Formal Consultationfor Continuing Current WeaponsTesting and Training on U.S.Department of the Air Force’sWeapons and Tactics Center RangeComplex (1997); and BO forContinuing Current WeaponsTesting/Training at the U.S.Department of the Air Force’sWeapons and Tactics Center RangeComplex (1994).COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities occurring at VandenbergAFB are considered routine trainingexercises and are documentedaccordingly via categoricalexclusions for each exercise.2-3 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Table 2.1-1. Ranges and Operating Areas of COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs (continued)Component Area Description COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities NEPA DocumentationNational TrainingCenter (NTC), FortIrwinNTC includes Leach Lake GunneryRange (LLGR) which is used forSTRIKE training2.1.1 Description of the ProposalCOMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities planned for execution atNTC include: STRIKE, CAS, UrbanCAS, and SPECWAROPS. Theseactivities are described in Section2.3.COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities occurring at NTC havebeen analyzed under the followingNEPA documentation: DraftIntegrated Natural ResourcesManagement Plan andEnvironmental Assessment 2004-2008 (2005); USFWS, DesertTortoise (Mojave Population)Recovery Plan, (1984); Finding ofNo Significant Impact, ProgrammaticEA U.S. Joint Forces Command(JFCOM), Millennium Challenge(2002);’ and the ROD forSupplemental Final EIS for theProposed Addition of ManeuverTraining Land at Fort Irwin, CA(2006).The Proposed Action will take place on existing military test and training ranges, installations and baseslocated in Arizona, California and Nevada and in southern California offshore areas. These locationsinclude the Southern California Operating Areas (including W-291), San Clemente Island RangeComplex, Point Mugu Sea Range (including W-289), Naval Base Coronado, Marine Corps Base CampPendleton, China Lake Range, Fallon Training Range Complex, Bob Stump Training Range Complex,Nevada Test and Training Range, National Training Center, Marine Corps Air Ground Combat CenterTwentynine Palms, Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, and Vandenberg Air Force Base.The purpose to conduct a COMPUTEX is to integrate the aircraft carrier and its air wing into a cohesiveteam, and to shape the deploying personnel and assigned ships, submarines, and aircraft, by realistictraining, into effective warfare teams. These warfare teams are then trained for proficiency in strike, airwarfare, undersea warfare, surface warfare, command and control, and coordinated air support. Thepurpose of conducting a JTFEX is to provide final certification of readiness prior to deploying forces toCombat Commanders. This exercise, which incorporates a multi-dimensional, multi-threat environmentthat stresses all aspects of naval operations, fulfills the need to ensure responsibilities under Title 10,United States Code 5032, where the Navy is required by law to organize, train and equip this militaryservice. The Navy uses JTFEX/COMPTUEX to meet that statutory responsibility by training units andstaffs, and evaluating, as well as certifying readiness.The EA studies two alternatives, they are: (1) the No Action Alternative (Current Operations); and, (2) theProposed Action (Preferred Alternative). The No Action Alternative consists of the individual operationsat existing major ranges and facilities associated with COMPTUEX and JTFEX events. Under thisalternative, Commander, THIRD Fleet, would continue to conduct training operations from February2007 through January 2009. These operations would include three ESG COMPTUEXs, four CSGCOMPTUEXs, three ESG JTFEXs and four CSG JTFEXs for a total of fourteen exercises in 2 years inthe Southwestern United States and Southern California (SOCAL) Operating Areas (OPAREAS).Under the Proposed Action, Commander, THIRD Fleet would have the option to conduct two concurrentmajor range events. While the overall number of major range events depicted in the No ActionAlternative, to include fourteen exercises, would not increase, Commander, THIRD Fleet would have theFebruary 2007 2-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2flexibility to assess two Strike Groups simultaneously, thereby supporting the Fleet Response Plan. Theability to conduct concurrent major range events provides the operational commander with thesereadiness goals: (1) flexibility to respond to surge requirements; (2) unique opportunity for carrieroperations; and, (3) enhanced operational capabilities.2.1.2 Offshore and Nearshore RangesWarning Area 291 (W-291), San Clemente Island Range Complex (SCIRC), Naval Base Coronado (NBCoronado), and the Camp Pendleton Amphibious Vehicle Training Area (CPAVA) and Camp PendletonAmphibious Assault Training Area (CPAAA) offshore of Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton (CampPendleton) are all located within the SOCAL OPAREA. The SOCAL OPAREA and PMSR have beencategorized as consisting of or including offshore and nearshore training areas, ranges, and special useairspace (SUA). At-sea operating areas include waters subject to U.S. jurisdiction and seaward.2.1.2.1 Warning Area 291W-291 is located along the coast and in the waters adjacent to Southern California from Santa Barbara toBaja California. W-291 parallels the coast to the south of Los Angeles for a distance of approximately288 nm (533 kilometer [km]) and extends seaward for up to 800 nm (1,482 km).2.1.2.2 San Clemente Island Range ComplexSan Clemente Island (SCI) is the southernmost of the eight California Channel Islands. It is located 55nm (102 km) south of Long Beach and 68 nm (126 km) west of San Diego, California. The island isapproximately 18 nm (33 km) long and 4 nm (7 km) across at its widest point. SCIRC includes SouthernCalifornia Offshore Range (SCORE) and the Southern California Anti-Submarine Warfare Range(SOAR). More than 60 range and operational areas covering approximately 2,620 mi 2 (6,786 km 2 ) areclustered within a 40-mile (64-kilometer) radius of the island. These areas stretch from the ocean floor toan altitude of 80,000 ft (24,000 m).2.1.2.3 Naval Base CoronadoNB Coronado is located in San Diego and Los Angeles counties in Southern California and encompasses42,573 ac (17,228 ha) of land and water. NB Coronado is comprised of the following geographicallyseparate installations:Naval Air Station North Island (NASNI)Naval Amphibious Base Coronado (NAB Coronado)Naval Auxiliary Landing Field (NALF), San Clemente IslandOutlying Landing Field (OLF) Imperial BeachSilver Strand Training Complex (SSTC)Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) Training Facility, Warner SpringsMountain Warfare Training Facility (MWTF), La Posta2.1.2.4 Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton - OffshoreCamp Pendleton is located approximately 38 mi (61 km) north of San Diego and occupies more than125,000 ac (50,586 ha) of varied terrain. The waters adjacent to Camp Pendleton are known as the CampPendleton Amphibious Assault Area (CPAAA) and contain 294 mi 2 (762 km 2 ) of ocean area. TheCPAAA includes areas dedicated to Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) training and operations and theCamp Pendleton Amphibious Vehicle Area (CPAVA). Less than 10 mi (16 km) of coastline is normally2-5 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2available for training. Camp Pendleton has several developed areas that are isolated from each other byrelatively large areas of mostly undeveloped land used for training and maneuvers.2.1.2.5 Point Mugu Sea RangeThe PMSR parallels the California coastline for about 230 nm (426 km) and extends seaward for morethan 200 nm (370 km). It includes San Nicolas Island and range support facilities at NB Ventura County(including NAS Point Mugu and Construction Battalion Center [CBC] Port Hueneme), Laguna Peak,Santa Cruz Island, San Miguel Island, and Santa Rosa Island. PMSR is a 36,000 mi 2 (93,240 km 2 )instrumented range. For purposes of this EA/OEA, the area of analysis for PMSR is an area along thesouthern boundary of the PMSR.2.1.3 Onshore RangesMCB Camp Pendleton, China Lake Range, Fallon Range Training Complex (FRTC), Marine Corps AirGround Combat Center (MCAGCC), Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Miramar, Bob Stump TrainingRange Complex (BSTRC), Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), Vandenberg Air Force Base(AFB), and National Training Center (NTC), Fort Irwin have been categorized as onshore ranges.COMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities that occur on onshore ranges have been previously addressed inexisting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance documents, provided in the discussionof each range.2.2 COMPTUEX AND JTFEX OVERVIEW AND TRAINING COMPONENTSCarrier Strike Groups (CSGs) and Expeditionary Strike Groups (ESGs) conduct COMPTUEX andJTFEX training events. A description of CSG and ESG components is provided below.Carrier Strike Groups — Carrier strike groups are the core of the Navy's war-fighting strength.Typically a carrier strike group normally consists of:Carrier – The carrier provides a wide range of options to the U.S. government from simplyshowing the flag to attacks on airborne, afloat and ashore targets. Because carriers operate ininternational waters, its aircraft do not need to secure landing rights on foreign soil. These shipsalso engage in sustained operations in support of other forces.Guided missile cruiser – multi-mission surface combatant. Equipped with Tomahawks for longrangestrike capability.Two guided missile destroyers – multi-mission surface combatants, used primarily for anti-airwarfare (AAW).Attack submarine – in a direct support role seeking out and destroying hostile surface ships andsubmarines.Combined ammunition, oiler, and supply ship – provides logistic support enabling the Navy'sforward presence: on station, ready to respond.The CSG could be employed in a variety of roles, all of which would involve the gaining andmaintenance of sea control:Protection of economic and/or military shipping.Protection of a Marine amphibious force while enroute to, and upon arrival in, an amphibiousobjective area.February 2007 2-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Establishing a naval presence in support of national interests.The Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG) centers on the flexibility and readiness of a combinedexpeditionary unit and an amphibious readiness group (ARG). The total ESG provides operationalfreedom and expanded warfare capabilities, not only by land with embarked Marines, but at sea, as well.The make-up of an Expeditionary Strike generally consists of:Amphibious Assault Ship (LHA or LHD) – Primary landing ships, resembling small aircraftcarriers, designed to put troops on hostile shores. In a secondary role, using AV-8B Harrieraircraft and anti-submarine warfare helicopters, these ships perform sea control and limited powerprojection missions.Amphibious Transport Dock (LPD) Ship – Warships that embark, transport, and land elementsof a landing force for a variety of expeditionary warfare missions.Dock Landing Ship (LSD) – Dock Landing Ships support amphibious operations includinglandings via LCAC, conventional landing craft and helicopters, onto hostile shores. The threeclasses of LSDs are the Harpers Ferry class, Whidbey Island class, and Anchorage class.Guided Missile Cruiser – multi-mission surface combatant. Equipped with Tomahawks forlong-range strike capability.Guided Missile Destroyer – multi-mission surface combatant, used primarily for AAW.Frigate – primarily for anti-submarine warfare (ASW).Attack Submarine – in a direct support role seeking out and destroying hostile surface ships andsubmarines.2.2.1 COMPTUEX/JTFEX Vessels, Aircraft, and PersonnelU.S. Navy ships are assigned to and deploy as a package or formation called a Strike Group. StrikeGroups are further divided by function into a Carrier Strike Group (CSG) or an Expeditionary StrikeGroup (ESG). Participants typically include up to:Ten (10) surface combatant shipsThree (3) submarinesOne hundred (100) aircraftEight thousand (8,000) personnelThe vessels, aircraft, and personnel that may participate in a COMPTUEX or JTFEX event are not limitedto those permanently stationed at bases within the Navy’s Southwest Region.2.2.2 COMPTUEX and JTFEX Exercise EventsForty-five different types of training events are associated with COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs. Although amajority of these training events are common to both exercises, some training events are unique to eitherone or the other. Representative COMPTUEX and JTFEX events, listed in Table 2.2-1, are grouped bythe primary environment that they occur in, such as at-sea, air, and ground operations. A few of theevents are listed as a combination, since they occur in multiple environments. A summary of thesetraining events is provided below.2-7 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Table 2.2-1. Representative COMPTUEX and JTFEX Activities, Locations, and EventsEVENT (NTAs)RANGE / OPAREA / LOCATIONOCCURRENCEJTFEXCOMPTUEXIN-PORT (N/A)AAW Operation(3.2.3)SSM Operation(3.2.1.1)Gunnery Operation(3.2.1.1)SINKEX (3.2.1.1)ASW Operation(3.2.1.2)SUBOPS (4.9.1)AMPHIB Operation(1.5.4)SMCM Operation(1.3.1)DEMO (1.3.2)VBSS/MIO/HVBSS(1.4.6)NCAGS ( 1.1.2.1)NB San Diego, NAS North Island, NBPoint Loma, NB Coronado, NB VenturaCounty (Pt. Hueneme & Point Mugu),NAWS China Lake, NAS Lemoore, MCBCamp Pendleton, MCAS MiramarCSG ESG CSG ESGmultiple events multiple events multiple events multiple eventsPt. Mugu Sea Range, SCORE multiple events multiple events multiple events multiple eventsPt. Mugu Sea Range, W-291, SCORE N/A N/A multiple events multiple eventsPt. Mugu Sea Range, W-291, SCORE N/A N/A multiple events multiple eventsW-289, W-291 1 event 1 event 1 event 1 eventW-291, SCORE multiple events N/A N/A N/AW-291, SCORE multiple events multiple events multiple events multiple eventsSCIUR, NB Coronado - SSTC, MCBCamp PendletonN/A multiple events 1 event multiple eventsSCIUR, NB Coronado - SSTC, SCI- multiple events multiple events multiple events multiple eventsSHOBA, MCB Camp Pendleton OPAREASCIUR, NB Coronado - SSTC, NAWSChina Lake, MCB Camp Pendleton,BSTRCmultiple events multiple events multiple events multiple eventsPt. Mugu Sea Range, W-291, SCIRC multiple events multiple events multiple events multiple eventsPt. Mugu Sea Range, W-291 N/A N/A 1 event 1 eventPt. Mugu Sea Range, W-291 1 event 1 event multiple events multiple eventsMSO/OPLAT DEFNSFS (3.2.2)STRAITS TRANSIT /Q ROUTE (1.3.2.3)FIACW-291, SCI - SHOBA N/A 24-40 hrs 1 event 1 eventW-291 1 event 1 event 1 event multiple eventsW-291 multiple events multiple events multiple events multiple eventsTracking OperationPSYOPSW-291 N/A N/A multiple events multiple eventsW-291 N/A N/A 1 event 1 eventFebruary 2007 2-8

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Table 2.2-1 (continued). Representative COMPTUEX and JTFEX Activities, Locations, and EventsEVENT (NTAs)RANGE / OPAREA / LOCATIONOCCURRENCEJTFEXCOMPTUEXAIROPS (1.1.2.3.6)AAM Operation(3.2.3)ASM Operation(3.2.6)Long Range STRIKE(3.2.2/3.2.8)CSG ESG CSG ESGNB San Diego, SCI, MCB Camp multiple events multiple events multiple events multiple eventsPendleton, MCAS Miramar, MCAS Yuma,Vandenburg AFB, NTC Ft. Irwin, W-291Pt. Mugu Sea Range, W-291, SCORE N/A N/A multiple events 1 eventPt. Mugu Sea Range, SCORE N/A N/A multiple events 1 eventSCORE, NAWS China Lake, NAS Fallon,MCAS Yuma TRC - Chocolate Mtns.,NTTR (Nellis AFB), NTC Ft. Irwinmultiple events N/A multiple events N/ADynamic STRIKE(TSS for JTFEX)(3.2.2/3.2.8)SCI multiple events multiple events multiple events N/AOver San Diego N/A N/A multiple events N/AHaystack (3.2.2/3.2.8)CAS (3.2.8)SCI - Shoba, MCAS Yuma TRC - R-2301W/Yodaville, Chocolate Mtns., NTCFt. Irwin, MCB Camp Pendletonmultiple events multiple events multiple events multiple eventsUrban CAS(3.2.8)CQ / DLQs(1.1.2.3.1)WAS Operation(1.1.2.3.1)GANGPLANK(1.1.2.3.1)COUNTER SOF(1.1.2.3.1)SSC(1.1.2.3.1)MARITIMEINTERDICTION(1.1.2.3.1)MPA (USW/ASW)Mining Operation(1.1.2.3.1)SURGE Operation(1.1.2.3.1)EW OperationMCAS Yuma TRC - R-2301W/Yodaville,NTC Ft. Irwinmultiple events multiple events multiple events N/AW-291 multiple events 1 event multiple events 1 eventW-291 1 event 1 event multiple events 1 eventW-291 N/A N/A multiple events N/AW-291 N/A N/A multiple events 1 eventW-291 multiple events multiple events multiple eventsW-291 N/A N/A 1 event N/AW-291 multiple events multiple events N/A N/AMTR 1 OR 2 N/A N/A multiple events N/AW-291 N/A N/A multiple events N/AW-291 N/A N/A multiple events multiple events2-9 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Table 2.2-1 (continued). Representative COMPTUEX and JTFEX Activities, Locations, and EventsEVENT (NTAs)RANGE / OPAREA / LOCATIONOCCURRENCEGROUND OPERATIONSJTFEXCOMPTUEXCSG ESG CSG ESGSOCAL, SCORE, MCB Camp Pendleton N/A N/A N/A 2 events, 2 hrs/eventLF Operation (3.2.8)SPECWAROPS(1.5.6)Pt. Mugu Sea Range - San Nicholas Isl.,SCIRC, NB San Diego, NBVC - PortHueneme, NAWS China Lake, NASFallon, NSWTF Niland, Seal Beach NWF,La Posta MWTF, NAF El Centro, LongBeach NS, MCB Camp Pendleton, MCAS29 Palms, MCAS Yuma TRC - ChocolateMtns., V1 - 14 days 1 - 14 days 1 - 28 days 1 - 28 daysHA/DR &PEACEOPS (6.5.1)NEO (6.2.1)EMBASSYREINFORCEMENTASHORE (N/A)MCB Camp Pendleton N/A 2-18 days N/A 2-18 daysSCI, MCB Camp Pendleton N/A 4 days N/A 4 daysSCI, MCB Camp Pendleton N/A 2 days N/A 2 daysNB San Diego, NBVC - Port Hueneme,SCI, NSWTF Niland, MCB CampPendleton, Vandenburg AFB10 days 10 days 21 days 21 daysEVENT (NTAs)RANGE / OPAREA / LOCATIONDURATIONCSAR (3.2.8) TRAPfor ESGAD Operation(3.2.3)COMBINED OPERATIONSJTFEXCOMPTUEXCSG ESG CSG ESGSCI - SHOBA, San Nicholas Isl, W-291, multiple events 1 event multiple events 1 eventMCB Camp Pendleton, MCAS Yuma TRC- Chocolate Mtns.W-291, Pt. Mugu Sea Range multiple events multiple events multiple events multiple eventsCOUNTERTARGETING(1.1.2.3.1)FINAL BATTLEPROBLEM (All)W-291 N/A N/A multiple events multiple eventsW-291 N/A N/A 1 event 1 eventFebruary 2007 2-10

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 22.3 OPERATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH A COMPTUEX OR JTFEX2.3.1 At-Sea Training Operations2.3.1.1 Anti-Aircraft Warfare (AAW) OperationAn AAW Operation provides realistic training and evaluation of ships and their crews in defendingagainst enemy aircraft and missiles. Typically, contracted Opposing Forces (OPFOR) aircraft (Lear25/35) with special mounted pods that radiate different threat signatures will ingress towards the surfaceships. On infrequent occasions, target drones representing enemy aircraft or missiles are flown or towedinto the engagement envelope of the ship. The ship’s crew must identify the incoming threat and respondwith surface-to-air missiles. Typically, this is a non-fire operation, as all weapon firings are simulated.Occasionally, for a live-fire event, two types of missiles are used. One type is equipped with aninstrumentation package, while the other type is equipped with an inert warhead. Recoverable targetdrones are refurbished and reused. AAW Operations are conducted in the open ocean at PMSR and theSCIRC.Participants in the AAW Operation event include:ShipsRecovery boatHelicopterMissilesAerial target(s)OPFOR aircraft2.3.1.2 Surface-to-Surface Missile (SSM) OperationAn SSM Operation provides basic training for Fleet units in firing surface-to-surface HARPOONmissiles. Prior to the event, aircraft conduct a surveillance flight to ensure that the range is clear of nonparticipatingships and marine mammals are not present. Thetraining consists of the pre-attack phase, including locating,identifying, and tracking the threat vessel, and the attack phasein which the missile is launched and flies to the target. This istypically a non-firing event; SSM Operations are usuallycomputer-simulated. On occasion, however, SSM Operationscan be live-fire events. The target is generally a speciallyprepared, deactivated vessel or hulk. When this occurs, SSMOperations become a smaller operation within a larger exercisecalled a sinking exercise (SINKEX) (refer to Section 2.3.1.5).The operation takes place in the open ocean at PMSR(including W-289), SCORE, and the SOCAL OPAREA(including W-291).SSM Operation participants and assets include:Firing shipAircraft for range surveillance and clearanceTarget hulkSurface-to-surface missile2-11 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Submarine2.3.1.3 Gunnery OperationSurface ship gunnery operations take place in the open ocean and involve a variety of stationary andmoving surface and aerial targets to provide gunnery practice for ship crews in an offensive or defensiveposture. The gun systems employed against surface and aerial targets include the 5-inch, 76mm, and25mm chain gun. The Close-in-Weapons System (CIWS) also is used against aerial targets.There are four types of surface targets used for Gunnery Operations. They are the High SpeedManeuverable Surface Target (HSMST), towed targets, such as the Improved Surface Tow Target (ISTT)and catamaran models, the Floating At-Sea Target (KillerTomato), and the Seaborne Powered Target (QST-35SEPTAR) (Table 2.1-1). The aerial target for CIWS trainingis a nylon, target (TDU-34) that is towed behind a contractaircraft. With the exception of the Killer Tomato, all targetsare recovered after the operation. A Gunnery Operation alsomight occur as part of a sinking exercise (SINKEX) using ahulk as a target.Ordnance expended for a single Gunnery Operation typicallyis up to 35 rounds of 5-inch or 76 mm, 75 rounds of 25mm, and 200 rounds of CIWS, all of which impactin the water. Ordnance expended during a Gunnery Operation is inert. Gunnery Operations occurthroughout the SOCAL offshore waters including W-289 and W-291. When maneuvering targets areused, the events would occur either at PMSR or SCORE due to the requirement for target controlservices.The participants and assets for a Gunnery Operation include:ShipsSurface targetsAerial targetsContract aircraft2.3.1.4 Sinking Exercise (SINKEX)In a SINKEX, a specially-prepared, deactivated vessel is deliberately sunk using multiple weaponssystems. The exercise trains ship and aircraft crews in deliveringlive ordnance on a real target. The target is a decommissioned,cleaned, and environmentally-remediated ship hulk. It is towedto sea and set adrift at the SINKEX location. The duration of aSINKEX is unpredictable because it ends when the target sinks,sometimes immediately after the first weapon impacts andsometimes only after multiple impacts by a variety of weapons.SINKEXs occur only occasionally during aCOMPTUEX/JTFEX. When scheduled, they occur in W-289 orW-291.The participants and assets could include:Full-size target ship hulkFebruary 2007 2-12

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Firing shipFiring aircraftFiring submarineEOD personnelRange clearance aircraftSome or all of the following weapons may be employed in a SINKEX:HARPOON surface-to-surface and air-to-surface missilesAir-to-surface Maverick missilesMK-82 General Purpose BombsHellfire air-to-surface missilesSLAM-ER air-to-surface missileRounds for a 5-inch gunMK-48 heavyweight submarine-launched torpedo2.3.1.5 Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) OperationAn ASW Operation provides crews of submarines, ships, aircraft, and helicopters with experience inlocating, tracking, and attacking submarines or submarine-like mobile underwater targets. ASWOperation tasks include responding rapidly and decisively to enemy submarine contacts; employingsensors and weapons to neutralize the target; and providingcommanders with a common tactical picture of the underseabattlespace.Target submarines are detected with active and passive sonarduring an ASW Operation. Submarines almost exclusively usepassive sonar. Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) aircraft, bothhelicopters and fixed-wing, use a combination of passive andactive sonobuoys. Helicopters may also use active dipping sonarwhile hovering. ASW Operations are conducted in conjunctionwith CSG JTFEX in SOCAL offshore waters.The baseline participants and assets used in an ASW Operation frequently include:Submarines (as available)Ships (Four [4] DDGs and one [1] CG)CVNP-3 Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance (MPR) aircraftHelicoptersSensors that are part of this operation include:Passive sonobuoysActive sonobuoysSurface ship hull-mounted and towed passive sonarSubmarine hull-mounted and towed passive sonarHelicopter dipping sonarAny of the following weapons and signaling devices may be used:2-13 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Inert air-dropped torpedo shapesLightweight non-explosive torpedoes launched by aircraft and surface shipsHeavyweight wire-guided non-explosive long-range torpedoesSignal Underwater Sound (SUS) chargesSmoke markersDue to an operational re-assessment of the Improved Extended Echo Ranging (IEER) sonobuoy, the Navyhas determined that IEER sonobuoy will not be deployed during Jan 07 – Dec 07 major range activities.Consequently, acoustic exposures associated with IEER have been omitted from underwater explosivecalculation results (Table 1-8). However, IEER may be included in ASW Operations after December2007. Should IEER be introduced into major range events after December 2007, the analysis of potentialIEER use in the EA/OEA can be used as the basis of regulatory consultation.2.3.1.6 Submarine Operations (SUBOPS)SUBOPS train submarine crews in using sonar systems to search for and track surface ships andsubmarines, responding to simulated attacks using evasive maneuvering and countermeasures in deep andshallow waters, and avoiding detection by ASW systems. The submarine uses passive sonar almostexclusively to remain covert and stealthy. The operation may include the firing of several exercisetorpedoes on the instrumented underwater tracking range at SOAR. Submarine operations take place atSCIRC and in W-291.The participants and assets used in submarine operations include:Submarine(s)P-3 MPR aircraftHelicopter(s)Torpedo recovery boatsSensors used include:Submarine hull-mounted AN/BQQ-5 and towed array passivesonarPassive sonobuoys SSQ53/57/77Active sonobuoys SSQ62In addition, the following weapons may be used:Inert air-dropped torpedo shapesHeavyweight wire-guided non-explosive long-range torpedoes (MK-48 EXTORP, MK-48ADCAP)SUSSmoke markersFebruary 2007 2-14

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 22.3.1.7 Amphibious (AMPHIB) OperationAn AMPHIB Operation involves the movement of Marine Corps combat and support forces from Navyships at-sea to an objective or an operations area ashore. AMPHIB operations may include shore assault,boat raid, airfield seizure, humanitarian assistance, andforce reconnaissance. AMPHIB Operations are theprincipal type of training conducted by an ESG duringan Expeditionary Fires (EF) Operation and may bepart of a COMPTUEX/JTFEX. The objective of theseoperations is to provide a realistic trainingenvironment for conducting amphibious assaults,amphibious raids, reconnaissance, hydrographicsurveys, and surf condition assessments. Navy andMarine Corps fighter and attack aircraft from the CSGand the ESG may provide Close Air Support (CAS) for the amphibious operation. Amphibious landingsare launched from Navy ships positioned out to 50 mi (80 km) offshore.For an assault on a beach, units come ashore in LCAC and in Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAV).LCACs are high-speed vessels whose air cushion capability allows them to travel across the beach to thedesired location for discharging Marines, combat vehicles, and cargo. The AAVs are lightly armoredtracked vehicles capable of maneuvering through the water and driving on land to ferry Marines from shipto shore.Amphibious operations normally take place at MCB Camp Pendleton and the SCIRC. Additionally,smaller amphibious exercises have occurred on the southern beaches of the SSTC.The participants and assets in an AMPHIB Operation typically include:One-thousand five-hundred (1,500) Marines of Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU)/AmphibiousSquadron (PHIBRON) ESG and their organic weapons and equipment including:o Rotary wing (CH-46, CH-53, UH-1, AH-1), fixed wing (FA-18C/D/E/F, AH-1, AV-8B),and tilt-wing (MV-22) aircrafto Amphibious vehicles, vessels, and boats (e.g., Landing Craft, Utility [LCU], CombatRubber Raiding Raft [CRRC], Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat [RHIB])Amphibious and other surface shipsOther surface ships2.3.1.8 Ship Mine Countermeasures (SMCM) OperationAn SMCM Operation is a training event for Mine Countermeasures (MCM) ships to locate and neutralizeinert mine shapes in shallow-water environments in support of the CSG and ESG. The MCM shipspresently are based in Corpus Christi, Texas. When available, their activities include the use of varioustypes of low-power, high-frequency active sonar, bottom-laid and underwater explosives, andminesweeping equipment. Between February 2007 and January 2009, C3F anticipates SMCMOperations in conjunction with up to three CSG COMPTUEX/JTFEXs and three ESGCOMPTUEX/JTFEXs, and two ESG/CSG COMPTUEXs. Each major range event will contain twoMCM ships per event, and eight SMCM Operations per range event. The training would take placeoffshore of the beaches at NB Coronado/Camp Pendleton, and in the nearshore waters off the westernside of SCI.2-15 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2When an SMCM Operation is included in a COMPTUEX and JTFEX, theparticipants and assets include:MCM ship; andAirborne mine countermeasures (AMCM) helicopter (MH-60S orMH-53E)Some or all of the following equipment would be used:Underwater explosives (bottom and midwater column)Side-scan sonarHigh-frequency sonarMagnetic sweep gearInfluence sweep gearEach event would utilize a MCM ship each detonating one bottomexplosive (40 lb net explosive weight [NEW]) and one midwater column explosive (20lb NEW), for atotal of 16 detonations (8 bottom and 8 midwater column) per range event. Bottom and midwater columndetonations occur in proximity to one another in place but not time.2.3.1.9 Demolition (DEMO)Demolition (DEMO) provides training in the identification and neutralization or destruction of inertfloating or moored mines. This training includes hydrographic reconnaissance of approaches toprospective landing beaches; demolition of obstacles and clearing mines; locating, improving, andmarking of useable channels; channel and harbor clearance; and acquisition of operational intelligenceduring pre-assault operations. Explosives used in DEMO are less than 20 pounds. During aCOMPTUEX or JTFEX there may be up to 3 demolition events. The DEMO exercise takes place atlocations routinely used for Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) and DEMO training at SCIRC, MCBCamp Pendleton, SSTC, and Naval Base Coronado (NBC).The participants and assets used in this event include:EOD diversSmall boatsHelicopter(s)Up to twenty (20) explosives, all less than 20 pounds2.3.1.10 Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure (VBSS) or Maritime Intercept Operations (MIO) orHelicopter Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure (HVBSS)VBSS missions are the principal type of MIO. Highly trained teamsof personnel armed with M-16s or M-4s, body armor, flotationdevices, and communications gear are deployed by small Zodiacboats or helicopters to board and inspect ships and vessels suspectedof carrying contraband. Once aboard, the team takes control of thebridge, crew, and engineering plant, and inspects the ship's papersand its cargo. VBSS missions are assumed to be non-hostile, butteam members are trained and prepared to deal with noncooperationat all levels. VBSS takes place offshore in WarningArea W-291, SCIRC, or in the PMSR.February 2007 2-16

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Typical participants in this event are:Ship(s)Small rubber boats (Zodiacs)Helicopter(s)2.3.1.11 Naval Cooperation and Guidance for Shipping (NCAGS)NCAGS assists the operational Commander in managing risk by providing situational awareness, a realtimeoperational picture, and the coordinated and safe passage offriendly merchant shipping carrying military supplies into seaportsfor off-load during a crisis or contingency. The operation takesplace in SOCAL offshore waters, in W-291 in the vicinity of SanDiego and Camp Pendleton, or in the PMSR. NCAGS is primarily acommand and control activity and does not include combat trainingevents. Supporting NCAGS are:Ship(s)Other vessels simulating merchant ship(s)Helicopter(s)2.3.1.12 Maritime Security Operation/Oil Platform (MSO/OPLAT) DefenseMSO/OPLAT Defense operations train ship crews to defend stationary high value infrastructures at-seafrom possible attack. To accomplish this, crews must train in the conducting of surveillance, assessingthreat intentions and taking appropriate offensive and defensive actions, if required, to counter the threat.To simulate real world scenarios, some ships are authorized to pull up next to the at-sea infrastructure,simulating the on-loading and off-loading of material. Prior to this, security inspections must beperformed on all these assets to ensure no contraband or explosive devices are onboard. The operationstake place in SOCAL offshore waters, in W-291 in the vicinity of San Clemente Island.The participants associated with an MSO/OPLAT Defense operation are:Ship(s)Small OPFOR boatsVessel simulating an oil platform or fixed infrastructure2.3.1.13 Naval Surface Fires Support (NSFS)Naval Surface Fires Support (NSFS) operations involve navalsurface ships with the MK-45 5-inch/54 or the MK-45 5-inch/62naval gun firing system, engaging land and surface targets. NSFSoperations are an annual requirement for all naval vessels outfittedwith the 5-inch gun system. NSFS is conducted against land targetsin the Shore Bombardment Area (SHOBA) on SCI. Because shipsare firing from sea to land targets located in SHOBA, the public isrestricted in the offshore portion of SHOBA, called Fire SupportArea (FSA), during the live-firing portion of the operations.However, the cumulative time that ships are actually firing weapons during these operations is extremelyshort.2-17 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2The participants associated with an NSFS operation include:ShipsThe weapons used in an NSFS include:5-inch/54 caliber5-inch/62 caliber2.3.1.14 STRAITS Transit/Q-RouteSTRAITS Transit/Q-Route operations involve ships transiting along a predetermined route through thewater in a simulated confined maneuvering area under potentially hostile conditions. In addition to thesurface assets, typically there is an airborne asset (P-3 MPA) that scansthe strait in front of the NSG for surface contacts. In the case of a Q-Route, the predetermined route is simulated to have been cleared ofunderwater and surface mines by mine clearing assets. Theseoperations typically occur one time per exercise, and the entire NavalStrike Group (NSG) must navigate the predetermined course. Thisoperation takes place in the SOCAL offshore waters, typically betweenSan Nicolas Island and San Clemente Island.The participants associated with a STRAITS Transit/Q-Routeoperation include:Ships (typically the entire flotilla of the NSG)P-3C MPASubmarine(s)2.3.1.15 Fast Inshore Assault Craft (FIAC)FIAC operations test a ship’s ability to defend itself against OPFOR small boats with hostile or unknownintentions. The operation is often combined with a STRAITSTransit, as this provides the best opportunity to have the entireNSG together in close proximity, and presents an even moredifficult scenario, as the NSG is restricted in its ability tomaneuver. When combined with a STRAITS Transit, thisoperation requires the pre-positioning and coordination of smallboats, typically located in and around harbors on the northeast sideof San Clemente Island. These operations occur in the SOCAL offshore waters, generally within closeproximity to San Clemente Island.The participants associated with FIAC operations include:Ship(s)Small OPFOR boats2.3.1.16 Tracking OperationA Tracking Operation tests the NSG ability to locate and track an unknown or hostile submarine over apredetermined time. This operation tests occurs as part of COMPTUEX and the NSG’s ability tocoordinate the positioning of assets, including surface, air, and subsurface, and the effectiveFebruary 2007 2-18

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2communication and turnover of responsibility for maintaining coverage of the unknown submarine.These operations occur in the SOCAL OPAREA.The participants associated with a Tracking Operation include:Ships;P-3 MPA;Helicopters;Submarines (one of which is OPFOR);MK30 or MK39 EMATTs.Sensors that are part of this operation include:AN/AQS-22;AN/SSQ-62C;AN/SQS-53;AN/SQS-56;AN/BQQ-10.Weapon systems that are part of this operation include: MK48 ADCAP; MK46/54 EXTORP.2.3.1.17 Psychological Operations (PSYOPS)PSYOPS are an aspect of Information Warfare, during which ships broadcast generic information to aparticular area in order to facilitate the desired end state. These operations occur in the SOCALOPAREA.The participants associated with PSYOPS include:Ship(s)2.3.2 Air Operations2.3.2.1 Aircraft Operations Support (AIROPS)AIROPS encompasses operational and logistics support for NSGs by Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, andcontract OPFOR aircraft, to include unmanned aerial vehicles(UAV), during a COMPTUEX/JTFEX. This activity takesplace at military airfields and on ships at-sea. It includesproviding bed-down for the various types of aircraft,equipment for refueling and maintenance, and billeting foraircraft crews and support personnel. This support is requiredfor 10 days during a COMPTUEX and 12 days during aCOMPTUEX/JTFEX. AIROPS take place at W-291, NASNorth Island, MCAS Miramar, Camp Pendleton, NASLemoore, NB Ventura County (NAS Point Mugu), Vandenberg AFB, MCAS Yuma, and NAF El Centro.The aircraft and sorties associated with AIROPS are:Thirty to fifty (30-50) Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and contract aircraftOne-hundred and fifty to two hundred (150-200) sorties spread out over the following areas:2-19 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2ooSorties to and from aircraft carriers and other ships at seaSorties from military airfields ashore2.3.2.2 Air-to-Air Missile (AAM) OperationAAM Operations are operations in which air-to-air missiles (less than half with live warheads, the restwith telemetry) are fired from aircraft against aerial targets to provide aircrews with experience usingaircraft missile firing systems and training on air-to-air combat tactics. Participating air units includefighter and fighter/attack squadrons firing a variety of air-to-air missiles. The main aerial targets areflares for heat-seeking missiles and Tactical Air Launched Decoys (TALDS) for radar-guided missiles.The targets typically are launched by other Navy aircraft that are participating in the operation. Neitherthe flares nor TALDS are recovered after use. Occasionally, the BQM-74 aerial target is used. It is asub-scale unmanned aircraft that simulates a subsonic enemy aircraft, and can be either air-launched orground-launched. The BQM-74 can be launched by C-130s or contracted Gulfstream G-1 aircraftoperating from a land airfield. The BQM-74s are equipped with a parachute that allows for a soft landingin the water. Unless the BQM-74s are severely damaged by a direct intercept from a live missile, they arerecovered either by boat or helicopter and returned to their support base for refurbishment and reuse.While AAM Operations do not occur during a COMPTUEX/JTFEX, about three AAM Operations occurin a COMPTUEX. AAM Operations are conducted on the PMSR, SCORE, W-291, and W-289.The participants and assets necessary for this operation are:AircraftMissilesTargetsRecovery boat(s)2.3.2.3 Air-to-Surface Missile/Bomb (ASM) OperationAn ASM Operation provides training for Navy and Marine tactical aircrews in air-to-surface missilefiring; conventional ordnance delivery (including bombing, gunnery, and rocketry); and precision-guidedmunitions (PGM) firing. PGMs include optical, infrared seeking or laser-guided missiles fired at surfacetargets. When this event takes place at-sea it is performed in conjunction with SINKEX. ASMOperations take place at SCORE, PMSR, and in W-291.The participants and assets used in an ASM Operation include:Helicopter(s)AircraftAir-to-surface missilesBombs or PGMsRecovery boatsThe weapons used in an ASM Operation include live and inert:MK-80 series General Purpose BombsHellfire, Harpoon, and Maverick missiles2.75-inch rocketsAircraft strafing weaponry to include 20mm and 7.62mmFebruary 2007 2-20

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 22.3.2.4 Air-to-Ground Operation (Long Range STRIKE)This event is similar to the ASM Operation except that the targets are land-based. A STRIKE Operationprovides training for Navy and Marine Corps fighter and attack aircraft crews in air-to-ground missilefiring, conventional ordnance delivery (including bombing, gunnery,and rocketry), and PGM firing. These operations typically involveat least a flight of two aircraft, and can number as many as twentyeightaircraft. During a COMPTUEX or JTFEX, strike aircraftdepart from an aircraft carrier or amphibious ship and proceed to thetraining area. Prior to commencing a bombing run, the pilotconfirms a clear range with Range Control and requests clearancefor weapons delivery. Safety procedures are employed to ensurethat personnel on the range are not jeopardized. These measuresinclude a requirement that the target be positively identified prior to weapons release, a prohibition frombombing through a cloud layer if it obscures the target, and no over-flight of shore facilities whilecarrying live or inert ordnance.Air-to-ground strikes are central to an NSG’s power projection capability. A COMPTUEX/JTFEXincludes a large number of STRIKE training events at a variety of ranges. STRIKE training occurs over aperiod from 6 days up to the length of the COMPTUEX/JTFEX. STRIKE Operations take place atNAWS China Lake, NTTR, Nellis AFB, BSTRC, NAS Fallon, SCIRC, and the NTC, Fort Irwin.The participants and assets necessary for a STRIKE Operation include:Strike aircraftSupport aircraft (OPFOR, Tankers, Command and Control Aircraft)Some or all of the following ordnance is expended:Laser guided training rounds (LGTR)MK-80 general purpose bombsPractice bombs (BDUs)2.3.2.5 Time Sensitive Strike (TSS) or Dynamic Strike for a COMPTUEXThe purpose of TSS or Dynamic Strike operations is to test the NSG in the prosecution of time sensitivetargets by testing intelligence-gathering and dissemination, command and control procedures, and strikeaircraft execution. A typical scenario would have intelligence assets receive cueing about the location ofa mobile target that needs to be confirmed or destroyed. That information would then be sent up theappropriate chain of command for a decision. Once the decision is made, the order needs to be relayedvia multiple assets to the nearest or most capable strike platform, which would then investigate orprosecute the target before it moves to a new position. A typical operation takes place on San ClementeIsland. The actual prosecution of targets is simulated, but video footage is often obtained by onboardsensors.The participants in a TSS or Dynamic Strike include:Ship(s)Aircraft2-21 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 22.3.2.6 HaystackThe purpose of a Haystack operation is a part-task training event, designed to challenge and refinefundamental target acquisition skills in an urban environment using available onboard sensors andsimulated weapons delivery for aircrew. During these operations, no ordnance is loaded on the aircraft,and aircrews must locate specific and often obscured targets in an urban environment under a compressedtimeline. This type of training helps aircrews by forcing them to focus on target identification,symbology, and switchology. Due to the need to work in an urban environment, haystack operations donot occur on a range per se. Aircraft launch from the CVN in W-291, contact approach control and fly ahorseshoe route around San Diego County that typically starts at the tip of Point Loma, heads east, curvesnorth towards Ramona and then west over Encinitas, ending back over the water. For these operations,SOCAL Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) and the Navy establish an Altitude Reservation(ALTREV), typically between 25,000 and 27,000 feet, that is activated by aircrew upon initial contactwith Approach Control.The participants in a Haystack include:Strike Fighter aircraft2.3.2.7 Close Air Support (CAS)CAS is the use of air-to-ground weapons in proximity to friendly forces. It differs from Long RangeStrikes in that it must be integrated with the fire and maneuver of ground forces. It requires the preciseapplication of firepower constrained by time, weapons effects, andcircular error probable (CEP). CAS operations require the highest levelof coordination and integration of fires of any military activity involvingair-delivered weapons, and sufficient training is required to instill thedegree of confidence necessary for ground forces to request/employCAS. The majority of these operations occur in SHOBA on thesouthwest side of San Clemente Island. CAS operations also occur inthe CMAGR, NTC Fort Irwin, and MCB Camp Pendleton, but to amuch lesser extent in numbers and duration.The participants in a CAS operation include:Strike Fighter aircraftSome or all of the following types of ordnance is expended:Laser guided training rounds (LGTR)MK-80 general purpose bombsMK-76 practice bombsBDUs2.3.2.8 Urban Close Air Support (Urban CAS)Urban CAS is identical to CAS with the exception that it occurs in a fabricated urban environment wherecollateral damage is a concern. The urban environment presents a unique challenge, in that much greaterprecision of ordnance dropping is required in an effort to reduce collateral damage. Because of thisrequirement, typically precision guided munitions are used to a much greater extent in Urban CAS ascompared to CAS. The operations take place at NTC Fort Irwin and occasionally in BMGR-W inBSTRC.February 2007 2-22

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2The participants in Urban CAS operations include:Strike Fighter aircraftSome or all of the following types of ordnance is expended:Laser guided training rounds (LGTR)MK-80 series precision guided munitions2.3.2.9 Carrier Qualifications (CQs) or Deck Launch Qualifications (DLQs)Perhaps the most demanding mission of any naval aviator is landing an aircraft aboard a ship. Themission is further compounded when these operations arerequired at night. The ability to land aboard a ship is aperishable skill. As such, this operation needs to be practicedroutinely. Additionally, for safety, the Naval AviationTraining and Operations Procedures Standardization(NATOPS) manual has strict guidelines and rules on frequencyand duration between landings. Subsequently, based uponwhen and the number of times that a particular aviator lastlanded upon the carrier, NATOPS dictates how many landings and/or touch-and-gos the aviator must doto be certified. As such, the number of particular CQs or DLQs that occur during a JTFEX orCOMPTUEX can vary dramatically. CQs and DLQs occur in the SOCAL OPAREA in W-291.The participants in CQs/DLQs include:Aircraft (approximately 80-90 pilots in the Airwing)2.3.2.10 War at Sea (WAS) OperationA WAS Operation is the planned prosecution of sea-borne targetsusing airborne assets. These operations involve fixed-wing androtary-wing aircraft conducting simulated attacks on surface assets.WAS Operations occur in the SOCAL OPAREA in W-291.The participants in a WAS Operation include:Strike Fighter aircraftRotary-wing aircraftOther vessel(s) simulating OPFOR2.3.2.11 GANGPLANKA GANGPLANK is a combination WAS Operation and TSS/Dynamic Strike Operation. The overallobjective of a GANGPLANK is the prosecution of a sea-borne target. However, it is reactionary innature and not a preplanned evolution. Additionally, it combines the no-notice tasking/redirecting of anairborne asset similar to that of a TSS/Dynamic Strike. GANGPLANKs occur in the SOCAL OPAREA,throughout W-291.The participants in a GANGPLANK include:Strike Fighter aircraftOther vessel(s) simulating OPFOR2-23 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 22.3.2.12 Counter Special Operations Force (CSOF)CSOF operations are similar in nature to GANGPLANK operations. They are a reactionary attackprosecuted by an airborne platform, except that the target is aseaborne unit of special operations landing forces. CSOFoperations occur in W-291 and SHOBA. Often times they aresimulated events.The participants in CSOF operations include:Small OPFOR boat(s)Strike Fighter aircraft2.3.2.13 Sea Surface Control (SSC)SSC operations involve aircraft, typically FA-18 hornets, performing reconnaissance of the surroundingbattlespace. Under the direction of the Sea Combat Commander, the airborne assets investigate surfacecontacts of interest and attempt to identify, via onboard sensors or cameras, the type, course, speed, name,and other pertinent data about the ship of interest. Due to the curvature of the earth, surface assets arelimited in their ability to see over the horizon. The airborne assets, due to their speed and altitude, cancover great distances in relatively short periods of time and see far beyond the capabilities of the surfaceship. This enables them to report contacts that cannot be seen by ships. By using airborne assets, the SeaCombat Commander, in effect, is able to see beyond the horizon and develop a clearer tactical picturewell in advance. SSC operations occur in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout W-291.The participants in a SSC operation include:Strike Fighter aircraftShip(s)2.3.2.14 Maritime InterdictionMaritime Interdiction is a coordinated pre-planned pre-emptive attack against multiple surface and aircontacts with the objective of delivering a decisive blow to enemy forces. Maritime Interdiction occurs inthe SOCAL OPAREA throughout W-291.The typical participants in Maritime Interdiction include:Strike Fighter aircraft (including EA-6B and E-2C aircraft)OPFOR aircraftShip(s)Surface OPFOR2.3.2.15 Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA)MPA operations utilize P-3C Orion aircraft conducting generalsearch, localization, identification and tracking operations throughoutW-291. P-3C Orion aircraft typically fly at lower altitudes and arecapable of staying airborne for extended periods of time. Due to themany sensors onboard, the aircraft are able to perform a variety ofmissions and function well as a reconnaissance platform.Additionally, when airborne, they act as a deterrent to potentiallyhostile submarines.February 2007 2-24

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2The participants in MPA operations include:P-3C Orion aircraft2.3.2.16 Mining OperationMining Operations consist of both mine laying and mine countermeasures. Mine laying training exercisesusually involve a single aircraft sortie. In the single aircraft mining exercise, the aircraft drops a series of(usually four) inert training shapes (MK-76, bomb dummy unit (BDU) 45, or BDU 48) in the water. Theaircraft may make multiple passes on the same flight pattern,dropping one or more shapes each pass. The shapes are scored foraccuracy as they enter the water. The training shapes are inert,expendable, and can be recovered.The second aspect of the exercise, mine countermeasures, caninvolve helicopters, Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) divers,and marine mammals. For helicopter training, any or all of fivetypes of helicopter-towed mine detection and/or detonationequipment, may be used. The purpose of this training is for thehelicopter crews to practice the deployment, employment, and extraction of the mine-hunting andminesweeping gear. Nothing remains in the water. For EOD divers working together with speciallytrained marine mammals (bottlenose dolphins or sea lions), the training involves the use of mammals todetect and mark potential mines and for divers to dispose of the mines using practice demolition charges.Use of trained marine mammals is not subject to analysis in this EA/OEA because the Navy hasappropriate permits for their use in Mining Activities. Mining Operations take place offshore of thebeaches at NB Coronado, SCIRC, and MCB Camp Pendleton.The participants and assets necessary to conduct a MINEX include some or all of the following: Aircraft capable of laying mines, usually a P-3 EOD divers MK-V Marine Mammal System (MMS) Rigid Hull Inflatable boats Helicopter(s) 1-20-pound explosive2.3.2.17 Surge OperationA Surge Operation is designed to test the Air Wing’s ability to generate and sustain a high tempo of fixedwing flight operations over an extended period of time. This operation mimics the beginning stages of aconflict, where operations are routinely run around the clock. Additionally, Surge Operations not onlytest the aircrew’s ability to perform under demanding circumstances, but the individuals who maintainand fix the jets as well. Often times, Surge Operations involve a large number of CAS operations, as theobjective is to get the jet over the target to employ its ordnance, return, refuel and launch again. SurgeOperations occur within W-291.The participants in a Surge Operation include:Strike Fighter aircraft (including EA-6Bs and E-2C)2-25 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 22.3.2.18 Electronic Warfare (EW) OperationEW Operations are electronic counter warfare operations that primarily focus on allowing shipboard EWmodules to track and correlate radar and electronic signals. During EW Operations, contract aircraft, toinclude a Gulfstream-1 and Lear 35/36 aircraft with special EW pods, fly different profiles inboundtowards surface ships. While inbound, these aircraft cycle through different radar and electronic signalsprogrammed into the EW pods. This training helps to refine electronic warfare counter targeting andsignals intelligence capabilities in support of surface assets. These operations occur throughout W-291.The typical participants in a EW Operation include:Contract aircraftShips2.3.3 Ground Operations2.3.3.1 Live-Fire (LF) OperationA Live-Fire Operation is a ground operation conducted by Marines from the ESG and supported by Navyships and aircraft. An LF Operation occurs as a part of an EFOperation, following an amphibious assault or helicoptermovement of Marines from Navy ships to positions ashore (seediscussion of AMPHIB Operation above). It provides Marineswith live-fire combat training and the Navy-Marine Corps teamwith combined supporting arms live-fire training, including aerialgunnery and artillery firing. These operations include MarineCorps movements by foot and vehicle, and the employment of thefull array of Marine Corps weapons. Supporting arms areprovided by surface fire support (NSFS) from Navy ships and CAS from Navy and Marine Corpsfighter/attack aircraft and helicopter gunships. For safety reasons, live ammunition is only used indesignated areas within an existing training range, and in accordance with strict safety rules. LFOperations are conducted at Camp Pendleton, and MCAGCC.The participants and assets used in an LF Operation include some or all of the following:Ships (amphibious ship and surface combatants)Amphibious landing and assault vehicles (LCU, LCAC, and AAV)Marine Corps helicoptersNavy and/or Marine Corps fighter and attack aircraftWeapons that may be employed in the LF Operation include:5-inch naval gun105mm and 155mm howitzers, towed81/66mm mortars and illumination rounds20 mm/.50 caliber machine guns and 25mm2.75-inch rocketsTube-launched, optically-tracked, wire-guided missiles (TOW)Hellfire missilesBDU-48 (laser guided training round)MK-76February 2007 2-26

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2MK-82 HEMK-83 I (Inert)2.3.3.2 Special Warfare Operations (SPECWAROPS)SPECWAROPS train Naval Special Warfare Sea, Air, and Land (SEAL) platoons in missions supportingthe CSG and ESG including reconnaissance, surveillance, land interdiction and maritime interdictionoperations, direct action missions, insertion and extraction missions, and Combat Search and Rescue(CSAR).The events occur at one or more ranges routinely used for SEAL training including:NB CoronadoSan Nicolas IslandNAS FallonNAF El CentroCamp PendletonSCIRCMCAGCCNaval Special Warfare Training Facility(NSWTF), NilandCMAGRNellis AFBVandenberg AFBNB Ventura County (Port Hueneme and Point Mugu)NAWS China LakeNaval Weapons Station (NWS) Seal BeachLong Beach NSNTC Fort IrwinMWTF La PostaThe participants and assets used in this event include some or all of:Navy SEAL platoonsSubmarineHelicoptersCRRCMK-VSDV Team w/submersibleUAV sorties (onshore and offshore)2-27 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2Ordnance use includes: MK-11 Blasting caps Grenade simulator M7 BANDOLEER MK 57 M112 Demo Charge 40mm 5.56mm w/tracers 0.50 cal (no tracers) 7.62mm w/tracers 9mm (no tracers) MK 31 smoke2.3.3.3 Humanitarian Assistance/Disaster Relief (HA/DR) (PEACEOPS)PEACEOPS provide training for Navy and Marine Corps forces in responding to a request for emergencysupport in a foreign country in response to a natural disaster, famine, or collapse of a government orregime. The purpose is to train Strike Group forces in providing assistance and relief to a civilianpopulation. The basic elements of the training are to establish and run a refugee camp, and to manage thelogistics, communications, and civil relations associated with a refugee camp. The training refugee campis established either in existing shore facilities or in temporary facilities such as tents. Refugees aremilitary or civilian personnel acting in the role. The camp includes a Civil–Military Operations Center(CMOC) that has communication links, media support center, staff billeting, and areas for visitors. ThesePEACEOPS training events occur at Camp Pendleton.The participants and assets used in this event are:Campsite(s)One-hundred and twenty-five to five hundred (125-500) military personnelOne-hundred and twenty-five to four hundred (125-400) refugee actorsBuses or trucks to transport refugeesMilitary helicoptersAdditional requirements may include:Portable latrinesShower unitsMedical facilitiesKitchen and dining facilitiesMedia supportWater and water storageActivities associated with PEACEOPS are routine, non-combat activities in designated training areas andconsistent with existing installation use. The responsibility for safety and environmental planning is withCamp Pendleton, which evaluates each proposed use for compliance and consistency with existing safetyand environmental procedures.February 2007 2-28

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 22.3.3.4 Non-combatant Evacuation Operation (NEO)NEO training practices the evacuation of American citizens from a country or region in which their safetycannot be assured such as during a revolution or coup. It is a subset of a larger ESG operation during aCOMPTUEX/JTFEX called a Special Operations Capable (SOC) Operation. The essential elements of anNEO operation include establishing and securing a marshalling area for evacuees, moving evacuees to themarshalling area, accounting for evacuees, and moving evacuees from the marshalling area to a safehaven, often on ships at-sea. An NEO requires rapid planning, ingress with appropriate transportation (inpermissive or non-permissive environments), location, identification and securing of evacuees, and egressto a secure location. Medical support may be required en route. An NEO operation occurs at MCB CampPendleton and occasionally at SCIRC.The participants or assets in an NEO include:One-hundred and fifty to three hundred (150-300) Marines from the ESGUp to one hundred (100) civilian evacuee actorsHelicoptersBoats and craft for transport to ships (LCAC, CRRC, RHIB)Ground transportation vehicles2.3.3.5 Embassy ReinforcementEmbassy reinforcement entails the reinforcement and/or evacuation of American citizens and heads ofstate from an embassy located in a foreign country during an uprising or revolution. Like NEO, it is asubset of a SOC Operation and requires a rapid response team to establish a secure perimeter around theembassy. The response team must provide for the security of American citizens and help to defusetensions. Should an evacuation be ordered, the Embassy Reinforcement operation becomes a NEO. AnEmbassy Reinforcement occurs at SCIRC and Camp Pendleton.The participants or assets in an Embassy Reinforcement include:Twenty-five to fifty (25-50) Marines from the ESGUp to fifty (50) civilian embassy actorsHelicoptersBoats and craft for transport to ships (LCAC, CRRC, RHIB)Ground transportation vehicles2.3.3.6 Command and Control (ASHORE)A COMPTUEX/JTFEX is a complex and lengthy operation requiring support from personnel and staffsoperating ashore. Two such support functions are the Joint Exercise Control Group (JECG) and OPFORCommand and Control. The JECG has the responsibility of monitoring the progress of the operation,providing intelligence and scenario “injects” to stimulate actions by COMPTUEX/JTFEX forces, servingas umpire for tactical engagements, and ensuring operation safety. To add realism to the training, aCOMPTUEX/JTFEX includes an OPFOR that reacts to and interacts with the COMPTUEX/JTFEXforces. The OPFOR needs to have a command and control cell to direct their actions in order to ensurethat exercise and training objectives are achieved. These command and control functions last for theduration of the COMPTUEX/JTFEX. One to three facilities may be required to support these functionsashore. The facilities are existing operations centers located on military installations at NB Point Loma,NB San Diego, NB Coronado, MCAS Miramar, Camp Pendleton, Vandenberg AFB, NSWTF, Niland,and NB Ventura County.2-29 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 22.3.4 Combat Training Operations2.3.4.1 Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) or Tactical Recovery ofAircraft and Personnel (TRAP)CSAR/TRAP operations are primarily concerned with the recovery of friendlyforces behind enemy lines or at-sea. These operations can occur in benign orhostile environments. These operations can occur in SCI-SHOBA, PMSR (SanNicolas Island), W-291, MCB Camp Pendleton, and the CMAGR.The participants or assets in a CSAR/TRAP include:Strike Fighter aircraft (including EA-6B and E-2C aircraft andhelicopters)OPFOR aircraftTanker support aircraft2.3.4.2 Air Defense (AD) OperationThe purpose of an AD Operation is to exercise the command and control of strike fighter aircraft bysurface and air control platforms in a defensive posture. During AD Operations, strike fighter aircraft arepositioned at various ranges from the NSG. Under direction, these aircraft investigate airborne contactsand attempt to visually identify the contacts without putting themselves in jeopardy. When able, thestrike fighters will attempt to escort the unknown contact away from the NSG. If unsuccessful or thecontact is deemed hostile, the strike fighter aircraft will simulate an engagement of the inbound threat.Occasionally, if the contact cannot be intercepted and identified in time, the ship or airborne platform willdisengage the fighters and the ship will have to take appropriate defensive actions. Each AD Operationlast from 4 to 5 hours, and occurs in W-291 and PMSR.The participants or assets in an AD Operation include:Strike Fighter aircraft (including E-2Cs)OPFOR aircraftTanker support aircraftShips2.3.4.3 Counter TargetingA Counter Targeting operation is a coordinated, defensive operation utilizing surface and air assets, thatattempts to use jamming and chaff to show a false force presentation to inbound surface-to-surfaceplatforms. During these operations, EA-6B jamming aircraft will establish an orbit along the inboundthreat axis and jam the radar systems of potential hostile surface units. NSG ships will launch chaff tocreate radar blooms that saturate the threat radars return, thus masking their true position. CounterTargeting operations occur in the SOCAL OPAREA and W-291.February 2007 2-30

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2The participants in Counter Targeting operations include:EA-6B aircraftShipsOPFOR ships2.3.4.4 Final Battle Problem (FBP)The Final Battle Problem is an operation that is unique to the COMPTUEX. It is designed to test allwarfare areas of the NSG in a simulated war. The operation occurs in W-291. Many of the operationspreviously listed are conducted during the Final Battle Problem.The participants or assets in a FBE include:NSG aircraftOPFOR aircraftTanker support aircraftShipsOPFOR shipsSmall OPFOR boatsSubmarine(s)OPFOR submarine2.4 DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVESAlternatives to the Proposed Action must be considered in accordance with NEPA, CEQ regulations forimplementing NEPA, and the Department of Navy Procedures for Implementing NEPA (32 CFR 775).Only those alternatives determined to fulfill the purpose and need for the Proposed Action requireddetailed analysis. Reasonable alternatives have the qualities required by the selection criteria.2.4.1 Alternatives Considered2.4.1.1 No Action AlternativeThe No Action Alternative consists of the individual operations at existing major ranges and facilitiesassociated with COMPTUEX and JTFEX events. Under this alternative, Commander, THIRD Fleetwould continue to conduct training operations, as anticipated, from February 2007 through January 2009.These operations would include three ESG COMPTUEXs, four CSG COMPTUEXs, three ESGCOMPTUEX/JTFEXs, and four CSG COMPTUEX/JTFEXs, for a total of fourteen exercises in 2 yearsin the southwestern United States and SOCAL OPAREAS.The purpose of including a no action alternative in environmental impact analyses is to ensure thatagencies compare the potential impacts of the proposed Federal action to the known impacts ofmaintaining the status quo. The current level of activity is used as a benchmark. By using the status quoas the no action alternative here, Navy compared the impacts of the original proposal and preferredalternative to the impacts of continuing operations.With regard to the no-action alternative, it currently exists in the EA/OEA as a baseline, where the actionpresented represents what is at essence a "continuing action", that is to say, a regular and historic level ofactivity on the SOCAL Range Complex to support this type of training and exercises. The no-actionalternative serves as a baseline, or representative "status quo" when studying levels of range use andactivity. The analysis then of this type of no-action alternative is a snapshot of continuing use of the asset,2-31 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2here a set of military ranges, with the "status quo" environment as a baseline. The preferred alternative,as the proposed action, analyzes greater use of range assets to support training exercises by combiningactivities together to maximize training opportunities. For this reason, the EA's baseline, or no-actionalternative, stands as no change from current levels of training usage.2.4.1.2 Preferred Alternative (Proposed Action)Under the Preferred Alternative, Commander, THIRD Fleet would have the option to conduct twoconcurrent, major range events. While the overall number of major range events depicted in the NoAction Alternative (14 exercises) would not increase, Commander, THIRD Fleet, would have theflexibility to assess two Strike Groups simultaneously which will enhance Navy readiness and support theFleet Response Plan. Concurrent major range events provide: flexibility to respond to surgerequirements; valuable opportunities for joint carrier operations; and enhanced operational capabilities.2.4.2 Evaluation Factors/Screening CriteriaEach of the alternatives must be feasible, reasonable, and reasonably foreseeable in accordance with Navyguidance in OPNAVINST 5090.1B, and CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508). Reasonable alternativesinclude those that are practical or feasible from the technical and economic standpoint and that usecommon sense.Alternatives were selected based on their ability to meet the following criteria:Provides access to instrumented deepwater range, instrumented air ranges, and class D airspaceProvides large enough area for the number of assets used during these major training exercisesProvides diverse geography to make training realisticMinimizes personnel time away from homeMinimizes logistics lead timeMinimizes aircraft, ship, and equipment "wear and tear" and fuel requirementsProvides a multi-dimensional, multi-threat, real-time environment that stresses all aspects ofnaval operationsAllows Commander, THIRD Fleet to fulfill Title 10 responsibilities2.4.3 Alternatives Eliminated From Further ConsiderationAlternatives considered during preparation of the EA/OEA included the use of alternate locations forconducting the exercises, reducing the number of exercises conducted during the year, and exercisesimulation.2.4.3.1 Alternative COMPTUEX/JTFEX Training LocationsCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training occurs at-sea and at various military training range locations throughoutCalifornia, Arizona and Nevada. The unique nature of the interplay between the SOCAL Range Complexassets, result in support for COMPTUEX/JTFEX at this particular location.There is no other series of integrated ranges that afford this level of operational support andcomprehensive integration for THIRD Fleet major exercises. By use of the SOCAL Range Complexassets, component commanders practice essential skills to examine and prioritize every potential threat,plan and develop tactical courses of action and effectively conduct military operations. There is noduplicative location where land, sea, undersea and airspace assets are controlled by military authoritiesthat allow full play and training by THIRD Fleet operational actors. This location and its supportingoperational environments allow readiness training to be conducted to properly build skills required forFebruary 2007 2-32

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2deploying naval forces. For this reason, alternative sites do not meet the purpose and need of theproposal, and therefore were eliminated from further study and analysis.Although THIRD Fleet has, in rare instances, conducted COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs at alternate locationsincluding Alaska and Hawaii, these exercises were designed to meet one-time operational requirements.The Southwestern U.S. and SOCAL Operating Areas serve as the primary training area for the majority ofTHIRD Fleet COMPTUEX and JTFEX participants. Using these training areas, which are nearby majorhome port installations, significantly reduces costs associated with:Personnel time away from home. COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs conducted in Hawaii and Alaskacan add up to 2 weeks (transit time) to the length of an exercise.Logistics lead-time. COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs conducted in remote locations require assets tobe staged for the exercise, thereby reducing the already limited time available for equipmentrepair and maintenance activities.Aircraft/ship/equipment “wear and tear” and fuel. Maintenance and fuel costs are directly relatedto the amount of travel time to and from training locations.In addition to the increased costs associated with using remote COMPTUEX and JTFEX locations suchas Alaska and Hawaii, none of the remote training areas provide the full complement of rangeinfrastructure necessary to conduct typical, realistic, coordinated COMPTUEX and JTFEX training. Forinstance, the Alaskan operations area does not have a military range or installation capable of supportingamphibious landings. Moreover, an underwater tracking range that can support ASW and MCM trainingdoes not exist. The Hawaiian operations area does not provide a variety of air-to-ground ranges locatedwithin aircraft STRIKE distance. The lack of multiple STRIKE ranges reduces the exercise planners’ability to adjust mission scenarios should an intended exercise range/target become unusable due toweather, fire, or in the case of other unforeseen circumstances.The factors listed above limit the viability of THIRD Fleet conducting its typical JTFEXs andCOMPTUEXs at alternate locations. Although, specific one-time mission requirements may dictate theuse of remote COMPTUEX and JTFEX training locations in the future, the routine usage of these trainingareas for the major exercises is infeasible and will not be evaluated further in this document.2.4.3.2 Conduct Fewer COMPTUEX/JTFEXsThe actual number of JTFEXs and COMPTUEXs conducted by THIRD Fleet is a function of the numberof CSGs and ESGs that deploy each year as ordered by the National Command Authority. The number ofJTFEXs and COMPTUEXs varies from year to year, based upon the requirement to support FRTPobjectives, but typically averages about seven exercises per year. During a period of increasedinternational tension or in times of war or conflict, deployments would be expected. The inability ofTHIRD Fleet to conduct at least seven JTFEXs and COMPTUEXs per year in the SOCAL OPAREAsand other range facilities in the southwestern U.S. would severely constrain THIRD Fleet from executingits Title 10 responsibilities and the Fleet Response Plan. Therefore, conducting fewer than seven JTFEXsand COMPTUEXs is not considered further.2.4.3.3 Computer Simulation TrainingTraining simulation technologies provide excellent tools for implementing a successful, integratedtraining program while reducing the risk and expense typically associated with military training. Thisalternative would involve using computer simulation to the exclusion of live training to train CSGs andESGs during a COMPTUEX and JTFEX. The Navy and Marine Corps currently use training simulationextensively and COMPTUEXs/JTFEXs make substantial use of virtual and constructive simulation2-33 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 2training tools. However, while it is an essential component of current training techniques, simulationcannot substitute for the high stress, dynamic environment (such as personnel experience under combatconditions) that would be encountered during an actual contingency situation and replicated as nearly aspossible during a live COMPTUEX and JTFEX. Consequently, this alternative fails to meet the Purposeand Need as discussed in Section 1.3, and therefore, is not considered feasible and is not evaluated furtherin this EA/OEA.February 2007 2-34

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3CHAPTER 3AFFECTED ENVIRONMENTThis Chapter describes relevant existing environmental conditions for facilities, ranges, and operatingareas potentially affected by the Proposed Action and No Action Alternative described in Chapter 2. Incompliance with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)regulations, and Department of the Navy (DON) procedures for implementing NEPA, the description ofthe affected environment focuses on those resources potentially subject to impacts to the offshore andnearshore ranges of the Southern California Offshore (SOCAL) Operating Area (OPAREA). Militaryfacilities that provide only logistical support for COMPTUEX/JTFEX, those whose routine dailyoperations provide a minor, peripheral contribution, and those whose COMPTUEX/JTFEX-relatedoperations have been recently and specifically subjected to NEPA review are not addressed in thisChapter.3.1 AIR QUALITYAir quality is defined by ambient air concentrations of specific pollutants determined by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to be of concern with respect to the health and welfare of thegeneral public. Seven major pollutants of concern, called “criteria pollutants,” are carbon monoxide (CO),sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), ozone (O 3 ), suspended particulate matter less than or equalto 10 microns in diameter (PM 10 ), fine particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter(PM 2.5 ), and lead (Pb). The USEPA has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)for these pollutants.Ambient air quality refers to the atmospheric concentration of a specific compound (amount of pollutantsin a specified volume of air) that occurs at a particular geographic location. The ambient air quality levelsmeasured at a particular location are determined by the interactions of emissions, meteorology, andchemistry. Emission considerations include the types, amounts, and locations of pollutants emitted intothe atmosphere. Meteorological considerations include wind and precipitation patterns affecting thedistribution, dilution, and removal of pollutant emissions. Chemical reactions can transform pollutantemissions into other chemical substances. Ambient air quality data are generally reported as a mass perunit volume (e.g., micrograms per cubic meter of air) or as a volume fraction (e.g., parts per million[ppm] by volume).Pollutant emissions typically refer to the amount of pollutants or pollutant precursors introduced into theatmosphere by a source or group of sources. Pollutant emissions contribute to the ambient airconcentrations of criteria pollutants, either by directly affecting the pollutant concentrations measured inthe ambient air or by interacting in the atmosphere to form criteria pollutants. Primary pollutants, such asCO, SO 2 , lead, and some particulates, are emitted directly into the atmosphere from emission sources.Secondary pollutants, such as O 3 , NO 2 , and some particulates, are formed through atmospheric chemicalreactions that are influenced by meteorology, ultraviolet light, and other atmospheric processes. PM 10 andPM 2.5 are generated as primary pollutants by various mechanical processes (for example, abrasion,erosion, mixing, or atomization) or combustion processes. However, PM 10 and PM 2.5 can also be formedas secondary pollutants through chemical reactions or by gaseous pollutants condensing into fine aerosols.In general, emissions that are considered “precursors” to secondary pollutants in the atmosphere (such asreactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), which are considered precursors for O 3 ), arethe pollutants for which emissions are evaluated to control the level of O 3 in the ambient air.3-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Federal Requirements – The USEPA is responsible for enforcing the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970, asamended (1977 and 1990) (42 U.S.C. Section 7401 et seq.). Specific geographic areas are classified aseither “attainment” or “nonattainment” areas for each criteria pollutant based upon the comparison ofmeasured data with the NAAQS and state standards. If data are incomplete, or do not support aclassification of attainment or nonattainment, then an area may be considered “unclassified” for thatpollutant.The USEPA requires each state to prepare a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that describes how that statewill achieve compliance with the NAAQS. Section 176(c) of the CAA, the General Conformity Rule,requires Federal agencies to ensure that actions undertaken in nonattainment or maintenance areas areconsistent with the applicable SIP. In order to demonstrate conformity with the CAA, a project mustclearly demonstrate that it does not: 1) cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard in anyarea; 2) increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation of any standard in any area; or 3)delay timely attainment of any standard, required interim emission reductions, or other milestones.Compliance with the General Conformity Rule is presumed if the emissions associated with the Federalaction are below the de minimis emission levels for the region in which the action is proposed.State Requirements – The CAA allows individual states to adopt ambient air quality standards and otherregulations provided they are at least as stringent as Federal standards. The proposed action includesparticipants from three individual states: California, Nevada, and Arizona. The following sectionsprovide a discussion of specific state requirements for these states.California – In California, the SIP consists of separate elements for each air basin. The California CleanAir Act of 1988 (26 California Health and Safety Code Section 1000 et seq.) established CaliforniaAmbient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for the seven criteria pollutants regulated by the USEPA, aswell as additional standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles.The California Air Resource Board (CARB) is the agency responsible for enforcing regulations designedto achieve and maintain the CAAQS. The CARB has delegated authority to local air quality managementdistricts to manage development of separate elements of the SIP for the air basin under their jurisdiction,and to adopt and enforce rules and regulations arising from the SIP and from State and Federalregulations. The CARB requires that each of the air districts in California develop its own strategy forachieving compliance with the NAAQS and CAAQS, but maintains regulatory authority over thesestrategies, as well as regulating mobile source emissions throughout the state.Nevada – The State of Nevada is divided into three jurisdictions, which manage their own air programsby designation of the Nevada State Legislature. Air quality programs for the rural areas of the state aremanaged by the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of EnvironmentalProtection. The urban areas of the state are managed by the Clark County Department of Air QualityManagement (Las Vegas), and the Washoe County District Health Department, Air Quality ManagementDivision (Reno). Statewide Air Quality Standards are established by the Nevada Code, Chapter445B.22097 (Standards of Quality for Ambient Air).Arizona – The Air Quality Division of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)administers the state’s air quality program from the Division’s main office and two regional offices. Theprogram is designed to enforce requirements based on the NAAQS. The ADEQ has not adopted morestringent state ambient air quality standards.State and Federal Air Quality Standards are shown in Table 3.1-1.February 2007 3-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3PollutantOzone (O3) 6CarbonMonoxide (CO)Nitrogen Dioxide(NO2)Sulfur Dioxide(SO2)Averaging Time1-HourTable 3.1-1. Ambient Air Quality StandardsNAAQS 1 NAAQS 1 CAAQS 2 NSQAA 10Primary 3 Secondary 4 Concentration 5 Concentration 50.12 parts per million(ppm) (235 microgramsper cubic meter [g/m 3 ])Same asPrimary Standard0.09 ppm (180 g/m 3 )0.12 parts per million (ppm) (235g/m 3 )8-Hour 0.08 ppm 0.070 ppm (137 g/m 3 ) note 7 0.08 ppm8-Hour 9 ppm (10 mg/m 3 ) None 9.0 ppm (10 g/m 3 )9 ppm (10 mg/m 3 ) less than5000’ above MSL; 6 ppm (7mg/m 3 ) greater than 5000’ aboveMSL1-Hour 35 ppm (40 mg/m 3 ) 20 ppm (23 g/m 3 ) 35 ppm (40 mg/m 3 )Annual Average 0.053 ppm (100 g/m 3 )Same asPrimary Standard- 0.053 ppm (100 g/m 3 )1-Hour - 0.25 ppm (470 g/m 3 ) -Annual Average 80 g/m 3 (0.03 ppm) - - 80 g/m 3 (0.03 ppm)24-Hour 365 g/m 3 (0.14 ppm) - 0.04 ppm (105 g/m 3 ) 365 g/m 3 (0.14 ppm)3-Hour - 1300 g/m 3 (0.5 ppm) - 0.5 ppm (1300 g/m 3 )1-Hour - - 0.25 ppm (655 g/m 3 ) -SuspendedSame as24-Hour 150 g/m 350 g/mPrimary Standard3 150 g/mParticulate3Matter (PM10) Annual Arithmetic Mean 50 g/m 3 20 g/m 3 note 8 50 g/m 3Fine ParticulateMatter (PM2.5) 624-Hour 65 g/m 3Same asPrimary Standard- 65 g/m 3Annual Arithmetic Mean 15 g/m 3 12 g/m 3 note 8 15 g/m 330-Day Average - - 1.5 g/m 3 -Lead (Pb) 9 Calendar Quarter 1.5 g/m 3Hydrogen Sulfide(HS)Same asPrimary Standard- 1.5 g/m 31-Hour 0.03 ppm (42 g/m 3 ) 0.08 ppm (112 g/m 3 )Sulfates (SO4) 24-Hour 25 g/m 3 No Nevada StandardVisibilityReducingParticles8-Hour(10 am to 6 pm, PacificStandard Time)No Federal StandardsIn sufficient amount toproduce an extinctioncoefficient of 0.23 perkilometer due to particleswhen the relative humidityis less than 70 percent.No Nevada StandardVinyl chloride 924 Hour0.01 ppm (26 g/m 3 ) No Nevada Standardμg/m 3 = milligrams per cubic meterSource: CARB 2005a, USEPA 2005a1NAAQS (other than O 3 , particulate matter, and those based on annual averages or annual arithmetic mean) are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The O 3standard is attained when the fourth highest 8-hour concentration in a year, averaged over 3 years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM 10 , the 24-hour standardis attained when 99 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or less than the standard. For PM 2.5 , the 24-hour standard is attained when98 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over 3 years, are equal to or less than the standard. Contact the USEPA for clarification and current Federal policies.2 California Ambient Air Quality Standards for O 3 , CO (except Lake Tahoe), SO 2 (1- and 24-hour), NO 2 , PM 10 , and visibility reducing particles, are values that are notto be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded.3 National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health.4 National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.5 Concentration expressed first in units in which it was promulgated. Ppm in this table refers to ppm by volume or micromoles of pollutant per mole of gas.6 New Federal 8-hour ozone and fine particulate matter standards were promulgated by USEPA on 18 July 1997. The Federal 1-hour O 3 standard was revoked on July15, 2005, but is the basis for currently adopted SIPs On 15 April 2004 the USEPA issued attainment designations for the 8-hour standard and described plans for thephase out of the 1-hour standard (USEPA 2004a).7 Approved by the Air Resources Board on April 28, 2005 and expected to become effective in early 2006.8 On 5 June 2003, the Office of Administrative Law approved the amendments to the regulations for the State ambient air quality standards for particulate matter andsulfates. Those amendments established a new annual average standard for PM 2.5 of 12 g/m 3 and reduced the level of the annual average standard for PM 10 to 20g/m 3 . The approved amendments were filed with the Secretary of State on 5 June 2003. The regulations became effective on 5 July 2003.9 The CARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as ‘toxic air contaminants’ with no threshold level of exposure for adverse health effects determined. These actionsallow for the implementation of control measures at levels below the ambient concentrations specified for these pollutants.10 Nevada Standards of Quality for Ambient Air.3-3 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.1.1 Air Quality ClassificationsThe following sections present a discussion of the baseline air quality in the operating areas/ranges inwhich the COMPTUEX/JTFEX participants are located.3.1.2 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area)There are no established criteria for emissions in offshore areas. Because of the vast areas involved, andthe distance from shore-based, stationary sources of emissions, it is likely that all areas of the SOCALOPAREA beyond U.S. Territorial Waters would meet the attainment criteria for the NAAQS were they tobe evaluated under the CAA. These waters are generally considered to be unclassifiable/attainment areasfor the NAAQS. The Navy currently carries out approximately 6,500 ship-days of operations each yearwithin the SOCAL OPAREA. Less than 10 percent of those ship-days are COMPTUEX/JTFEX-relatedoperations.3.1.3 Land Areas3.1.3.1 San Clemente IslandUnder the territorial provisions of the State of California, San Clemente Island is a part of Los AngelesCounty, and is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Basin. The South Coast Air Basin wasclassified as an extreme nonattainment area for the 1-hour Federal standard for O 3 , and is classified as asevere nonattainment area for the 8-hour Federal standard for O 3 . The South Coast Air Basin is alsoclassified as serious nonattainment area for the Federal standard for CO, a serious nonattainment area forPM 10 , and a nonattainment are for the Federal standard for PM 2.5 . The South Coast Air Basin is classifiedas a nonattainment are for the state standards for particulate and O 3 . All potential emissions associatedwith COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities at SCIRC are from mobile sources. No final baseline data areavailable for the ranges of SCIRC.3.1.3.2 NB Coronado – SSTCNB Coronado – SSTC is located in San Diego County, within the San Diego Air Basin. The San DiegoAir Basin was redesignated as an attainment area for the 1-hour Federal standard for O 3 , and is classifiedas a basic nonattainment area for the 8-hour Federal standard for O 3 . The San Diego Air Basin is alsoconsidered a maintenance area for the Federal standard for CO. Under California standards, the county isdesignated as a nonattainment area for PM 10 , PM 2.5 , and O 3.3.1.4 De Minimis LevelsAs discussed in Section 3.3.1, Section 176(c) of the CAA, the General Conformity Rule, requires Federalagencies to ensure that actions undertaken in nonattainment or maintenance areas are consistent with theapplicable SIP. Compliance with the General Conformity Rule is presumed if the emissions associatedwith the Federal action are below the de minimis emission levels for the region in which the action isproposed. De minimis levels are established based on the attainment status of the region. De minimislevels were proposed for PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursors on April 5, 2006; however, no SIPs have beendeveloped to date for PM 2.5 or the 8-hour O 3 standard.The relevant de minimis levels for operating areas/ranges in which COMPTUEX/JTFEX participants arelocated are shown in Table 3.1-2.February 2007 3-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Table 3.1-2. De Minimis Levels for Determination of Applicability of General Conformity RuleDe Minimis Levels, tons/yearInstallation Air Basin CO NOx ROG PM10 PM2.5 SOxSOCAL OPAREA Offshore N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ASan Clemente Island South Coast 100 10 1 10 1 70 100 2 100NB Coronado – SSTC San Diego 100 100 100 N/A N/A N/AMCB Camp Pendleton San Diego 100 100 100 N/A N/A N/A1 De minimis levels shown are based on the 8-hour O3 designations. De minimis levels based on the current approved SIPs, which are based on the 1-hour Federalstandard for O 3 , 10 tons per year for the South Coast Air Basin.2 De minimis levels for PM2.5 are proposed for direct and indirect emissions per April 5, 2006, 71 FR 17003..3.2 WATER RESOURCESWater quality consists of the chemical and physical composition of groundwater and surface waters.Potentially affected water bodies include Pacific Ocean waters off southern California, and rivers, lakes,streams, wetlands, and groundwaters within or affected by actions on the subject onshore ranges.3.2.1 Federal RequirementsThe Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC 1251 et seq.) addresses surface water quality in general, andwetlands. USEPA enforces the regulations promulgated under both laws. Under CWA Section 403(a),USEPA or an authorized state may issue a permit for an ocean discharge only if the discharge complieswith CWA guidelines for protection of marine waters. In accordance with the Marine Protection,Research, and Sanctuaries Act, USEPA has issued a General Permit to the Navy (40 CFR Part 229) forthe transport and disposal of environmentally clean vessels during SINKEX training exercises.The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has responsibility for coastal and marineresources under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1990(CERCLA), the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA).NOAA has established programs to monitor coastal environmental quality, protect marine habitat, andrestore natural resources.The Fiscal Year 1996 National Defense Authorization Act amended the CWA to authorize Department ofDefense (DoD) and USEPA to jointly establish Uniform National Discharge Standards (UNDS) forincidental liquid discharges from Armed Forces vessels. USEPA has published final rules for Phase 1 ofthe UNDS program. In these rules, USEPA and the Navy identified which discharges will require controlstandards and a marine pollution control device (MPCD). The rules also identify the mechanism bywhich states can petition USEPA and DoD to review whether or not a discharge should require control bya MPCD or to review a Federal performance standard for a MPCD. Finally, the rules establish theprocesses USEPA and the states must follow to establish no-discharge zones, where any release of aspecified discharge is prohibited.3.2.2 State RequirementsCalifornia State Water Resources Control Board (CSWRCB) oversees state responsibilities for waterquality in the affected area of California. CSWRCB was created under the California Water Code (CWC)to exercise the adjudicatory and regulatory functions of the state in the field of water resources. Underthe provisions of the CWC, CSWRCB and nine regional water quality control boards oversee waterquality issues in nine water quality regions. The water quality regions include ground and surface waters3-5 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3within the three-mile state-jurisdictional limit. The regional boards are responsible for implementingprovisions of the CWA delegated to states, such as the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System,which regulates point and non-point sources of water pollutants. For onshore military facilities, theDefense and State Memorandum of Agreement among CSWRCB, the regional boards, and DoD definesthe division of responsibilities for addressing water quality issues.CSWRCB adopted the Ocean Waters of California Water Quality Control Plan (the Ocean Plan)(California Environmental Protection Agency and SWRCB, 2001) in 1974; the Ocean Plan was amendedin 1988, 1990, 1997, and 2001. The Ocean Plan establishes beneficial uses and water quality objectivesfor waters of the Pacific Ocean adjacent to the California coast outside of enclosed bays, estuaries, andcoastal lagoons. The Ocean Plan also identifies Areas of Special Biological Significance designated orapproved by CSWRCB.3.2.3 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area)The water resources of SOCAL OPAREA include the Pacific Ocean waters within the ranges. Thegroundwater and surface waters on Camp Pendleton and NB Coronado are discussed below in Section3.3.2.The ocean waters of SOCAL OPAREA are influenced by two interdependent circulation systems. TheSouthern California Bight (SCB) extends along the coast from Point Conception to Mexico, and westwardfrom the coast to the waters of the California Current (CC) in the vicinity of the California ChannelIslands. The CC is a broad system of surface and undercurrents extending up to 625 mi (1,000 km)offshore, from Oregon to Baja California. The vast expanse of the offshore waters of the CC, combinedwith their distance from the shore and the mixing and transport effects of the currents, work together tomaintain a generally high quality of water that meets criteria set forth by the Ocean Plan and by NationalRecommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA, 2002).The southward-flowing, cold-water CC mixes with the northward-flowing, warm-water CaliforniaCounter Current in the SCB to create a complex web of water quality regimes characterized by theirtemperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, and nutrient levels. Water quality within the SCB is stronglyaffected by human activities in heavily developed southern California. The Southern California CoastalWater Research Project identified urban runoff as “among the largest sources of contamination toSouthern California’s coastal ocean, containing bacterial contamination, inorganic nutrients, variousorganic compounds, and metals” (Southern California Coastal Water Research Project 2003). The reportalso stated that sediment toxicity was most severe in port and marina areas within bays, harbors, and rivermouths.Ocean water quality offshore of the Silver Strand peninsula is influenced primarily by natural conditionssuch as thermal stratification, upwelling, tides, and currents; by surface runoff and river discharges; andby wastewater discharges. Three wastewater treatment plants in the region discharge treated wastewaterto the Pacific Ocean via two ocean outfalls. The Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plan has an oceanoutfall north of Coronado that discharges wastes at a point 4.5 mi (7.2 km) offshore at a depth of 320 ft(97 m). The South Bay Reclamation Plant and International Wastewater Treatment Plant have an oceanoutfall that discharges wastes at a point 3.5 mi (5.6 km) offshore at a depth of 100 ft (30 m) (City of SanDiego 2005). The San Diego County Health Department closed the beaches on Silver Strand peninsulafor a total of 124 days between 2003 and 2005 (an average of 41 days per year) due to sewage spills thatresulted in unhealthful concentrations of coliform bacteria in the water.February 2007 3-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.2.4 Land Areas3.2.4.1 San Clemente Island3.2.4.1.1 Surface WatersSCI has no perennial streams. During the winter, storm waters supply numerous intermittent streamslocated in steep canyons on SCI. Surface waters persist through the dry season in constructedimpoundments and in bedrock plunge pools located in the deeper portions of major canyons. Accordingto the Basin Plan, potential beneficial uses for inland surface waters of SCI include municipal anddomestic water supply, groundwater recharge supply, contact water recreation, non-contact waterrecreation, warm freshwater habitat, wildlife habitat, and habitat for rare, threatened, or endangeredspecies (California Regional Water Quality Control Board [CRWQCB], 1994).3.2.4.1.2 GroundwaterLittle information is available on groundwater resources on SCI. Drilling to date has only locatedbrackish aquifers. The island is generally a volcanic monolith, and may lack a groundwater aquifer (U.S.Navy 1954). According to the Basin Plan, potential beneficial uses for groundwater on SCI includemunicipal and domestic water supply and industrial service supply (CRWQCB, 1994).3.2.4.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCThere are no naturally occurring streams or other watercourses on NB Coronado. The area is susceptibleto local storm flooding or seismic sea waves, however, due to the low-lying, flat terrain. NB Coronadodepends upon the City of San Diego Water Utilities Department for potable water.3.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCESCOMPTUEX and JTFEX activities will occur primarily in the offshore marine environment, althoughexisting ranges in the nearshore, bays and estuaries, and terrestrial environments will be used for sometraining activities.3.3.1 Regulatory FrameworkNumerous Federal laws protect biological resources within the affected area. The Navy has adopted anaggressive program to address the often-conflicting demands of military readiness and resourceprotection.The Sikes Act Improvement Act (SAIA) of 1997 (Public Law 105-85 Div B, Title XXIX, 18 November1997) amended the Sikes Act of 1960 to require all DoD branches to prepare and implement INRMPs, inconsultation with Federal and State fish and wildlife agencies, for each military installation withsignificant natural resources. The goal of the INRMP is to achieve sustainable natural resourcesmanagement while ensuring no net loss in the capability of installation lands to support the militarymission.The Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. § 1531) provides for the conservation of species that areendangered or threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant portion of their range, and theconservation of the ecosystems on which they depend. The listing of a species qualifies it for increasedprotective measures: critical habitat necessary for the continued survival of the species may bedesignated, and a recovery plan is prepared that identifies conservation measures to help increase speciesnumbers. In addition, Section 7 of the ESA requires all Federal agencies to use their authorities toconduct conservation programs and to consult with National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (or3-7 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3USFWS) concerning the potential effects of their actions on any species listed under the ESA. Thepurpose of consultation is to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the impacts of their activities on listed species.The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2004 (H.R. 1588) addresses the designation ofcritical habitat on DoD lands that are subject to an INRMP, while reaffirming the obligation of DoD tocomply with Section 9 of the ESA to prevent extinction and taking of endangered and threatened species.The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) of 1972 established, with limited exceptions, a moratoriumon the “taking” of marine mammals in waters or on lands under US jurisdiction. The act further regulates“takes” of marine mammals in the global commons (i.e., the high seas) by vessels or persons under USjurisdiction. The term “take,” as defined in Section 3 (16 USC 1362) of the MMPA, means “to harass,hunt, capture, or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine mammal.” “Harassment” wasfurther defined in the 1994 amendments to the MMPA, which provided two levels of “harassment,” LevelA (potential injury) and Level B (potential disturbance).The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of Fiscal Year (FY) 2004 (Public Law [PL] 108-136)amended the definition of harassment as applied to military readiness activities or scientific researchactivities conducted by or on behalf of the Federal government, consistent with Section 104(c)(3) [16USC 1374 (c)(3)]. The FY 2004 NDAA adopted the definition of “military readiness activity” as set forthin the FY 2003 NDAA (PL 107-314). COMPTUEX/JTFEX constitute military readiness activities as thatterm is defined in PL 107-314 because training activities constitute “training and operations of the ArmedForces that relate to combat” and constitute “adequate and realistic testing of military equipment,vehicles, weapons, and sensors for proper operation and suitability for combat use.” For militaryreadiness activities, the relevant definition of harassment is any act that: Injuries or has the significant potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stockin the wild (“Level A harassment”) Disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild bycausing disruption of natural behavioral patterns including, but not limited to, migration,surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering to a point where such behavioral patternsare abandoned or significantly altered (“Level B harassment”) [16 USC 1362 (18)(B)(i)(ii)].Section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA directs the Secretary of the Department of Commerce to allow, uponrequest, the incidental (but not intentional) taking of marine mammals by US citizens who engage in aspecified activity (exclusive of commercial fishing), if certain findings are made and regulations areissued. Permission will be granted by the Secretary for the incidental take of marine mammals if thetaking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock and will not have an unmitigable adverseimpact on the availability of such species or stock for taking for subsistence uses.Title 16 United States Code, Section 1371(f) of the MMPA provides that [t]he Secretary of Defense, afterconferring with the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of the Interior or both as appropriate, mayexempt any action or category of actions undertaken by the Department of Defense or its componentsfrom compliance with any requirement of this chapter, if the Secretary determines that it is necessary fornational defense. (Section 1371 (f) (1)). An exemption is effective for the period specified by theSecretary of Defense not to exceed two years. (Section 1371 (f) (2)).The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) of 1972 (16 U.S.C. § 1451) encourages states to preserve,protect, develop, and, where possible, restore or enhance valuable natural coastal resources such aswetlands, floodplains, estuaries, beaches, dunes, barrier islands, and coral reefs, as well as the fish andwildlife using those habitats. Participation by states is voluntary. Once a state’s program is approved byNOAA, the activities of Federal agencies are required to be consistent to the maximum extent practicableFebruary 2007 3-8

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3with the enforceable policies of that approved state management programs. The California Coastal Act(CCA) (California Public Resources Code, sections 3000 et seq.) implements California’s CZMAprogram. The CCA includes policies to protect and expand public access to shorelines, and to protect,enhance and restore environmentally sensitive habitats including intertidal and nearshore waters,wetlands, bays and estuaries, riparian habitat, certain wood and grasslands, streams, lakes, and habitat forrare or endangered plants or animals. Analysis of resources subject to state-enforceable policy underCZMA can be found in both Chapter 7 – Possible Conflicts between the Action and the Objectives ofFederal, Regional, State, and Local Plans, Policies, and Controls, and Appendix O – FederalConsistency with Coastal Zone Management Act.The National Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA) (16 U.S.C. § 1431) authorizes the Secretary of Commerceto designate and manage areas of the marine environment with special national significance due to theirconservation, recreational, ecological, historical, scientific, cultural, archeological, educational, or estheticqualities as National Marine Sanctuaries. The primary objective of this law is to protect marine resources,such as coral reefs, sunken historical vessels or unique habitats. The act also directs the Secretary tofacilitate all public and private uses of those resources that are compatible with the primary objective ofresource protection. Sanctuaries are managed according to site-specific Management Plans prepared bythe NOAA National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP), within NOAA's Ocean Service. Operationsunder this proposal do not occur within the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary or any otherNational Marine Sanctuary, therefore, further analysis is not required.The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), (16 U.S.C. § 1801) asamended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267), established proceduresdesigned to identify, conserve, and enhance Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) for those species regulatedunder a Federal fisheries management plan. Federal agencies must consult with NMFS on actions thatmay adversely affect EFH, and NMFS must provide conservation recommendations for any Federal orState action that would adversely affect EFH.The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 U.S.C. § 703) and its amendments implement fourinternational treaties governing the protection of migratory birds. The Act makes it unlawful to pursue,hunt, take, capture, kill, or ship migratory birds except by regulation. The National DefenseAuthorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (PL 107-314) authorized exemption of the DoD from the MBTAin the event of the incidental taking of migratory birds during authorized military readiness activities.Section 315 of the Authorization Act provides that, not later than one year after its enactment, theSecretary of the Interior (Secretary) shall exercise his/her authority under Section 704(a) of the MBTA toprescribe regulations to exempt the Armed Forces for the incidental taking of migratory birds duringmilitary readiness activities authorized by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of the militarydepartment concerned. The Authorization Act further requires the Secretary to promulgate suchregulations with the concurrence of the Secretary of Defense. The rule would authorize the Armed Forcesto take migratory birds incidental to military readiness activities, subject to certain limitations and subjectto withdrawal of the authorization to ensure consistency with the provisions of the migratory bird treaties.The MBTA required the DoD to take appropriate actions to avoid any unnecessary takings and to monitorthe impact of authorized activities on affected categories of migratory birds. At applicable ranges, theDoD is an active participant in programs to promote and support a partnership role in the protection andconservation of migratory birds and their habitat by protecting vital habitat, enhancing biodiversity, andmaintaining healthy and productive natural systems consistent with the military mission.3-9 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.3.2 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area)Marine resources include the offshore, nearshore, and bays and estuaries of the Pacific Ocean adjacent toSouthern California. The offshore ecosystem consists of the open ocean environments over the deeperparts of the continental shelf, the continental slope, and ocean basins. The nearshore ecosystem is definedas the area from the coastal high tide line offshore to a depth of 120 ft. The area is home to a wide varietyof fishes, giant kelp, marine invertebrates, and marine mammals, as well as a large number of sea andshore bird species. The bays and estuaries dotting California’s coastline are partially enclosed bodies ofwater protected from the full force of ocean waves, winds, and storms. Bays are wide inlets orindentations of the ocean, whereas estuaries are inlets containing the terminus of a river or stream. Thedefining feature of an estuary is the mixing of fresh water from upland and riverine sources with oceanicsalt water. The estuary ecosystem forms a zone of transition from land to sea and from fresh to salt water.Important biological resources within the marine environment include a diverse array of plant and animalspecies. For the COMPTUEX/JTFEX analysis, marine resources of concern included EFH, marinemammals, turtles, protected marine environments, and marine flora and fauna generally.EFH is those waters and substrate necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth tomaturity. Waters include aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical, and biological propertiesthat are used by fish and may include aquatic areas historically used by fish where appropriate; substrateincludes sediment, hard bottom, structures underlying the waters, and associated biological communities;necessary means the habitat required to support a sustainable fishery and the managed species’contribution to a healthy ecosystem; and “spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity” covers aspecies' full life cycle (50 CFR 600.10). Adverse effect means any impact that reduces quality and/orquantity of EFH, and may include direct, indirect, site-specific or habitat-wide impacts, includingindividual, cumulative, or synergistic consequences of actions (50 CFR 600.810).Marine mammals of California include cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises), pinnipeds (seals, furseals, and sea lions), and sea otters. Some are residents, while others pass along the coast during greatmigrations. Gray and humpback whales, for example, feed in Alaskan waters and migrate along the coaston their way to Mexican waters to breed and calf. Blue whales visit during summer to feed on richconcentrations of krill (CDFG, 2001).Four species of sea turtles found in Southern California waters are currently listed as either endangered orthreatened under the ESA. These include loggerhead (Caretta caretta), leatherback (Dernochelyscoriacea), eastern Pacific green (Chelonia mydas agassizii), and olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea).None of these species is known to nest on the beaches of Southern California (CDFG, 2001).Protected Environments include Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) to be established by Executive Order(EO) 13158. MPAs may include national marine sanctuaries, fishery management zones, nationalseashores, national parks, national monuments, critical habitats, national wildlife refuges, nationalestuarine research reserves, state conservation areas, state reserves, and many others. MPAs havedifferent shapes, sizes, and management characteristics, and have been established for different purposes.EO 13158 would establish a national inventory of MPAs and directed Federal agencies to avoid harm tothe natural and cultural resources protected by a listed MPA. There are currently no designated MPAsunder the EO and therefore, no further analysis is required.Marine flora and fauna generally represent the diverse array of plants and animals that typically reside inor make use of the varied physical assets of the affected area. Approximately 280 species ofphytoplankton and 669 species of macroalgae are known to occur in California waters. Marine animalsFebruary 2007 3-10

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3can be grouped into three general categories based on where they live and their form of movement:planktonic, nectonic, and benthic. Planktonic animals (zooplankton) drift with the ocean currents and areunable to control their horizontal position within the ocean. Nectonic organisms have the ability to swimand move independent of ocean currents. This group includes animals such as fish, squid, marine reptiles,and marine mammals. Benthic organisms are separated into two groups based on where they reside.Infauna are organisms such as worms, mollusks, and crustaceans that live buried in ocean sediments.Epifauna are organisms that live and move over the surface of the ocean bottom.Biological resources include native or naturalized plant and animal species and the vegetationcommunities within which they occur. Although the existence and preservation of biological resourcesare intrinsically valuable, these resources also provide aesthetic, recreational, and socioeconomic valuesto society. This analysis focuses on species or vegetation communities that are important to the functionsof biological systems, of special public importance, or are protected under Federal or State law or statute.For purposes of this EA/OEA, these resources are divided into four major categories: vegetation/habitattypes, jurisdictional waters of the U.S., wildlife, and sensitive species.Vegetation/Habitat Types includes all existing terrestrial plant communities as well as its individualcomponent species. The affected environment for vegetation includes only those areas potentially subjectto ground disturbance.Jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. are regulated resources and are subject to Federal authority underSection 404 of the CWA. The term "waters of the U.S." is broadly defined to include navigable waters(including intermittent streams), impoundments, tributary streams, vernal pools, and wetlands. Areasmeeting the waters of the U.S. definition are under the jurisdiction of the USACE. They are consideredimportant to public interest because they perform significant biological functions, such as providingnesting, breeding, foraging, and spawning environments for a wide variety of resident and migratoryanimal species. In addition, wetlands help improve water quality and provide flood protection anderosion control.Wildlife includes all animals with the exception of those identified as sensitive: invertebrates, fish,amphibians, reptiles, birds (to include those protected under the Federal MBTA), and mammals.Sensitive species of wildlife or plants are designated as such due to a combination of overall rarity,endangerment, unique habitat requirements, and/or restricted distribution. For purposes of this EA,sensitive terrestrial plant and wildlife species include those listed as endangered or threatened by theUSFWS or endangered, threatened, or rare by the CDFG under the State of California ESA. In addition,plants may be listed by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) with regard to their rarity,endangerment, and distribution (BLM, 2006). CNPS List 1A plants are presumed extinct (CNPS, 2006);1B plants are native California species, subspecies, or varieties that are rare, threatened, or endangered inCalifornia and elsewhere; and List 2 plants are rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but are morecommon elsewhere (BLM, 2006).3.3.2.1 Regional SettingThe status of populations of cetaceans and pinnipeds that occur in the SOCAL OPAREA in relation topopulations found off the entire California coast is summarized in Section 3.3.2.5. These areas are similarin their offshore habitats and with only few exceptions the same species use each of the range areas,although there may be some geographical differences. One of the main differences is the large scale useof the San Nicolas Island beaches by California sea lions and northern elephant seals. Migratory orforaging behavior of cetaceans is generally influenced by oceanographic conditions (water temperature3-11 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3and current) and topography that affect prey distribution. The SSTC area is mostly a near shore shallowhabitat in close proximity to a large population and recreation center with only several species inhabitingthis area. A large proportion of the California gray whale population migrates through waters of theSOCAL OPAREA during their northward and southward migrations. For most other species, the watersof the SOCAL OPAREA constitute a relatively small portion of their total range, although in some casesnumbers within the study area may be high, at least at certain times of year. Species-by-species detailsare given in later sections.3.3.2.2 Marine ResourcesThe marine resources of the SOCAL OPAREA closely reflect the similar environment of the PMSR, aswell as the marine resources associated with SCIRC, and NB Coronado. Descriptions of the affectedresources have been obtained from several resources, including the PMSR EIS/OEIS (U.S. Navy, 2002b)and the AAAV EIS/OEIS (USMC, 2003b). Additional material has been obtained from California’sLiving Marine Resources: A Status Report (CDFG, 2001).3.3.2.2.1 Marine Flora and FaunaThe main marine flora of the SOCAL OPAREA is composed of phytoplankton, seasonally abundantmicroscopic plants that are the basis of the marine food chain. Phytoplankton abundance and distributiondepends on the season, water temperature, currents, and nutrients. The life cycles, migration patterns, andforaging behavior of many marine animals are dependent, directly or indirectly, on phytoplankton. Themacroscopic marine flora are very diverse with 70 percent of the know algal species (e.g., kelps) ofCalifornia being found in this area (Daily et al., 1993) with the larger kelp species such as bull, giant, andfeather boa forming large canopies that are important areas for fish and invertebrate protection. Othersmaller species such as eel grass, Laminaria, and sea lettuce provide important habitat to juvenile fish andinvertebrate species in shallow water areas or estuaries (Ricketts et al., 1968).Benthic marine invertebrates in the SOCAL OPAREA inhabit a variety of habitats from the nearshoreareas to the offshore ridges and banks and including both rocky and soft substrates. Various species ofmollusks, sea stars, crustaceans, anemones, nudibranchs, barnacles, urchins, and snails may use the rockyareas and kelp beds to forage and breed while species of clams, some crustaceans, sand dollars, andworms (e.g., the fat innkeeper) use sandy or mud bottoms (Ricketts et al., 1968).The affected nearshore area is composed of a variety of habitats ranging from high-relief rocky reef tobroad expanses of sand and mud. South of Point Conception, warm waters from the south join with thecold California Current to provide habitat for a wide variety of seasonal sub-tropical visitors likeyellowtail, white seabass, Pacific bonito, and California barracuda, all found in close association with theabundant stands of giant kelp found around the offshore islands and along the mainland. Major residentspecies such as kelp bass, sheephead, halfmoon, and olive rockfish sustain a year-round nearshore fishery.In addition to the resident species, many offshore species such as Pacific sardine, Pacific mackerel,northern anchovy, market squid, and numerous groundfish use nearshore habitats for some portion oftheir life history. Major issues are the impact of environmental events like El Niño on animal and plantspecies, over-harvest of species such as abalone and nearshore rockfish, interactions between fisheriesand marine mammals, pollution from human activities, and competition among user groups, bothconsumptive and non-consumptive (CDFG, 2001).The affected offshore ecosystem is characterized by fewer particles and dissolved substances than arefound in rich coastal waters. The offshore waters are dominated by the California Current, a relativelyshallow, broad, and slow moving current. This cool water current generally moves from north to southFebruary 2007 3-12

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3along the west coast of North America. South of Point Conception, adjacent to the Southern CaliforniaBight, the California Current breaks away from the coast and flows offshore along the continental edgeuntil it swings back toward the mainland south of San Diego. In the Southern California Bight, the usualsurface flow, called the California Countercurrent, moves north along the coast resulting in acounterclockwise gyre that mixes offshore and nearshore surface waters (CDFG, 2001).The California Current is a dynamic system with considerable variation over time. Relatively short-term,dramatic events like El Niño (warmer water) and La Niña (cooler water) cause significant temperaturechanges, variation in productivity, and occurrences of organisms beyond their usual ranges. Long-termtemperature regimes, periods of slightly warmer or cooler conditions that persist for decades, can affectreproduction and recruitment of marine species like sardines and rockfish for several generations andresult in substantial changes in abundance over time (CDFG, 2001).The offshore ecosystem is home to Coastal Pelagic Species (CPS) (sardines, anchovy, mackerel, andsquid); highly migratory species (tuna, bill fishes, and pelagic sharks); ground fish species (shelf andslope rockfish, flat fish, sable fish, and Pacific whiting); marine mammals (such as whales and porpoises);and pelagic seabirds (including albatross and shearwaters) (CDFG, 2001).The pelagic zone, relating to open water, is the largest habitat in the study area with 40 percent of the fishspecies inhabiting this area. This zone is subdivided into three distinct regions: epipelagic (up to 50 mdeep), mesopelagic (50 to 500 m deep), and bathypelagic regions (greater than 500 m deep) (Cross andAllen, 1993). The epipelagic region is inhabited by small, planktivorous schooling fish (e.g., northernanchovy), predatory schooling fishes (e.g., Pacific mackerel), and large solitary predators (e.g., blueshark). Abundance of all epipelagic species changes seasonally with fishes moving offshore to spawn.The northern anchovy is the most abundant epipelagic species in the study area. The mesopelagic regionis characterized by steep environmental gradients and fishes that are small, slow-growing, long-lived, andreproduce early and repeatedly (e.g., bigeye lightfish). The bathypelagic zone is a rather uniform systemcontaining large, sluggish, fast growing, short-lived fishes, that reproduce late and typically only once(e.g., bigscale and hatchetfish ) (Cross and Allen, 1993).Typical fishes utilizing soft substrates (sand, silt, and mud) include sharks, skates, rays, smelts, flatfish(flounders), gobies, and northern anchovies (Allen et al., 1992; Pondella and Allen, 2000; U.S. Navy,2002a). Regions with hard substrates and kelp beds (Macrocystis) are not as abundant as other benthichabitats in the Southern California Bight, but they nevertheless provide important habitats for manyspecies. Shallow reefs (i.e.,

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3dredging, filling of marshes and tidal flats, and oil development and spills typify the long-termdegradation of many of California’s estuaries. As a result, 40 animal and ten 10 plant species that occurin or depend on the State’s estuarine ecosystems, currently are Federally-listed as threatened, endangered,or protected status (CDFG, 2001).There is a single invertebrate species, the white abalone, which is listed as endangered. The largereduction in the white abalone population (99 percent decrease) is due to overfishing, not habitatdegradation, so there is no critical habitat designation (NMFS, 2001). The white abalone is a species ofgastropod (clams, mussels, oysters, etc.) found at depths to 60 m in rocky areas where it can cling to rocks(Hobday and Tegner, 2000). White abalone ranges from Point Conception, California, to Punta Abreojos,Baja California, Mexico (NMFS, 2001). It is sympatric with other west coast species of abalone (i.e.,green, pink, black, and red) near the SCIRC. Historically, white abalone densities in southern Californiawere greatest around the Channel Islands. For example, up to 80 percent of commercial landings weretaken off San Clemente Island (Hobday and Tegner, 2000; Rogers-Bennett et al., 2002). Santa CatalinaIsland also once supported a strong white abalone recreational fishery (Hobday and Tegner, 2000).Currently, the distribution of the species is primarily around islands along banks of the area (Davis et al.,1996; Davis et al., 1998; Hobday and Tegner, 2000; U.S. Navy, 2002; Butler et al., in press).The white abalone is found to depths of 70 m in rocky areas (Hobday and Tegner, 2000). Ranging fromPoint Conception, California, to Punta Abreojos, Baja California, Mexico (NMFS, 2001), white abalonesare distributed primarily around islands and along banks (Davis et al., 1996; Davis et al., 1998; Hobdayand Tegner, 2000; U.S. Navy, 2002; Butler et al., in press). White abalones are not randomly distributedalong rocky substrate. They occupy crevices in open, low relief rock or boulder habitat surrounded bysand (Tutschulte, 1976; Davis et al., 1996). Research submarine surveys for white abalone wereconducted by the Abalone Restoration Consortium in 1999, concentrating in areas of their historicalgreatest abundance around 5 of the Channel Islands and 4 banks. Density estimates ranged from 0 atSanta Cruz Island and Osborn Bank to 9.79 at Tanner Bank (2.7/ha overall); 24 individuals recorded at30–65-m depths off west SCI gave a density estimate of 0.96/ha (Haaker et al., 1999). NMFS conducteda submersible and multi-beam and side-scan sonar survey of Tanner Banks (~80 km southwest of SanClemente Island) in 2002 for white abalone and abalone habitat. A total of 194 white abalone wererecorded at 30–60 m depths, resulting in a density estimate of 18/ha (NMFS, 2003). Another survey (ajoint effort between NMFS, Scripps, California State University Monterey Bay, and the Navy) using aremote operated vehicle (ROV) and divers was completed in August 2004 to map white abalone habitat inwaters 20–70 m deep on the western side of San Clemente Island. During this survey, only 6 wererecorded at 37–50 m depths (U.S. Navy, 2005).3.3.2.3 Fish3.3.2.3.1 Regional SettingsThe Southern California Operation area is located in the southern portion of the Southern California Bight(SCB). About 481 species of fish inhabit the SCB (Cross and Allen, 1993). The great diversity ofspecies in the area occurs for several reasons: (1) the ranges of many temperate and tropical speciesextend into, and terminate in, the SCB; (2) the area has complex bottom topography and a complexphysical oceanographic regime that includes several water masses and a changeable marine climate (Hornand Allen, 1978; Cross and Allen, 1993); and (3) the islands and nearshore areas provide a diversity ofhabitats that include soft bottom; rock reefs; extensive kelp beds; and estuaries, bays, and lagoons.Point Conception is recognized as a boundary for certain fish species, especially southern species (Crossand Allen, 1993). South of Point Conception, northern species tend to move into deep, colder water orFebruary 2007 3-14

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3upwelling areas. There are also seasonal migrations of temperate and subtropical species into the SCB,invasions of tropical species during warm-water years, and invasions of northern species during coldwateryears (Cross and Allen, 1993).Fish can be categorized as pelagic (living in the water column), benthic (living on the ocean bottom), ordemersal (associated with the ocean bottom, but are often found feeding in the water column). Thepelagic habitat can be subdivided into the epipelagic, mesopelagic, and bathypelagic zones. Epipelagichabitats in the SCB extend to depths of 328 feet (ft) (100 meters [m]) and are inhabited by nearly 200species of fish. The mesopelagic zone and the deep (greater than 1,640 ft [500 m]) bathypelagic zone,taken together, are inhabited by 124 species, and coastal areas by 79 species (Cross and Allen, 1993).Water depths in large areas of the SCIRC are greater than 1,640 ft (500 m).The epipelagic zone is illuminated and subject to fluctuations in temperature. It is inhabited by large,active, fast-growing, and long-lived epipelagic fishes, by mesopelagic species that rise in the watercolumn to feed at night, and by those demersal and benthic species that feed in the water column (Crossand Allen, 1993). Epipelagic fish include small schooling herbivores such as northern anchovy, Pacificsardine, and Pacific mackerel; schooling predators such as tunas; and large solitary predators such assharks and swordfish (Cross and Allen, 1993).The nearshore zone includes a great diversity of habitats; different fish communities occupy soft androcky bottoms and kelp forests. Rocky reefs also add to habitat diversity. The diversity and abundance offish that occupy the nearshore zone are directly related to the diversity of available habitats. Thenearshore sea bed around SCI is mainly rocky. Kelp beds are found on much of the nearshore rockysubstrates around the island. Soft bottoms are very limited in extent around SCI. The only relativelyshallow areas with extensive areas of soft substrate are on the Tanner/Cortes Banks.During their life cycles and over the period of a day, fish may occupy more than one habitat. At night,some benthic and midwater species rise to the surface, and other species that dwell in kelp forests maybecome pelagic (i.e., midwater) or move out over soft or rock substrates (i.e., ocean bottom habitats).3.3.2.3.2 Non-commercial Fish SpeciesNon-commercial fish species include prey for commercial species; species that are unpalatable, rare,and/or not easily captured; and deep water species. Many of the species mentioned in this section andthose that follow are harvested by commercial and recreational fisheries. However, the focus of thesesections is a description of the fish communities and their associations with common habitat types.The fish fauna of the islands within the SCB changes from a typically southern assemblage in thenearshore waters of SCI and Santa Catalina Island in the south, to a typically northern assemblage innearshore waters of San Miguel Island at the western end of the Channel Islands (Cross and Allen, 1993).Engle (1993) rated the geographical affinities of the rocky subtidal fish fauna of the islands in the SCB asfollows:Warm – Santa Catalina, San ClementeWarm intermediate – Anacapa, Santa Cruz, Santa BarbaraCold intermediate – Santa Rosa, San NicolasCold – San Miguel3-15 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Nearshore HabitatsNearshore fish habitats include soft and hard bottoms, rock reefs, and kelp beds. Sixty species of fishhave been collected from rocky and sand substrates with and without kelp cover in the islands of the SCBby Engle (1993). However, this number under-represents the actual number observed by about 50percent. Sand dwellers, rare and cryptic species, and some species that were hard to identify in the fieldare not included in his estimate. In all, about 125 species of fish inhabit kelp beds and rocky nearshorehabitats (Ebeling et al., 1979). The relative abundance of fish observed by divers at ten locations in thenearshore waters of SCI by CDFG (1970) and at 17 locations by Engle (1993) are shown in Table 3.3-1Kelp Habitats. The most conspicuous feature of the nearshore zone of SCI is the presence of extensivekelp beds. Giant kelp prefer depths of less than 131 ft (40 m) (Bushing, 1995). The total extent of kelpbeds around SCI was measured from digitized sensitivity index maps produced in 1980 (National OceanService, 1980). The extent of kelp beds may be about 9.3 mi², or about half the nearshore zone within the20-fathom contour. However, the abundance of kelp in suitable habitat is quite variable over time(Murray and Bray, 1993; Bushing, 1995). Results of surveys conducted between 1975 and 1977produced an estimate of 3.5 mi² of kelp canopy coverage (Murray and Bray, 1993).In general, there is a large positive relationship between density of kelp and the density of fish on cobbleand rock bottoms (DeMartini and Roberts, 1990). A minimum density of giant kelp is necessary forpopulations of some species to occur on a rock reef (Holbrook et al., 1990). These species are stronglyassociated with kelp at some or all of their life stages. Removal of kelp can cause a decline of over 50percent in fish biomass. Most of the decline is caused by the disappearance of midwater species thatassociate with the kelp canopy (Bodkin, 1988).In general, the abundance of fish on rock reefs is related to abundance of kelp as well as vertical relief ofthe bottom (Cross and Allen, 1993). In the nearshore waters of nearby San Nicolas Island, Cowen andBodkin (1993) found that within the kelp forests, areas with the greatest vertical relief supported thegreatest numbers and diversity of fish, while those with sandy bottoms supported the fewest. They didnot find that coverage by kelp affected the abundance of fish. However, most of their rocky samplingsites had enough kelp cover to accommodate fish that associate with kelp. In the presence of kelp, theabundance of some species assemblages does not depend on the presence of high relief rock (Larson andDeMartini, 1984).February 2007 3-16

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Table 3.3-1. Relative Abundance of Fish in Nearshore Waters of SCISpeciesEngle1993CDFG 1970SpeciesEngle1993CDFG 1970Pacific angel shark P Garibaldi A CBlue shark P Senorita A ASwell shark P P California clingfish PHorn shark C P California sheephead A CBat ray C C Rock wrasse A CChimera P Kelpfish CCalifornia moray C C Giant kelpfish C CSmelt C Island kelpfish A ATopsmelt A Blackeye goby A A(Calico) kelp bass A C Blueband goby A ABarred sand bass P Zebra goby C CGiant sea bass Kelp rockfish C PGuadalupe cardinalfish C Treefish C PSpotted cusk-eel P Blue rockfish PPurple brotula P Black-and-yellow rockfish PSargo P Olive rockfish P PSalema P Gopher rockfish PHalfmoon A C Grass rockfish POpaleye A C Bocaccio rockfish PZebra surfperch P Honeycomb rockfish PBlack surfperch A California scorpionfish C PRubberlip surfperch P Rainbow scorpionfish PPhanerodon spp. P Painted greenling C CStriped surfperch P Snubnose sculpin PPile surfperch P C Coralline sculpin PKelp surfperch A A Cabezon PRainbow surfperch P Lavender sculpin PShiner surfperch C Ocean whitefish PZebra surfperch C Jack mackerel P PBlack surfperch C Turbot PBlacksmith A A Yellowtail CSources: CDFG 1970; Engle 1993.A—abundant, C—common, P—present.Mass mortality of kelp forest fishes may occur during an El Niño event (Bodkin et al., 1987). Thismortality is caused by warming of the water and large swells generated during storms associated with an3-17 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3El Niño event. Rockfishes associated with kelp forests are particularly susceptible to mortality duringthese events.The abundance of fishes in kelp forests has been estimated for various areas Table 3.3-2. However, mostsurveys only estimate the abundance of conspicuous fishes. The abundance of cryptic forms can be fourtimes higher than that of conspicuous species; however, biomass of cryptic species is equivalent to onlyabout ten percent of that of conspicuous species (Allen et al., 1992).Table 3.3-2. Fish per Acre within Kelp Beds in the Southern California BightLocationKind of FishNumbers/PoundsNo. SamplesReferenceNumbersSan Nicolas Island Conspicuous Fish 320 295 Cowen and Bodkin 1993Santa Catalina Conspicuous Fish 2,771 360 Allen et al. 1992Cryptic Fish 10,456 360 Allen et al. 1992All Fish 13,227 360 Allen et al. 1992San Onofre All Fish 2,506 407 Larson and DeMartini 1984PoundsSanta Catalina All Fish 46 360 Allen et al. 1992San Onofre All Fish 298 407 Larson and DeMartini 1984Rocky Habitats. Density of fish is much lower on rocky bottoms that have little or no kelp coverage thanwithin kelp forests. Density of fish on a cobble bottom without kelp at San Onofre, which is on themainland at the same latitude as SCI, was 324 fish per acre compared to 2,506 fish per acre within kelpforests on cobble bottoms (Larson and DeMartini, 1984). Barred sand bass, white sea perch, Californiasheephead, and kelp bass were the most common species on the cobble bottom without kelp.Removal of kelp from a high relief rocky bottom reduced the abundance of midwater fish from 3,189 peracre to 816 per acre, and bottom fish from 1,650 per acre to 804 per acre (Bodkin, 1988). Total(midwater and bottom fish) biomass was reduced from 1,426 lb per acre to 585 lb per acre. There was nochange in biomass at a control site where kelp was not removed. The most notable decline was in theabundance of rockfish.Allen (1985) characterized the fish fauna of nearshore habitats in the southern part of the SCB, whichincluded Santa Catalina Island. Among the habitat types in his classifications were shallow water rockreefs close to shore at depths of 6.6–39 ft (2–12 m) and deeper rock reefs at depths >65 ft (20 m). Fishassemblages in shallow reef habitats were similar to those in kelp forests but lacked the kelp associatedspecies, especially those associated with the kelp canopy. Species characteristic of shallow and deeperreef habitats are shown in Table 3.3-3. Also shown in Table 3.3-3 are species found in all rock habitats atSCI. Most of the species characteristic of rock habitats in the SCB are found at SCI.Nearshore and Offshore SubstratesSpecies characteristic of nearshore and offshore soft substrate habitats in the SCB are shown in Table 3.3-4. In comparison to fish species characteristic of rocky substrates, fewer species characteristic of softsubstrates are found at SCI (Tables 3.3-3 and 3.3-4). Nearshore soft substrate habitats are not common inthe SCIRC, and only limited sampling has been carried out around SCI. Nearshore and inner shelf, softsubstratespecies include smelt, turbot, northern anchovy, queenfish, shiner surfperch, walleye surfperch,February 2007 3-18

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3and white surfperch (Cross and Allen, 1993). Fishes of the outer shelf include calico and stripetailrockfish, curlfin turbot, English sole, northern anchovy, and Pacific sanddab (Table 3.3-4) (Allen, 1985;Cross and Allen, 1993).Love et al. (1986) sampled soft substrates at three stations at each of three sites along the coast of theSCB. Queenfish and white croaker were the dominant species in trawls taken at depths of 20, 40, and60 ft (6, 12, and 18 m) at northern sites off the city of Santa Barbara. Northern anchovy, Californiahalibut, and speckled sanddab were caught in significant quantities at all depths. At three sampling sitesnear Los Angeles, the dominant species and their corresponding depths were queenfish, white croaker,and California halibut at 20 ft (6 m); speckled sanddab, white croaker, California halibut, and queenfish at40 ft (12 m); and speckled sanddab and California halibut at 60 ft (18 m). Queenfish and white croakerwere the most commonly taken species in trawls taken at 20 and 40 ft (6 and 12 m) off San Onofre.White croaker and northern anchovy were dominant at the 60-ft (18-m) depth at this site. White croakerand queenfish, which are common all along the coast, were not recorded in samples collected off SCI(Table 3.3-3). At northern sites (near Santa Barbara), fish abundance was constant at all three depths,whereas off Los Angeles and San Onofre, abundance decreased with increasing depth. There wereconsiderable seasonal and annual fluctuations in the abundance of fish. At depths of 20 ft (6 m), fishabundance was low during December, increased in April, and peaked in late summer and early fall. Fishmay have moved offshore during winter. During the study, from 1982 to 1984, an El Niño event(1982/1983) was associated with a decline in the abundance of many fish species in nearshore waters.The fish may have moved out of warmer, nearshore waters to areas of cooler water.Most of the nearshore shelf on the western, southern, and northern coasts of SCI are rocky with only afew sandy areas (Helgren, 1999). The largest sandy area is near the airstrip in West Cove, whereas othersoccur in Pyramid Cove and the inside of Northwest Harbor. The Tanner/Cortes Banks are composedmainly of base rock that may be covered with a thin veneer of sediment (Thompson et al., 1993). Softsubstrates are found in the deep basins. However, the deep area immediately to the east of SCI in theeastern portion of the Catalina Basin is rocky (Thompson et al., 1983).Mean standing crop of fish recorded in beam trawls taken at depths of 20–43 ft (6–13 m) on soft bottomsbetween Hermosa Beach and Carlsbad was 9,778 pounds (lb) (4,438 kg) nm 2 (Allen and Herbinson,1991). Catch along coasts more exposed to the open sea was slightly lower at 8,328 lb (3,780 kg) pernm 2 .3-19 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Table 3.3-3. Species Characteristic of Shallow and Deep Rock Reef Habitats without Kelp in theSCB and Species Found in All Rock Habitats at SCISpecies Shallow Deep SCI Species Shallow Deep SCIHorn shark B White sea bass BSwell shark B Black croaker A A BCalifornia moray B White croaker ANorthern anchovy A Queenfish ATopsmelt A B Opaleye A A BJacksmelt A Halfmoon A A BCalifornia scorpionfish A B Kelp surfperch A ASpotted scorpionfish B Shiner surfperch A BKelp rockfish A Pile surfperch A A BBrown rockfish A Black surfperch A A BGopher rockfish A Walleye surfperch A BBlack and yellow rockfish B Rainbow surfperch A ABlue rockfish A A B Dwarf surfperch ABrown rockfish B White surfperch A ABocaccio rockfish A Rubberlip surfperch A A BGopher rockfish B Blacksmith A A BGrass rockfish A Garibaldi A BKelp rockfish B California barracuda AOlive rockfish A A B Rock wrasse ASquarespot rockfish B Señorita A A BYellowtail rockfish B California sheephead A A BTreefish B Kelpfish BPainted greenling A Spotted kelpfish A ACabezon A A B Giant kelpfish A(Calico) kelp bass A A B Lingcod BBarred sand bass A A B Ocean whitefish BGiant sea bass B Blackeye goby AJack mackerel A Yellowtail BSargo A B Pacific bonito ASalema A Turbot ASource: A—Allen 1985; B—Blunt 1980Mean standing crop of fish on soft substrates of the outer shelf and slope of the SCB may be about1,622 lb (736 kg) per nm2 (Cross and Allen, 1993). Flatfish, sculpins, and rockfish are commonlyassociated with offshore soft substrates (Table 3.3-4). Outer shelf and slope habitats occupy a relativelysmall proportion of the marine area of the SCIRC.February 2007 3-20

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Midwater FishMidwater or mesopelagic fish are pelagic and inhabit depths of 164–1,969 ft (50–600 m). Manymidwater fish are strong swimmers; migrate to surface waters each night and return to deep water duringthe day; have well developed eyes, swim bladders, and photophores (light-producing organs); and areshaded dark on the dorsal (upper) surface and light on the ventral (lower) surface. In contrast,bathypelagic fish, which inhabit the deepest waters, are generally weak swimmers; have either no orpoorly developed eyes, swim bladders, and photophores; and are black or brown in color (Brown, 1974).There are about 120 species of midwater fishes in the SCB. Only a small percentage of these areimportant commercially. Northern species are associated with the lower mesopelagic zone, where Pacificsubarctic water is the dominant water mass and are most common in winter and spring when intrusions ofthis northern water mass are greatest. Southern species are most common during summer and fall whenwater of southern origin intrudes. Central Pacific species are represented by only a few species (Cross andAllen, 1993).Table 3.3-4. Species Characteristic of Sandy Beach Open Coast, Nearshore, and Offshore SoftSubstrates in the SCBSpecies Open Coast Nearshore Offshore Species Open Coast Nearshore OffshoreGray smoothhoundsharkA A White croaker A A AShovelnose guitarfish A A Spotfin croaker ASpiny dogfish B Queenfish A, B A, B ARound stingray A A California corbina ANorthern anchovy A, B A, B A Yellowfin croker ADeepbody anchovy A A Barred surfperch ASlough anchovy A A Shiner surfperch A, B A, B A, BCalifornia lizardfish A A Pile surfperch A, B A, B APacific hake A A Black surfperch A A ASpotted cusk-eel A A Walleye surfperch A, B A, B ABasketweave cusk-eel A A Dwarf surfperch A ABlackbelly eelpout A White surfperch A, B A, B ASpecklefinmidshipmanA A Pink surfperch A A, BPlainfin midshipman A A California barracuda A, B A, BCalifornia killifish A Giant kelpfish A ATopsmelt A, B A, B A Arrow goby AJacksmelt A, B A, B Blackeye goby A ACalifornia grunion A Bay goby A AKelp pipefish A A Pacific butterfish BCalifornia scorpionfish A A Pacific sanddab A A, BCalico rockfish A A, B Speckled sanddab A A3-21 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Table 3.3-4. Species Characteristic of Sandy Beach Open Coast, Nearshore, and Offshore SoftSubstrates in the SCB (continued)Species Open Coast Nearshore Offshore Species Open Coast Nearshore OffshoreSplitnose rockfish A Longfin sanddab A, BVermilion rockfish A A Bigmouth sole ABocaccio rockfish A A California halibut A AStripetail rockfish A, B Fantail sole A AHalfbanded rockfish A, B Rex sole AShortspine combfish A Diamond turbot ALongspine combfish A Slender sole ARoughback sculpin A Dover sole A AYellowchin sculpin A A English sole A, BPacific staghornsculpinA Hornyhead turbot A, BPygmy poacher A Turbot A, B ABlacktip poacher A Curlfin turbot A A, BBarred sand bass A A A California toungefish A AWhite sea bassBSources: A—Allen 1985; B—Blunt 1980.A—soft bottom fishesB—soft bottom fishes found or expected to be found at SCIVariations in Abundance in Relation to Oceanographic ConditionsAnnual variations in abundance of fish are, in large measure, related to the prevailing oceanographicregime. The physical oceanographic regime in the study area is dynamic and affects the abundance anddistribution of fishes (Lenarz et al., 1995; MacCall, 1996). Short-term fluctuations associated with an ElNiño event are superimposed on long-term changes in oceanographic conditions.During El Niño events, upwelling of deep, relatively cold, nutrient-rich water ceases or is much reducedand water temperatures rise, causing southern species to expand their distribution northward and northerlyspecies to retreat farther north. The two largest El Niño events of the century were during 1982–1983 and1997–1998 (IRI/LDEO, 1998). A long-lived El Niño began in late 1991 and extended into 1993. Duringthe 2000 to 2004 period, for which we present catch data, there was not an El Niño event.Sport FishingSport fishing is an important activity. Major sport fish species caught in the SOCAL Operating Area areyellowfin tuna, shallow water rockfish, yellowtail rockfish, kelp bass, yellowtail, California sheephead,ocean whitefish, dolphin, marlin, barracuda, and lingcod (Fletcher, 1999; Helgren, 1999). Therecreational fishery occurs at depths of 30–100 ft (9–30 m) (Fletcher, 1999). Sport fishers fish for bluefintuna, yellowfin tuna, yellowtail rockfish, and rock cod on the Tanner/Cortes Banks (Fletcher, 1999;Helgren, 1999). Halibut and sea bass are fished in the sandy area in West Cove (Helgren, 1999).February 2007 3-22

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3DivingDivers fish for sea urchins along the western, northern, and southern coasts to depths of 100 ft (9–30 m)Fletcher, 1999). Divers also take gorgonians and black coral. The exclusive use, safety, security, anddanger zones are described in 33 CFR as being restricted to naval vessels or otherwise presenting asignificant hazard to mariners. Whereas civilian use is restricted during military operations, at other timesthe areas may be open but users must check in with Range Control.3.3.2.3.3 Essential Fish HabitatThe 1996 amendments to the MSA established new requirements for describing and identifying EFH inFederal Fisheries Management Plans (FMPs). The MSA defines EFH as those waters and substratenecessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity. For each FMP, discrete areas ortypes of EFH are designated within the area extending from the mean high water mark to the areaextending to 200 mi beyond the shoreline within which the U.S. has sovereign rights for the purpose ofexploring and exploiting, conserving, and managing the natural resources, whether living or non-living, ofthe waters and sea-bed— along the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California. A total of 91 fish andinvertebrate species with designated EFH occur in the study area (Table 3.3-5). They are grouped into thecoastal pelagic species (CPS) (5 species), Pacific coast groundfish (73 species), and highly migratoryspecies (HMS) (13 species). The status, distribution, habitat preference (depth, substrate), life history(spawning, migration), common prey species, and EFH designations of the complex and individualspecies are provided below (PFMC, 1998a, b; 2003a). Seven additional rockfish species have been addedto the Groundfish FMP under Amendment 16-3. These include the chameleon (Sebastes phillipsi),dwarf-red (S. rufinanus), freckled (S. lentiginosus), half-banded (S. semicinctus), pinkrose (S. simulator),pygmy (S. wilsoni), and swordspine (S. ensifer). Currently, information is insufficient to define EFH forthese seven species (Carretta et al., 2005).Coastal pelagic species are small to medium sized, schooling species that migrate in coastal waters, oftennear the ocean surface. CPS collectively comprise one of the largest marine fisheries in California withrespect to biomass, landed volume, and revenue. One characteristic common to CPS is the highlydynamic nature of their populations with respect to movement, biomass, and availability to the fishery.“Boom or bust” population cycles of coastal pelagic stocks have been attributed to a number of keyfactors, including relatively short life-cycles, variable recruitment, and annual and longer-cycle variationin optimal habitats for spawning, larval survival, recruitment, and feeding. Large natural fluctuations inCPS abundance have been accentuated in the past by human influence (CDFG, 2001).Groundfish species are bottom dwelling finfish. More than 80 species of marine fish are included underthe Pacific Coast Ground Fish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) that was adopted by the Pacific FisheryManagement Council (PFMC) in 1982. In general, the FMP provides for management of bottomdwelling finfish species (including all rockfish and whiting) that are found in U.S. waters off Washington,Oregon, and California. Of these, fewer than 20 of the commercially and recreationally most importanthave ever been comprehensively assessed. Ground fish management is complicated and demandingbecause fisheries for many of the species are interrelated, but the various stocks have respondeddifferently to fishing pressure. For example, flat fish populations such as Dover, Petrale, and Englishsoles have been subjected to significant commercial fisheries for decades yet have not shown themagnitude of declines that have occurred in some of the rockfish populations. The current status of manyrockfish and lingcod off the West Coast is poor, and significant changes in the ground fish fishery havebeen necessary to address this situation. In response to the sharp decline in ground fish landings and thegenerally poor condition of West Coast ground fish stocks, the Secretary of Commerce formally3-23 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3announced a disaster determination for the fishery in January 2000. The intent of the declaration was tominimize economic and social impacts on fishing communities while protecting and rebuilding groundfish stocks (CDFG, 2001).Highly migratory species include the tunas, billfishes, pelagic sharks, and dolphin fish. As a group, theycontribute to some of the most valuable commercial fisheries and are also very important in the sportfishery, especially in Southern California. Currently, the harvest of highly migratory species is regulatedby the state. However, beginning in 2001, the PFMC proposed adopting a FMP regulating the take ofhighly migratory species within and outside the EEZ. Upon completion of the FMP process, which maytake more than 2 years, jurisdiction over the harvest of these species will pass to the Federal government.Currently, the stocks of all HMS are considered to be healthy (CDFG, 2001).February 2007 3-24

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 31Table 3.3-5. EFH Designated Fish & Invertebrate Species in the SOCAL OPAREA and VicinityCoastal Pelagic SpeciesNorthern anchovy (Engraulis mordax)Jack mackerel (Traxchurus symmetricus)Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax)Pacific mackerel (Scomber japonicus)Market squid (Loligo opalescens)Groundfish SpeciesFlatfishCurlfin sole (Pleuronichthys decurrens)Dover sole (Microstomus pacificus)English sole (Parophrys vetulus)Petrale sole (Eopsetta jordani)Rex sole (Glyptocephalus zachirus)Rock sole (Lepidopsetta bilineata)Sand sole (Psettichthys melanostictus)Pacific sanddab (Citharichthys sordidus)RockfishAurora rockfish (Sebastes aurora)Bank rockfish (Sebastes rufus)Black rockfish (Sebastes melanops)Black-and-yellow rockfish (Sebastes chrysomelas)Blackgill rockfish (Sebastes melanostomus)Blue rockfish (Sebastes mystinus)Bocaccio (Sebastes paucispinis)Bronzespotted rockfish (Sebastes gilli)Brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus)Calico rockfish (Sebastes dallii)Canary rockfish (Sebastes pinniger)Chilipepper (Sebastes goodei)China rockfish (Sebastes nebulosus)Copper rockfish (Sebastes caurinus)Cowcod (Sebastes levis)Darkblotched rockfish (Sebastes crameri)Flag rockfish (Sebastes rubrivinctus)Gopher rockfish (Sebastes carnatus)Grass rockfish (Sebastes rastrelliger)Greenblotched rockfish (Sebastes rosenblatti)Greenspotted rockfish (Sebastes chlorostictus)Greenstriped rockfish (Sebastes elongatus)Honeycomb rockfish (Sebastes umbrosus)Kelp rockfish (Sebastes atrovirensnus)Mexican rockfish (Sebastes macdonaldi)Olive rockfish (Sebastes serranoides)Pacific ocean perch (Sebastes alutus)Pink rockfish (Sebastes eos)Redbanded rockfish (Sebastes babcocki)Redstripe rockfish (Sebastes proriger)Rosethorn rockfish (Sebastes helvomaculatus)Rosy rockfish (Sebastes rosaceus)Rougheye rockfish (Sebastes aleutianus)Sharpchin rockfish (Sebastes zacentrus)Shortbelly rockfish (Sebastes jordani)Source: Turgeon et al., 1998; Nelson et al., 2004Silvergray rockfish (Sebastes brevispinis)Speckled rockfish (Sebastes ovalis)Stripetail rockfish (Sebastes saxicola)Tiger rockfish (Sebastes nigrocinctus)Treefish (Sebastes serriceps)Vermillion rockfish (Sebastes miniatus)Widow rockfish (Sebastes entomelas)Yelloweye rockfish (Sebastes ruberrimus)Yellowtail rockfish (Sebastes flavidus)ScorpionfishCalifornia scorpionfish (Scorpaena guttatta)ThornyheadsLongspine thornyhead (Sebastolobus altivelis)Shortspine thornyhead (Sebastolobus alascanus)RoundfishCabezon (Scorpaenichthvs marmoratus)Kelp greenling (Hexagrammos decagrammus)Lingcod (Opiodon elongatus)Pacific cod (Gadus macrocephalus)Pacific hake (Merluccius productus)Pacific flatnose (Antimora microlepis)Pacific grenadier (Coryphaenoides acrolepis)Sablefish (Anoplop oma fimbria)Skates, Sharks, and ChimerasBig skate (Raja binoculata)California skate (Raja inornata)Longnose skate (Raja rhina)Leopard shark (Triakis semifasciata)Soupfin shark (Galeorhinus zyopterus)Spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias)Spotted ratfish (Hydrolagus colliei)Highly Migratory SpeciesSharksCommon thresher shark (Alopias vulpinus)Pelagic thresher shark (Alopias pelagicus)Bigeye thresher shark (Alopias superciliosus)Shortfin mako shark (Isurus oxyrinchus)Blue shark (Prionace glauca)TunasAlbacore tuna (Thunnus alalunga)Bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus)Northern bluefin tuna (Thunnus orientalis)Skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis)Yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares)BillfishStriped marlin (Tetrapturus audax)SwordfishBroadbill swordfish (Xiphias gladius)Dolphin-fishDorado (mahi mahi) (Coryphaena hippurus)Squarespot rockfish (Sebastes hopkinsi)Starry rockfish (Sebastes constellatus)3-25 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.3.2.3.4 Endangered FishThere is one endangered fish species, the Southern California Stock of steelhead that may inhabit theSOCAL area. However, the likelihood of steelheads occurring in the SOCAL OPAREA duringCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities is very rare. There was only one sighting of a steelhead near the SOCALOPAREA in 2002 (7.5 mi [12 km] north of Camp Pendleton). Because it is very unlikely that steelheadmay enter the SOCAL OPAREA, steelhead are not discussed in detail in this EA/OEA.3.3.2.3.5 Hearing in FishFish vary greatly in their ability to detect underwater sounds (see Hastings and Popper, 2005 for areview). Hearing specialists, such as the Atlantic herring, have relatively good auditory capabilities. Inthese fish, the swim bladder is acoustically coupled to the inner ear (Popper, 1996). However, most otherspecies of fish, including mackerel, tuna, and flatfish, are not hearing specialists and either have no swimbladder or, if it is present, it is not coupled acoustically to the inner ear. Although it is difficult tocompare the hearing capabilities of terrestrial and marine vertebrates, the sensitivity of hearing specialistsis similar to that of other vertebrates after standardization of units (Popper and Fay, 1993).The upper limit of hearing in herring ranges from 4 to 13 kilohertz (kHz) (Enger, 1967). The upper limit ofhearing in fish without a swim bladder-inner ear type of coupling is only ~1.0–1.2 kHz (Enger, 1967). Theherring is also relatively sensitive to sound. At 300–1,000 Hertz (Hz) its hearing threshold is ~80 decibels(dB) re 1 micropascal (μPa) (Enger, 1967). However, at high frequencies, hearing thresholds rise rapidlywith increasing frequency. It is a minimum of 135 dB at 4 kHz. Atlantic cod do not have a directconnection between swim bladder and inner ear and are less sensitive to sound than are some other speciesof fish (Olsen, 1969). The hearing threshold for most marine species is ~140 dB at 1–1.5 kHz, and specieswith the best hearing ability are relatively insensitive to sounds above 2–3 kHz (Wodinsky and Tavolga,1964; Hawkins, 1993).Fish within the same taxonomic grouping have similar hearing abilities because of their anatomicalsimilarities (Popper and Fay, 1993; Popper, 1996). There is great diversity in the hearing abilities of thesedifferent groups of fish (Popper and Fay, 1993). Some of the differences may be attributable to differencesin measurement procedures. The three audiograms available for cod demonstrate SPL values at the mostsensitive frequency that vary by 30 dB. Yellowfin tuna may not be very sensitive to sound impulses; theirthreshold is 107 dB, a relatively high (poor) value. Table 3.3-6 summarizes best hearing thresholds forvarious species of fish.February 2007 3-26

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Table 3.3-6. Best Hearing Thresholds for Various Species of FishSpeciesBest Hearing ThresholdAtlantic Cod95 dB @ 283 Hz“ 75 dB @ 160 Hz“ 65 dB @ 150 HzPollackAtlantic HerringAmerican PlaiceDabYellowfin TunaTautogSource: Fay 198881 dB @ 160 Hz80 dB @ 300-1000 Hz100 dB @ 160 Hz89 dB @ 110 Hz107 dB @ 500 Hz81 dB @ 150 HzBecause of evident decreasing sensitivity with increasing sound frequency, most researchers did not test thecapability of fish to detect ultrasonic pulses (Mann et al., 1998). American shad and other species offreshwater herring (Alosa spp.) can detect ultrasonic pulses >100 kHz (Ross et al., 1993; Nestler et al., 1992;Mann et al., 1997). The hearing threshold at these high frequencies is about 160 dB or more; thus few fishspecies may be able to hear these high-frequency sounds at levels present in the sea (Mann et al., 1998).Because of this diversity in sound detection abilities by various fish species, one cannot makecomprehensive statements about the ability of fish in general to detect sounds at a particular frequencyand/or received level. However, it is clear that most species of fish can hear low-frequency sound pulsessuch as those created by underwater explosions. Fish that are able to hear the high-frequency pulses emittedby sonar would need to be relatively close to the sound source to detect it.3.3.2.4 Sea TurtlesFour species of sea turtles occur at sea off the coast of southern California: loggerhead (Caretta caretta);leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea); eastern Pacific green (Chelonia agassizi); and olive ridley(Lepidochelys olivacea). The eastern Pacific green, also known as the black sea turtle, is considered bysome to be a subspecies of the green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas). None of the four species is known tonest on southern California beaches. All are currently listed as either endangered or threatened under theESA.Data on use of the SCIRC by sea turtles are extremely limited, and no data are available on actualnumbers of turtles occurring there or in California waters in general. There presence within the SOCALOPAREA is considered rare.The distribution of sea turtles is strongly affected by seasonal changes in ocean temperature (Radovich,1961). In general, sightings increase during summer as warm water moves northward along the coast(Stinson, 1984). Sightings may also be more numerous in warm years compared to cold years.Sea turtles typically remain submerged for several minutes to several hours depending upon their activitystate (Standora et al., 1984, 1994; Renaud and Carpenter, 1994). Long periods of submergence hamperdetection and confound census estimates.Young loggerhead, green, and olive ridley turtles are believed to move offshore into open oceanconvergence zones where abundant food attracts predators, including sea turtles (Carr, 1987; NRC, 1990;3-27 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3NMFS and USFWS, 1998; Gooding and Magnuson, 1967). A survey of the eastern tropical Pacific foundthat sea turtles were present during 15 percent of observations in habitats of floating debris and materialof biological origin (flotsam) (Pitman, 1990; Arenas and Hall, 1992).Stinson (1984) reported that over 60 percent of eastern Pacific green and olive ridley turtles observed inCalifornia waters were in waters less than 165 ft (50 m) in depth. Green turtles were often observed alongshore in areas of eelgrass. Loggerheads and leatherbacks were observed over a broader range of depthsout to 3,300 ft (1,000 m). When sea turtles reach subadult size, they move to the shallow, nearshorebenthic feeding grounds of adults (Carr, 1987; NRC, 1990; NMFS and USFWS, 1998). Aerial surveysoff California, Oregon, and Washington have shown that most leatherbacks occur in slope waters and thatfew occur over the continental shelf (Eckert, 1993). Tracking studies found that migrating leatherbackturtles often travel parallel to deepwater contours ranging in depth from 650 to 11,500 ft (200 to 3,500 m)(Morreale et al., 1994).3.3.2.5 Marine MammalsMarine mammals addressed within this EA/OEA include members of two orders: Cetacean, whichincludes whales, dolphins, and porpoises; and Carnivora, which includes true seals (family Phocidae), sealions (family Otariidae), and sea otters (a member of the Mustelidae family). Cetaceans spend their livesentirely at sea. Pinnipeds (seals and sea lions) hunt and feed exclusively in the ocean, and some of thespecies occurring in the areas addressed in this EA/OEA come ashore to rest, mate, and bear young.Although most mustelids (a family which includes otters, weasels, skunks, and wolverines) are terrestrial,sea otters primarily swim, feed, and sleep in the ocean and rarely haul-out on shore to rest.3.3.2.5.1 CetaceansA total of 31 species of cetaceans could be encountered in the SOCAL OPAREA area (Table 3.3-2).They include 23 species of toothed whales (odontocetes) and eight species of baleen whales (mysticetes).At least ten species generally can be found in the SOCAL OPAREA area in moderate or high numberseither year-round or during annual migrations into or through the area: gray whale (Eschrichtiusrobustus), pygmy sperm whale (Kogia breviceps), bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus), pantropicalspotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata), striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba), short-beaked commondolphin (Delphinus delphis), Pacific white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens), Risso’s dolphin(Grampus griseus), northern right whale dolphin (Lissodelphis borealis), and Dall’s porpoise(Phocoenoides dalli). Other species are represented by either small numbers, moderate numbers duringpart of the year, occasional sightings, or strandings. Not included in the 23 species are species consideredto be extralimital in the SOCAL OPAREA area. Details of the species found in the area and theirabundance, distribution, and density estimates are given in Appendix A.Six species of cetaceans occurring in the SOCAL OPAREA are listed as endangered. Most endangeredbaleen whales that occur in California waters were once commercially hunted to the point that theirpopulations were severely depleted. The humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), blue whale(Balaenoptera musculus), fin whale (B. physalus), sei whale (B. borealis), and the North Pacific rightwhale (Eubalaena glacialis) are currently listed as endangered species and protected by the ESA. Graywhales were removed from the endangered list in 1994 because of an increase in population numbers(Carretta et al., 2005). The one toothed whale that is listed as endangered is the sperm whale (Physetermacrocephalus).Stocks of all species listed as endangered under the ESA are automatically considered ‘depleted’ and‘strategic’ under the MMPA. The specific definition of a strategic stock is complex, but in general it is aFebruary 2007 3-28

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3stock for which human activities may be having a deleterious effect on the population and may not besustainable. The stocks of blue, fin, sei, and humpback whales occurring off California are consideredstrategic (Barlow et al., 1997). In addition, the California/Oregon/Washington Stock of the short-finnedpilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus) and sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) have beendesignated as strategic. The killer whale is not listed under the ESA, but the Eastern North PacificSouthern Resident Stock, members of which may occur off California, is considered depleted and astrategic stock. The stocks of minke whales and mesoplodont beaked whales off the coast ofCalifornia/Oregon/Washington have been reclassified as non-strategic (Barlow et al., 1998; Caretta et al.,2005). All marine mammals are protected by the MMPA.Overall, a comparison of cetacean abundance in 1979/80 vs. 1991 indicated that numbers of mysticetesand odontocetes have increased in offshore California waters over the 12-year period. However, this isnot so for the harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) and the short-finned pilot whale, which appear tohave decreased in numbers (Barlow, 1994 and 1995; Forney et al., 1995 and 2000). Also, the increasedabundance of blue whales reported previously in the Channel Islands and elsewhere off southernCalifornia (e.g., Calambokidis et al., 1990; Barlow, 1994 and 1995) was not confirmed by certain longtermvessel-based surveys (Larkman and Veit, 1998). The status of cetacean stocks and their abundanceestimates for California are summarized in Table 3.3-2 from Marine Mammal Stock Assessmentsprepared by Barlow et al. (1997), Forney et al. (2000), and Carretta et al. (2001 and 2004).3.3.2.5.2 PinnipedsSix species of pinnipeds may occur in the SOCAL OPAREA (Table 3.3-7). Only one of the species, theCalifornia sea lion (Zalophus californianus), is abundant in the Southern California Bight and breedsregularly on SCI. In the SOCAL OPAREA, a small rookery is located on Santa Barbara Island (Le Boeufand Bonnell, 1980; Bonnell and Dailey, 1993), and Guadalupe Island, just south of the OPAREA, is amajor haul-out site (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993; Ronald and Gots, 2003; Lowry and Forney, 2005). Largecolonies of California sea lions are found on San Nicolas and San Miguel Islands.Two other species, the harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) and the northern elephant seal (Miroungaangustirostris), haul out regularly in small numbers and occasionally pup on SCI. The harbor seal (Phocavitulina) occupies haul-out sites on mainland beaches and all of the Channel Islands, including SantaBarbara, Santa Catalina, and San Nicolas Islands (Lowry and Carretta, 2003). Small colonies of northernelephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) breed and haul out on Santa Barbara Island with large colonieson San Nicolas and San Miguel Islands (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993; U.S. Navy, 1998 and 2002a). Allthree species are more abundant on the Channel Islands north of the SOCAL OPAREA.3-29 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Table 3.3-7. Summary of Marine Mammal Species Found in Southern California WatersCommon NameSpecies NameBlue whaleBalaenoptera musculusBryde’s whaleBalaenoptera edeniFin whaleBalaenoptera physalusGray whaleEschrichtius robustusHumpback whaleMegaptera novaeangliaeMinke whaleBalaenoptera acutorostrataNorth Pacific right whaleEubalaena japonicaSei whaleBalaenoptera borealisBaird’s beaked whaleBerardius bairdiiBottlenose dolphin coastalTursiops truncatusBottlenose dolphin offshoreTursiops truncatusCuvier’s beaked whaleZiphius cavirostrisDall’s porpoisePhocoenoides dalliDwarf sperm whaleKogia simaFalse killer whalePseudorca crassidensHarbor porpoisePhocoena phocoenaKiller whale offshoreOrcinus orcaKiller whale transientOrcinus orcaLong-beaked common dolphinDelphinus capensisAbundance(CV)1,744(0.28)12(2.0)3,279(0.31)26,635(0.1006)1,034(0.11)1,015(0.73)Stock (SAR)ESA &MMPAStatusAnnual PopulationTrendEastern North Pacific E, D, S May be increasing UncommonCalifornia Unknown RareCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonE, D, S May be increasing UncommonEastern North Pacific Increasing ~ 2.5%California, Oregon, &WashingtonCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonSouthern CaliforniaOperating AreaCommon duringmigrationE, D, S Increasing 6-7% UncommonUnknownUnknown Eastern North Pacific E, D, S Unknown Rare56(0.61)228(0.51)206(012)5,065(0.66)1,884(0.68)99,517(0.33)UnknownUnknownRare7,579(0.38)1,340(0.31)346(?)43,360(0.72)Eastern North Pacific E, D, S May be increasing RareCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonUnknownUncommonRareCalifornia Coastal Stable RareCalifornia Offshore Unknown CommonCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonUnknownUnknownUnknownUncommonCommonEastern Tropical Pacific Unknown RareCentral California Northof Point ConceptionIncreasing but notsignificantPossible visitorVery rareEastern North Pacific Unknown UncommonEastern North Pacific Unknown UncommonCaliforniaUnknown – seasonaldifferencesUncommonFebruary 2007 3-30

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Table 3.3-2 (cont). Summary of Marine Mammal Species Found In Southern California WatersCommon NameSpecies NameMesoplodont beaked whalesMesoplodon spp.Northern right whale dolphinLissodelphis borealisPacific white-sided dolphinLagenorhynchus obliguidensPantropical spotted dolphinStenella attenuatePygmy sperm whaleKogia brevicepsRisso’s DolphinGrampus griseusRough-toothed dolphinSteno bredanensisShort-beaked common dolphinDelphinus delphisShort-finned pilot whaleGlobicephala macrorhynchusSperm whalePhyseter macrocephalusSpinner dolphinStenella longirostrisStriped dolphinStenella coeruleoalbaNorthern elephant sealMirounga angustirostrisPacific harbor sealPhoca vitulinaCalifornia sea lionZalophus californianusGuadalupe fur sealArctocephalus townsendiNorthern fur sealCallorhinus ursinusSteller sea lionEumetopias jubatusAbundance(CV)1,247(0.92)20,362(0.26)59,724(0.50)Stock (SAR)California, Oregon, &WashingtonCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonESA &MMPAStatusAnnual PopulationTrendUnknownNo TrendNo TrendSouthern CaliforniaOperating AreaRareCommonCommonUnknown Eastern Tropical Pacific Unknown Rare119(?)16,066(0.28)Unknown449,846(0.25)304(1.02)1,233(0.41)2,805(0.66)13,934(0.53)California, Oregon, &WashingtonCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonTropical and warmtemperateCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonTropical and warmtemperateCalifornia, Oregon, &WashingtonUnknownNo TrendUnknownUnknown – seasonaldifferencesUnknownRareCommonRareCommonSeasonally abundantUncommon; commonbefore 1982E, D, S Unknown UncommonUnknownNo TrendRareOccasional visitor101,000 California Increasing Common27,863(0.17)California Stable Common237,000 U.S. Stock Increasing 6.1% Abundant in summer6,443 Mexico T, D, S Increasing 13.7% Rare7,784 San Miguel Island Increasing 8.3% Common6,555California, Oregon, &WashingtonT, D Decreasing RareSouthern sea otter2,359 California T, D Increasing RareEnhydra lutrisStock or population abundance estimates and the associated correlation of variance (CV) from NOAA Stock Assessment Reports (SAR), their status under theEndangered Species Act (ESA) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), the population trend, and relative abundance in each range area. E=Endangeredunder the ESA; D = Depleted under the ESA; and S=Strategic Stock under the ESA. Due to lack of information, several of the Mesoplodont beaked whales have beengrouped together.3-31 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3The overall abundance of these species increased rapidly on the Channel Islands between the end ofcommercial exploitation in the 1920s and the mid-1980s. The growth rates of populations of somespecies appear to have declined after the mid-1980s, and some survey data suggested that localizedpopulations of some species were declining. The declines may have been a result of either inter-specificcompetition or population numbers having exceeded the carrying capacity of the environment (Stewart etal., 1993; Hanan, 1996). More recently, most populations are increasing (Carretta et al., 2004), and insome cases seals have recently occupied new rookeries and haul-out areas. The aforementioned pinnipedspecies are not listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA (Barlow et al., 1997).3.3.2.6 Species Accounts3.3.2.6.1 Mysticete Cetaceans (Baleen Whales)All species of baleen whales that could occur in and near the SOCAL OPAREA have extensive ranges inthe North Pacific, extending from high-latitude feeding grounds in the summer to subtropical calvinggrounds in the winter (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993).Blue, fin, and humpback whales are present in southern California offshore waters during the summer andautumn months (Heyning and Lewis, 1990). Minke whales appear to be present year-round off theChannel Islands (Rice, 1974; Leatherwood et al., 1987). In the winter and spring, migrating gray whalesare abundant both close to shore and in offshore migration corridors along and between the ChannelIslands. North Pacific right, sei, and Bryde’s whales are uncommon or rare in the area.Blue Whale (Balaenoptera musculus)Status—The blue whale is listed as endangered under the ESA, and the Eastern North Pacific Stock is,therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. The population estimate for blue whalesin the Eastern North Pacific Stock is 1,744 (CV=0.28) individuals (Calambokidis et al., 2003; Carretta etal., 2006). The population using California waters may be increasing but it is not known if this is due toan increase in the stock or an increase in animals foraging in California waters (Barlow, 1997).Distribution—The blue whale has a worldwide distribution in circumpolar and temperate waters. Thepopulation that uses coastal waters of California is present there primarily from June to November, with apeak in blue whale calling intensity observed in September (Burtenshaw et al.,. 2004). Foraging areasinclude the edges of continental shelves and upwelling regions (Reilly and Thayer 1990; Schoenherr1991). Feeding grounds have been identified in coastal upwelling zones off the coast of California (Crollet al.,. 1998; Fiedler et al.,. 1998; Burtenshaw et al.,. 2004), Baja California (Reilly and Thayer, 1990).Blue whales are found around the Northern Channel Islands, Santa Rosa and San Miguel Islands, fromsummer through the fall where currents provide dense layers of euphausiids for them to feed on. Thispopulation is thought to inhabit waters off Central America from December to May (Calambokidis 1995).During the cold-water months, very few blue whales are present in waters off California (Forney andBarlow, 1998; Larkman and Veit, 1998; U.S. Navy, 1998). These seasonal movement patterns arethought to coincide with productivity, particularly abundance of euphausiids which are the main foodsource of blue whales. Blue whales are not expected to be in the SOCAL OPAREA from Decemberthrough May (Calambokidis, 1995; Burtenshaw et al., 2004).A few blue whales were observed in or near the SOCAL Range Complex in early to mid spring (U.S.Navy, 1998), but were most common during July–September (Hill and Barlow, 1992; Mangels andGerrodette, 1994; Teranishi et al.,. 1997; Larkman and Veit, 1998; U.S. Navy, 1998). During theSWFSC/NMFS surveys in 1998–1999, blue whales arrived in late May and were common into August,with one whale seen as late as November (Carretta et al., 2000). In other years, blue whales wereFebruary 2007 3-32

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3common in waters west of San Clemente Island as late as mid-October (e.g., in 1995) (Spikes and Clark,1996; Clark and Fristrup, 1997; Clark et al., 1998).Photographic studies have proven that blue whales remain in waters off California throughout thesummer, apparently to feed (Calambokidis, 1995; Larkman and Veit, 1998). Over 100 blue whales werepresent in the Santa Barbara Channel in 1992 and 1994 (Calambokidis, 1995). Concentrations of bluewhales have been seen elsewhere off southern California in some years.Acoustics—Blue and fin whales produce calls with the lowest frequency and highest source levels of allcetaceans. Blue whale vocalizations are long, patterned low-frequency sounds with durations up to 36 sec(Richardson et al., 1995) repeated every 1 to 2 min (Mellinger and Clark, 2003). Their frequency range is12 to 400 Hz, with dominant energy in the infrasonic range at 12 to 25 Hz (Ketten, 1998; Mellinger andClark, 2003). Source levels are up to 188 dB re 1 μPa-m (Ketten, 1998; McDonald et al., 2001). Duringthe Magellan II Sea Test (at-sea operations designed to test systems for antisubmarine warfare), off thecoast of California in 1994, blue whale vocalization source levels at 17 Hz were estimated in the range of195 dB re 1 μPa-m (Aburto et al., 1997).Vocalizations of blue whales appear to vary among geographic areas (Rivers, 1997), with cleardifferences in call structure suggestive of separate populations for the western and eastern regions of theNorth Pacific (Stafford et al., 2001). Stafford et al., (2005) recorded the highest calling rates when bluewhale prey was closest to the surface during its vertical migration. While no data on hearing ability forthis species are available, Ketten (1997) hypothesized that mysticetes have acute infrasonic hearing.Bryde’s Whale (Balaenoptera edeni)Status—Bryde’s whale is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and the Eastern Tropical Pacific Stockis not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. The best estimate of the eastern tropical Pacificpopulation size is 11,163 (CV=0.20) individuals but only an estimate 12 (CV = 2.0) use the California,Oregon and Washington waters (Carretta et al., 2005).Distribution—Bryde’s whale is found in tropical and subtropical waters, generally not moving polewardof 40° in either hemisphere (Jefferson et al., 1993). Long migrations are not typical of Bryde’s whales,though limited shifts in distribution toward and away from the equator, in winter and summer,respectively, have been observed (Cummings, 1985). Bryde’s whales are year-round residents of theinshore waters on the west coast of Baja California south to at least as far as the Islas Tres Marias, at21°N (Rice, 1977). The species is rarely seen near the SOCAL Range Complex. None were sighted inthe SCIRC during recent studies (U.S. Navy, 1998; Carretta et al., 2000). Only one Bryde’s whale hasever been positively identified in surveys of California coastal waters (Barlow, 1994). Only one Bryde’swhale has ever been positively identified in surveys of California coastal waters (Barlow, 1994b). It ispossible that Bryde’s whales could be sighted in the southernmost portion of the SOCAL OPAREA. It isnot known how many of the eastern tropical Pacific population could occur in California waters. Oneestimate is 12 (CV=2.0) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005), another is 160 (Tershy et al., 1990). Bryde’swhales are more likely to be found in non-territorial waters but are occasionally sighted in nearshoreareas. There was only one sighting of Bryde’s whales in SOCAL OPAREA (Barlow, 1994): therefore,the seasonal occurrence of the Bryde’s whale can not be determined.Acoustics—Bryde’s whales produce low frequency tonal and swept calls similar to those of otherrorquals (Oleson et al., 2003). Calls vary regionally, yet all but one of the call types have a fundamentalfrequency below 60 Hz; they last from 0.25 sec to several seconds; and they are produced in extendedsequences (Oleson et al., 2003). Heimlich et al. (2005) recently described five tone types. While no data3-33 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3on hearing ability for this species are available, Ketten (1997) hypothesized that mysticetes have acuteinfrasonic hearing.Fin Whale (Balaenoptera physalus)Status—The fin whale is listed as endangered under the ESA, and the California/Oregon/WashingtonStock is, therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. Fin whales have a worldwidedistribution with two distinct stocks recognized in the North Pacific: the East China Sea Stock and “therest of the North Pacific Stock” (Donovan, 1991). Currently, there are considered to be three stocks in theNorth Pacific for management purposes: an Alaska Stock, a Hawaii Stock, and aCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock (Barlow et al., 1997). Currently, the best estimate for theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is 3,279 (CV = 0.31), based on ship-based surveys (Carretta et al.,2005).Distribution—The fin whale is found in continental shelf and oceanic waters (Gregr and Trites, 2001;Reeves et al., 2002). Globally, it tends to be aggregated in locations where populations of prey are mostplentiful, irrespective of water depth, although those locations may shift seasonally or annually (Payne etal., 1986, 1990; Kenney et al., 1997; Notarbartolo-di-Sciara et al., 2003). Fin whales in the North Pacificspend the summer feeding along the cold eastern boundary currents (Perry et al., 1999).The North Pacific population summers from the Chukchi Sea to California, and winters from Californiasouthward (Gambell, 1985). Aggregations of fin whales are found year-round off southern and centralCalifornia (Dohl et al., 1983; Forney et al., 1995; Barlow, 1997). In the NMFS, 1998–1999 surveys inSCIRC, they were sighted most frequently during warm-water months (Carretta et al., 2000). The finwhale was the second most commonly-encountered baleen whale (after gray whales) during thosesurveys; there were 21 sightings, with most sightings on the western side of San Clemente Island. Finwhales can be found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year (Barlow, 1997).Fin whales typically dive for 5 to 15 min, separated by sequences of 4 to 5 blows at 10 to 20 sec intervals(CETAP, 1982; Stone et al., 1992; Lafortuna et al., 2003). Kopelman and Sadove (1995) foundsignificant differences in blow intervals, dive times, and blows per hour between surface feeding and nonsurface-feedingfin whales. Croll et al. (2001) determined that fin whales dived to 97.9 m (standarddeviation [S.D.] = ± 32.59 m) with a duration of 6.3 min (S.D. = ± 1.53 min) when foraging and to 59.3 m(S.D. = ± 29.67 m) with a duration of 4.2 min (S.D. = ± 1.67 min) when not foraging. Fin whale divesexceeding 150 m and coinciding with the diel migration of krill were reported by Panigada et al. (1999).Acoustics—Fin and blue whales produce calls with the lowest frequency and highest source levels of allcetaceans. Infrasonic, pattern sounds have been documented for fin whales (Watkins et al., 1987; Clarkand Fristrup, 1997; McDonald and Fox, 1999). Fin whales produce a variety of sounds with a frequencyrange up to 750 Hz. The long, patterned 15 to 30 Hz vocal sequence is most typically recorded; onlymales are known to produce these (Croll et al., 2002). The most typical fin whale sound is a 20 Hzinfrasonic pulse (actually an FM sweep from about 23 to 18 Hz) with durations of about 1 sec and canreach source levels of 184 to 186 dB re 1 μPa-m (maximum up to 200) (Richardson et al., 1995; Charif etal., 2002). Croll et al. (2002) recently suggested that these long, patterned vocalizations might function asmale breeding displays, much like those that male humpback whales sing. The source depth, or depth ofcalling fin whales, has been reported to be about 50 m (Watkins et al., 1987). While no data on hearingability for this species are available, Ketten (1997) hypothesized that mysticetes have acute infrasonichearing.February 2007 3-34

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Gray Whale (Eschrichtius robustus)Status—The eastern Pacific gray whale stock is not listed under the ESA, nor is it considered strategicunder the MMPA. It was removed from the list of threatened and endangered species in 1994 because ofincreases in population. The stock was believed to consist of 24,477 (CV=0.10) individuals in 2002(Carretta et al., 2005). This estimate is similar to previous estimates in 1997–1998 (26,635; CV=0.101;Hobbs and Rugh [1999]), 1993–1994 (23,109; CV=0.054; Laake et al. [1994]) and 1995–1996 (22,263;CV=0.093; Hobbs et al. [1996]).Distribution—The gray whale makes a well-defined seasonal north-south migration (Fig. 10). Most ofthe population summers in the shallow waters of the northern Bering Sea, the Chukchi Sea, and thewestern Beaufort Sea (Rice and Wolman, 1971), whereas some individuals also summer along the Pacificcoast from Vancouver Island to central California (Rice and Wolman 1971; Darling 1984; Nerini 1984).In October and November, the whales begin to migrate southeast through Unimak Pass and follow theshoreline south to breeding grounds on the west coast of Baja California and the southeastern Gulf ofCalifornia (Braham, 1984; Rugh, 1984). The average gray whale migrates 7,500–10,000 km at a rate of147 km/d (Rugh et al., 2001; Jones and Swartz, 2002). Although some calves are born along the coast ofCalifornia, most are born in the shallow, protected waters on the Pacific coast of Baja California fromMorro de Santo Domingo (28°N) south to Isla Creciente (24°N) (Urban et al., 2003). The main calvingsites are Laguna Guerrero Negro, Laguna Ojo de Liebre, Laguna San Ignacio, and Estero Soledad (Rice etal., 1981).Almost all of the population passes through the SOCAL Range Complex during both the northward andthe southward migration. Gray whales are common there only during cold-water months; none weresighted in the warm season (May–October) in the 1998–1999 NMFS surveys of the SCIRC (Carretta etal., 2000). Southbound and northbound migrations through the SOCAL Range Complex occur, for themost part, at predictable times. The southbound migration begins in the third week of December, peaks inJanuary, and extends through February (Gilmore, 1960; Leatherwood, 1974). The northbound migrationgenerally begins in mid-February, peaks in March, and lasts at least through May. Gray whales do notspend much time feeding in the Range Complex. Northbound mothers and calves travel more slowly thanother whales, and tend to be seen later in the season. Gray whales are typically absent from August toNovember (Rice et al., 1981), although there have been a few summer sightings in southern Californiawaters (Patten and Samaras, 1977). The nearshore route follows the shoreline between Point Conceptionand Point Vicente but includes a more direct line from Santa Barbara to Ventura and across Santa MonicaBay. Around Point Vicente or Point Fermin, some whales veer south towards Santa Catalina Island andreturn to the nearshore route near Newport Beach. Others join the inshore route that includes the northernchain of the Channel Islands along Santa Cruz Island and the Anacapas and east along the Santa CruzBasin to Santa Barbara Island and the Osborn Bank. From here, gray whales migrate east directly toSanta Catalina Island and then to Point Loma or Punta Descanso, or southeast to San Clemente Island andon to the area near Punta Banda. A significant portion of the eastern North Pacific Stock passes by SanClemente Island and its associated offshore waters (Carretta et al., 2000). The offshore route follows theundersea ridge from Santa Rosa Island to the mainland shore of Baja California and includes San NicolasIsland and Tanner and Cortes banks (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993). Gray whales are not expected to be inthe SOCAL OPAREA from August through November (Rice et al., 1981).When foraging, gray whales typically dive to 50 to 60 m for 5 to 8 min. In the breeding lagoons, divesare usually less than 6 min (Jones and Swartz, 2002), although dives as long as 26 min have beenrecorded (Harvey and Mate 1984). When migrating, gray whales may remain submerged near the surfacefor 7 to 10 min and travel 500 m or more before resurfacing to breathe. The maximum known dive depth3-35 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3is 170 m (Jones and Swartz, 2002). Migrating gray whales sometimes exhibit a unique “snorkeling”behavior in which they surface cautiously, exposing only the area around the blow hole, exhale quietlywithout a visible blow, and sink silently beneath the surface (Jones and Swartz, 2002). A mean groupsize of 2.9 gray whales was reported for both coastal (16 groups) and non-coastal (15 groups) areas in theSCIRC (Carretta et al., 2000). The largest group reported was nine animals. The largest group reportedby U.S. Navy (1998) was 27 animals. There is no apparent difference in group sizes between day andnight (Donahue et al., 1995).Acoustics—Au (2000) reviewed the characteristics of gray whale vocalizations. Gray whales producebroadband signals ranging from 100 Hz to 4 kHz (and up to 12 kHz) (Dahlheim et al., 1984; Jones andSwartz, 2002). The most common sounds on the breeding and feeding grounds are knocks (Jones andSwartz, 2002), which are broadband pulses from about 100 Hz to 2 kHz and most energy at 327 to 825 Hz(Richardson et al., 1995). The source level for knocks is approximately 142 dB re 1 μPa-m (Cummings etal., 1968). During migration, individuals most often produce low-frequency moans (Crane and Lashkari,1996). The structure of the gray whale ear is evolved for low-frequency hearing (Ketten, 1992). Theability of gray whales to hear frequencies below 2 kHz has been demonstrated in playback studies(Cummings and Thompson, 1971; Dahlheim and Ljungblad, 1990; Moore and Clarke, 2002) and in theirresponsiveness to underwater noise associated with oil and gas activities (Malme et al., 1986; Moore andClarke, 2002). Gray whale responses to noise include changes in swimming speed and direction to moveaway from the sound source; abrupt behavioral changes from feeding to avoidance, with a resumption offeeding after exposure; changes in calling rates and call structure; and changes in surface behavior,usually from traveling to milling (e.g., Moore and Clarke, 2002).Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae)Status—The humpback whale is listed as endangered under the ESA, and the California/Mexico Stock is,therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. Humpback whales occur worldwide,migrating from tropical breeding areas to polar or sub-polar feeding areas (Jefferson et al., 1993). Themost recent estimate of population size for the California/Washington Stock is 943 (Carretta et al., 2005).Distribution—The California/Mexico Stock inhabits waters from Costa Rica (Steiger et al., 1991) tosouthern British Columbia (Calambokidis et al., 1993). This Stock is most abundant in coastal waters offCalifornia during spring and summer, and off Mexico during autumn and winter.Although humpback whales typically travel over deep, oceanic waters during migration, their feeding andbreeding habitats are mostly in shallow, coastal waters over continental shelves (Clapham and Mead,1999). Shallow banks or ledges with high sea-floor relief characterize feeding grounds (Payne et al.,1990; Hamazaki, 2002). North Pacific humpback whales are distributed primarily in four more-or-lessdistinct wintering areas: the Ryukyu and Ogasawara (Bonin) Islands (south of Japan), Hawai’i, theRevillagigedo Islands off Mexico, and along the coast of mainland Mexico (Calambokidis et al., 2001).During summer months, North Pacific humpback whales feed in a nearly continuous band from southernCalifornia to the Aleutian Islands, Kamchatka Peninsula, and the Bering and Chukchi seas (Calambokidiset al., 2001). Humpback whales are mainly found in the SOCAL OPAREA from December through Junebut may be in the area throughout the rest of the year (Calambokidis et al., 2001).Humpback whale diving behavior depends on the time of year (Clapham and Mead, 1999). In summer,most dives last less than 5 min; those exceeding 10 min are atypical. In winter (December throughMarch), dives average 10 to 15 min; dives of greater than 30 min have been recorded (Clapham andMead, 1999). Although humpback whales have been recorded to dive as deep as 500 m (Dietz et al.,2002), on the feeding grounds they spend the majority of their time in the upper 120 m of the waterFebruary 2007 3-36

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3column (Dolphin, 1987; Dietz et al., 2002). Humpback whales on the wintering grounds do dive deeply;Baird et al. (2000) recorded dives deeper than 100 m.Acoustics—Humpback whales are known to produce three classes of vocalizations: (1) “songs” in thelate fall, winter, and spring by solitary males; (2) sounds made within groups on the wintering (calving)grounds; and (3) social sounds made on the feeding grounds (Thomson and Richardson, 1995). The bestknowntypes of sounds produced by humpback whales are songs, which are thought to be breedingdisplays used only by adult males (Helweg et al., 1992). Singing is most common on breeding groundsduring the winter and spring months, but is occasionally heard outside breeding areas and out of season(Matilla et al., 1987; Clark and Clapham, 2004). There is geographical variation in humpback whalesong, with different populations singing different songs, and all members of a population using the samebasic song. However, the song evolves over the course of a breeding season, but remains nearlyunchanged from the end of one season to the start of the next (Payne et al., 1983). Social calls are from50 Hz to over 10 kHz, with the highest energy below 3 kHz (Silber, 1986).Female vocalizations appear to be simple; Simão and Moreira (2005) noted little complexity. The malesong, however, is complex and changes between seasons. Components of the song range from under 20Hz to 4 kHz and occasionally 8 kHz, with source levels of 144 to 174 dB re 1 μPa m, with a mean of 155dB re 1 μPa-m. Au et al. (2001) recorded high-frequency harmonics (out to 13.5 kHz) and source level(between 171 and 189 dB re 1 μPa-m) of humpback whale songs. Songs have also been recorded onfeeding grounds (Mattila et al., 1987; Clark and Clapham, 2004).The main energy lies between 0.2 and 3.0 kHz, with frequency peaks at 4.7 kHz. “Feeding” calls, unlikesong and social sounds, are highly stereotyped series of narrow-band trumpeting calls. They are 20 Hz to2 kHz, less than 1 sec in duration, and have source levels of 175 to 192 dB re 1 μPa-m. The fundamentalfrequency of feeding calls is approximately 500 Hz (D’Vincent et al., 1985).No tests on humpback whale hearing have been made. Houser et al. (2001) constructed a humpbackaudiogram using a mathematical model based on the internal structure of the ear. The predictedaudiogram indicates sensitivity to frequencies from 700 Hz to 10 kHz, with maximum relative sensitivitybetween 2 and 6 kHz.Minke Whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata)Status—The minke whale is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock and is not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. In theNortheast Pacific Ocean, minke whales range from the Chukchi Sea south to Baja California(Leatherwood et al., 1987). They occur year-round off California (Dohl et al., 1983; Barlow, 1995;Forney et al., 1995). The minke whales found in waters off California, Oregon, and Washington appearto be resident in that area, and to have home ranges, whereas those farther north are migratory. Thepopulation abundance for offshore California, Oregon, and Washington as a whole was estimated to be585 (CV=0.73) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005).Distribution—The minke whale generally occupies waters over the continental shelf, including inshorebays and estuaries (Mitchell and Kozicki, 1975; Ivashin and Vitrogov, 1981; Murphy, 1995; Mignucci-Giannoni, 1998; Calambokidis et al., 2004). However, based on whaling catches and surveys worldwide,there is also a deep-ocean component to the minke whale’s distribution (Slijper et al., 1964; Horwood,1990; Mitchell, 1991; Mellinger et al., 2000; Roden and Mullin, 2000).Minke whale abundance in the Southern California Bight fluctuates dramatically through the year, withwarm-water months being the period of greatest abundance (Dohl et al., 1981). Because of the apparent3-37 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3fluctuations in abundance, Bonnell and Dailey (1993) believed that some minke whales migratednorthward through the Southern California Bight in spring and returned southward through the same areain autumn. Leatherwood et al. (1987) suggested that minke whales may remain in the area throughout theyear, and that the scarcity of sightings during autumn and winter may be attributable to behavioral andenvironmental considerations. The lack of sightings in autumn and winter may also be attributable tomovements into offshore areas where there has been less survey effort. The surveys conducted in theSCIRC in 1998–1999 recorded minke whales during the cold-water but not the warm-water period(Carretta et al., 2000), whereas the densities calculated for the Point Mugu EIS/OEIS showed nopreference for cold or warm water (U.S. Navy, 1998).The summer distribution of minke whales was described by Bonnell and Dailey (1993). They are seencommonly along the shelves associated with the southern coasts of the Channel Islands and offshorefeatures south of there. Ship-based surveys during the summers of 1991 and 1993 seem to confirm theimportance of the Southern California Bight for minke whales. Three of the eight sightings made duringthose two extensive surveys were in or adjacent to the Southern California Bight despite relatively littlesurvey effort in that area.Few minke whales are present in the nearshore and continental slope parts of the Southern CaliforniaBight during winter, but they appear to be present in offshore waters. The few sightings in wintersometimes include newborn or small calves, suggesting that the Southern California Bight is part of, or atleast near, the calving grounds of this Stock (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993). In the Southern California,during both the warm-water and cold-water periods, the minke whale appears to be concentrated nearshore and over the continental shelf and slope. Data from acoustic surveys indicate that minke whalesalso occur further offshore on the westernmost fringe of the SOCAL Range Complex (Barlow et al.,2004). Minke whales are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year but in higher numbers Junethrough December (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993).Acoustics—Recordings in the presence of minke whales have included both high-and low-frequencysounds (Beamish and Mitchell, 1973; Winn and Perkins, 1976; Mellinger et al., 2000). Mellinger et al.(2000) described two basic forms of pulse trains that were attributed to minke whales: a “speed up” pulsetrain with energy in the 200 to 400 Hz band, with individual pulses lasting 40 to 60 msec, and a lesscommon“slow-down” pulse train characterized by a decelerating series of pulses with energy in the 250to 350 Hz band. Recorded vocalizations from minke whales have dominant frequencies of 60 Hz togreater than 12,000 Hz, depending on vocalization type (Richardson et al., 1995). Recorded sourcelevels, depending on vocalization type, range from 151 to 175 dB re 1 μPa-m (Ketten, 1998). Gedamke etal. (2001) recorded a complex and stereotyped sound sequence (“star-wars vocalization”) in the SouthernHemisphere that spanned a frequency range of 50 Hz to 9.4 kHz. Broadband source levels between 150and 165 dB re 1 μPa-m were calculated. “Boings” recorded in the North Pacific have many strikingsimilarities to the star-wars vocalization, in both structure and acoustic behavior. “Boings”, recentlyconfirmed to be produced by minke whales and suggested to be a breeding call, consist of a brief pulse at1.3 kHz, followed by an amplitude-modulated call with greatest energy at 1.4 kHz, with slight frequencymodulation over a duration of 2.5 sec (Anonymous, 2002; Rankin and Barlow, 2003). While no data onhearing ability for this species are available, Ketten (1997) hypothesized that mysticetes have acuteinfrasonic hearing.February 2007 3-38

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3North Pacific Right Whale (Eubalaena japonica 2 )Status—The North Pacific right whale is listed as endangered under the ESA, and the North PacificStock is, therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. It may be the most endangered ofthe large whale species (Perry et al., 1999). The stock was severely depleted by commercial whaling,from an initial population of more than 11,000 (NMFS, 1991) to at most 100–200 (Wada, 1973; Brahamand Rice, 1984). No reliable population estimate presently exists for this species (Angliss and Outlaw,2005); the population in the eastern North Pacific Ocean is considered to be very small, perhaps only inthe tens of animals (NMFS, 2002; Clapham et al., 2004), whereas in the western North Pacific Ocean, thepopulation may number at least in the low hundreds (Brownell et al., 2001; Clapham et al., 2004). Onlyone North Pacific right whale calf has been seen in the eastern North Pacific Ocean (in the southeasternBering Sea) since 1980 (Balance, 2002). There is no designated critical habitat for the North Pacific rightwhale in the SOCAL OPAREA, critical habitat has only been designated in the Gulf of Alaska, BeringSea and areas of the Atlantic Ocean (NMFS, 2002 and 2006).Distribution—The historic range of the North Pacific right whale included the entire North Pacific northof 35ºN, and included occasional sightings as far south as 20ºN. Recent sightings have been near shore incontinental shelf waters, but it must be noted that there have been more opportunities for sightings innearshore than in offshore waters.Current distribution patterns and migration routes of North Pacific right whales are not known (Scarff,1986; NMFS, 2002), nor is the extent to which they engage in north-south migrations in the eastern NorthPacific Ocean (Scarff, 1986). The location of winter calving grounds for the eastern North Pacificpopulation is unknown (Scarff, 1986; NMFS, 2002; Clapham et al., 2004). In summer, the eastern BeringSea is used for foraging (NMFS, 2002). Right whales have been observed each summer since 1996 in theeastern Bering Sea in roughly the same location (Goddard and Rugh, 1998; Moore et al., 2000; Tynan etal., 2001).Despite many miles of systematic aerial and ship-based surveys for marine mammals off the coasts ofOregon/Washington/California over the years, only seven documented sightings of right whales weremade from 1990 to 2000 (Waite et al., 2003). Most of the sightings have been of single animals, andmost occurred in winter or early spring (March–May) and very close to shore (Scarff, 1991). It is highlyunlikely for this species to be present in the SOCAL OPAREA, generally it occurs 35 degrees north.North Pacific right whales probably feed almost exclusively on calanoid copepods (Canalus marshallae),a type of zooplankton. High concentrations of copepods have been recorded in zooplankton samplescollected in 1997 and 1999 near right whales in the North Pacific. When feeding, a right whale skimsprey from the water (Pivorunas, 1979). Feeding can occur throughout the water column (Watkins andSchevill, 1976, 1979; Goodyear, 1993; Winn et al., 1995).Dives of 5 to 15 min or even longer have been reported (Winn et al., 1995; Mate et al., 1997;Baumgartner and Mate, 2003). Baumgartner and Mate (2003) found that the average depth of a NorthAtlantic right whale dive was strongly correlated with both the average depth of peak copepod abundance2 On December 27, 2006, NMFS completed a status review of the northern right whale concluding that right whalesin the northern hemisphere exist as two species: North Pacific right whale (Eubalaena japonica) and North Atlanticright whale (E. glacialis). This document uses E. japonica throughout.3-39 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3and the average depth of the bottom mixed layer’s upper surface. North Atlantic right whale feedingdives are characterized by a rapid descent from the surface to a particular depth between 80 and 175 m,remarkable fidelity to that depth for 5 to 14 min and then rapid ascent back to the surface (Baumgartnerand Mate, 2003). Longer surface intervals have been observed for reproductively active females and theircalves (Baumgartner and Mate, 2003).Acoustics—North Pacific right whale calls are classified into five categories: (1) up; (2) down-up; (3)down; (4) constant; and (5) unclassified (McDonald and Moore, 2002). The ‘up’ call is the predominanttype (McDonald and Moore, 2002; Mellinger et al., 2004). Typically, the ‘up’ call is a signal sweepingfrom about 90 to 150 Hz in 0.7 sec (McDonald and Moore, 2002; Wiggins et al., 2004). Right whalescommonly produce calls in a series of 10 to 15 calls lasting 5 to 10 min, followed by silence lasting anhour or more; some individuals do not call for periods of at least four hours (McDonald and Moore 2002).This calling pattern is similar to the ‘moan cluster’ reported for North Atlantic right whales by Matthewset al. (2001). Vocalization rates of North Atlantic right whales are also highly variable, and individualshave been known to remain silent for hours (Gillespie and Leaper, 2001).Frequencies of these vocalizations are between 50 and 500 Hz (Matthews et al., 2001; Laurinolli et al.,2003); typical sounds are in the 300 to 600 Hz range with up- and down-sweeping modulations(Vanderlaan et al., 2003). Vanderlaan et al. (2003) found that lower (900 Hz)frequency sounds are relatively rare. Source levels have been estimated only for pulsive calls of NorthAtlantic right whales, which are 172 to 187 decibels (dB), with a reference pressure of one micropascal(μP) at one meter (dB re 1 μPa-m) (Richardson et al., 1995).Morphometric analyses of the inner ear of right whales resulted in an estimated hearing frequency rangeof approximately 10 Hz to 22 kHz, based on established marine mammal models (Parks et al., 2004).Nowacek et al. (2003) investigated the development of an alarm signal that could be used to alert NorthAtlantic right whales to the presence of vessels with the specific goal of reducing the potential for shipstrike. The sound source investigated by Nowacek incorporated three, 2-minute, frequency-modulatedsignals (500 Hz to 4.5 kHz) played sequentially three times for a total of 18 minutes. Nowacek noted thatthe strong response of the whales to the alert signal demonstrated that the "experimental design wascapable of eliciting a strong response with an appropriate stimulus" (Nowacek et al., 2003). In addition,as soon as the signal stopped, North Atlantic right whales immediately returned to feeding. Although thisresearch has often been cited as an indication that the acoustic effects threshold for mid-frequency activesonar should be lower, it is important to note that it is unknown which part, if any, 3.5 kHz signals playsin the overall reaction. In addition, the signal investigated by Nowacek is not similar to the narrowbandwidth, short pulse mid-frequency active sonar source.Sei Whale (Balaenoptera borealis)Status—The sei whale is listed as endangered under the ESA, and the Eastern North Pacific Stock is,therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. The current estimate for sei whales inCalifornia, Oregon, and Washington is 35 (CV=0.61) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005).Distribution—Sei whales are most often found in deep, oceanic waters of the cool temperate zone. Theyappear to prefer regions of steep bathymetric relief, such as the continental shelf break, canyons, or basinssituated between banks and ledges (Kenney and Winn, 1987; Schilling et al., 1992; Gregr and Trites,2001; Best and Lockyer, 2002). On feeding grounds, the distribution is largely associated with oceanicfrontal systems (Horwood, 1987). In the North Pacific, sei whales are found feeding particularly alongthe cold eastern currents (Perry et al., 1999).February 2007 3-40

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Historically, sei whales occurred in the California Current off central California (37ºN–39ºN), and theymay have ranged as far south as the area west of the Channel Islands (32º47’N) (Rice, 1977). A few earlysightings were made in May and June, but they were encountered there primarily during July–September,and had left California waters by mid-October.Three sightings were made north of the SOCAL Range Complex in the PMSR during the warm-watermonths (June–September); there were two sightings north of Point Conception and one sighting south ofthe western tip of Santa Cruz Island (U.S. Navy, 1998). Recently, only one confirmed sighting of seiwhales and five possible sightings (identified as either sei or Bryde’s whales) were made in Californiawaters during extensive ship and aerial surveys during 1991–1993 (Mangels and Gerrodette, 1994;Barlow, 1995; Forney et al., 1995). The confirmed sighting was more than 200 nm (370 km) off northernCalifornia. No sei whales were sighted during the recent NMFS/SWFSC surveys in 1998–1999 (Carrettaet al., 2000). Sei whales are found in the SOCAL OPAREA from May through October (U.S. Navy,1998).Acoustics—Sei whale vocalizations have been recorded only on a few occasions. They consist of pairedsequences (0.5 to 0.8 sec, separated by 0.4 to 1.0 sec) of 7 to 20 short (4 milliseconds [msec]) frequencymodulated sweeps between 1.5 and 3.5 kHz; source level is not known (Richardson et al., 1995). Whileno data on hearing ability for this species are available, Ketten (1997) hypothesized that mysticetes haveacute infrasonic hearing.Historically, sei whales occurred in the California Current off central California (37ºN–39ºN), and theymay have ranged as far south as the area west of the Channel Islands (32º47’N) (Rice, 1977). A few earlysightings were made in May and June, but they were encountered there primarily during July–September,and had left California waters by mid-October.3.3.2.6.2 Odontocete Cetaceans (Dolphins and Tooth Whales)Baird’s Beaked Whale (Berardius bairdii)Status—Baird’s beaked whale is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is not considered strategic under the MMPA. The minimumpopulation estimate for the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is 152 (CV=0.51) individuals (Carrettaet al., 2005).Distribution—Baird’s beaked whales appear to occur mainly in deep waters over the continental slope,oceanic seamounts, and areas with submarine escarpments (Ohsumi, 1983; Kasuya and Ohsumi, 1984;Willis and Baird, 1998; Kasuya, 2002). They may be seen close to shore where deep water approachesthe coast (Jefferson et al., 1993) and in shallow waters in the central Okhotsk Sea (Kasuya, 2002).Baird’s beaked whales are infrequently encountered along the continental slope and throughout deepwaters of the eastern North Pacific (Forney et al., 1994; Barlow et al., 1997). No sightings were madeduring the 1998–1999 NMFS surveys of the SCIRC (Carretta et al., 2000). All Baird’s beaked whalesfound in the SOCAL Range Complex are expected to be found in non-territorial waters. There are fewsightings of Baird’s beaked whales in the SOCAL OPAREA, sightings occurred in both the cold andwarm seasons (U.S. Navy, 1998).Acoustics—MacLeod (1999) suggested that beaked whales use frequencies of between 300 Hz and 129kHz for echolocation, and between 2 and 10 kHz, and possibly up to 16 kHz, for social communication.Both whistles and clicks have been recorded from Baird’s beaked whales in the eastern North PacificOcean (Dawson et al., 1998). Whistles had fundamental frequencies between 4 and 8 kHz, with 2 to 33-41 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3strong harmonics within the recording bandwidth (Dawson et al., 1998). Pulsed sounds (clicks) had adominant frequency around 23 kHz, with a second frequency peak around 42 kHz (Dawson et al., 1998).The clicks were most often emitted in irregular series of very few clicks; this acoustic behavior appearsunlike that of many species that do echolocate (Dawson et al., 1998).There is no direct information available on the exact hearing abilities of beaked whales (MacLeod, 1999).Beaked whale ears are predominantly adapted to hear ultrasonic frequencies (MacLeod, 1999). Based onthe anatomy of the ears of beaked whales, these species may be more sensitive than other cetaceans tolow frequency sounds; however, as noted earlier, there is no direct evidence to support this idea(MacLeod, 1999).Bottlenose Dolphin, Coastal Stock (Tursiops truncatus)Status—The bottlenose dolphin is not listed as endangered under the ESA. In southern California, twopopulations occur: a coastal population within 0.5 nm (0.9 km) of shore and a larger offshore population(Hansen 1990). There is a minimum population estimate of 186 (CV=0.12) for the California CoastalStock of the bottlenose dolphin, and 3,053 (CV=0.66) for the California/Oregon/Washington OffshoreStock (Carretta et al., 2005). Neither stock is considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA.Distribution—The coastal population of bottlenose dolphins inhabits waters from Point Loma to SanPedro (Dohl et al., 1981; Hansen, 1990). Occasionally, during warm-water incursions such as during the1982–1983 El Niño event, their range extends as far north as Monterey Bay (Wells et al., 1990).Bottlenose dolphins in the Southern California Bight appear to be highly mobile within a relativelynarrow coastal zone (Defran et al., 1999), and exhibit no seasonal site fidelity to the region (Defran andWeller, 1999). Sightings of coastal bottlenose dolphins are common along the coast east of the SCIRC(Barlow et al., 1997). Bottlenose dolphins are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year(Defran and Weller, 1999).Acoustics—Sounds emitted by bottlenose dolphins have been classified into two broad categories: pulsedsounds (including clicks and burst-pulses) and narrow-band continuous sounds (whistles), which usuallyare FM. Clicks and whistles have a dominant frequency range of 110 to 130 kHz and a source level of218 to 228 dB re 1 Pa-m (Au 1993) and 3.5 to 14.5 kHz and 125 to 173 dB re 1 Pa-m, respectively(Ketten, 1998). Generally, whistles range in frequency from 0.8 to 24 kHz (Thomson and Richardson,1995).The bottlenose dolphin has a functional high-frequency hearing limit of 160 kHz (Au, 1993) and can hearsounds at frequencies as low as 40 to 125 Hz (Turl, 1993). Inner ear anatomy of this species has beendescribed (Ketten, 1992). Electrophysiological experiments suggest that the bottlenose dolphin brain hasa dual analysis system: one specialized for ultrasonic clicks and the other for lower-frequency sounds,such as whistles (Ridgway, 2000). The audiogram of the bottlenose dolphin shows that the lowestthresholds occurred near 50 kHz at a level around 45 dB re 1 Pa-m (Nachtigall et al., 2000). Below themaximum sensitivity, thresholds increased continuously up to a level of 137 dB at 75 Hz. Above 50 kHz,thresholds increased slowly up to a level of 55 dB at 100 kHz, then increased rapidly above this to about135 dB at 150 kHz. Scientists have reported a range of best sensitivity between 25 and 70 kHz, withpeaks in sensitivity occurring at 25 and 50 kHz at levels of 47 and 46 dB re 1 Pa-m (Nachtigall et al.,2000). Richardson (1995) noted that the differences between the reported audiograms for these twostudies might be attributable in part due to conducting the experiments in tanks. A neurophysiologicalmethod was used to determine the high-frequency audiograms (5 to 200 kHz) of five bottlenose dolphins(Richardson, 1995).February 2007 3-42

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Temporary threshold shifts (TTS) in hearing have been experimentally induced in captive bottlenosedolphins (Ridgway et al., 1997; Schlundt et al., 2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003). Ridgway et al. (1997)observed changes in behavior at the following minimum levels for 1 sec tones: 186 dB at 3 kHz, 181 dBat 20 kHz, and 178 dB at 75 kHz (all re 1 Pa-m). TTS levels were 194 to 201 dB at 3 kHz, 193 to 196dB at 20 kHz, and 192 to 194 dB at 75 kHz (all re 1 Pa-m). Schlundt et al. (2000) exposed bottlenosedolphins to intense tones (0.4, 3, 10, 20, and 75 kHz); the animals demonstrated altered behavior at sourcelevels of 178 to 193 dB re 1 Pa-m, with TTS after exposures generally between 192 and 201 dB re 1Pa-m (though one dolphin exhibited TTS after exposure at 182 dB re 1 Pa-m). Nachtigall et al. (2003)determined threshold for a 7.5 kHz pure tone stimulus. No shifts were observed at 165 or 171 dB re 1Pa-m, but when the noise level reached 179 dB re 1 Pa-m, the animal showed the first sign of TTS.Recovery apparently occurred rapidly, with full recovery apparently within 45 min following noiseexposure. TTS measured between 8 and 16 kHz (negligible or absent at higher frequencies) after 30 minof noise exposure (4 to 11 kHz) at 160 dB re 1 Pa-m (Nachtigall et al., 2004).Bottlenose Dolphin, Offshore Stock (Tursiops truncatus)Status—Bottlenose dolphins are not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is not considered to be depleted or strategic under the MMPA. Theminimum population estimate for the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is 5,065 (CV=0.66)individuals (Carretta et al., 2005).Distribution—Offshore bottlenose dolphins are thought to have a continuous distribution in California(Mangels and Gerrodette, 1994). They have been found in the Southern California Bight and in waters asfar north as ~41ºN (Barlow et al., 1997). During most of the year, a relatively large population ofbottlenose dolphins occurs in offshore waters of the Southern California Bight centered around SantaCatalina Island and, to a lesser degree, the eastern coast of San Clemente Island. The population maydisperse more broadly in summer than in winter (Dohl et al., 1981). Offshore bottlenose dolphins arefound in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year (Carretta et al., 2005).Acoustics—The acoustic abilities of offshore bottlenose dolphins is assume to be similar to the coastalpopulation of bottlenose dolphins described in the previous section on the coastal stock of bottlenosedolphins.Cuvier’s Beaked Whale (Ziphius cavirostris)Status—The Cuvier’s beaked whale is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is not considered to be strategic under the MMPA. The minimumpopulation estimate for the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is 1,121 (CV=0.68) individuals (Carrettaet al., 2005).Distribution—Little is known about the habitat preferences of any beaked whale. Based on currentknowledge, beaked whales normally inhabit deep ocean waters (>2,000 m) or continental slopes (200–2,000 m), and only rarely stray over the continental shelf (Pitman, 2002). Cuvier’s beaked whalegenerally is sighted in waters >200 m deep, and is frequently recorded at depths >1,000 m (Gannier,2000; MacLeod et al., 2004). They are commonly sighted around seamounts, escarpments, and canyons.MacLeod et al. (2004) reported that Cuvier’s beaked whales occur in deeper waters than Blainville’sbeaked whales in the Bahamas.The distribution and abundance of beaked whales in the SOCAL Range Complex are not well knownbecause they are difficult to identify; many of the beaked whales that have been sighted have not beenidentified to species. Based on those that were identified, Cuvier’s beaked whale appears to be the most3-43 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3abundant beaked whale in the area, representing almost 80% of the identified beaked whale sightings(Barlow and Gerrodette, 1996). It was sighted only during the cold-water season. Cuvier’s beakedwhales are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year.Acoustics—Little is known of the acoustic abilities of the Curvier’s beaked whale. MacLeod (1999)suggested that beaked whales in general use frequencies of between 300 Hz and 129 kHz forecholocation, and between 2 and 10 kHz, and possibly up to 16 kHz, for social communication.Vocalizations recorded from two juvenile Hubbs’ beaked whales consisted of low and high frequencyclick trains ranging in frequency from 300 Hz to 2000 Hz and from 300 Hz to 80 kHz and whistles with afrequency range of 2.6 to 10.7 kHz and duration of 156 to 450 msec (Lynn and Reiss, 1992; Marten,2000).Dall’s Porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli)Status—Dall’s porpoise is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theWashington/Oregon/California Stock is not considered depleted or strategic. No specific data areavailable regarding trends in population size in California or adjacent waters. The best estimate of stocksize for the Washington/Oregon/California Stock is 75,915 (CV=0.33, Carretta et al., 2005).Distribution—Dall’s porpoise’s range in the eastern North Pacific extends from Alaska south to BajaCalifornia (Morejohn, 1979). It is probably the most abundant small cetacean in the North Pacific Ocean.Its abundance changes seasonally, probably in relation to water temperature. It is considered to be a coldwaterspecies, and is rarely seen in areas where water temperatures exceed 17°C (Leatherwood et al.,1982). Its distribution shifts southward and nearshore in autumn, especially near the northern ChannelIslands, and northward and offshore in late spring (Dohl et al., 1981; Leatherwood et al., 1987; Barlow etal., 1997; Forney and Barlow, 1998). Dall’s porpoises are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout theyear (Forney and Barlow, 1998).Although feeding aggregations of up to 200 have been sighted (Leatherwood et al., 1987), recentsightings in and near the Southern California Bight have been of groups averaging 3.1–3.4 (Barlow, 1995;Forney et al., 1995; Carretta et al., 2000). During the 1998–1999 NMFS surveys of the SCIRC, the meansize of 8 groups was 3.4 (Carretta et al., 2000).Acoustics—Only short duration pulsed sounds have been recorded for Dall’s porpoise (Houck andJefferson, 1999); this species apparently does not whistle often (Richardson et al., 1995). Dall’sporpoises produce short-duration (50 to 1,500 μs), high-frequency, narrow band clicks, with peakenergies between 120 and 160 kHz (Jefferson, 1988). There are no published data on hearing ability ofthis species.Dwarf Sperm Whales (Kogia sima)Status—These two species of small whales are distributed widely in the world's oceans, but they arepoorly known (Caldwell and Caldwell, 1989). Their small size, non-gregarious nature, and crypticbehavior make pygmy whales (Kogia breviceps) and dwarf sperm whales difficult to observe. The twospecies are also difficult to distinguish when sighted at sea, and are often jointly categorized as Kogia spp.Neither species of Kogia is listed as endangered under the ESA or considered depleted under the MMPA.The minimum population estimate for the California/Oregon/Washington Stock of the pygmy spermwhale is 119 (CV=0.67), and there is no information available to estimate the population size of the dwarfsperm whale off the Pacific coast of the U.S (Carretta et al., 2005).February 2007 3-44

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Distribution—Dwarf and pygmy sperm whales are sighted primarily along the continental shelf edge andover deeper waters off the shelf (Hansen et al., 1994; Davis et al., 1998). However, along the U.S. westcoast, sightings of the whales have been rare, although that is likely a reflection of their pelagicdistribution and small size rather than their true abundance (Carretta et al., 2002). Several studies havesuggested that pygmy sperm whales live mostly beyond the continental shelf edge, whereas dwarf spermwhales tend to occur closer to shore, often over the continental shelf (Rice, 1998; Wang et al., 2002;MacLeod et al., 2004). Barros et al. (1998), on the other hand, suggested that dwarf sperm whales mightbe more pelagic and dive deeper than pygmy sperm whales.Another suggestion is that the pygmy sperm whale is more temperate, and the dwarf sperm whale moretropical, based at least partially on live sightings at sea from a large database from the eastern tropicalPacific Ocean (Wade and Gerrodette, 1993). There, the pygmy sperm whale was not seen in truly tropicalwaters south of the southern tip of Baja California, but the dwarf sperm whale was common in thosewaters. This idea is also supported by the distribution of strandings in South American waters (Muñioz-Hincapié et al., 1998). Also, in the western tropical Indian Ocean, the dwarf sperm whale was much morecommon than the pygmy sperm whale, which is consistent with this hypothesis (Balance and Pitman,1998). There have been few sightings of Dwarf sperm whales in the SOCAL OPAREA; therefore,seasonal occurrence can not be determined (Wade and Gerrodette, 1993).Acoustics—There is no information available on dwarf sperm whale vocalizations or hearing capabilities.The pygmy sperm whale clicks range from 60 to 200 kHz, with a dominant frequency of 120 kHz(Thomson and Richardson, 1995). An auditory brainstem response study indicates that pygmy spermwhales have their best hearing between 90 and 150 kHz (Ridgway and Carder, 2001).False Killer Whale (Pseudorca crassidens)Status—The false killer whale is not listed under the ESA, and the individuals found off California arenot part of a strategic stock. There are no abundance estimates available for this species in the NOAAStock Assessment Report for this area of the Pacific.Distribution—False killer whales occur predominantly in tropical to subtropical pelagic waters(Leatherwood et al., 1987; Bonnell and Dailey, 1993). In the eastern North Pacific Ocean, the species hasbeen reported rarely north of Baja California (Leatherwood et al., 1982, 1987; Mangels and Gerrodette,1994). There are four stranding records from San Nicolas Island (Stager and Reeder, 1951), and a reportof a probable capture of this species off the west end of Santa Catalina Island (Norris and Prescott, 1961).The only sightings in the 5 Ferguson and Barlow (2001) survey blocks that contain parts of the SOCALRange Complex were 2 sightings in Block 72, which includes the southeast corner of the SOCAL RangeComplex. There have been few sightings of false killer whales in the SOCAL OPAREA; therefore,seasonal occurrence can not be determined (Ferguson and Barlow, 2001).Acoustics—The dominant frequencies of false killer whale whistles are 4 to 9.5 kHz; those of their clicksare 25 to 30 kHz and 95 to 130 kHz (Thomas et al., 1990; Richardson et al., 1995). The source level is220 to 228 dB re 1 μPa-m (Ketten, 1998). Best hearing sensitivity measured for a false killer whale wasaround 16 to 64 kHz (Thomas et al., 1988, 1990).Harbor Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena)Status—The harbor porpoise from the Morro Bay Stock (from just south of Monterey Bay to PointConception) is not listed as endangered under the ESA and is not considered depleted or strategic.Previous SARs listed the harbor porpoise as part of a larger California/Oregon/Washington Stock butgenetic studies have divided that stock into six separate stocks. The Morro Bay Stock of harbor porpoises3-45 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3has been increasing significantly since 1988 No specific data are available regarding trends in populationsize in California or adjacent waters. The best estimate of stock size for the Morro Bay Stock is 1,656(CV=0.39, Carretta et al., 2006).Distribution—Harbor porpoises are a common near shore (remaining within the 200 m isobaths)cetacean along the central California coast but rarely move south of Point Conception (Dohl et al., 1983;Oliver and Jackson, 1987). During surveys conducted between 1975 and 1999 no sightings were made inthe SCIRC. There have been few sightings of harbor porpoises south of Point Conception, therefore,seasonal occurrence in the SOCAL OPAREA can not be determined.Harbor porpoises feed on a variety of small, schooling clupeoid (herring-like) and gadid (cod-like) fishesup to 40 cm in length, and usually less than 30 cm (Read, 1999). Harbor porpoises make brief dives,generally lasting less than 5 min (Westgate et al., 1995). Tagged harbor porpoise individuals spend 3 to7% of their time at the surface and 33 to 60% in the upper 2 m (Westgate et al., 1995; Read and Westgate,1997). Average dive depths range from 14 to 41 m with a maximum dive of 226 m, and average divedurations range from 44 to 103 sec (Westgate et al., 1995). Westgate and Read (1998) noted that diverecords of tagged porpoises did not reflect the vertical migration of their prey; porpoises made deep divesduring both day and night.Acoustic—Harbor porpoise vocalizations include clicks and pulses (Ketten, 1998), as well as whistle-likesignals (Verboom and Kastelein, 1995). The dominant frequency range is 110 to 150 kHz, with sourcelevels of 135 to 177 dB re 1 μPa-m (Ketten, 1998). Echolocation signals include one or two lowfrequencycomponents in the 1.4 to 2.5 kHz range (Verboom and Kastelein, 1995). A behavioralaudiogram of a harbor porpoise indicated the range of best sensitivity is 8 to 32 kHz at levels between 45and 50 dB re 1 μPa-m (Andersen, 1970); however, auditory-evoked potential studies showed a muchhigher frequency of approximately 125 to 130 kHz (Bibikov, 1992). The auditory-evoked potentialmethod suggests that the harbor porpoise actually has two frequency ranges of best sensitivity. Morerecent psycho-acoustic studies found the range of best hearing to be 16 to 140 kHz, with a reducedsensitivity around 64 kHz (Kastelein et al., 2002). Maximum sensitivity occurs between 100 and 140 kHz(Kastelein et al., 2002).Killer Whale, Eastern North Pacific Offshore Stock (Orcinus orca)Status—Killer whales are segregated socially, genetically, and ecologically into three distinct groups:residents, transients, and offshore animals. Offshore whales do not appear to mix with the other types ofkiller whales (Black et al., 1997; Dahlheim et al., 1997). Most of the killer whales off California are fromtransient and offshore groups. The population estimate for all killer whales along the coasts of California,Oregon and Washington is 1,340 (CV=0.31; Carretta et al., 2006).Distribution—Killer whales from the Eastern North Pacific Southern Offshore Stock, range fromWashington to the Southern California Bight and could occur in the PMRC. No killer whales weresighted during the 1998–1999 NMFS surveys of the SCIRC (Carretta et al., 2000).The maximum depth recorded for free-ranging killer whales diving off British Columbia is 264 m (Bairdet al., 2005). On average, however, for seven tagged individuals, less than 1% of all dives examined wereto depths greater than 30 m (Baird et al., 2003). A trained killer whale dove to a maximum of 260 m(Dahlheim and Heyning, 1999). The longest duration of a recorded dive from a radio-tagged killer whalewas 17 min (Dahlheim and Heyning, 1999). Killer whales are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughoutthe year (Black et al., 1997).February 2007 3-46

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Acoustics—The killer whale produces a wide variety of clicks and whistles, but most of its sounds arepulsed and at 1 to 6 kHz (Richardson et al., 1995). Source levels of echolocation signals range between195 and 224 dB re 1 Pa-m (Au et al., 2004). The source level of social vocalizations ranges between137 to 157 dB re 1 Pa-m (Veirs, 2004). Acoustic studies of resident killer whales in British Columbiahave found that there are dialects, in their highly stereotyped, repetitive discrete calls, which are groupspecificand shared by all group members (Ford, 2002). These dialects likely are used to maintain groupidentity and cohesion, and may serve as indicators of relatedness that help in the avoidance of inbreedingbetween closely related whales (Ford, 2002). Dialects also have been documented in killer whalesoccurring in northern Norway, and likely occur in other locales as well (Ford, 2002). The killer whale hasthe lowest frequency of maximum sensitivity and one of the lowest high frequency hearing limits knownamong toothed whales (Szymanski et al., 1999). The upper limit of hearing is 100 kHz for this species.The most sensitive frequency, in both behavioral and in auditory brainstem response audiograms, hasbeen determined to be 20 kHz (Szymanski et al., 1999).Killer Whale, Transient Stock (Orcinus orca)Status—The population estimate for the Eastern North Pacific Stock of transient killer whales is 346(Carretta et al., 2006) and along the coast of California 105 killer whales have been identified Forney etal., 2000).Distribution—The range of that stock in spring, summer, and fall includes the inland waterways of PugetSound, Strait of Juan de Fuca, and Southern Georgia Strait. Their occurrence in the coastal waters offOregon, Washington, Vancouver Island, and more recently off the coast of central California has beendocumented. Little is known about the winter movements and range of the Southern Resident Stock(Caretta et al., 2004). The killer whale is not listed under the ESA, but the Southern Resident Stock isconsidered depleted and a strategic stock. It has an estimated minimum population size of 83 (Carretta etal., 2005). Killer whales are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year (Black et al., 1997).Acoustics—The acoustic abilities of transient killer whales is assume to be similar to the residentpopulation of killer whales described in the section on the killer whale offshore stock.Long-beaked Common Dolphin (Delphinus capensis)Status—Two species of common dolphin occur off California, the more coastal long-beaked dolphin (D.capensis) and the more offshore short-beaked dolphin (D. delphis). The long-beaked common dolphin isless abundant, and only recently has been recognized as a separate species (Heyning and Perrin, 1994).Thus, much of the available information has not differentiated between the two species. The long-beakedcommon dolphin is not listed under the ESA and is not considered to be depleted or strategic under theMMPA. The minimum population estimates are 43,360 (CV = 0.72) (Carretta et al., 2005).Available data regarding trends in population size in California and adjacent waters suggest an increase innumbers of both the short-beaked and long-beaked forms, likely because of gradual warming of watersoff California with the population shifting north (Heyning and Perrin, 1994; Barlow et al., 1997; Forney,1997).Distribution—Common dolphin distributions are related to bathymetry; high-relief areas known to beassociated with high concentrations of anchovies (Hui, 1979) are used more frequently than are low-reliefareas. Short-beaked common dolphins have been sighted as far as 300 nm (556 km) from shore, and arelikely present further offshore (Barlow et al., 1997). Long-beaked common dolphins are usually foundwithin 50 nm (92.5 km) of shore (Barlow et al., 1997) and have not been sighted further than 100 nm (185km) from shore (Perrin et al., 1985; Barlow, 1992 in Heyning et al., 1994).3-47 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3The short-beaked common dolphin is abundant in the waters of the SOCAL Range Complex, and thelong-beaked common dolphin is much less common, occurring there mostly in the warm-water period.The abundance of common dolphins has been shown to change on both seasonal and inter-annual timescales in southern California (Dohl et al., 1986; Barlow, 1995; Forney et al., 1995; Forney and Barlow,1998). The common dolphin is the most abundant cetacean in the SCIRC; it comprised 74.6% of theestimated number of cetaceans in cold-water months and 98.0% in warm-water months (Carretta et al.,2000). The available data show a mean group size of 353.6 animals (based on n=61 groups) within theSCIRC (Carretta et al., 2000). The largest group of common dolphins seen there was 2,700. Longbeakedcommon dolphins are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year (Carretta et al., 2000).Acoustics—Recorded Delphinus vocalizations include whistles, chirps, barks, and clicks (Ketten, 1998).Clicks and whistles have dominant frequency ranges of 23 to 67 kHz and 0.5 to 18 kHz, respectively(Ketten, 1998). Maximum source levels were approximately 180 dB 1 Pa-m (Fish and Turl, 1976).Popov and Klishin (1998) recorded auditory brainstem responses from a short-beaked common dolphin.The audiogram was U-shaped with a steeper high-frequency branch. The audiogram bandwidth was up to128 kHz at a level of 100 dB above the minimum threshold. The minimum thresholds were observed atfrequencies of 60 to 70 kHz.Mesoplodont Beaked Whales (Mesoplodon spp.)Status—Mesoplodonts are difficult to distinguish in the field. They are pelagic, spending most of theirtime in deep water far from shore, and dive for long periods. Five species of Mesoplodon may occur offthe coast of southern California: Blainville’s beaked whale (M. densirostris), Hubb’s beaked whale (M.carlhubbsi), Perrin’s beaked whale (M. perrini), pygmy beaked whale (M. peruvianus), and ginkgotoothedbeaked whale (M. ginkgodens) (Mead 1981). Until better methods are developed fordistinguishing the different Mesoplodon species from one another, the management unit is defined toinclude all Mesoplodon populations. The minimum population estimate ofCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock of Mesoplodont beaked whales is 645 (CV=0.92) individuals(Carretta et al., 2005).Distribution—Blainville’s beaked whale is the Mesoplodon species with the widest distributionthroughout the world (Mead, 1989), although it is generally limited to tropical and warmer temperatewaters (Leatherwood and Reeves, 1983). Occasional occurrences in cooler higher-latitude waters arepresumably related to warm-water incursions (Reeves et al., 2002). In the North Pacific Ocean, thenorthernmost documented occurrence of this species is a stranding off central California (Reeves et al.,2002). Seasonal movements or migrations by Blainville’s beaked whales are not known to occur.Blainville’s beaked whale distribution is mainly derived from stranding data. It is mainly a pelagicspecies, and like other beaked whales, is generally found in deep slope waters ~500–1000 m deep (Daviset al., 1998; Reeves et al., 2002). However, it may also occur in coastal areas, particularly where deepwater gullies come close to shore. Most strandings involved single individuals, although groups of 3–7were observed in tropical waters (Jefferson et al., 1993). Ritter and Brederlau (1999) estimated groupsize to range from 2–9 (mean 3.44).Hubb’s beaked whale occurs in temperate waters of the North Pacific (Mead, 1989). Most (22 of 35) ofthe records are from California, including two records in Santa Barbara County (Mead, 1989). Thedistribution of the species appears to be correlated with the deep subarctic current (Mead et al., 1982).Hubb’s beaked whales are often killed in drift gillnets off California (Reeves et al., 2002).February 2007 3-48

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Perrin’s beaked whale was first discovered in 2002, when genetic analysis was carried out on four whalesstranded between 1975 and 1979 in California, all along

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Acoustics—Clicks with high repetition rates and whistles have been recorded from animals at sea (Fishand Turl, 1976; Leatherwood and Walker, 1979). Maximum source levels were approximately 170 dB 1Pa-m (Fish and Turl, 1976). There is no published data on the hearing abilities of this species.Pacific White-sided Dolphin (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens)Status—The Pacific white-sided dolphin is not listed under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. Nopopulation trends have been observed in California or adjacent waters. The best estimate of the size ofthe California/Oregon/Washington Stock, derived from data collected during shipboard surveysconducted between 1996 and 2001, is 39,822 (CV=0.50, Carretta et al., 2005).Distribution—There is conflicting evidence concerning seasonal shifts in distribution and numbers ofPacific white-sided dolphins in the Southern California Bight. Analyses of many years of data suggestthat peak numbers probably occur in and near the SOCAL Range Complex in the cold-water months(Leatherwood et al. 1984). Most wintertime Pacific white-sided dolphin sightings within the SCIRCoccurred in coastal waters on the western side of San Clemente Island (Carretta et al., 2000).The Pacific white-sided dolphin is most common in waters over the continental shelf and slope. Sightingrecords and captures in pelagic driftnets indicate that this species occurs in oceanic waters well beyondthe shelf and slope (Leatherwood et al., 1984; Ferreo and Walker, 1999). The Pacific white-sided dolphinoccurs across temperate Pacific waters, to latitudes as low as (or lower than) 38°N, and northward to theBering Sea and coastal areas of southeast Alaska (Leatherwood et al., 1984). Surveys suggest a seasonalnorth-south movement of Pacific white-sided dolphins in the eastern North Pacific, with animals foundprimarily off California during the colder water months and shifting northward into Oregon andWashington as water temperatures increase during late spring and summer (Green et al., 1992; Forney,1994; Carretta et al., 2005). Peak abundance in California waters occurs from November to April(Leatherwood et al., 1984). Pacific white-sided dolphins are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughoutthe year (Carretta et al., 2005).Acoustics—Vocalizations produced by Pacific white-sided dolphins include whistles and clicks.Whistles are in the frequency range of 2 to 20 Hz (Richardson et al., 1995). Peak frequencies of the pulsetrains for echolocation fall between 50 and 80 kHz; the peak amplitude is 170 dB re 1Pa-m (Fahner etal., 2004). Tremel et al. (1998) measured the underwater hearing sensitivity of the Pacific white-sideddolphin from 75 Hz through 150 kHz. The greatest sensitivities were from 4 to 128 kHz, while the lowestmeasurable sensitivities were 145 dB at 100 Hz and 131 dB at 140 kHz. Below 8 Hz and above 100 kHz,this dolphin’s hearing was similar to that of other toothed whales.Pantropical Spotted Dolphin (Stenella attenuata)Status—The pantropical spotted dolphin is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and is not consideredto be a strategic stock under the MMPA. There are no abundance estimates available for this species inthe NOAA Stock Assessment Reports for this area of the Pacific.Distribution—The pantropical spotted dolphin can be found throughout tropical and some subtropicaloceans of the world (Perrin and Hohn, 1994). In the eastern Pacific, its range is from 25ºN (BajaCalifornia, Mexico) to 17ºS (southern Peru) (Perrin and Hohn, 1994). Pantropical spotted dolphins areassociated with warm tropical surface water (Au and Perryman, 1985; Reilly, 1990; Reilly and Fiedler,1994). Au and Perryman (1985) noted that the species occurs primarily north of the Equator, off southernMexico, and westward along 10ºN. They also noted its occurrence in seasonal tropical waters south ofthe Galápagos Islands.February 2007 3-50

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Pantropical spotted dolphins usually occur in deeper waters, and rarely over the continental shelf orcontinental shelf edge (Davis et al., 1998; Waring et al., 2002). They are extremely gregarious, forminggroups of hundreds or even thousands of individuals. In the Eastern Tropical Pacific (ETP), spotted andspinner dolphins are often seen together in mixed groups (Au and Perryman, 1985). There have been fewsightings of pantropical spotted dolphins in the SOCAL OPAREA; therefore seasonal occurrence can notbe determined (Waring et al., 2002).Results from various tracking and food habit studies suggest that pantropical spotted dolphins in the ETPand off Hawai’i feed primarily at night on epipelagic species and on mesopelagic species which risetowards the water’s surface after dark (Robertson and Chivers, 1997; Scott and Cattanach, 1998; Baird etal., 2001). Dives during the day generally are shorter and more shallow than dives at night; rates ofdescent and ascent are higher at night than during the day (Baird et al., 2001). Similar mean divedurations and depths have been obtained for tagged pantropical spotted dolphins in the ETP and offHawai’i (Baird et al., 2001).Acoustics—Pantropical spotted dolphin whistles have a dominant frequency range of 6.7 to 17.8 kHz(Ketten 1998). Click source levels between 197 and 220 dB re 1 Pa-m have been recorded forpantropical spotted dolphins (Schotten et al., 2004). There are no published hearing data for pantropicalspotted dolphins (Ketten, 1998). Anatomy of the ear of the pantropical spotted dolphin has been studied;Ketten (1992, 1997) found that they have a Type II cochlea, like other delphinids.Pygmy Sperm Whale (Kogia breviceps)Status—The pygmy sperm whale is not listed under the ESA, and the California/ Oregon/WashingtonStock is not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. No population trends have been observedin California or adjacent waters. The best estimate of the size of the California/Oregon/Washington Stockis 247 (CV = 1.06, Carretta et al., 2004).Distribution—Both Kogia species have a worldwide distribution in tropical and temperate waters(Jefferson et al., 1993). Both species of Kogia generally occur in waters along the continental shelf breakand over the continental slope (e.g., Baumgartner et al., 2001; McAlpine, 2002; Baird, 2005). This takesinto account their preference for deep waters. There is a rare occurrence for Kogia inshore of the area ofprimary occurrence. Occurrence is expected to be the same throughout the year. There have been fewsightings of pygmy sperm whales in the SOCAL OPAREA; therefore, seasonal occurrence can not bedetermined (Wade and Gerrodette, 1993).Willis and Baird (1998a) reported that Kogia make dives of up to 25 min. Median dive times of around11 min have been documented for Kogia (Barlow, 1999). A satellite-tagged pygmy sperm whale releasedoff Florida was found to make long nighttime dives, presumably indicating foraging on squid in the deepscattering layer (DSL) (Scott et al., 2001). Most sightings of Kogia are brief; these whales are oftendifficult to approach and they actively avoid aircraft and vessels (Würsig et al., 1998).Acoustics—Pygmy sperm whale clicks range from 60 to 200 kHz, with a dominant frequency of 120 kHz(Richardson et al., 1995). There is no information available on dwarf sperm whale vocalizations orhearing capabilities. An auditory brainstem response study indicates that pygmy sperm whales have theirbest hearing between 90 and 150 kHz (Ridgway and Carder, 2001).Risso’s Dolphin (Grampus griseus)Status—Risso’s dolphin is not listed under the ESA and the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is notconsidered depleted or strategic. There are no quantitative data regarding trends in population size in3-51 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3California or adjacent waters, although sightings have become more frequent in the past 20 years. Theminimum population estimate of the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is 12,748 (CV=0.28), based onship surveys conducted between 1991 and 1996 (Carretta et al., 2005).Distribution—A comprehensive study of the distribution of Risso’s dolphin in the Gulf of Mexico foundthat they used the steeper sections of the upper continental slope in waters 1,150–3,200 ft (350–975 m)deep (Baumgartner, 1997). Risso’s dolphins have been sighted in waters of the SOCAL Range Complexduring all seasons. However, in most years, higher numbers are present during the cold-water monthsthan during other times of the year (Forney and Barlow, 1998). Most sightings in the study area havebeen well offshore, but Risso’s dolphins have been sighted close to the eastern shore of San ClementeIsland during the cold season (Carretta et al., 2000). Risso’s dolphins occur individually or in small tomoderate-sized groups, normally ranging in numbers from 2 to nearly 250. The majority of groupscontain fewer than 50 (Leatherwood et al., 1980; Carretta et al., 1995 and 2000), however group sizesmay reach as high as 2,500. Risso’s dolphins are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year(Carretta et al., 2000).Acoustics—Risso’s dolphin vocalizations include broadband clicks, barks, buzzes, grunts, chirps,whistles, and simultaneous whistle and burst-pulse sounds (Corkeron and Van Parijs, 2001). Thecombined whistle and burst pulse sound appears to be unique to Risso’s dolphin (Corkeron and VanParijs, 2001). Corkeron and Van Parijs (2001) recorded five different whistle types, ranging in frequencyfrom 4 to 22 kHz. Broadband clicks had a frequency range of 6 to greater than 22 kHz. Low-frequencynarrowband grunt vocalizations had a frequency range of 0.4 to 0.8 kHz. A recent study establishedempirically that Risso’s dolphins echolocate; estimated source levels were up to 216 dB re 1 Pa-m(Philips et al., 2003).Nachtigall et al. (1995) conducted baseline audiometric work. Because of the natural background noise(the study was conducted in a natural setting), it was not possible to precisely determine peak (or best)hearing sensitivity in the species. Maximum sensitivity occurred between 8 and 64 kHz. Reportedthresholds (all re 1 Pa-m) were 124 dB at 1.6 kHz, 71.7 dB at 4 kHz, 63.7 dB at 8 kHz, 63.3 dB at 16kHz, 66.5 dB at 32 kHz, 67.3 dB at 64 kHz, 74.3 dB at 80 kHz, 124.2 dB at 100 kHz, and 122.9 dB at 110kHz.Rough-toothed Dolphin (Steno bredanensis)Status—The rough-toothed dolphin is not listed as endangered under the ESA or as depleted or strategicunder the MMPA. There are no abundance estimates available for this species in the NOAA StockAssessment Report for this area of the Pacific.Distribution—Rough-toothed dolphins are typically found in tropical and warm temperate waters (Perrinand Walker, 1975 in Bonnell and Dailey, 1993), rarely ranging north of 40°N or south of 35°S (Miyazakiand Perrin, 1994). Rough-toothed dolphins occur in low densities throughout the ETP where surfacewater temperatures are generally above 25°C (Perrin and Walker, 1975). Sighting and stranding recordsin the eastern North Pacific Ocean are rare (e.g., Ferrero et al., 1994).Rough-toothed dolphins usually form groups of 10–20 (Reeves et al., 2002), but aggregations of hundredscan be found (Leatherwood and Reeves, 1983). In the ETP, they have been found in mixed groups withspotted, spinner, and bottlenose dolphins (Perrin and Walker, 1975). Reeves et al. (2002) suggested thatthey are deep divers, and can dive for up to 15 min. They usually inhabit deep waters (Davis et al., 1998),where they prey on fish and cephalopods (Reeves et al., 2002). There have been few sightings of rough-February 2007 3-52

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3toothed dolphins in the SOCAL OPAREA; therefore seasonal occurrence can not be determined (Ferreroet al., 1994).Acoustics—The vocal repertoire of the rough-toothed dolphin includes broad-band clicks, barks, andwhistles (Yu et al. 2003). Echolocation clicks of rough-toothed dolphins are in the frequency range of 0.1to 200 kHz, with a peak of about 25 kHz (Miyazaki and Perrin, 1994; Yu et al., 2003). Whistles show awide frequency range: 0.3 to >24 kHz (Yu et al., 2003). There is no published information on hearingability of this species.Short-beaked Common Dolphin (Delphinus delphis)Status—This is the most abundant cetacean off California (Dohl et al., 1981; Forney et al., 1995; Carrettaet al., 2005). The single current management unit for the short-beaked common dolphin in this area is aCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock, with a minimum population estimate of 449,846 (CV = 0.25)individuals (Carretta et al. 2004). The abundance of common dolphins varies seasonally but may beincreasing in California with a northward shift in the population (Heyning and Perrin, 1994; Barlow et al.,1997; Forney, 1997). The short-beaked common dolphin is not listed as endangered under the ESA or asdepleted or strategic under the MMPA.Distribution—Along the U.S. west coast, the short-beaked common dolphins’ distribution overlaps withthat of the long-beaked common dolphin. The short-beaked common dolphin is distributed between thecoast and at least 556 km from shore (Carretta et al., 2005). Short-beaked common dolphin abundanceoff California has increased dramatically since the late 1970s, along with a concomitant decrease inabundance in the ETP, suggesting a large-scale shift in the distribution of this species in the eastern NorthPacific (Forney et al., 1995; Forney and Barlow, 1998). The northward extent of short-beaked commondolphin distribution appears to vary inter-annually and with changing oceanographic conditions (Forneyand Barlow 1998). Short-beaked common dolphins are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout theyear (Forney and Barlow, 1998).Stomach contents of Delphinus from California waters revealed 19 species of fish and 2 species ofcephalopods; Delphinus feeds primarily on organisms in the vertically migrating DSL (Evans, 1994).Diel fluctuations in vocal activity of this species (more vocal activity during late evening and earlymorning) appear to be linked to feeding on the DSL as it rises during the same time (Goold, 2000). Atagged individual tracked off San Diego conducted dives deeper than 200 m, but with most in the range of9 to 50 m (Evans, 1971, 1994).Acoustics—Recorded Delphinus vocalizations include whistles, chirps, barks, and clicks (Ketten, 1998).Clicks and whistles have dominant frequency ranges of 23 to 67 kHz and 0.5 to 18 kHz, respectively(Ketten, 1998). Maximum source levels were approximately 180 dB 1 Pa-m (Fish and Turl, 1976).Oswald et al. (2003) found that short-beaked common dolphins in the ETP have whistles with a meanfrequency range of 6.3 kHz, mean maximum frequency of 13.6 kHz, and mean duration of 0.8 sec. Popovand Klishin (1998) recorded auditory brainstem responses from a common dolphin. The audiogram wasU-shaped with a steeper high-frequency branch. The audiogram bandwidth was up to 128 kHz at a levelof 100 dB above the minimum threshold. The minimum thresholds were observed at frequencies of 60 to70 kHz.Short-finned Pilot Whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus)Status—The short-finned pilot whale is not listed under the ESA. However, theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is considered strategic under the MMPA because the averagehuman-caused mortality may not be sustainable (Barlow et al., 1997). A recent calculation of the3-53 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3minimum population size for the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is 149 (CV=1.02; Carretta et al.,2005).Distribution—The range of the short-finned pilot whale in the eastern North Pacific extends from thetropics to the Gulf of Alaska. However, sightings north of Point Conception are uncommon (Forney,1994). Prior to the 1982–1983 El Niño event, short-finned pilot whales were commonly seen off southernCalifornia, with an apparently resident population around Santa Catalina Island (Dohl et al., 1981). Afterthe El Niño event, they virtually disappeared from the region, and few sightings were made from 1984 to1992. The reason for the decrease in numbers is unknown (Heyning et al., 1994b), but the El Niño eventapparently disrupted their distribution pattern, and they have not returned as residents to waters offsouthern California (Forney, 1994). Short finned pilot whales are found in the SOCAL OPAREAthroughout the year (Forney, 1994).Pilot whales are deep divers; the maximum dive depth measured is 971 m (Baird, personalcommunication). Pilot whales feed primarily on squid, but also take fish (Bernard and Reilly, 1999).Pilot whales are not generally known to prey on other marine mammals; however, records from the ETPsuggest that the short-finned pilot whale does occasionally chase, attack, and may eat dolphins duringfishery operations (Perryman and Foster, 1980), and they have been observed harassing sperm whales inthe Gulf of Mexico (Weller et al., 1996).Acoustics—Short-finned pilot whale whistles and clicks have a dominant frequency range of 2 to 14 kHzand a source level of 180 dB re 1 Pa-m (Fish and Turl, 1976; Ketten, 1998). There are no publishedhearing data available for this species.Sperm Whale (Physeter macrocephalus)Status—The sperm whale is listed as endangered under the ESA and the California/Oregon/WashingtonStock is considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. The available data suggest that sperm whaleabundance has been relatively stable in California waters since 1979 (Barlow, 1994), but there isuncertainty about both the population size and the annual mortality rates. There is a minimum populationestimate of 885 (CV=0.41) for the California/Oregon/Washington Stock based on ship-based surveysduring summers of 1991 and 1993 (Carretta et al., 2005). Sperm whale abundance in the easterntemperate North Pacific Ocean is estimated to be 32,100 and 26,300 by acoustic and visual detectionmethods, respectively (Barlow and Taylor, 2005).Distribution—Sperm whales show a strong preference for deep waters (Rice, 1989), especially areaswith high sea-floor relief. Sperm whale distribution is associated with waters over the continental shelfedge, over the continental slope, and into deeper waters (Hain et al., 1985; Kenney and Winn, 1987;Waring and Finn, 1995; Gannier, 2000; Gregr and Trites, 2001; Waring et al., 2001). However, in someareas, such as off New England, on the southwestern and eastern Scotian Shelf, and in the northern Gulfof California, adult males are reported to quite consistently use waters with bottom depths

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3(Carretta et al., 2000). However, sperm whales are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year(Carretta et al., 2000).Sperm whales forage during deep dives that routinely exceed a depth of 400 m and 30 min duration(Watkins et al., 2002). Sperm whales are capable of diving to depths of over 2,000 m with durations ofover 60 min (Watkins et al., 1993). Sperm whales spend up to 83% of daylight hours underwater (Jaquetet al., 2000; Amano and Yoshioka, 2003). Males do not spend extensive periods of time at the surface(Jaquet et al. 2000). In contrast, females spend prolonged periods of time at the surface (1 to 5 hrs daily)without foraging (Whitehead and Weilgart, 1991; Amano and Yoshioka, 2003). The average swimmingspeed is estimated to be 0.7 m/sec (Watkins et al., 2002). Dive descents averaged 11 min at a rate of 1.52m/sec, and ascents averaged 11.8 min at a rate of 1.4 m/sec (Watkins et al., 2002).Acoustics—Sperm whales produce short-duration (generally less than 3 sec), broadband clicks. Theseclicks range in frequency from 100 Hz to 30 kHz, with dominant energy in two bands (2 to 4 kHz and 10to 16 kHz). Generally, most of the acoustic energy is present at frequencies below 4 kHz, althoughdiffuse energy up to past 20 kHz has been reported (Thode et al., 2002). The source levels can be up to236 dB re 1 μPa-m (Møhl et al., 2003). Thode et al. (2002) suggested that the acoustic directivity(angular beam pattern) from sperm whales must range between 10 and 30 dB in the 5 to 20 kHz region.The clicks of neonate sperm whales are very different from usual clicks of adults in that they are of lowdirectionality, long duration, and low-frequency (centroid frequency between 300 and 1,700 Hz) withestimated source levels between 140 and 162 dB re 1 μPa-m (Madsen et al., 2003). Clicks are heard mostfrequently when sperm whales are engaged in diving/foraging behavior (Whitehead and Weilgart, 1991;Miller et al., 2004; Zimmer et al., 2005). These may be echolocation clicks used in feeding, contact calls(for communication), and orientation during dives. When sperm whales are socializing, they tend torepeat series of clicks (codas), which follow a precise rhythm and may last for hours (Watkins andSchevill, 1977). Codas are shared between individuals of a social unit and are considered to be primarilyfor intra-group communication (Weilgart and Whitehead, 1997; Rendell and Whitehead, 2004).The anatomy of the sperm whale’s ear indicates that it hears high-frequency sounds (Ketten, 1992).Anatomical studies also suggest that the sperm whale has some ultrasonic hearing, but at a lowermaximum frequency than many other odontocetes (Ketten, 1992). The sperm whale may also possessbetter low-frequency hearing than some other odontocetes, although not as extraordinarily low as manybaleen whales (Ketten, 1992). Auditory brainstem response in a neonatal sperm whale indicated highestsensitivity to frequencies between 5 and 20 kHz (Ridgway and Carder, 2001).Spinner Dolphin (Stenella longirostris)Status—Spinner dolphins are not found in California but inhabit the warm waters of Central America,therefore, they are a possible summer visitor to southern California waters. The spinner dolphin is notlisted as endangered under the ESA, and is not considered to be depleted or strategic under the MMPA.Distribution—The spinner dolphin is found in tropical and subtropical waters worldwide. Limits arenear 40°N and 40°s (Jefferson et al., 1993). There have been few sightings of spinner dolphins in theSOCAL OPAREA; therefore, seasonal occurrence can not be determined (Forney, 1994).Acoustics—There is little information on the acoustic abilities of the spinner dolphin. They producewhistles in the range of 1 to 22.5 kHz with the dominant frequency being 6.8 to 17.9 kHz, above that ofthe active sonar frequencies, although their full range of hearing may extend down to 1 kHz or below asreported for other small odontocetes (Richardson et al., 1995, Nedwell et al., 2004). They also display3-55 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3pulse burst sounds in the range of 5 to 60 kHz. Their echolocation clicks range up to at least 65 kHz(Richardson et al., 1995).Striped Dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba)Status—The striped dolphin is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is not considered to be depleted or strategic under the MMPA. Thebest estimate of the size of the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is 13,934 (CV=0.53; Carretta et al.,2004).Distribution—Striped dolphins have a cosmopolitan distribution in tropical to warm temperate waters(Perrin et al., 1994a). Their preferred habitat seems to be deep water (Davis et al., 1998) along the edgeand seaward of the continental shelf, particularly in areas influenced by warm currents (Waring et al.,2002). This species is well documented in both the western and eastern Pacific off the coasts of Japanand North America (Perrin et al., 1994); the northern limits are the Sea of Japan, Hokkaido, Washingtonstate, and along roughly 40°N across the western and central Pacific (Reeves et al., 2002). In and near theSOCAL Range Complex, striped dolphins are found mostly offshore, and are much more common in thewarm-water period. Striped dolphins are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year (Waring etal., 2002).Striped dolphins are gregarious (groups of 20 or more are common) and active at the surface (Whiteheadet al., 1998). Wade and Gerrodette (1993) noted a mean group size of 61 in the ETP, and Smith andWhitehead (1999) reported a mean group size of 50 in the Galápagos.Acoustics—Striped dolphin whistles range from 6 to 24+ kHz, with dominant frequencies ranging from 8to 12.5 kHz (Thomson and Richardson, 1995). The striped dolphin’s range of most sensitive hearing(defined as the frequency range with sensitivities within 10 dB of maximum sensitivity) was determinedto be 29 to 123 kHz using standard psycho-acoustic techniques; maximum sensitivity occurred at 64 kHz(Kastelein et al., 2003). Hearing ability became less sensitive below 32 kHz and above 120 kHz(Kastelein et al., 2003).3.3.2.6.3 PinnipedsThree pinniped species (California sea lion, harbor seal, and northern elephant seal) are found regularly inthe SOCAL OPAREA. The California sea lion is the most abundant; while at sea, juveniles and adultfemales stay close to their rookeries, whereas adult males occupy offshore waters only while migratingbetween haul-out sites and feeding areas to the north. Northern elephant seals spend little time nearshore,and pass through offshore waters four times a year as they travel to and from breeding, pupping, andmolting areas on various Channel Islands. Small numbers of harbor seals are found hauled out on landand in nearshore waters of the OPAREA, but because of their preference for shallow coastal waters, feware found in moderate numbers. Three additional species, the Steller sea lion, northern fur seal, andGuadalupe fur seal, are also seen occasionally. Steller sea lions and Guadeloupe fur seals are rarelyencountered. Relatively few northern fur seals may be found in offshore waters during the winter andspring, when animals from northern populations may feed there. During the rest of the year, moderatenumbers of fur seals are found in offshore waters north of the SOCAL OPAREA. They include only theanimals that breed and raise their young on San Miguel Island. Table 3.3-8 summarizes seasonalactivities of pinniped species present in the SOCAL OPAREA.February 2007 3-56

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Northern Elephant Seal (Mirounga angustirostris)Status—The northern elephant seal is not listed under the ESA, and the California Breeding Stock is notconsidered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. The California Breeding Stock has recovered fromnear extinction in the early 1900s to an estimated 60,547 (Carretta et al. 2005).Distribution—Northern elephant seals molt, breed, and give birth primarily on offshore islands off BajaCalifornia and California. Rookeries are found as far north as the South Farallon Islands and Point Reyes(Barlow et al., 1993). The California population is demographically isolated from the Baja Californiapopulation, and is considered a separate stock, although genetically the two populations areindistinguishable (Barlow et al., 1997). About two thirds of the California population hauls out on SanMiguel Island, about 32% on San Nicolas Island, and the remaining seals use Santa Rosa (1%), SantaCruz, Anacapa, Santa Barbara, and San Clemente islands (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993; U.S. Navy, 1998;Carretta et al., 2000).They haul out on land to give birth and breed from December through March, and pups remain hauled outthrough April. After spending time at sea to feed (post-breeding migration), they generally return to thesame areas to molt (Odell, 1974; Stewart and Yochem, 1984; Stewart, 1989; Stewart and DeLong, 1995).However, they do not necessarily return to the same beach. Adult males tend to haul out to molt betweenJune and August (peaking in July), whereas females and juveniles haul out to most between March andMay (peaking in April). Different age classes of northern elephant seals are found in the SOCALOPAREA throughout the year (Carretta et al., 2000).For much of the year, northern elephant seals feed mostly in deep, offshore waters, and their foragingrange extends thousands of kilometers offshore from the breeding range into the eastern and central NorthPacific (Stewart and DeLong, 1995; Stewart, 1997; Le Boeuf et al., 2000). Adult males and femalessegregate while foraging and migrating; females mostly range west to about 173°W, between the latitudesof 40°N and 45°N, whereas males range further north into the Gulf of Alaska and along the AleutianIslands, to between 47°N and 58°N (Stewart and Huber, 1993; Stewart and DeLong, 1995; Le Boeuf etal., 2000). Both sexes routinely dive deep (492–2,625 ft [150–800 m]) (Le Boeuf et al., 2000); divesaverage 15–25 min, depending on time of year, and surface intervals between dives are 2–3 min. Thedeepest dives recorded for both sexes are over 5,000 ft (1,524 m) (e.g., Le Boeuf et al., 2000; Williams etal., 2000; Schreer et al., 2001). Females remain submerged ~86–92% of the time and males ~88–90%(Le Boeuf et al., 1988; Stewart and DeLong, 1993, 1995). Feeding juvenile northern elephant seals divefor slightly shorter periods (13–18 min), but they dive to similar depths (980–1,500 ft [300–450 m]) andspend a similar proportion (86–92%) of their time submerged (Le Boeuf et al., 1996).Acoustics—The northern elephant seal produces loud, low-frequency in-air vocalizations (Bartholomewand Collias, 1962). The mean fundamental frequencies are in the range of 147 to 334 Hz for adult males(Le Boeuf and Petrinovich, 1974). The mean source level of the male-produced vocalizations during thebreeding season is 110 dB re 20 Pa (Sanvito and Galimberti, 2003). In-air calls made by aggressivemales include: (1) snoring, which is a low intensity threat; (2) a snort (0.2 to 0.6 kHz) made by adominant male when approached by a subdominant male; and (3) a clap threat (

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3have been definitively identified (Fletcher et al., 1996; Burgess et al., 1998). Burgess et al. (1998)detected possible vocalizations in the form of click trains that resembled those used by males forcommunication in air.The audiogram of the northern elephant seal indicates that this species is well-adapted for underwaterhearing; sensitivity is best between 3.2 and 45 kHz, with greatest sensitivity at 6.4 kHz and an upperfrequency cutoff of approximately 55 kHz (Kastak and Schusterman, 1999).Pacific Harbor Seal (Phoca vitulina richardsi)Status—The Pacific harbor seal is not listed under the ESA, and the California Stock is not considereddepleted or strategic under the MMPA. The California population has increased from the mid-1960s tothe mid-1990s, although the rate of increase may have slowed during the 1990s (Hanan, 1996). Theminimum population estimate of the California Stock is 25,720 (Carretta, 2005).Distribution—Harbor seals are considered abundant throughout most of their range from Baja Californiato the eastern Aleutian Islands. The Southern California Bight is near the southern limit of their range(Bonnell and Dailey, 1993). Some harbor seals haul out and breed on Santa Barbara and Santa Catalinaislands within the SOCAL Range Complex, but most harbor seals haul out north of the SOCAL RangeComplex. They generally favor sandy, cobble, and gravel beaches (Stewart and Yochem, 1994), andmost haul out on the mainland (Carretta et al., 2005).Peak numbers of harbor seals haul out on land during late May to early June, which coincides with thepeak of their molt. When at sea during May and June (and March to May for breeding females), theygenerally remain in the vicinity of haul-out sites and forage close to shore in relatively shallow waters.Nursing of pups begins in late February, and pups start to become weaned in May. Breeding occursbetween late March and early May. Harbor seals are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year(Carretta et al., 2000).While feeding, harbor seals dive to depths of 33–130 ft (10–40 m) in the case of females with nursingpups, and 260–390 ft (79–119 m) in the case of other seals. Dives as deep as 1,463 ft (446 m) have beenrecorded, although dives greater than 460 ft (140 m) are infrequent.Acoustics—Harbor seals produce a variety of airborne vocalizations including snorts, snarls, andbelching sounds (Bigg, 1981). Adult males produce low frequency vocalizations underwater during thebreeding season (Hanggi and Schusterman, 1994; Van Parijs et al., 2003). Male harbor seals producecommunication sounds in the frequency range of 100 to 1,000 Hz (Thomson and Richardson, 1995).The harbor seal hears almost equally well in air and underwater (Kastak and Schusterman, 1998). Harborseals hear best at frequencies from 1 to 180 kHz; the peak hearing sensitivity is at 32 kHz in water and 12kHz in air (Terhune and Turnball, 1995; Kastak and Schusterman, 1998; Wolski et al., 2003). Kastak andSchusterman (1996) observed a TTS of 8 dB at 100 Hz, with complete recovery approximately one weekfollowing exposure. Kastak et al. (1999) determined that underwater noise of moderate intensity (65 to75 dB source level) and duration (20 to 22 min) is sufficient to induce TTS in harbor seals.3.3.2.6.4 Otarids (Sea Lions and Fur Seals)California Sea Lion (Zalophus californianus)Status—The California sea lion is not listed under the ESA, and the U.S. Stock, some of which occurs inthe SOCAL Range Complex, is not considered a strategic stock under the MMPA. The U.S. Stock hasincreased from the early 1900s to the present; the counts of pups increased at an annual rate of 5.4%February 2007 3-58

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3between 1975 and 2001 (Carretta et al., 2005). The minimum population estimate of the U.S. Stock,based on a 2001 census, is 138,881 (Carretta et al., 2005).Distribution—Nearly all of the U.S. Stock (more than 95%) breeds and gives birth to pups on SanMiguel, San Nicolas, and Santa Barbara islands, only one of which–Santa Barbara, the smallest–is in theSOCAL Range Complex. Smaller numbers of pups are born on San Clemente Island, the FarallonIslands, and Año Nuevo Island (Lowry et al., 1992).The California sea lion is by far the most commonly-sighted pinniped species at sea or on land in thevicinity of the SOCAL Range Complex. In California waters, sea lions made up 87.7% (2,976 of 3,393)of identified pinniped sightings at sea during all of the studies summarized in the SCIRC EIS/OEIS.Similarly, they represented 97% (381 of 393) of identified pinniped sightings at sea during the 1998–1999NMFS surveys (Carretta et al., 2000). They were sighted during all seasons and were sighted in all areaswith survey coverage from near shore to offshore areas (Carretta et al., 2000).Survey data from 1975 to 1978 were analyzed to describe the seasonal shifts in the offshore distributionof California sea lions (Bonnell and Ford, 1987). During summer, the highest densities were foundimmediately west of San Miguel Island. During autumn, peak densities of sea lions were centered onSanta Cruz Island. During winter and spring, peak densities occurred just north of San Clemente Island.The seasonal changes in the center of distribution were attributed to changes in the distribution of the preyspecies. If California sea lion distribution is determined primarily by prey abundance, these same areasmight not be the center of sea lion distribution every year.The distribution and habitat use of California sea lions vary with the sex of the animals and theirreproductive phase. Adult males haul out on land to defend territories and breed from mid-to-late Mayuntil late July. Individual males remain on territories for 27–45 days without going to sea to feed. DuringAugust and September, after the mating season, the adult males migrate northward to feeding areas as faraway as Washington (Puget Sound) and British Columbia (Lowry et al., 1992). They remain there untilspring (March–May), when they migrate back to the breeding colonies. Thus, adult males are present inoffshore areas of the SOCAL Range Complex only briefly as they move to and from rookeries.The distribution of immature California sea lions is less well known, but some make northwardmigrations that are shorter in length than the migrations of adult males (Huber, 1991). However, mostimmature seals are presumed to remain near the rookeries, and thus remain in or near the SOCAL RangeComplex for most of the year (Lowry et al., 1992). Adult females remain near the rookeries throughoutthe year. Most births occur from mid-June to mid-July (peak in late June).Higher densities of California sea lions are observed during cold-water months. At-sea densities likelydecrease during warm-water months because females spend more time ashore to give birth and attendtheir pups. Radio-tagged female California sea lions at San Miguel Island spent approximately 70% oftheir time at sea during the non-breeding season (cold-water months) and pups spent an average of 67%of their time ashore during their mother’s absence (Melin et al., 2000). Different age classes of Californiasea lions are found in the SOCAL OPAREA throughout the year (Lowry et al., 1992).Although adult male California sea lions feed in areas north of the SOCAL OPAREA, animals of all otherages and sexes spend most, but not all, of their time feeding at sea during winter so the winter estimateslikely are somewhat low. During warm-water months, a high proportion of the adult males and femalesare hauled out at terrestrial sites during much of the period, so the summer estimates are low to a greaterdegree.3-59 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Information on movements and foraging at sea has been restricted to breeding females (adult males do notforage near the rookeries, do not feed during the breeding season, and migrate north after the breedingseason). Over one third of the foraging dives by breeding females are 1–2 min in duration; 75% of divesare

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Island in 1997. Distribution at sea is unknown (Reeves et al., 1992), but Guadalupe fur seals may migrateat least 600 km from the rookery sites, based on pelagic observations of individuals in the SCB (Seagars,1984). The Guadalupe fur seal is expected to be very rare in the SOCAL Range Complex, except perhapsfor a small area around Guadalupe Island. Researchers suspect that water temperature and preyavailability would affect fur seal movements to the north. With cooler water they would stay south tofeed and with warmer water they would move north to follow prey. There was a warming of the EasternNorth Pacific (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) from the mid 1970s to the mid 1990s but now it is currently ina cooling trend. Except during El Niño conditions, Guadalupe fur seals would stay to the north duringcooler periods (Boeuf and Crocker, 2005).Acoustics—In-air sounds of Guadalupe fur seals include barks, roars, and coughs; few details are known(Peterson et al., 1968). There is no published information on the hearing range of the Guadalupe fur sealalthough it is most likely similar to other fur seals species. Northern fur seals produce underwater clicks,and in-air bleating, barking, coughing, and roaring sounds (Schusterman, 1978; Richardson et al., 1995).The underwater hearing range of the northern fur seal ranges from 0.5 Hz to 40 kHz (Moore andSchusterman, 1987; Babushina et al., 1991) and the threshold is 50 to 60 dB re 1 μPa-m (Moore andSchusterman, 1987). The best underwater hearing occurs between 4 and 17 to 28 kHz (Moore andSchusterman, 1987; Babushina et al., 1991). The maximum sensitivity in air is at 3 to 5 kHz (Babushinaet al., 1991), after which there is an anomalous hearing loss at around 4 or 5 kHz (Moore andSchusterman, 1987; Babushina, 1999).The species is not expected to be present in the SOCAL OPAREA; therefore, density information can notmeaningfully be calculated and this species is not described in Appendix A. Additional discussion ofGuadalupe fur seal is provided by NMFS in their Biological Opinion for the JTFEX/COMPTUEXPreferred Alternative (2007).Northern Fur Seal (Callorhinus ursinus)Status—The northern fur seal is not listed under the ESA. The range of the northern fur seal extendsfrom southern California north to the Bering Sea, and west to the Okhotsk Sea and the Sea of Japan(Antonelis and Fiscus, 1980). Two separate stocks of northern fur seals are recognized within U.S.waters: the Eastern Pacific Stock and the San Miguel Island Stock (Barlow et al., 1998). The San MiguelIsland Stock, which occurs north of the SOCAL Range Complex, is not considered depleted or strategicunder the MMPA. A minimum population estimate for the San Miguel Island Stock is 4,190 (Carretta etal., 2005).Distribution—The Eastern Pacific Stock spends May–November in northern waters and at northernbreeding colonies. In late November, females and young begin to arrive in offshore waters of California,with some animals moving south into continental shelf and slope waters. Maximum numbers are found inwaters from 34ºN to 42ºN during February–April; most are found offshore of the continental slope. Byearly June, most seals of the eastern Pacific Stock have migrated back to northern waters (Antonelis andFiscus, 1980). Adult males from the Eastern Pacific Stock generally migrate only as far south as the Gulfof Alaska (Kajimura, 1984). The Eastern Pacific Stock of northern fur seal is classified as a strategicstock because it is designated as depleted under the MMPA. The minimum population estimate for theEastern Pacific Stock is 751,714 (Angliss and Lodge, 2004).Northern fur seals were made locally extinct at San Miguel Island during the mid-1800s by commercialsealing operations. After an absence of over 100 years, they re-colonized the island during the late 1950sor early 1960s (DeLong, 1982). The population at San Miguel Island has been increasing steadily since1972, except for a drop in numbers during the El Niño events of 1982 (Barlow et al., 1998) and 1997–3-61 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 31998 (Barlow et al., 1999). The 1997 live pup count was the highest since the colony was reported in1968, but up to 75% of those pups died within 5 months of birth. A 1998 pup count resulted in a totalcount of 627 pups, a 79.6% decrease from the 1997 count of 3,068 (Melin and DeLong, 2000). In 1999,the population began to recover, and by 2002 the total pup count was 1,946 (Carretta et al., 2005).Although they feed primarily in deep offshore waters, average depths of dives of lactating females arerelatively shallow (223 ft [68 m]) with an average dive duration of 2.6 min (Reeves et al., 1992).Acoustics—Northern fur seals produce underwater clicks, and in-air bleating, barking, coughing, androaring sounds (Schusterman, 1978; Richardson et al., 1995). Males vocalize (roar) almost continuouslyat rookeries (Gentry, 1998). In-air and underwater audiograms are available for the northern fur seal. Ofall the pinniped species for which hearing information is available, the northern fur seal is the mostsensitive to airborne sound (Moore and Schusterman, 1987). The underwater hearing range of thenorthern fur seal ranges from 0.5 Hz to 40 kHz (Moore and Schusterman, 1987; Babushina et al., 1991);the threshold is 50 to 60 dB re 1 Pa-m (Moore and Schusterman, 1987). The underwater hearingthreshold is 90 to 100 dB re 1 Pa-m at 1 kHz; best underwater hearing occurs between 4 and 17 to 28kHz (Moore and Schusterman, 1987; Babushina et al., 1991). The underwater hearing sensitivity of thisspecies is 15 to 20 dB better than in the air (Babushina et al., 1991). The maximum sensitivity in air is at3 to 5 kHz (Babushina et al., 1991), after which there is an anomalous hearing loss at around 4 or 5 kHz(Moore and Schusterman, 1987; Babushin, 1999).The species is not expected to be present in the SOCAL OPAREA; therefore, density information can notmeaningfully be calculated and this species is not described in Appendix A.Steller Sea Lion (Eumetopias jubatus)Status—In response to population declines, the Steller sea lion was classified as threatened under theESA in the eastern portion of its range (including California) and endangered in the western portion in1997 (U.S. Federal Register 62: 24345-24355). The stocks are divided at an east-west boundary nearCape Suckling, Alaska (144ºW). Both stocks are considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA.The minimum population estimate for the Eastern Stock of the Steller sea lion is 31,028, and theminimum estimate of the number of Steller sea lions in California, Oregon, and Washington is 6,555(Angliss and Lodge, 2004).The size of the Eastern Stock has increased in recent years (Hill and DeMaste, 1998), but counts insouthern California have declined by over 50%. The size of the closest breeding colony to the SOCALRange Complex, which is on Año Nuevo Island, declined by 85% between 1970 and 1987 (Le Boeuf etal., 1991), and pup counts at Año Nuevo Island have been steadily declining at about 5% annually since1990 (Angliss and Lodge, 2004).Distribution—The range of the Steller sea lion extends throughout most of the North Pacific fromsouthern California through the Aleutian and Pribilof Islands to the Kuril Islands and Okhotsk Sea, Japan(Kenyon and Rice, 1961). Major haul-outs and rookeries are centered in the Aleutian Islands and atislands and mainland sites in the Gulf of Alaska (Loughlin et al., 1984). Primary haul-out and rookerysites in California are north of the SCB, on the Farallon Islands, Año Nuevo Island, St. George Reef, andSugarloaf Island (Loughlin et al., 1992; Hastings and Sydema, 2002). Año Nuevo Island, 40 km north ofMonterey Bay, is the most southern Steller sea lion rookery. Steller sea lions are rarely sighted inSouthern California waters and the last sighting occurred at San Miguel Island in 1998 (Thorson et al.,1998).February 2007 3-62

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Foraging habitat is primarily shallow, nearshore and continental shelf waters; some Steller sea lions evenfeed in freshwater rivers (Reeves et al., 1992; Robso, 2002).Acoustics—In-air territorial male Steller sea lion sounds are usually low frequency roars, while femalesvocalize less and at a higher frequency (Schusterman et al., 1970; Loughlin et al., 1987). Campbell et al.(2002) determined that females have distinctive acoustic signatures. These calls range in frequency from30 to 3,000 Hz with peak frequencies from 150 to 1,000 Hz; typical duration is 1,000 to 1,500 msec(Campbell et al., 2002). Pups produce bleating sounds. Underwater sounds are like the in-air signals(Loughlin et al., 1987). The underwater hearing sensitivity of two Steller sea lions was recently tested;the hearing thresholds of the male were significantly higher than those of the female (Kastelein et al.,2005). The range of best hearing for the male was from 1 to 16 kHz, with maximum sensitivity (77 dB re1 μPa-m) at 1 kHz. The range of best hearing for the female was from 16 to above 25 kHz, withmaximum sensitivity (73 dB re 1 μPa-m) occurred at 25 kHz. It is not known whether the differences inhearing sensitivity are due to individual differences in sensitivity or due to sexual dimorphism in hearing(Kastelein et al., 2005).The species is not expected to be present in the SOCAL OPAREA; therefore, density information can notmeaningfully be calculated and this species is not described in Appendix A.3.3.2.6.5 Sea OtterThe southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis) is listed as threatened under the ESA and the CaliforniaStock is, therefore, considered depleted under the MMPA. If the restrictions on the use of gill andtrammel nets in areas inhabited by southern sea otters were lifted, the southern sea otter population wouldbe designated as a strategic stock as defined by the MMPA (USFWS, 1995 in Carretta et al., 2005). Thesouthern population increased at an average annual rate of 5–7 percent between 1983 and 1994. As thepopulation has increased, its range has also expanded. The sea otter falls under the regulatory oversightof the USFWS (All other species of marine mammals occurring within the SOCAL OPAREA fall underthe regulatory oversight of NMFS).Historically, sea otters occupied a large range throughout the northern Pacific Coastal region, extendingfrom Russia and Alaska to Mexico (Kenyon, 1969). Harvests of sea otters in the 18th and 19th centuriesnearly exterminated the species (Orr and Helm, 1989). Until recent years, the northern population hadincreased to well over 100,000 individuals, while the southern or California population had grown moreslowly, apparently because of a lower rate of pup survival (Riedman et al., 1994). Except during 1976–1983, the southern population increased steadily since it received protection in 1911. The southern seaotter’s primary range is restricted to the coastal area of central California, from Point Año Nuevo to southof Point Conception (Orr and Helm, 1989; USFWS, 1996, 2005), plus a small translocated populationaround San Nicolas Island that diminished to about 17 by 1995, which was not considered viable becausethe population size was too small (Ralls et al., 1995; USFWS, 1996). Sea otters prefer rocky shorelineswith kelp beds and waters about 66 ft (20 m) deep (USFWS, 1996). Few sea otters venture beyond 5,200ft (1,600 m) from shore, and most remain within 1,600 ft (500 m) (Estes and Jameson, 1988). Theyrequire a high intake of energy to satisfy their metabolic requirements. Most sea otters in California tendto be active at night and rest in the middle of the day (Ralls and Siniff, 1990), but there is extensivevariation in the activity of individuals both among and within age and sex classes (Ralls et al., 1995).Sea otters are rarely sighted in the SOCAL OPAREA. Sea otters have been reported at SCI (only threesitings) (Leatherwood et al., 1978). All of those were ~3 mi (5 km) from SCI during the NMFS/SWFSC1998–1999 surveys (Carretta et al., 2000). The species is not expected to be present in the SOCAL3-63 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3OPAREA; therefore, density information cannot meaningfully be calculated and this species is notdescribed in Appendix A.Table 3.3-8. Seasonal Activities of Pinnipeds and Otarids in and Near the SOCAL OPAREAPacific harbor sealJan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Decadult males B M Madult females N B N N M Mpups N N Njuveniles M MNorthern elephantsealadult males B B M M Madult females B N B N M N M M Npups N N N Njuveniles M M MCalifornia sea lionadult males B B Badult females N B N B N B N N M N N Npups N N N N N N N NjuvenilesNotes: Green indicates not in complex, Yellow indicates found in the complex at sea and hauled out periodically, but not engaged in sensitive activities, and Redindicates found in the complex at sea and hauled out for prolonged periods engaged in sensitive activities: M = molting, B = Breeding, N = Nursing3.3.2.7 ESA-Listed Marine Species Not Carried Forward for AnalysisThreatened and endangered species that are not expected to occur within the SOCAL OPAREA include:the steelhead, southern sea otter, North Pacific right whale, Guadalupe fur seal, and the Steller sea lion.Federally-listed threatened and endangered species that may be present in the vicinity of the SOCALOPAREA are discussed in Sections 3.3.2.3 through 3.3.2.6. Of the ESA-listed species, only species thatare present in the training area are analyzed in Chapter 4. However, the Biological Opinion issued byNMFS for these exercises additionally considers other listed species (See Section 4.3.1.8.1).3.3.3 Land AreasBiological resources include native or naturalized plant and animal species and the vegetationcommunities within which they occur. Although the existence and preservation of biological resourcesare intrinsically valuable, these resources also provide aesthetic, recreational, and socioeconomic valuesto society. This analysis focuses on species or vegetation communities that are important to the functionsof biological systems, of special public importance, or are protected under Federal or State law or statute.For purposes of this EA/OEA, these resources are divided into four major categories: vegetation/habitattypes, jurisdictional waters of the U.S., wildlife, and sensitive species.Vegetation/Habitat Types includes all existing terrestrial plant communities as well as its individualcomponent species. The affected environment for vegetation includes only those areas potentially subjectto ground disturbance.February 2007 3-64

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Jurisdictional Waters of the United States are regulated resources and are subject to Federal authorityunder Section 404 of the CWA. The term “waters of the U.S.” is broadly defined to include navigablewaters (including intermittent streams), impoundments, tributary streams, vernal pools, and wetlands.Areas meeting the waters of the U.S. definition are under the jurisdiction of the USACE. They areconsidered important to public interest because they perform significant biological functions, such asproviding nesting, breeding, foraging, and spawning environments for a wide variety of resident andmigratory animal species. In addition, wetlands help improve water quality and provide flood protectionand erosion control.Wildlife includes all animals with the exception of those identified as sensitive: invertebrates, fish,amphibians, reptiles, birds (to include those protected under the Federal MBTA), and mammals.Sensitive species of wildlife or plants are designated as such due to a combination of overall rarity,endangerment, unique habitat requirements, and/or restricted distribution. For purposes of this EA,sensitive terrestrial plant and wildlife species include those listed as endangered or threatened by theUSFWS or endangered, threatened, or rare by the CDFG under the State of California ESA. In addition,plants may be listed by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) with regard to their rarity,endangerment, and distribution (BLM, 2006). CNPS List 1A plants are presumed extinct (CNPS, 2006);1B plants are native California species, subspecies, or varieties that are rare, threatened, or endangered inCalifornia and elsewhere; and List 2 plants are rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but are morecommon elsewhere (BLM, 2006).3.3.3.1 Southern California Operating AreaW-291, which is part of the SOCAL OPAREA, encompasses Santa Catalina Island; however, jointmaritime operations associated with COMPTUEX/JTFEX operations would do not affect the land area ofthe island. Other terrestrial sites located within the SOCAL OPAREA are SCI and the shoreline of NBCoronado. These locations are addressed under separate headings.3.3.3.2 San Clemente IslandThirteen vegetative community categories are found on SCI. Grassland is the largest unit, covering aboutone-third of the island, or nearly 4,855 ha (12,000 ac). The high-elevation plateau is dominated by nativeperennial grasses with native annual forbs in the interspaces. Mid- and low-elevation grasslands tend tobe less diverse and dominated by introduced annual grasses, which are believed to be permanentlyestablished. Other vegetation communities and their extent on the island include:Maritime succulent scrub-prickly pear phase—20%Maritime succulent scrub-Lycium phase—16%Maritime succulent scrub-cholla phase—14%Disturbed—7%Maritime succulent scrub-prickly pear/cholla phase—4%Disturbed—7%Island woodland—2%Stabilized sand dunes—1%Maritime sage scrub—1%Active sand dunes—1%Coastal strand—0.3%Sea bluff succulent—0.1%3-65 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Coastal salt marsh—0.1%Both the flora and fauna of the island have been radically altered by human activities. Although the lastremaining non-native feral ungulates (goats [Capra hircus], sheep [Ovis aries], pigs [Sus scrofa], muledeer [Odocoileus hemionus], and cattle [Bos taurus]) introduced at various times to the island in the late1800s and early 1900s, were removed from the island in 1993. Their presence has significantly impactedthe native vegetation and topsoil (U.S. Navy, 2005). These impacts have also affected the remainingwildlife species present on the island. There are 272 species of native plants, 245 bird species, sixmammal species, and two reptile species known to occur on the island. In addition, there are 124 plantspecies, three bird species, and eight mammal species that have been introduced to the island (U.S. Navy,2006).There are no perennial streams on SCI. Intermittent streams are present during the rainy season as watermoves through the numerous steep canyons before reaching the ocean. The rainy season is generallyfrom November to April, with the annual precipitation averaging approximately 7 in (18 cm). Persistentsurface water falls into two categories: naturally held water in canyons and artificially held water inconstructed impoundments. Natural water is held through the dry period of the year in bedrock plungepools located in the deeper portions of the island’s major canyons.Other than salt marsh, aquatic and wetland habitats on SCI are very limited. They include man-madeimpoundments with associated marsh vegetation and natural aquatic and wetland habitats associated withintermittent streams, especially on the east side of the island where perennial seeps may exist (U.S. Navy,2000).SCI supports 11 Federally-listed endangered or threatened plant and wildlife species, most of which arealso State-listed:Birdso California brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis californicus)—endangeredo San Clemente loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus mearnsi)—endangeredo San Clemente sage sparrow (Amphispiza belli clementeae)—threatenedo Western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus)—threatenedReptileso Island night lizard (Xantusia riversiana)—threatenedPlantso San Clemente Island broom (Lotus dendroideus var. traskiae)—endangeredo San Clemente Island bush-mallow (Malacothamnus clementinus)—endangeredo San Clemente Island Indian paintbrush (Castilleja grisea)—endangeredo San Clemente Island larkspur (Delphinium variegatum ssp. kinkiense)—endangeredo San Clemente Island woodland star (Lithophragma maximum)—endangeredo Santa Cruz Island rock cress (Sibara filifolia)—endangeredOther State-listed island species include the San Clemente Island fox (Urocyon littoralis), Xantus’smurrelet (Synthliboramphus hypoleucus), Santa Catalina bedstraw (Genus Galium), and San ClementeIsland silver hosakia (Lotus argophyllus var. adsurgens). Many of the island’s sensitive species are onlyknown to occur on SCI or the other Channel Islands (U.S. Navy, 2006).February 2007 3-66

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.3.3.3 Naval Base Coronado- SSTCAvailable surveys for NB Coronado have focused on reptiles and amphibians, bird populations, andmammals. With the exception of a few very common species, populations of reptiles and amphibians areprobably quite low on most of NB Coronado. Some lizard species, such as the western fence lizard(Sceloporus occidentalis) and the side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), can frequently be observedaround buildings. Snakes are probably quite rare on most coastal NB Coronado properties, with theexception of the San Diego gopher snake (Pituophis melanoleucusbimaris), which has been observed atNRRF. Reptiles and amphibians have shown well documented declines in recent decades. They areimportant prey items for many bird species, including raptors and loggerhead shrikes (U.S. Navy, 2002a).Numerous non-migratory bird species inhabit NB Coronado year-round. Many non-migratory species,such as the western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia hypugaea) and Belding’s savannah sparrow(Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi), have also shown recent population declines due to habitat loss.Resident bird species tend to breed slightly earlier than most migratory birds but still rely on plentifulspring resources to raise their young. Most of these species are also protected under the MBTA andmanagement concerns are similar to those for migratory birds.Mammals are often less conspicuous than other wildlife, but are found year-round on all installations ofNB Coronado. The native habitats and developed areas harbor populations of small mammals thatdeserve attention as part of the native fauna and as an important food source for raptors and other largecarnivores. Some smaller mammal species, including bats (Order Chiroptera), have been shown to bedeclining throughout their ranges. The only sensitive mammal known to occur on NB Coronado is theSan Diego black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus).Due to the small size of the installation, larger terrestrial mammals are probably not prevalent; however,installations may represent an important part of home ranges and migratory corridors. Coyotes (Canislatrans), skunks (Family Mepitidae), raccoons (Procyon lotor), bats, ground squirrels (Family Sciuridae),and opossums (Didelphis virginiana) are probably the most common larger terrestrial mammals. Theyprimarily use beaches and creeks as natural corridors for movements between properties and can be foundin urban settings. As predators, they can also be detrimental to sensitive bird species. Deer may also bepresent at the inland sites.Four Federally-listed bird species are known to occur at NB Coronado-SSTC: California brown pelican,light-footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes), western snowy plover, and California least tern.Potential habitat also exists on NB Coronado for several sensitive species. The coastal dunes found onthis installation may be home to two sensitive reptile species: the San Diego horned lizard (Phrynosomacoronatum blainvillei) and the silvery legless lizard (Anniella pulchra). Coastal dunes milk-vetch(Astragalus tricarinatus), a State and Federally-listed endangered plant, once occupied the Silver Strandbeaches at NB Coronado, but is now only found on one coastal bluff in Monterey County, California.Salt marsh bird’s beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus), a State and Federally-listed endangeredplant species, inhabits saline and alkaline habitat of the high salt marsh of San Diego County, but iscurrently not found at NB Coronado (U.S. Navy, 2002a).3.4 CULTURAL RESOURCESCultural resources generally are grouped into three major categories: Archaeological Resources;Architectural Resources; and Traditional Cultural Resources. Archaeological sites may be prehistoric orhistoric in age. Architectural Resources include historic buildings, structures or engineering objects.3-67 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Traditional Cultural Resources are held by a specific group, most often Native Americans, as beingessential for the persistence and continuity of their traditional culture. Traditional Cultural Resourcesmay consist of archaeological sites, locations of events, or sacred places.COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities would primarily affect terrestrial archaeological sites. Submergedarchaeological sites, primarily shipwrecks, also could be affected. The COMPTUEX/JTFEX activitiestake place primarily offshore or on established inland ranges, so potential impacts on architecturalresources are not a major consideration. Some traditional cultural resources associated with local NativeAmericans have been identified on installations to be used by COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities.3.4.1 Federal RequirementsCultural resources on Federal or Federally-controlled lands are protected by Federal law. Federal lawsand Executive Orders (EOs) applicable to the protection of cultural resources include:National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA)Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA)Native American Graves and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)EO 13084, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal GovernmentsUnder NHPA, Federal agencies are required to responsibly manage the cultural resources under theircontrol. Specific management responsibilities are described in Section 106 and Section 110 of NHPA.NHPA also calls for consultation with local Native Americans concerning relevant cultural resourceissues. ARPA established penalties for the theft or damage of archaeological resources from Federallands. NAGPRA regulates and mandates Federal actions concerning Native American human remainsand funerary objects. NAGPRA further codifies Federal consultation procedures with Native Americans,as does EO 13084.For COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities, potentially affected cultural resources include the archaeological,architectural, and traditional cultural resources of the SOCAL OPAREA; including Warning Area 291;San Clemente Island; NB Coronado; and Camp Pendleton.3.4.2 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area)SOCAL OPAREA is a sea range, and therefore does not contain any terrestrial cultural resources. Thereare no architectural resources in the SOCAL OPAREA. No traditional cultural resources have beenidentified in the SOCAL OPAREA.Prehistoric cultural resources in SOCAL OPAREA are likely to be limited to isolated, nearshore artifactslost from Native American watercraft. A large number of historic shipwrecks and downed aircraft arecertain to be present in the SOCAL OPAREA. If present, shipwrecks are likely to be located near thecoast or the offshore islands. Little is known about the number and locations of shipwrecks in the outerportions of the SOCAL OPAREA.A number of literature sources were reviewed to provide information regarding offshore culturalresources. Commercial fishermen and divers at commercial docks in San Diego and San Pedro also wereinterviewed (Pettus et al. 2000). An inventory of submerged historic-period cultural resources included68 submerged sites. Included in the inventory are 35 named shipwrecks, 14 unknown or unidentifiedvessels, 17 aircraft, an anchor, and the scuttled Sea Lab. Of the resources with locations indicated, 22 arewithin the 12 nm (22 km) limit and 7 are outside the limit.February 2007 3-68

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.4.3 Land Areas3.4.3.1 San Clemente Island3.4.3.1.1 Archeological ResourcesApproximately 33 percent of the Island has been intensively surveyed for cultural resources. Themajority of recorded sites are prehistoric. Many are small middens containing shellfish, fish, and seamammal remains along with tools used to process these and other resources. In support of the SCI EIS,pedestrian surveys were recently conducted at three locations in the SHOBA (Apple et al. 2003). Surveyshave identified over 3,100 archeological sites which have been cataloged into an archeological database.Some 629 of the Island’s sites have warning signs posted to help identify them as locations for avoidance.The island-wide archeological database described above also includes 28 identified historic periodcultural resources. Historic-period sites include the remains of abalone camps along the western shoreand remnants of the sheep ranching efforts. These sites often are comprised of rock features withassociated domestic debris such as glass or ceramics. Throughout the historic period, the humanpopulation of the Island has been low and archeological remains are limited.3.4.3.1.2 Architectural ResourcesArchitectural resources on the Island are primarily related to military activities, and date to World War IIand the Cold War, although a few structures predating the military development are present. Thesestructures include three cement water tanks and a dam from the sheep ranching era. Based on a review ofthe property records for the island, there are 58 pre-World War II and World War II era (1935-1945), 172Cold War (1946-1989), and 46 modern (1989-1998) buildings and structures. Another 143 structures(dams, tanks, etc.) of undetermined age are also present on the island. One World War II dam has beeninventoried (Apple and Allen 1996). A Cold War antenna complex and a missile launch complex, alongwith two World War II gun range targets, also were inventoried and evaluated (JRP Historical ConsultingServices 1997).3.4.3.1.3 Traditional Cultural Resources and Native American IssuesSCI has been in the stewardship of the U.S. government since 1848, and public access since that time hasbeen limited. Evidence of some historic-period Native American use exists, but no traditional culturalresources have been identified on SCI. No Federally recognized Native American tribes are affiliatedwith SCI, although Native Americans of Gabrielino descent have expressed interest and concern aboutisland resources.3.4.3.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCIn the early 1900s, the San Diego Bay area was surveyed, and sites were recorded on Silver Strand andNASNI. Within NB Coronado, a site no more than three to four inches (7.6 or 10.2 centimeters) thickwas recorded, consisting of shell, thermal fractured rock, and charcoal. This site occurred on a road bankand may have been destroyed or covered by the road that was expanded there.A 1982 cultural resources inventory identified four sites that may be eligible for the National Register ofHistoric Places (NRHP). Two single, isolated artifacts also were identified, but isolated resources are noteligible for the NRHP. Because the project is located in areas with fill and aeolian sediments, additionalburied archaeological resources may be present. Surveys in the 1950s and 1960s established a 4,000-yearoccupation for a portion of Silver Strand.3-69 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTESMaterials that have been determined by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to be capable of posing anunreasonable risk to health, safety, or property when transported in commerce are designated ashazardous under U.S. law (49 CFR 171.8). Hazardous wastes, as defined in the Resource Conservationand Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976, are substances with strong physical properties of ignitability,corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity which may cause an increase in mortality, a serious irreversible illness,an incapacitating reversible illness, or a substantial threat to human health or the environment. Hazardousmaterials and wastes are regulated by U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in accordancewith the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Clean Water Act (CWA), Solid Waste Disposal Act(SWDA), Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976, RCRA, Clean Air Act, (CAA) andComprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The EmergencyPlanning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) establishes requirements for Federal, State, andlocal governments and industry regarding reporting of hazardous and toxic chemicals. Access to thisinformation contributes to improving chemical safety and protecting public health and the environment.Federal agencies are required to comply with these acts and with all applicable state regulations underExecutive Order 12088, Federal Compliance with Pollution Control Standards; DoD Directive 4165060,Solid Waste Management; and Navy and USMC guidelines for hazardous materials management.Environmental compliance policies and procedures applicable to shipboard operations are defined inNavy doctrinal publications. The Navy’s standing operating procedures reinforce the CWA’s prohibitionagainst discharge of harmful quantities of hazardous substances into or upon U.S. waters out to 200 nm(370 km). These instructions include stringent hazardous waste discharge, storage, dumping, andpollution prevention requirements. Navy ships are required to conduct operations at sea in a manner thatminimizes or eliminates any adverse impacts on the marine environment.Shipboard waste-handling procedures governing the discharge of non-hazardous waste streams also havebeen established. The categories of wastes include: (a) liquids: “black water” (sewage); “gray water”(water from deck drains, showers, dishwashers, laundries, etc.); and oily wastes (oil water mixtures); (b)solids (garbage); (c) hazardous wastes; and (d) medical wastes.The Navy has an active Pollution Prevention Program that applies to all aspects of its activities. It isNavy policy to conduct its facility management and acquisition programs in a manner that minimizes thequantity of toxic chemicals entering the environment. Pollution prevention is not pollution control but acomprehensive set of practices that result in a lesser volume of wastes to be dealt with or transferred tothe environment. The fundamental tenet of the Navy’s pollution prevention program is the reduction ofhazardous materials and wastes at their source. This results in less hazardous waste for all waste streams.3.5.1 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area)Most of the hazardous wastes generated in the SOCAL OPAREA result from shipboard activities.Shipboard hazardous wastes are containerized and stored on-board, off-loaded while in port, and disposedof in accordance with State and Federal laws and Navy regulations. Missile firings introduce smallamounts of spent rocket motor fuel into the marine environment. Target drones and unmanned aerialvehicles carry fuel, lubricants and electrochemical cells. Target drones normally are recovered unlessthey are hit by an inert missile or are destroyed by a live warhead. If a drone is destroyed, small amountsof fuel, lubricants and battery chemicals are released into the marine environment.February 2007 3-70

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Training operations involve numerous ships, boats, and support craft. These manned vessels do notintentionally release any hazardous constituents into the water. However, small amounts of diesel fuel orengine oil may leak into the water.3.5.2 Land Areas3.5.2.1 San Clemente Island3.5.2.1.1 Hazardous Materials ManagementVarious hazardous materials, oils, and hydraulic fuels are used to support aircraft, target, and vehiclemaintenance performed on the Island. Hazardous materials used on SCI are ordered through NASNI andshipped to the island via barge or aircraft. Only the minimum amount of a hazardous material is obtainedfor a task in order to prevent disposing excess material as hazardous waste.The largest quantity of stored hazardous materials is fuel. SCI facilities are heated and powered withdiesel fuel. Unleaded gasoline is shipped for use by ground vehicles. About 2,300 gallons (8,700 liters)of unleaded gasoline and 15,000 gallons (57,000 liters) of diesel are shipped by freight barge per week. Atotal of 120,000 gallons (454,000 liters) of unleaded gasoline and 780,000 gallons (2.9 million liters) ofdiesel were used on the Island in Fiscal Year (FY) 1994. About 1,200,000 gallons (4.5 million liters) ofJP-5 are shipped to the Island by tanker barge per year (Note: Information on fuel usage has not beenupdated to reflect FY04 usage; those data are to be determined).Aircraft fire fighting foam, in addition to fuel, was the only material that was reported in NASNI'sEPCRA report. Approximately 15,000 gallons (56,800 liters) of fire-fighting foam is stored on SCI, andapproximately 100 gallons (380 liters) are used each year. Ordnance is stored at the mid-island MillsCircle Ordnance facility, comprised of seven magazines. From the magazines, ordnance is transported byvehicle to approved ready-service lockers at the user’s site.3.5.2.1.2 Pollution PreventionSCI has an active Pollution Prevention Program to reduce the amount of hazardous and solid wastesgenerated on base. The guidance for the program is the December 1995 Pollution Prevention Plan.Since many of the activities that occur at SCI are research and development in the weapons systemsacquisition process, these activities must be compliant with the overall DoD guidance on pollutionprevention during weapons acquisition.3.5.2.1.3 Hazardous Wastes ManagementThere is one 90-day accumulation point on SCI. The accumulation area is located at the operationsterminal at the airport, near to where most of the hazardous wastes are generated. The hazardous waste iscontainerized and then transported to the pier from where it is shipped back to NANSI by barge. Afterarrival at San Diego, the waste is handled by NASNI’s hazardous waste contractor, who transports it to anapproved treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF). In FY 1997, 201,504 lb (91,452 kg) ofhazardous wastes were shipped from SCI, mostly waste oil and oily waste.3.5.2.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTC3.5.2.2.1 Hazardous MaterialsNB Coronado has a hazardous materials business plan that provides guidance and direction for the use,storage, and compliance activities for hazardous materials and wastes. The transport of dangerousarticles, including hazardous materials and non-fused munitions, on public roads is controlled andregulated by the Federal Department of Transportation (49 CFR). The State of California enforces3-71 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3Federal transportation safety regulations within its jurisdiction. Munitions and other dangerous articlesgenerally may be transported on public highways if proper safety procedures are followed. Bulkhazardous materials loads are prohibited from using Coronado Bridge, so hazardous materials for NBCoronado are typically transported on SR-75 through Imperial Beach.Hazardous materials required to maintain and operate equipment used in NB Coronado training activitiesincludes petroleum products, coolants, paints, adhesives, solvents, corrosion inhibitors, cleaningcompounds, photographic materials and chemicals, and batteries. Most of the hazardous materials usedwithin NB Coronado are stored in a Hazardous Material Minimization Center. Individual shops are alsoauthorized to store hazardous materials in small quantities. Shops generally are limited to storing aweek’s worth of hazardous materials for routine tasks. Lubricating oils, aerosol paints, adhesives, andgrease comprise the greatest amount of hazardous materials on the base.3.5.2.2.2 Hazardous WasteWithin NB Coronado, SSTC-North is a hazardous waste Large-Quantity Generator and Transporter underRCRA (USEPA RCRA Identification Number CA9170023130). SSTC-South is a Small QuantityGenerator (USEPA ID# CA1170090558). SSTC-North was last inspected in June 2004, and has been innon-compliance status with regard to general generator requirements for eight out of the twelve calendarquarters ending in December 2005 (USEPA, 2005). SSTC-South never has been inspected by USEPA,but is deemed to be in compliance.SSTC training activities generate hazardous wastes primarily through operation and maintenance ofvehicles and equipment required for training. This waste stream includes used batteries and electrolyte,painting and plating wastes, used photographic chemicals, used solvent and degreasing wastes, spillcleanup materials, ordnance remnants and residues, bilge tank residues, used coolants, waste and off-specfuels, oils, and grease. Commander, Navy Region Southwest (CNRSW) has prepared a Hazardous WasteManagement Plan (HWMP) for Navy facilities in the San Diego region (U.S. Navy, 2005b). The HWMPprovides comprehensive and consistent guidance to personnel at SSTC-North and SSTC-South regardingcharacterization, storage, disposal, and record-keeping for RCRA wastes.Hazardous wastes are generated at most of the industrial shops on SSTC. SSTC produced approximately421,242 lb (191,072 kg) of hazardous waste in FY 2000. These wastes consisted primarily of waste rags,paint, solvent, spill residues and absorbent materials, corrosion prevention compound in aerosol cans,ethylene glycol, batteries, photograph processing wastes, waste cleaning compounds, and debris. Thereare several satellite accumulation areas and one 90-day accumulation area at SSTC. Hazardous wastesare collected from the 90-day accumulation area by Public Works Center (PWC) and transported tostorage facilities at NASNI. All hazardous wastes are removed from PWC by a Defense Reutilization andMarketing Office contractor to an approved treatment, storage, and disposal facility. Waste fuels, oils,and hydraulic fluids are stored temporarily in fuel tanks at the fuel farm. A contractor periodically drainsthe contents from the tanks and recycles the fluids.3.6 SOCIOECONOMICSSocioeconomics are the basic attributes and resources associated with the human environment,particularly population and economic activity. Economic activity typically encompasses employment,personal income, and industrial growth. Impacts on these fundamental socioeconomic componentsinfluence other issues such as housing availability and provision of public services.February 2007 3-72

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.6.1 Southern California Operating Area3.6.1.1 OverviewEconomic activities within the SOCAL OPAREA consist of commercial shipping, commercial fishing,and recreational activities including sport fishing, pleasure boating, and eco-tourism. These activitiesmake a significant contribution to the overall economy of Southern California. Commercial andrecreational activities are especially important uses of offshore waters.3.6.1.2 Commercial ActivitiesCommercial uses include commercial fishing, diving, and trapping. These activities occur at variouslocations off the coast of Southern California. Commercial fishing in the Southern California areaaccounts for a significant proportion of the fish and invertebrate catches in California, with an annualvalue of approximately $145 million (California Department of Fish and Game [CDFG], 2001). Sportfishing and tourism are important economic activities, supporting large numbers of charter operators andboaters in the Southern California area. The commercial harvest of kelp and other marine vegetation nearthe coastline is becoming an established industry in Southern California.Commercial fishing takes place in nearshore waters from La Jolla to the Silver Strand; the targetresources include both hard-bottom (urchins and crustaceans) and pelagic (mackerel and tuna) species.The extensive kelp bed and rocky substrate offshore of Point Loma likely supports most of the hardbottomfishing efforts, which include diving (urchins and top snail) and traps (lobster and crab). Purseseining occurs throughout this area. This area results in an annual harvest of about 656,000 pounds (lb)(298,000 kilograms [kg]) of fish and about 339,000 lb (154,000 kg) of invertebrates annually. Commonlytargeted species include barracuda, halibut, croaker, white sea bass, and surfperch (USFWS 1981).3.6.1.3 Recreational ActivitiesRecreational activities occur primarily in the nearshore waters of Southern California. Typical offshorerecreational activities include sport fishing, sailing, boating, diving and swimming. In addition, thecoastal and offshore marine environments are popular locations for tourist activities including sightseeing,whale watching, sport fishing, pleasure boating, and diving.Salt-water sport fishing and recreational diving are centered around the Channel Islands, and secondarilyin the shallower waters over the Cortes and Tanner Banks. Most boat trips originate from marinas andharbors along the Southern California coast. Charter and privately operated boats also occasionally enterthese waters for other tourism and recreational purposes. Whale watching is popular primarily fromMarch through May, during the annual gray whale northward migration. Other activities include birdwatching and marine mammal observation.While there are numerous diving sites off Southern California, SCI’s relatively warm waters, goodunderwater visibility and largely pristine diving conditions make it a popular destination. A review ofscuba diving charter advertising shows dive trips scheduled as often as weekly by some operators. Divingoccurs year-round, although the number of trips to SCI and the Banks appears to peak during lobsterseason (October-March).Recreational diving and spear fishing are also popular off of Point Loma (CDFG, 1983). TheInternational Artificial Reef, located in approximately 165 ft (50 m) of water to the southwest of theImperial Beach Pier, is a popular destination. The proximity of rocky and sedimentary habitats to themajor recreational fishing centers in San Diego Bay makes this area particularly popular with sportfishers. Kelp bass, sheephead, sculpin, and rockfish are popular recreational species.3-73 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.6.1.4 Navy ActivitiesNavy activities in Southern California make a substantial contribution to the social and economic wellbeing of California. The Department of the Navy (including the Marine Corps activities in the San Diegoarea) supports the largest concentration of naval forces in the world. Most of the ships and units that trainin the SOCAL complex are home-ported in San Diego, and their social and positive economic impact arefelt in the cities, towns, and countryside of Southern California.The DON in the San Diego region operates in an intensely urban context. The DoD’s annual financialbenefit to San Diego’s economy is estimated at $10.6 billion. This value represents the direct and indirectbenefits provided by 87,000 sailors, 240,000 family members, and 29,000 civilian employees working atthe U.S. Navy and U.S. Marine Corps installations. San Diego Bay is homeport to over 75 ships thatrequire servicing, supplying, maintaining, and locations for crews to train.3.6.2 Land Areas3.6.2.1 San Clemente IslandEconomic activity on SCI is driven by the Navy. Military support facilities on SCI are staffed bygovernment contractors or Navy civilian or military personnel. The mission of the Island and itspersonnel is to operate facilities and provide services, arms and material support to Fleet tactical trainingand RDT&E activities. All employment on the island is directly or indirectly related to Navy activities.About 500 DON personnel, civil service employees, and contractors live on SCI on a continuing basis.During major training exercises, the number of personnel on-island can exceed 1,000 for short periods.The primary economic impact of this workforce is in San Diego County, where most of these individualsreside.SCI has very limited housing. Most of the on-island living quarters are located in the Wilson Cove area,and range from trailers to permanent Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (BEQs). Visitor facilities are limited to20 individuals. No children live on SCI.Medical facilities on SCI are limited. A medical office staffed by a corpsman is used solely by militaryand civilian personnel stationed on SCI. This facility provides assistance for routine care and short-termemergency care. For all other medical needs, on-island personnel are transported to the mainland.3.6.2.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCThe region of influence for NB Coronado includes San Diego County and the cities of Coronado andImperial Beach. The economy of the San Diego region is based primarily on the service, retail trade,government, and manufacturing sectors of the economy.3.6.2.2.1 PopulationNB Coronado is located in the City of Coronado, in the South Bay portion of the San Diego metropolitanarea, an intensely urban and growing area. With a current population of about 25,000, the population ofthe City is projected to grow by about 6 percent through 2030. With a current population of about130,000, the South Bay area is projected to grow by about 33 percent through 2030.February 2007 3-74

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.6.2.2.2 HousingSan Diego County has about one million housing units, of which about 60 percent are single-family unitsand about 35 percent are multi-family units; the overall housing stock is projected to grow by about 33percent over the next 25 years. The City of Coronado has about 9,600 housing units, and this housingstock is anticipated to grow by about three percent over the next 25 years.NB Coronado's Main Base provides officer and enlisted bachelor housing and officer family housing.Officer family housing consists of single-family and duplex housing units, some of which front on SanDiego Bay. Basic Underwater Detonation / SEAL student housing is located on the surf side of the MainBase. An enlisted family housing area located south of the Fiddler's Cove Marina consists of duplex andtownhouse units with an elementary school.3.6.2.2.3 RecreationNB Coronado is located in a portion of the San Diego metropolitan area that is used extensively forrecreation. Numerous hotels and other visitor facilities are located on the Coronado peninsula and innearby areas. The extensive beaches on the ocean side of the peninsula are among the most popularbeaches in the County, and both San Diego Bay and the ocean waters off Coronado are popular for allforms of boating and water sports. Several marinas and public parks are located in the area.Military recreational facilities in the area include Gater Beach, located just north of the Main Base, andFiddler's Cove Marina and recreational vehicle park, located south of the Main Base. A 40-acre parcel ofbayside Navy property is leased to State of California for an interpretive trail and campsite. Also, theYMCA is allowed temporary use of about 80 acres in the southwestern corner of SSTC, through arevocable license, for a youth camp.3.7 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDRENExecutive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations andLow-Income Populations, was issued on February 11, 1994. This EO requires each Federal agency toidentify and address, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmentaleffects of its programs, policies and activities on minority and low-income populations. The EPA and theCEQ have emphasized the importance of incorporating environmental justice review in the analysesconducted by Federal agencies under NEPA and of developing protective measures that avoiddisproportionate environmental effects on minority and low-income populations.Objectives of this EO as it pertains to this EA/OEA include development of Federal agencyimplementation strategies, identification of minority and low-income populations where proposed Federalactions have disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects, andparticipation of minority and low-income populations. Accompanying Executive Order 12898 was aPresidential Transmittal Memorandum, which referenced existing Federal statutes and regulations to beused in conjunction with Executive Order 12898. The memorandum addressed the use of the policies andprocedures of NEPA. Specifically, the memorandum requires that, "Each Federal agency shall analyzethe environmental effects, including human health, economic and social effects, of Federal actions,including effects on minority communities and low-income communities, when such analysis is requiredby the NEPA 42 U.S.C. section 4321 et. seq."3.7.1 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area)Environmental justice is not applicable to the SOCAL OPAREA because the area consists of open waterand no permanent human populations exist.3-75 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.7.2 Land Areas3.7.2.1 San Clemente IslandEnvironmental justice is not applicable to SCIRC because the only residents on SCI are temporarymilitary and contractor personnel. SCIRC is owned and operated by the Navy and access is restricted.3.7.2.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCNB Coronado is located within San Diego County. Race and ethnic composition in San Diego County isshown in Table 3.7-1.3.8 TRANSPORTATIONTable 3.7-1. Population and Ethnicity for San Diego CountyRace/Ethnicity (1)San Diego County750,000White 1,871,839Black 161,480American Indian and Alaska Native 24,337Asian 249,802Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islanders 13,561Some Other Race 360,847Two or More Races 131,967Total 2,813,833Hispanic or Latino (of any race, included inthe above total) (2)(1 ) 2000 Census.(2) The Hispanic category is an ethnic, rather than a racial distinction. These tables therefore includeonly non-Hispanic individuals in the black, white, and other categories to avoid over counting.Source: SANDAG 2001, 2002.Traffic issues refer to transportation and circulation of vehicles within an organized framework. Since theCOMPTUEX/JTFEX occurs primarily in the marine environment, transportation and traffic discussionsin this EA/OEA focus on military and civilian use of the air and sea routes within the SOCAL OPAREA.Transportation activities related to surface traffic would not be affected by COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities because these activities are minimal and would not disrupt transportation patterns, affect trafficflow, or deteriorate existing levels of service for existing transportation networks. Therefore, surfacetraffic it is not addressed in this EA/OEA.3.8.1 Ocean TrafficThe Coast Guard typically establishes maritime traffic routes. The major purpose of the routes (oftenreferred to as shipping lanes) is to allow access to major ports for large commercial vessels whileproviding adequate separation space from other types of offshore activities. The ranges are adjacent toseveral major commercial shipping lanes.Ocean traffic flow in congested waters, especially near-coastlines, is controlled by the use of directionalshipping lanes for large vessels (cargo, container ships, and tankers). Traffic flow controls are alsoimplemented to ensure that harbors and ports-of-entry remain as uncongested as possible. There is lesscontrol on ocean traffic involving recreational boating, sport fishing, commercial fishing, and activity byFebruary 2007 3-76

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3naval vessels. In most cases, the factors that govern shipping or boating traffic include the following:adequate depth of water; weather conditions (primarily affecting recreational vessels); the availability offish of recreational or commercial value; and water temperature (higher water temperatures will increaserecreational boat traffic and diving activities).3.8.2 Air TrafficAir traffic refers to movements of aircraft through airspace. Air traffic varies from very highly controlledto uncontrolled. Examples of highly controlled air traffic situations are flight in the vicinity of airports,where aircraft are in critical phases of flight (take-off and landing), flight under instrument flight rules(IFR), and flight on the high or low altitude route structure (airways). Less controlled situations includeflight under visual flight rules (VFR) or flight outside of United States controlled airspace (e.g., flightover international waters off the coast of California).Airways are established routes that are used by commercial aircraft, general aviation, and militaryaircraft. There are two types of airway route structures: low altitude routes (those below 18,000 feetMean Sea Level [MSL]) and high altitude routes (those above 18,000 feet MSL).Special Use Airspace (SUA) refers to areas with defined dimensions where flight activities are confineddue to their nature and the need to exclude or restrict non-participating aircraft. SUA is established underprocedures outlined in Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 73. Most SUA areas are established formilitary flight activities. SUAs applicable to COMPTUEX/JTFEX events include restricted areas,warning areas, military operations areas, controlled firing areas, and military training routes.Restricted Areas contain airspace within which the flight of aircraft, while not wholly prohibited, issubject to restriction. Restricted Areas denote the existence of unusual, often invisible, hazards to aircraftsuch as artillery firing, aerial gunnery, or guided missile flights.Warning Areas are designated airspace for military activities in international airspace located over thecoastal waters of the United States and its territories. Military flight activities associated with a WarningArea may be hazardous (e.g., conducting weapons firing), but since international agreements do notprovide for prohibition of flight in international airspace, there are no restrictions to flight by nonparticipatingaircraft. Designated corridors through a warning area are defined for commercial air traffic.These Controlled Area Extensions (CAEs) can be opened or closed at the request of a user, incoordination with the FAA.Military Operations Areas (MOAs) consist of airspace of defined vertical and lateral limits established forthe purpose of separating certain non-hazardous military training activities from IFR traffic.Controlled Firing Areas contain activities that, if not conducted in a controlled environment, could behazardous to non-participating aircraft. The distinguishing feature of the Controlled Firing Area, ascompared to other special use airspace, is that activities are suspended immediately when spotter aircraft,radar, or ground lookout positions indicate an aircraft might be approaching the area. They are notcharted since they do not cause a non-participating aircraft to change its flight path.Military Training Routes (MTRs) are a joint venture by the FAA and the DoD. MTRs are mutuallydeveloped for use by the military for the purpose of conducting low-altitude, high-speed training. Theroutes above 457 m (1,500 ft) above ground level, identified by three number characters (e.g., IR-206,VR-207), are developed to be flown, to the maximum extent possible, under instrument flight rules. Theroutes at 457 m (1,500 ft) above ground level and below, identified by four number characters (e.g., IR-1206, VR-1207), are generally developed to be flown under visual flight rules. Generally, military3-77 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3training routes are established below 3,048 m (1 0,000 ft) mean sea level for operations at speeds inexcess of 250 knots. However, route segments may be defined at higher altitudes for purposes of routecontinuity. Route width is normally 9 km (5 nm) on either side of the centerline. In addition to theinstrument and visual flight rules routes, there are slow-speed, low-altitude routes used for military airoperations at or below 457 m (1,500 ft) at airspeeds of 250 knots or less.3.8.3 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area)3.8.3.1 Ocean TrafficA significant amount of ocean traffic (consisting of both large and small vessels) transits in the vicinity ofthe SOCAL OPAREA. Ocean traffic is the transit of commercial, private, or military vessels at sea. Thetypes of Navy vessels that operate in the offshore areas range from small workboats to major combatships such as aircraft carriers, cruisers, and submarines.Civilian vessels fall into two general categories: commercial and recreational. The Coast Guard hasindicated that there are no precise estimates for recreational or commercial fishing or boating activitythroughout SOCAL.The Navy vessels that operate in the offshore areas around San Clemente Island range from small workboats to major Navy combat ships such as aircraft carriers, cruisers, or submarines. The activity level ofships or boats is characterized as a ship or boat “event” (one trip into the range areas off the island). Non-Navy Ocean traffic consists of recreational and commercial fishing or boating events, and commercialshipping vessels.3.8.3.2 Air TrafficW-291 extends from the surface to Flight Level 800 (approximately 80,000 feet [24,384 m] above MSL).W-291 is located entirely over international waters (except the portion over the island itself). W-291 isactive on an intermittent basis and is activated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on requestby the Navy when operations that would pose a hazard to non-participating aircraft are being conducted.When W-291 is active, CAE 1156 may be closed to air traffic under the control of the FAA if a hazard tocivil air traffic is deemed to exist.Military aircraft routinely operate in W-291 near San Clemente Island. These aircraft take off fromairfields on the mainland, San Clemente Island, or from aircraft carriers operating offshore nearby.Military aircraft take off from mainland airfields with an IFR clearance from FAA Air Traffic Control.After entering W-291, flights proceed via VFR using a “see-and-avoid” rule to remain clear of other airtraffic.Civilian aircraft operating under IFR clearances, authorized by the Los Angeles Air Route Traffic ControlCenter (ARTCC), normally fly on formal airway route structures. In the vicinity of San Clemente Islandthese airways run from coastal California north of W-291 and through W-291. These airways are CAE1177 and 1156. When W-291 is active, CAE 1156 is normally closed. CAE 1177 is the most importantroute through the coastal warning areas and is closed only when weapons hazard patterns extend into thearea, and then only with full coordination with the FAA. When W-291 is active, aircraft on IFRclearances are precluded from entering W-291 by the FAA. However, since W-291 is located entirelyover international waters, non-participating aircraft on VFR flight plans are not prevented from enteringthe area. Examples of aircraft flights of this nature include light aircraft, fish spotters, researchers, andwhale watchers.February 2007 3-78

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.8.4 Land Areas3.8.4.1 San Clemente IslandThere are approximately 50 miles of roads on SCI consisting of both paved and unpaved roads. Theprimary route is San Clemente Island Ridge Road, which runs the length of the island from the airfield tothe southern part of SHOBA. The northern half of Ridge Road is paved; it is generally unpaved south ofthe abandoned airfield. The other road network is located in the Wilson Cove area.3.8.4.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCState Route 75 (SR-75) is the principal access to NB Coronado. SR-75 connects to Interstate 5 (I-5) onthe mainland north and south of the SSTC. Transportation issues resulting from Navy operations arebeing evaluated in an EIS addressing operations at NB Coronado. If the EIS determines the need forprotective measures to address potential concerns about transportation issues at NB Coronado, thosemeasures would be incorporated into operating procedures for all activities using the land and waterresources of NB Coronado.3.9 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETYHazardous military operations include vehicle and equipment operations, storage and use of live and inertammunition and explosives, and use of laser and electromagnetic devices. The degree of risk posed topublic health and safety by these activities is related primarily to their proximity to the public, and topublic access. The Navy observes every possible precaution in planning and executing its operations toprevent injury to people, or damage to property or the environment. The primary public health and safetyissues associated with implementing the Proposed Action are posed by aircraft operations and the use ofweapons.3.9.1 Range OperationsHazardous training activities include small arms fire, artillery fire, naval surface fire support, underwaterdemolition in nearshore areas, and air-to-ground munitions delivery. Where live and inert munitions areexpended, a qualified Range Safety Officer (RSO) always is on duty on the range. The safety ofparticipants is the primary consideration for all COMPTUEX/JTFEX training operations. Thefundamental guidance adhered to by military units during training is that the range must be able to safelycontain the hazard footprints of the weapons and equipment employed. RSOs ensure that these hazardousareas are clear of personnel during operations. After a live-fire event, the participating unit ensures thatall weapons are safe and clear of live rounds. The RSOs also are responsible for the emergency medicalevacuation of personnel from the range in the case of a mishap.3.9.2 LasersLasers are used on the ranges for precision distance range finding and for target designation for guidedmunitions. Strict precautions are observed and written instructions are in place for laser users to ensureno personnel suffer eye injury from the intense light energy. The completion of a laser safety course,protective goggles, a medical surveillance program, and mishap reporting procedures are required of allunits operating lasers. Laser safety measures for aircraft include a dry run to ensure that target areas areclear. Aircraft run-in headings are restricted to preclude inadvertent lasing of areas where personnel maybe present. Lasers cannot be fired over water if the surface is smooth enough to cause reflections andpossible injury to personnel. For laser operations on land, a qualified Laser Safety Officer must bepresent.3-79 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.9.3 AircraftMilitary aircraft in offshore areas operate under Visual Flight Rules and under visual meteorologicalconditions. The commanders of military aircraft are responsible for separating their aircraft from otheraircraft in the area, and for the safe conduct of the flight. Prior to releasing any weapons or ordnance,flight personnel must confirm that the impact area is clear of non-participating vessels and aircraft. TheOfficer Conducting the Exercise is responsible for the safe conduct of range training. During all trainingevents or exercises, a qualified Navy Safety Officer also is on duty, and can terminate activities if unsafeconditions exist. During operations on the range, aircraft are required to be in radio contact whenentering a designated traffic area.3.9.4 SubmarinesSubmarines routinely train on Southern California Offshore Range (SCORE). The range has an array ofhydrophones to track submarines, torpedoes, and targets. Vehicles on the Southern California Anti-Submarine Warfare Range (SOAR) are equipped with pingers (noise makers) to allow SCORE to trackthem. Submarines on SOAR are in continuous communication with SCORE. For the safety ofsubmarines on the range, minimum vertical and horizontal separation distances are specified. When twosubmarines are on the range simultaneously, vertical separation is maintained by operating the submarinesat different depths.3.9.5 ShipsFor COMPTUEX/JTFEXs, ships conduct anti-submarine training against submarines and submarinesimulatedtargets. During these exercises, ships maintain radio contact with range control. Prior tolaunching any weapon, ships are required to obtain a “Green Range" condition, which indicates that allsafety criteria have been satisfied and that the weapons/target recovery conditions and recoveryhelicopter/boats are ready to be employed.3.9.6 MunitionsOrdnance of various types is stored and used at military facilities in the SOCAL region. Ordnancestorage facilities include Ready Service Lockers (RSLs) and reinforced munitions bunkers. Munitions arehandled and stored in accordance with long-standing Navy protocols and procedures. The presence of amunitions storage site restricts the types of activities that can occur in its vicinity.The types and amounts of explosive material that may be stored in an area are determined by explosivessafety quantity-distance (ESQD) requirements established by the DoD Explosives Safety Board. ESQDarcs determine the minimum safe distance from munitions storage areas to habitable structures.3.9.7 MissilesFor Missile Operations, safety is the top priority and paramount concern. These operations are surface-tosurface.A Missile Operation Letter of Instruction is prepared prior to any missile firing operation. Thisinstruction establishes precise ground rules for the safe and successful execution of the operation. AnyMissile Operation participant that observes an unsafe situation can communicate a “Red Range” orderover any voice communication system.3.9.8 Ocean Areas (Southern California Operating Area)W-291 is the Warning Area associated with the SOCAL OPAREA. W-291 parallels the coast to thesouth of Los Angeles for a distance of approximately 288 nm (533 km), and extends seaward for up to800 nm (1,482 km). The nearshore waters of the SOCAL OPAREA are extensively used by recreationalFebruary 2007 3-80

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 3boaters and commercial fishing boats. Major coastal and oceanic shipping routes cross the offshoretraining areas. When not in use by the Navy, the nearshore areas generally are accessible to boaters andfisherman. Several coastal areas that are restricted to naval vessels or that pose a substantial hazard tomariners are identified in 33 Code of Federal Regulations.Except for STRIKE, SOCAL OPAREA supports the full spectrum of major COMPTUEX/JTFEXtraining activities that use aircraft and marine vessels. Training events in SOCAL OPAREA follow allRange Safety, Aviation Safety, Submarine Safety, Surface Ship and Munitions Safety procedures.3.9.9 Land Areas3.9.9.1 San Clemente IslandPublic health and safety in the offshore areas surrounding SCIRC were addressed above.SCI is owned and operated by the Navy. Exclusive use, security, and danger zones have been establishedon and around SCIRC. Access to SCI is granted for military activities and for non-military uses such asbiological surveys and scientific research. The users of the SCI ranges must comply with numerousestablished safety procedures to ensure that both participants and non-participants do not engage inactivities that would endanger life or property.3.9.9.1.1 Live Fire and DemolitionOnshore hazardous activities include live-fire of small arms and artillery, Naval Surface Fire Supportagainst targets in the Shore Bombardment Area (SHOBA), and air-to-ground munitions delivery. Wherelive or inert munitions are expended, a qualified RSO always is on duty. Safety is the primaryconsideration for all operations on weapons ranges on SCI. The fundamental principles are that the rangemust be able to contain the hazard footprints of the weapons employed, and that hazardous areas are clearof personnel during operations. The RSOs are also responsible for the emergency medical evacuation ofpersonnel from the range in the case of a mishap.SCI features small arms ranges, a hand grenade range, and a demolition range. In addition, there is anold, approved machine gun range at Eel Point. The machine gun range is approved for 0.50 caliberweapons, M-79 grenade launchers, M-66 Light Anti-Armor-Weapon rockets, and all types of handgrenades. The Eel Point range is being proposed for reactivation, and is undergoing separate NEPAreview.Demolitions occur at the Underwater Demolition Team Land Training Site, located northeast of the riflerange. It is approved for up to 500-lb (227-kg) of high explosives, and for use of automatic weapons.Northwest Harbor is approved for underwater demolitions; Basic Underwater Demolition/SEALS(BUD/S) Beach and Graduation Beach are active demolition training sites.3.9.9.1.2 Laser OperationsLaser operations are generally discussed in Section 3.9.2.3.9.9.1.3 Electromagnetic RadiationCommunications and electronic devices such as radar, electronic jammers, and radio transmitters produceelectromagnetic radiation (EMR). A hazard exists when EMR from transmitting equipment inducescurrents or voltages that can trigger electro-explosive devices, harm people or wildlife, or igniteflammable substances. Hazards are reduced or eliminated by establishing minimum separation distancesbetween EMR emitters and people, ordnance, and fuels.3-81 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 33.9.9.1.4 Ammunition and Explosives Handling and StorageOrdnance arrives on SCI either by aircraft or ship. The hazardous cargo area at the airfield is approvedfor off-loading of up to 10,000 lb (4,538 kg) net explosive weight (NEW) of ordnance from aircraft.There also is a hazardous cargo area for rotary wing aircraft at the old (VC-3) airfield, approved for up to5,000 lb (2,269 kg) NEW of ordnance. After off loading from aircraft, ordnance is transported to storagelocations or directly to a designated range area for use.Ammunition and explosives are stored in bunkers and magazines on SCI. The type and amount ofmaterial that may be stored is determined by DoD safety regulations. ESQD arcs prescribe the minimumsafe distances from the storage facility to inhabited buildings. RSLs are located in the BUD/S camp, atNaval Ordnance Transfer Station Pier, and in SHOBA. There are six munitions storage bunkers ormagazines south of the old airfield. Each bunker is approved for up to 90,000 lb (40,823 kg) NEW ofordnance. Munitions storage areas restrict the types of activities that can occur nearby.3.9.9.1.5 Shore Bombardment AreaSHOBA is the only range on the West Coast available for naval surface vessel live-firing. SHOBA alsohosts artillery firing and aircraft bombing operations, several of which involve the use of laser-guidedweapons. SHOBA is used for the full range of naval ordnance.3.9.9.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCWithin NB Coronado, a Clear Zone for a helicopter pad and landing/approach path exists at NavalAmphibious Base (NAB) Coronado. Three 30-foot radius ESQD arcs exist for RSLs on SSTC, two atNAB Coronado and one at the Naval Radio Receiving Facility. No safety zones exist on or adjacent tothe SSTC beaches.February 2007 3-82

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4CHAPTER 4ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCESThis chapter describes the potential environmental consequences that would be expected to occur as aresult of implementation of the No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action. After the impactsanalysis was completed, the results indicate that the impacts associated with the No Action do notsignificantly differ from the impacts associated with the Proposed Action. Based on the results of theimpact analysis presented in the EA/OEA, the No Action Alternative does not significantly differ fromimpacts associated with the Proposed Action. They are fundamentally the same because:The sum total number and type of training activity is the same for both alternatives,Two concurrent exercises do not result in an additive effect on resources because the twoevents would occur in geographically separate areas, andCoordinated COMPTUEX/JTFEX events would rely on resources from separate StrikeGroups working in tandem to support a shared objective.The Proposed Action facilitates Commander, THIRD Fleet’s ability to support the Strike Group readinessobjective outlined in the FRTP. The No Action Alternative does not support this flexibility. Because thenet effects between the two Alternatives do not differ, the analysis presented in this chapter represents thepotential impacts associated with either the No Action Alternative or the Proposed Action.Environmental consequences are addressed by resource area as characterized in Chapter 3, AffectedEnvironment. Section 2.1, discussed several documents that have been incorporated by reference into thisEA/OEA because the actions addressed are applicable to the No Action and the Proposed Action. Foreach of the resource areas, the description of environmental consequences addresses the ocean areas andland areas within the SOCAL OPAREA. For the PMSR, only marine mammal impacts associated withsonar use are analyzed in this chapter because all other COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities have beenpreviously analyzed in the Final EIS/OEIS for the Point Mugu Sea Range (U.S. Navy, 2002b).4.1 AIR QUALITYPotential impacts to air quality from COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities could result from missile/aircraftexhaust, marine vessel exhaust, and emissions from ordnance use.The evaluation of potential air quality impacts includes two separate analyses for the reasons identifiedbelow:National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) air quality analysis will assess the impact of airpollutant emissions from COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities for those effects occurring withinU.S. Territory (i.e., activities occurring within 12 nm of shore). The NEPA analysis includesa Clean Air Act (CAA) General Conformity Analysis in order to make an applicabilitydetermination pursuant to the General Conformity Rule (40 C.F.R. § 93[B]), by focusing onoperations that could potentially impact nonattainment areas within the Region of Influence(ROI). The NEPA analysis also includes an evaluation of potential exposures to toxic airpollutant emissions.Executive Order (EO) 12114 air quality analysis will assess the impact of air pollutantemissions from proposed COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities for those effects occurring outsideU.S. Territory. The EO-compliant analysis involves estimating emissions generated from theproposed activities and assessing potential impacts on air quality outside U.S. Territory.4-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4CAA General Conformity analysis is not conducted for actions outside the territorial watersof the United States.Individual operations may include participation by aircraft, surface ships, submarines, and ordnance use.Each of these constitutes a potential source of air emissions. The approach used to characterize emissionsfrom each of the emission source categories is summarized below.4.1.1 Aircraft OperationsThe methodology for estimating aircraft emissions involves evaluating the type of operations for eachtype of aircraft, the number of hours of operation for each aircraft type, the type of engine in each aircraft,and the mode of operation for each type of aircraft. Emissions occurring above 3,000 feet would be to beabove the atmospheric inversion layer and therefore would not impact the local air quality. Aircraftflights originate from onshore air stations and are counted in that installation’s aircraft operations. It wasassumed that all aircraft would be traveling from their home base to the exercise locations at an elevationabove 3,000 feet, and that transits to the range would therefore not affect the local onshore air quality.Time on range for the COMPTUEX/JTFEX was estimated based on the individual operational scenariosand participants in each operation. Estimated altitudes of operations for all aircraft were obtained fromdescriptions of the operational scenarios based on training requirements. Helicopters, including theSH-60, CH-46, CH-53, and UH-1, were assumed to operate below 3,000 feet elevation during their timeparticipating in the COMPTUEX/JTFEX. To estimate times in the various air quality zones of interest(offshore, nearshore, and onshore), the locations of representative operations were analyzed, and theirpaths plotted. Time in the individual areas was then estimated based upon operational maneuvers androutine flight path analysis.Emissions were estimated based on times in mode, using the Navy’s Aircraft Emission Support Office(AESO) Memorandum Reports for individual aircraft categories (Aircraft Emission Estimates: Landingand Takeoff Cycle and Maintenance Testing, and Aircraft Emission Estimates: Mission Operations). Foraircraft for which AESO emission factors were not available (such as the Learjet and Gulfstream aircraft),emission factors were obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Emission andDispersion Modeling System (EDMS), which is the FAA’s approved model for military airfield andcivilian airport operations.4.1.2 Surface Ship OperationsMarine surface vessels include naval ship and military boat traffic participating in theCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities, as well as support vessels providing various services for the militarytraining operations and tests. The methodology of estimating marine vessel emissions involvesevaluating the type of operation for each type of vessel, the number of hours of operation for each vesseltype, the type of propulsion engine in each vessel, and the type of generator used onboard each type ofvessel.Emission factors for marine vessels were obtained from the database developed for Naval Sea SystemsCommand (NAVSEA) by JJMA Consultants (JJMA, 2001) and the EPA’s AP-42 emission factors forcombustion of diesel (EPA, 1996). Emission factors were provided for each marine vessel type andoperational mode (i.e., power level). The resulting calculations provided information regarding the timespent at each power level during the COMPTUEX/JTFEX, emission factors for that power level (in lbs ofpollutant per hour), and total emissions for each marine vessel for each operational type and mode.February 2007 4-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4To assess the potential for significant air quality impacts resulting from these emissions, the major newstationary source thresholds for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) of 250 tons per year forcriteria pollutants was used for comparison purposes. While the major new source thresholds are notdirectly applicable to emissions generated offshore, they were identified as indicators for establishing thepotential for significant air quality impacts under NEPA. This approach is very conservative given thatthe emission sources under consideration are mobile (e.g., aircraft, vessels) and typically would not besubject to the stationary new source thresholds. However, the PSD thresholds were selected for thisanalysis as conservative thresholds would indicate the potential for significant effects.For areas outside U.S. Territorial waters, the attainment area thresholds for PSD of 250 tons per year forcriteria pollutants were also used for comparison purposes to assess the potential significance of airquality impacts under EO 12114. While CAA requirements are implemented by state agencies and applyto areas extending 3 nm (5.6 km) from shore, the Federal thresholds were used in the absence of any otherestablished criteria for emissions in offshore regions. CAA standards provide a conservative basis forevaluating potential EO 12114 air quality impacts.Emissions associated with the Proposed Action both within and outside U.S. Territory would be belowthe PSD thresholds and would therefore be less than significant.Under the provisions of 40 C.F.R. Parts 51 and 93, Federal actions are required to conform with theapproved State Implementation Plan (SIP) for those areas that are categorized as nonattainment ormaintenance areas for any criteria pollutant. The purpose of the General Conformity Rule is todemonstrate that the Proposed Action will not cause or contribute to a violation of an air quality standard,and that the project will not adversely affect the air basin’s ability to attain and maintain the ambient airquality standards.4.1.3 AlternativesAs discussed in Section 1, the No Action Alternative consists of the individual operations at existingmajor ranges and facilities associated with COMPTUEX and JTFEX events. Under this alternative,Commander, THIRD Fleet would continue to conduct training operations, as anticipated, from February2007 through January 2009. These operations would include three ESG COMPTUEXs, four CSGCOMPTUEXs, three ESG COMPTUEX/JTFEXs, and four CSG COMPTUEX/JTFEXs, for a total offourteen exercises in 2 years in the southwestern United States and SOCAL OPAREAS.Under the Proposed Action, Commander, THIRD Fleet would have the option to conduct two concurrent,major range events. While the overall number of major range events depicted in the No ActionAlternative (14 exercises) would not increase, Commander, THIRD Fleet, would have the flexibility toassess two Strike Groups simultaneously which would enhance Navy readiness and support the FleetResponse Plan. The total number of exercises conducted on an annual basis would not increase under theProposed Action.Emissions associated with the Proposed Action were calculated per COMPTUEX/JTFEX event. It wasassumed that a total of seven events could occur in a single calendar year; thus the total emissions perevent were multiplied by seven to obtain annual emissions.COMPTUEX/JTFEX training includes activities within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Basin,which is classified as a severe nonattainment area for the Federal 8-hour ozone standard, a nonattainmentarea for the Federal PM 2.5 and PM 10 standards, and a nonattainment area for CO. The provisions of theGeneral Conformity Rule state that a Proposed Action is exempt from the requirements of a fullconformity demonstration for those pollutants for which net emissions increases are below the de minimis4-3 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4emissions levels specified in the law. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) hasnot yet developed and received approval for a SIP for the Federal 8-hour ozone standard or the FederalPM 2.5 standard. In accordance with the General Conformity Rule, as adopted by the SCAQMD inRegulation XIX, of which Rule 1901 applies to Federal Actions, the de minimis levels for ozoneprecursors (based on the current approved SIP), CO, PM 10 , and PM 2.5 and precursors are as follows:Ozone precursors (NO x and ROGs)COPM 1010 tons per year100 tons per year70 tons per yearPM 2.5 and precursors (NO x , SO x , NH 3 , ROGs) 100 tons per yearThe estimated emissions for COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events within 3 nm of shore within the SouthCoast Air Basin were estimated. The results are shown in Table 4.1-1.Because the number of COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events that would occur during a single year wouldnot increase, the net emissions associated with implementation of the Proposed Action in comparisonwith the No Action Alternative would be zero for all criteria pollutants. The Proposed Action does notrepresent an increase in emissions over the No Action Alternative, and net emissions are therefore belowthe de minimis thresholds for requiring a full conformity determination. Furthermore, emissions ofcriteria pollutants are within the emissions budget contained in the SCAQMD SIP for Navy activitieswithin 3 nm of shore.Table 4.1-1. Summary of Annual Air Emissions Within 3 nm of Shore – South Coast Air BasinCOMPTUEX/JTFEXTraining EventsEmissions, tons/yearEmission Source CO NOx ROG/HC Sox PM10/PM2.5Aircraft 2.65 5.03 0.39 0.26 2.91Surface Ships 6.42 11.90 0.92 4.40 0.95Total 9.08 16.93 1.31 4.66 3.87Net Emissions –Proposed Action vs.No Action Alternative 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00De minimis Limits 100 10/100 1 10/100 1 100 1 70/100 2SCAQMD SIP Budget 376.66 90.49 117.58 10.10 66.161 De minimis threshold for PM 2.5 precursors is 100 tpy2 De minimis threshold for direct PM 2.5 emissions is 100 tpyCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training includes activities within the jurisdiction of the San Diego Air Basin,which is classified as a basic nonattainment area for the Federal 8-hour ozone standard, and amaintenance area for CO. The provisions of the General Conformity Rule state that a Proposed Action isexempt from the requirements of a full conformity demonstration for those pollutants for which emissionsincreases are below the de minimis emissions levels specified in the law. The San Diego Air PollutionControl District (SDAPCD) has not yet developed and received approval for a SIP for the Federal 8-hourozone standard or the Federal PM 2.5 standard. In accordance with the General Conformity Rule, asadopted by the SDAPCD in Regulation XV, of which Rule 1501 applies to Federal Actions, the deminimis levels for ozone precursors (based on the current approved SIP), CO, and PM 10 are as follows:February 2007 4-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Ozone precursors (NO x and ROGs)CO100 tons per year100 tons per yearThe estimated emissions for COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events within 3 nm of shore within the SanDiego Air Basin were estimated. The results are shown in Table 4.1-2.Because the number of COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events that would occur during a single year wouldnot increase, the net emissions associated with implementation of the Proposed Action in comparisonwith the No Action Alternative would be zero for all criteria pollutants. The Proposed Action does notrepresent an increase in emissions over the No Action Alternative, and net emissions are therefore belowthe de minimis thresholds for requiring a full conformity determination.Table 4.1-2. Summary of Annual Air Emissions Within 3 nm of Shore – San Diego Air BasinCOMPTUEX/JTFEXTraining EventsEmissions, tons/yearEmission Source CO NOx ROG/HC SOx PM10/PM2.5Aircraft 1.02 1.20 0.13 0.07 0.40Surface Ships 26.16 45.91 3.61 18.97 5.86Total 27.17 47.12 3.75 19.04 6.26Net Emissions –Proposed Action vs.No Action Alternative 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00De minimis Limits 100 100 100 N/A N/A1 De minimis threshold for PM 2.5 precursors is 100 tpy2 De minimis threshold for direct PM 2.5 emissions is 100 tpyImplementation of the No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action would result in no long-termincreases in emissions in the exercise areas. Units that participate in COMPTUEX/JTFEX events havebeen accounted for either in the participation of units normally using the ranges evaluated, or wereaccounted for in the specific NEPA compliance evaluations for the ranges in which theCOMPTUEX/JTFEX events would occur. The emissions would therefore not be subject to the GeneralConformity Rule and a conformity determination is not required.4.1.4 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)Areas of the SOCAL OPAREA that are within U.S. territorial waters are associated with specific rangesdiscussed in the sections below. Current COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities are included in the existingbaseline emissions within the SOCAL OPAREA beyond the limits of U.S. territorial waters. The vesselsand aircraft that take part in a COMPTUEX/JTFEX event are the units that normally operate in theSOCAL OPAREA. The Proposed Action would enable Commander, THIRD Fleet to conduct twoconcurrent major range events; however, the overall number of major range events would not increase (14exercises over a 2-year period).Operating days for COMPTUEX/JTFEX events in the SOCAL OPAREA constitute less than ten percentof total operations in the OPAREA. Under the Proposed Action, with two additionalCOMPTUEX/JTFEXs during surge years, the proportion of emissions assignable to COMPTUEX/JTFEXactivities would increase from less than ten percent of the existing emissions due to Navy actions to nomore than fifteen percent.4-5 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4All COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events at the SOCAL OPAREA are conducted in accordance withrange operating procedures developed in compliance with CAA requirements. Estimates of emissionsassociated with surface vessels and aircraft participating in the COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events areprovided in Table 4.1-3 for emissions within U.S. Territory and 4.1-4 for emissions outside U.S.Territory. Ordnance emissions would mainly occur outside U.S. Territory. A preliminary evaluation ofordnance emission factors and usage indicates that ordnance emissions would be minor and would notcontribute to the overall emissions from the COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events. Thus ordnanceemissions were not evaluated quantitatively in this EA/OEA.COMPTUEX/JTFEXTraining EventsTable 4.1-3. Summary of Annual Air Emissions Within U.S. TerritoryEmissions, tons/yearEmission Source CO NOx ROG/HC SOx PM10/PM2.5Aircraft 0.88 2.11 0.13 0.10 1.17Surface Ships 63.29 81.54 7.60 33.39 7.24Total 64.16 83.65 7.73 33.49 8.41COMPTUEX/JTFEXTraining EventsTable 4.1-4. Summary of Annual Air Emissions Outside U.S. TerritoryEmissions, tons/yearEmission Source CO NOx ROG/HC SOx PM10/PM2.5Aircraft 4.97 20.15 0.83 0.90 14.90Surface Ships 89.22 80.73 8.70 36.80 6.79Total 94.19 100.87 9.52 37.70 21.694.1.5 Land Areas4.1.5.1 San Clemente IslandSan Clemente Island (SCI)is regulated as part of the South Coast Air Basin, which is classified as a severenonattainment area for the 8-hour NAAQS for O 3 , a nonattainment area for the NAAQS for PM 10 , PM 2.5 ,and CO, and a maintenance area for NO 2 . Emissions on the SCIRC would not affect air quality in theSouth Coast Air Basin; however, due to the island’s location and meteorology that transports emissions tothe south. In 1995, the Navy requested that San Clemente Island be designated as a unique sub-region forair quality management purposes by the U.S. EPA, rather than be included in the South Coast Air Basin.Stationary sources located on San Clemente Island were excluded from the requirements of the RegionalClean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM) Rule. In comments on the EA for the RECLAIM rule, theSCAQMD concluded that “…emissions from the island [San Clemente] do not impact the South CoastAir Basin due to the island’s location and meteorological conditions” (SCAQMD, 1995).Since the forces involved in COMPTUEX/JTFEX events are similar to or the same as units that use thetraining range on an ongoing basis for routine training activities, no increase in the overall tempo oftraining events at the ranges is anticipated.4.1.5.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCAll existing and proposed concurrent major range events associated with COMPTUEX/JTFEX operationsat the ranges of NB Coronado would be within the current operational capacities of the affected ranges.Since the forces involved in COMPTUEX/JTFEX events are similar to or the same as units that use theFebruary 2007 4-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4training range on an ongoing basis for routine training activities, no increase in the overall tempo oftraining events at the ranges is anticipated. Thus, no significant increase in emissions is expected fromeither the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action. The future conduct of COMPTUEX/JTFEXtraining activities at NB Coronado will adhere to protocols and protective measures adopted for ongoingenvironmental compliance programs.4.2 WATER RESOURCESPotential impacts on water resources from COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities could result from wastedisposal, floating debris, leaking and deteriorating unexploded ordnance (UXO), expended batteries,accidental spills of hazardous materials, and, on land ranges, from terrain disturbance caused by vehicletravel, ground support activities, and exploding ordnance. Conducting two major training eventsconcurrently could generate short-term water resources impacts above those levels normally resultingfrom a single COMPTUEX/JTFEX (baseline conditions). Therefore, this EA/OEA addresses thepotential for short-term water quality impacts. Neither the No Action Alternative nor the ProposedAction would have a significant impact on long-term water quality levels.COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events are conducted in accordance with range operating proceduresdeveloped in compliance with Integrated Natural Resources Management Plans (INRMPs), BiologicalOpinions, NEPA analyses, and other environmental planning and compliance documents. As newenvironmental requirements are incorporated into the range operating procedures, COMPTUEX/JTFEXtraining activities are updated to comply with the new requirements.The following sections discuss the environmental consequences of the No Action Alternative andProposed Action at each of the test and training ranges to be used during COMPTUEX/JTFEXs, focusingon the potential impacts of short-term changes in water quality.4.2.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)The SOCAL OPAREA, including Warning Area 291 (W-291), currently hosts COMPTUEX/JTFEXexercises on a regular basis. The core of COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities occurs in SOCAL OPAREA.The potential for water resources impacts within U.S. Territorial Waters of the SOCAL OPAREA islimited to the waters adjacent to SCIRC, NB Coronado, and offshore Camp Pendleton.Potential impacts to water resources in the SOCAL OPAREA associated with COMPTUEX/JTFEXactivities could occur as a result from the following:Incidental release of materialsExpended materials and/or dischargeExpendable devicesJet fuel, oils, hydraulic fluid, batteries, and explosive cartridgesTorpedoes and missilesChaff and flarePotential impacts to water quality would primarily be associated with the incidental release of materialsfrom surface ships, submarines, or other vessels. Hazardous constituents of concern possibly emittedfrom the surface ship or submarine (i.e., fuel, oil) are less dense than seawater and would remain near thesurface and therefore would not affect the benthic community. Sheens produced from these activities are4-7 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4not expected to cause any significant long-term impact on water quality because a majority of the toxiccomponents would evaporate within several hours to days and/or be degraded by biogenic organisms(e.g., bacteria, phytoplankton, zooplankton).The resulting expended materials and/or discharges from operations may also affect the physical andchemical properties of benthic habitats and the quality of surrounding marine waters. Hazardousconstituents can be released from sonobuoys, targets, torpedoes, missiles, and underwater explosions(discussed below). Impacts from hazardous materials, primarily batteries, may affect water or sedimentquality in the vicinity of the materials. The release of metal ions (e.g., Pb +2 , Cu +2 , and Ag + ) duringoperation of the seawater batteries or as a result of corrosion of sonobuoy or target components representsa source of potential environmental degradation for marine invertebrates. In general, the toxicologicalimpact of exposure to high concentrations of heavy metals can result in either immediate mortality ofexposed organisms (acute effect) or accumulation of heavy metal residues by these same species. Benthiccommunities exposed to high concentrations of heavy metals (specifically copper and zinc) arecharacterized by reduced species richness (number of species), reduced abundance (number oforganisms), and a shift in community composition from sensitive to more tolerant taxa.Sonobuoys are expendable devices used for the detection of underwater acoustic sources and forconducting vertical water column temperature measurements. The primary source of contaminants ineach sonobuoy is the seawater battery; these batteries have a maximum operational life of 8 hours, afterwhich the chemical constituents in the battery are consumed. Long-term releases of lead and other metalfrom the remaining sonobuoy components would be substantially slower than the release during seawaterbattery operation. Lead has the potential to accumulate in bottom sediments, but the potentialconcentrations would be well below sediment quality criteria based on thresholds for negative biologicaleffects. By far the greatest amount of material would likely to be deposited in a relatively inert form, asthe lead ballast weights would become encrusted with lead oxide and other salts and would be covered bythe bottom sediments. Sonobuoy emissions are not anticipated to accumulate or result in additive effectson water or sediment quality as would occur within an enclosed body of water since the constituents ofsonobuoys would be widely dispersed in space and time throughout training areas. In addition, dispersionof released metals and other chemical constituents due to currents near the ocean floor would helpminimize any long-term degradation of water and sediment quality. As a result, substantial long-termdegradation of marine water or sediment quality would not likely occur as a result of sonobuoyoperations.Most air targets contain jet fuel, oils, hydraulic fluid, batteries, and explosive cartridges as part of theiroperating systems. Following a training operation, targets are generally flown (using remote control) to apre-determined recovery point. Fuel is shut off by an electronic signal, the engine stops, and the targetdescends. A parachute is activated and the target ascends to ocean surface where it is retrieved by rangepersonnel using helicopters or range support boats. However, some targets are physically hit by missiles,and these targets fall into the ocean, and could potentially result in temporary, localized adverse impactson water quality. Most of the hazardous constituents of concern (i.e., fuel, oil) are less dense thanseawater and would remain near the surface and therefore would not affect sediment quality. Oceancurrents at the surface and within the water column would also rapidly dilute any metal ions or otherchemical constituents released by the target. Sheens (e.g., oil or fuel) produced from these activities havea less than significant long-term effect on water quality because a majority of the toxic components (e.g.,aromatics) would evaporate within several hours to days or be degraded by biogenic organisms. Thisprocess may occur at a faster rate depending on sea conditions (e.g., wind and waves).February 2007 4-8

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Potential effects of torpedoes on water or sediment quality are associated with propulsion systems,chemical releases, or expended accessories. During normal exercise operations, none of the potentiallyhazardous or harmful materials are released into the marine environment because the torpedo is sealedand, at the end of a run, the torpedoes are recovered. It would be unlikely that OTTO Fuel II contained ina torpedo would be released into the marine environment. Under the worst-case scenario of a catastrophicfailure, however, up to 59 pounds (lb) (27 kg) could be released from a MK-46 (DON, 1996). It isanticipated that in the event of such a maximum potential spill, temporary impacts to water quality mayoccur, but no long-term significant impacts to water quality are anticipated because:The water volume and depth would dilute the spillAlthough OTTO Fuel II may be toxic to marine organisms (DON, 1996), in particular, sessilebenthic animals and vegetation, mobile organisms may move away from areas of high OTTOFuel II concentrations Common marine bacteria degrade and ultimately break down OTTO Fuel (DON, 1996)Missiles contain hazardous materials as normal parts of their functional components. In general, thelargest single hazardous material type is solid propellant, but there are numerous hazardous materials usedin igniters, explosive bolts, batteries, and warheads. For missiles falling in the ocean, the principal sourceof potential impacts to water and sediment quality would be the unburned solid propellant residue andbatteries. The remaining solid propellant fragments would sink to the ocean floor and undergo changes inthe presence of seawater. Testing has demonstrated that water penetrates only 0.06 inches (0.14centimeters [cm]) into the propellant during the first 24 hours of immersion, and that fragments wouldvery slowly release ammonium and perchlorate ions (Aerospace Corporation 1998). These ions would beexpected to be rapidly diluted and disperse in the surrounding water such that local concentrations wouldbe extremely low. However, assuming that all of the propellant on the ocean floor would be in the formof 4-inch cubes, only 0.42 percent of it would be wetted during the first 24 hours. If all the ammoniumperchlorate leaches out of the wetted propellant, then approximately 0.01 lb (0.003 kg) would enter thesurrounding seawater. The concentration would decrease over time as the leaching rate decreases andfurther dilution occurs. The aluminum would remain in the propellant binder and would eventually beoxidized by seawater to aluminum oxide. The remaining binder material and aluminum oxide would notpose a threat to the marine environment. Therefore, effects from missile propellant may have temporaryimpacts on water quality, but are less than significant.Both chaff and flares are used during aircraft training exercises. Chaff is an aluminum coated glass fiberused as a defensive mechanism to reflect radar. All of the components of the aluminum coating arepresent in seawater in trace amounts, except magnesium, which is present at 0.1 percent. The stearic acidcoating is biodegradable and nontoxic. The potential for chaff to have a long-term adverse impact onwater quality is very unlikely, and chemicals leached from the chaff would also be diluted by thesurrounding seawater, thus reducing the potential for concentrations to build up to levels that could haveeffects on sediment quality and benthic habitats.Flares are used over water during training. They are composed of a magnesium pellet that burns quicklyat a very high temperature leaving ash and end caps and pistons. Laboratory leaching tests of flare pelletsand residual ash using synthetic seawater found barium in the pellet tests, while boron and chromiumwere found in the ash tests. The pH of the test water was raised in both tests. Ash from flares would bedispersed over the water surface and then settle out. Chemical leaching would occur throughout thesettling period through the water column, and any leaching after the particles reached the bottom would4-9 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4be dispersed by currents. Therefore, localized and temporary impacts to water quality may occur, but nosignificant, long-term impact is anticipated.Turbidity is the only potential impact from detonations, since products from the detonation of highexplosives are non-hazardous (e.g., CO, CO 2 , H 2 , H 2 O, N 2 , and NH 3 ). In shallow water, underwaterexplosions would re-suspend sediments into the water column creating a turbidity plume. This would bea localized event and impacts would not be considered significant because the turbidity plume woulddissipate as particles return to the bottom and/or currents disperse the plume. Therefore, potential effectsto water and sediment quality, from underwater demolitions are less than significant.Based on the analysis presented above, no significant water resources impacts are expected to occur in theSOCAL OPAREA as a result of COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities.4.2.2 Land Areas4.2.2.1 San Clemente IslandCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training currently occurs in the SCIRC. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities within theSCIRC resemble the activities evaluated in the AAAV EIS/OEIS (U.S. Navy, 2003b), for nearshore,amphibious, and upland activities. Potential contaminants include propellants, fuels, engine oil, hydraulicfluid, batteries, explosives residues, and constituents of concern associated with spent ammunition andweapons and disposable training items.The general findings of the AAAV EIS/OEIS (U.S. Navy, 2003b) may reasonably be applied toCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities in the SCIRC. The AAAV EIS/OEIS demonstrated that amphibiouslandings and associated activities would result in less-than-significant impacts on inshore waters, beaches,and upland training areas. Therefore, no significant water resources impacts are expected to occur in theSCIRC as a result of the No Action Alternative.The potential for COMPTUEX/JTFEX training on SCI to result in discharges or spills of hazardoussubstances that eventually contaminate water resources is considered to be negligible. Spills typically arepromptly cleaned up and thus have no opportunity to be flushed into surface waters or migrate togroundwaters. In any case, SCI has no known potable water aquifers. Thus, water resources impacts inthe SCIRC from the Proposed Action would be less than significant.4.2.2.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training currently occurs at NB Coronado. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities at NBCoronado resemble the activities evaluated in the AAAV EIS/OEIS. Potential water resources impacts atNB Coronado are similar in nature to the water resources impacts described for SCIRC. Sources ofpotential contaminants include propellants, fuels, engine oil, hydraulic fluid, batteries, explosivesresidues, and hazardous constituents of disposable training items. The water resources consideredinclude: marine mammal and essential fish habitat; contact and non-contact water recreation; commercialexploitation of ocean resources; and aesthetics.The general findings of the AAAV EI/OEIS may reasonably be applied to NB Coronado. The AAAVEIS/OEIS demonstrated that amphibious landings and associated activities would have less-thansignificantimpacts on inshore waters and beaches. The potential for COMPTUEX/JTFEX training at NBCoronado to result in discharges or spills of hazardous substances that substantially contaminate waterresources is considered to be negligible. Spills typically are promptly cleaned up and thus have noopportunity to be flushed into surface waters or migrate to groundwaters. In any case, the Silver StrandFebruary 2007 4-10

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4peninsula has no potable water aquifer. Therefore, no significant impacts to water resources would occuras a result of implementation of the No Action or Proposed Action at NB Coronado.4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCESGenerally, impacts to biological resources are evaluated as potential losses to populations of species ofconcern or to important habitat resources. Specific evaluation focuses on whether implementation of theNo Action or the Proposed Action will cause any or all of the following impacts:Loss of habitat (destruction, degradation, denial, competition)Over-harvesting or excessive take (accidental or intentional death, injury, harassment)Increases in exposure or susceptibility to disease and predationDecrease in breeding successCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities could cause these impacts to biological resources as a result of collisionwith ordnance, expended materials, expendable devices, or vehicles; release of contaminants frommunitions constituents or range materials; noise; terrain disturbance; range fires; or human contact.The following marine resources section focuses only on environmental consequences within the SOCALOPAREA while the terrestrial resources section focuses on environmental consequences within SCI, NBCoronado, and MCB Camp Pendleton. Only those species with the potential to be present within theSOCAL OPAREA are evaluated in this section (as described in Section 3.3).The analysis of effects on faunal species presented in this section is based on the analyses as presented toNMFS for the initiation of Section 7 consultation. NMFS findings and conclusions, as determined in theBiological Opinion, are presented in Section 4.3.1.8.4.3.1 Marine Resources4.3.1.1 Effects on Marine Flora and FaunaWith almost 300 different species of marine alga, the waters of the SOCAL OPAREA contain a diverseassemblage of marine plants. In particular, the kelp forests around SCI are among the richest of all kelpforests in the Channel Islands (Kelp Forest Monitoring Naval Auxiliary Landing Field San ClementeIsland Annual Report, 2004 and Final Report, 2005). The mature giant kelp forests (Macrocystispyrifera) around SCI extend from the nearshore water out to a depth of about 100 ft (33 m). At theNavy’s invitation, researchers from the Channel Islands National Park Kelp Forest Monitoring Programcame out to SCI and conducted surveys in 2003 and again in 2004. The research revealed:All monitoring sites had thick, healthy giant kelp canopies that covered 85-100 percent of thesurvey transects, and all monitoring sites appeared to have changed little from 2003-2004.Pink abalone (Haliotis corrugata) are more abundant than around the other Channel Islands;the SCI population is one of the largest pink abalone populations along the California coast.Fish were abundant at the monitoring sites, with diversity comparable to other ChannelIslands within similar oceanographic regimes such as Santa Barbara and Catalina Islands. In three of the four transect sites, percent cover of invertebrates increased from 2003 to 2004:oCategory miscellaneous invertebrates, excluding Ophiothrix, covered 27.8% of thebottom, an increase from the previous year's 12.7% cover (Horse Beach Cove)4-11 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4oooooCategory miscellaneous invertebrates, excluding Ophiothrix, covered 5.7% of the bottom,an increase from the previous year's 0.83% cover (Boy Scout Camp)Miscellaneous bryozoans increased by 15% (Eel Cove)Sponges were moderately abundant (all sites)Gorgonian densities remained the same (all sites)Tunicate coverage increased by 15.2% (Boy Scout Camp)The fourth transect site, Northwest Harbor, remained relatively unchanged from the previousyearThe waters of SOCAL OPAREA are similar in extent and physical character to the waters and habitats ofthe PMSR. The PMSR EIS/OEIS concluded long-term marine biological affects associated with missiledebris, and battery constituent accumulation would be less than significant. In addition, increasedturbidity from amphibious landings and underwater demolitions would be localized and short-term.Effects from COMPTUEX/JTFEX would be short-term and not result in loss or degradation of sensitivehabitats or species. Therefore, effects from the No Action and Proposed Action would be less thansignificant on marine flora and non-endangered invertebrates. Analysis of effects on white abalone, fish,sea turtles, and marine mammals are provided below.4.3.1.2 Effects on InvertebratesThe white abalone is the only invertebrate within the SOCAL OPAREA that is listed as endangered.White abalone are found in the SOCAL OPAREA; however, they are restricted to a very small area in theSCIRC. Densities of the white abalone are very low. Because of the rarity of the white abalone in theSOCAL OPAREA, depth of occurrence, and distribution in crevices of rocky substrate, effects fromCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities may affect but are not likely to adversely affect white abalone.4.3.1.3 Effects on FishBehavioral studies have shown that most fish only detect low- to mid-frequency sound up to 2 kHz.frequency range. COMPTUEX/JTFEX mid-frequency active tactical sonar transmits at centerfrequencies of 2.6 kHz and 3.3 kHz. Thus, it is expected that some fish species would be able to detectthe mid-frequency active sonar only at the upper end of their hearing range. The results of several studieshave indicated that acoustic communication and orientation of fishes, in particular of hearing specialists,may be limited by noise regimes in their environment and some fish may respond behaviorally to varyingsound frequencies.There is no information available that suggests that exposure to non-impulsive acoustic sources results infish mortality. While experiments have shown that exposure to loud sound can result in significantthreshold shifts in certain fish that are classified as hearing specialists (but not those classified as hearinggeneralists), these threshold shifts are temporary, and it is not evident that they lead to any long-termbehavioral disruptions. Most fish species would not be able to detect the COMPTUEX/JTFEX midfrequencyactive sonar.Fish classified as hearing specialists may respond behaviorally to mid-frequency sources (similar to thesonar sources that would be used during COMPTUEX/JTFEX). This behavioral modification is onlyexpected to be brief and not biologically significant. Additionally, review of the available literatureappears to indicate that low and high frequency acoustic sources are more likely to result in behavioralmodifications in fish than are mid- frequency acoustic sources. Research by Gearin et al., (2000) andFebruary 2007 4-12

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Culik et al., (2001) indicated the mid- frequency sound from acoustic devices designed to deter marinemammals from gillnet fisheries were either inaudible to fish or, the fish were not disturbed by the sound.Based on the evaluation of the data presented below, significant effects on fish are not anticipated fromthe use of mid-frequency active sonar.4.3.1.3.1 Underwater DetonationsWith respect to underwater detonations, several factors determine a fish’s susceptibility to harm. Mostinjuries in fish involve damage to air- or gas-containing organs. Some commercially significant speciesof fish have swim bladders, which are gas-filled organs used to control buoyancy. Fish with swimbladders are vulnerable to effects of explosives, while fish without swim bladders are much more resistant(Yelverton, 1981; Young, 1991). Most fish that die do so within one to four hours, and almost all do sowithin 24 hours (Yelverton, 1973 and 1981).The effects on fish from a given amount of explosive depend on location, season, and many other factors.O’Keeffe (1984) provides charts which allow estimation of the potential effect on swim-bladder fishusing a damage prediction method developed by Goertner (1982). O’Keeffe’s parameters include the sizeof the fish and its location relative to the explosive source, but are independent of environmentalconditions (e.g., depth of fish, explosive shot frequency content). Table 4.3-1 lists the estimatedmaximum effects ranges using O’Keefe’s (1984) method for an 8-lb explosion at source depths of 10 ft (3m).Table 4.3-1. Maximum Fish-Effects RangesFish Weight10% Mortality Rangemft1 oz 157.9 518.31 pound 63.6 208.930 pound 47.3 155.2Source: O’Keefe, 19844.3.1.3.2 ShockwaveSome COMPTUEX/JTFEX operations involve the use of mines, bombs, munitions, missiles, or targetsthat fall into the waters. As described, in many cases, inert ordnance is used, or the ordnance is targetedto explode on a target or hull, substantially reducing the introduction of sound in the surrounding marineenvironment.Where underwater detonation is required for the activity, impacts to the water surface involve force andproduce a shock wave. Larger detonations could injure or kill fish in the immediate vicinity.Several factors determine a fish’s susceptibility to injury and death from shock wave effects. Most blastinjuries in fish and other marine animals involve damage to air- or gas-containing organs (Yelverton,1981). Many species of fish have a swim bladder, which is a gas-filled organ used to control buoyancy.Fish with swim bladders are vulnerable to effects of underwater explosions, whereas fish without swimbladders, like most species of invertebrates, are much more resistant (Yelverton, 1981; Young, 1991).During exposure to shock waves, the differential speed of shock waves through the body of the fish(which has a density close to water) versus the gas-filled space of the swim bladder causes the bladder tooscillate. If the swim bladder ruptures, it may cause hemorrhages in nearby organs. In the extreme case,the oscillating swim bladder may rupture the body wall of the fish (Yelverton, 1981). Some fish have aswim bladder that is ducted to the intestinal tract and some do not, but there is no difference in4-13 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4susceptibility between fish with these two types of bladders (Yelverton et al., 1975; Yelverton, 1981).After a nearby underwater blast, most fish that die do so within 1–4 hours, and almost all do so within 24hours (Yelverton et al., 1975; Yelverton, 1981).The rapid rise time of the shock wave resulting from detonation of high explosives causes most of theorgan and tissue damage. Mortality of fish correlates better with impulse, measured in units of pressuretime, than with other blast parameters (Yelverton, 1981). The received impulse depends on the depth atwhich the fish is swimming, the depth of the charge, the mass of the charge, and the distance from chargeto fish. Fish near the bottom or near a bank will receive a larger impulse. A fish on the bottom over ahard surface would receive a greater impulse than it would in open water (Yelverton et al., 1975;Yelverton, 1981). Bottom reflection can also be enhanced if it is focused by bottom terrain.Data from explosive blast studies indicate that very fast, high-level acoustic exposures can cause physicaldamage and/or mortally wound fishes (Hastings and Popper, 2005). There is also reason to believe thatlesser effects might also occur, but these have not been well documented. Just as in investigations testingthe effects of sound, however, the number of species studied in tests of the effects of explosives is verylimited, and there have been no investigations to determine whether blasts that do not kill fish have hadany impact on short- or long-term hearing loss, or on other aspects of physiology (e.g., cell membranepermeability, metabolic rate, stress), and/or behavior (e.g., feeding or reproductive behavior, movementfrom preferred home sites).In addition to impacts occurring near the ocean surface, there is also the possibility that falling fragmentsmay injure or kill individual fish. However, most missiles hit their target or are disabled before hitting thewater. Therefore, most of these missiles and targets hit the water as fragments, which quickly dissipatetheir kinetic energy within a short distance from the surface. Similarly, expended small-arms rounds mayalso strike the water surface with sufficient force to cause injury, but most fish swim some distance belowthe surface of the water. Therefore, fewer fish are exposed to mortality from falling fragments whoseeffects are limited to the near surface.Given the random distribution of juvenile and adult pelagic fish species, planktonic eggs and larvae, andprey items, the relatively large area of the range, and the relatively infrequent number of operations,recovery is expected to occur quickly. The abundance and diversity of fish within the OPAREAs areunlikely to measurably decrease as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternative or ProposedAction. Significant impacts on fish populations are not anticipated with implementation of the No ActionAlternative or Proposed Action.4.3.1.3.3 SoundThere are insufficient data on the effects of exposure to sound, in particular mid-frequency sound, on thevast majority of fishes, and there is a great diversity of ear structures, hearing capabilities, and/or acousticbehaviors among fish. The literature on the detection of, and response to, sound are limited and the dataon vulnerability to injury are almost totally non-existent, only relevant to particular species, and becauseof the great diversity of fishes are not easily extrapolated.If the sound is loud enough and within the range of frequencies that a fish can hear, a sound will bedetected by a fish at some distance from the source. Because of the variable hearing thresholds, thisdistance will vary among species. Theoretically, a yellowfin tuna would have to be much closer than anAtlantic cod to hear a low-frequency sound at a given energy level. Underwater sounds have been usedby fishermen to guide herring and other schooling fish to their nets (Yelverton, 1981), or to exclude fishfrom water intakes (Haymes and Patrick, 1986). The noises made by fishing boats can scare some targetFebruary 2007 4-14

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4fish (Anon., 1970). Sudden changes in noise level can cause fish to dive or to avoid the sound bychanging direction. Time of year, whether the fish have eaten, and the nature of the sound signal may allinfluence how fish will respond to the sound.In the studies that have been conducted, effects of noise or sonar have been noted at the individual level.However, these studies have focused on a few species and it is not known whether their responses arerepresentative of the wide diversity of other marine fish species. Based on the limited informationcurrently available, mid-frequency active sonar is not likely to injure or kill fish, and any behavioralavoidance of an area is expected to be temporary. Fish species are unlikely to be affected at thepopulation level. Note that the SOCAL OPAREA has maintained a healthy and thriving population ofmany recreationally and commercially important fish species in concert with the historical use of the areafor Navy training.4.3.1.4 Effects on Essential Fish HabitatThis section discusses the potential impacts to Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) established for speciesmanagement under Fishery .Management Plans (FMPs). Coastal Pelagics and Pacific Groundfish(NMFS, 1998) may utilize both nearshore and offshore areas during their lives, as eggs and larvae formost species are planktonic and can occur in nearshore and offshore waters, while adults may be presentin nearshore and/or offshore waters. EFH is established for the life stages of managed species.Adverse effects mean any impact that reduces quality and/or quantity of EFH. Adverse effects mayinclude direct or indirect physical, chemical, or biological alterations of the waters or substrate and lossof, or injury to, benthic organisms, prey species and their habitat, and other ecosystem components, ifsuch modifications reduce the quality and/or quantity of EFH. Adverse effects to EFH may result fromactions occurring within EFH or outside of EFH and may include site-specific or habitat-wide impacts,including individual, cumulative, or synergistic consequences of actions (50 CFR 600.810(a)).Rocky substrate can support extensive communities and provides habitat for a diverse ecosystem of fish,invertebrates, and algae. Live bottoms, as defined by the Bureau of Land Management, are areas“containing biological assemblages consisting of such sessile invertebrates as sea fans, sea whips,hydroids, anemones, ascidians, sponges, bryozoans, and hard corals living upon and attached to naturallyoccurring hard or rocky formations with rough, broken, or smooth topography; and whose lithotopefavors accumulation of turtles, pelagic and demersal fish.” In the SOCAL OPAREA, colonized hardbottom, macroalgae, invertebrates, and deep-slope terraces are found near San Clemente Island , and theoffshore banks (e.g., Tanner and Cortes).. The marine benthic invertebrate assemblages are extremelydiverse and include representatives of nearly all phyla.The majority of the operations that use live munitions, bombs, or missiles occur in the open ocean awayfrom sensitive nearshore benthic habitats. Underwater detonations will occur in areas of soft bottom.Rocky substrate, colonized hard bottoms, and live bottom habitat will be avoided. The conduct of allvessel sinkings in water at least 1,000 fathoms (6,000 feet) deep and at least 50 nautical miles from land.Therefore, SINKEX operations would not destroy or adversely effect sensitive benthic habitats.Expendable materials such as sonobuoys, torpedoes, targets, munitions, intact missiles would eventuallysink to the bottom, and are unlikely to result in any physical impacts to the sea floor because they wouldsink into a soft bottom, where they eventually would be covered by shifting sediments. Soft-bottomhabitats are less sensitive than hard bottom habitats, and, in such areas, the effects of expended materialswould be minimal. Rates of deterioration would vary, depending on material and conditions in theimmediate marine and benthic environment.4-15 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4While COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities may have minor, temporary impacts on open ocean and limitedbenthic areas, adverse effects to essential fish habitat are not anticipated.4.3.1.5 Sea TurtlesFour species of sea turtles could potentially occur in the action area, all of which are protected under theESA: leatherback, loggerhead, green turtle, and olive ridley turtles. There are no density estimates for seaturtles in the SOCAL OPAREA, and there are no established criteria for harm or harassment.Studies indicate that the auditory capabilities of sea turtles are centered in the low-frequency range(

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4dives (e.g., sperm whale). Accordingly, the Navy has adopted standard operating procedures to reducethe potential for collisions with surfaced marine mammals and sea turtles (refer to Chapter 5). Based onthese standard operating procedures, collisions with cetaceans, pinnipeds, and sea turtles are not expected.Personnel are aware that they are not to harm or harass marine mammals or sea turtles. As part of therequired clearance before an exercise, the target area must be inspected visually (from vessels andaircraft) and determined to be clear. The required clearance zones at the target areas, and exercises withincontrolled ranges, keep the risk to marine mammals remote. Open ocean clearance procedures are thesame for live or inert ordnance. Whenever ships and aircraft use the ranges for missile and gunnerypractice, the weapons are used under controlled circumstances involving clearance procedures to ensurecetaceans, pinnipeds, or sea turtles are not present in the target area. These involve, at a minimum, adetailed visual search of the target area by aircraft reconnaissance, range safety boats, and rangecontrollers.Ordnance cannot be released until the target area is determined clear. Operations are immediately haltedif cetaceans, pinnipeds, or sea turtles are observed within the target area. Operations are delayed until theanimal clears the target area. All observers are in continuous communication in order to have thecapability to immediately stop the operations. The exercise can be modified as necessary to obtain a cleartarget area. If animals remain in the OPAREA, then the exercise is either delayed, moved, or canceled.All of these factors serve to avoid the risk of harming cetaceans, pinnipeds, or sea turtles.The weapons used in most missile and Gunnery Operations pose little risk to whales, monk seals, or seaturtles unless they were to be near the surface at the point of impact. Both 50-caliber machine guns andthe close-in weapons systems exclusively fire non-explosive ammunition. The same applies to largerweapons firing inert ordnance for training operations. These rounds pose a risk only at the point ofimpact. Target area clearance procedures would again reduce this risk.4.3.1.7.2 Acoustic Effects Analysis Modeling ApproachThe inputs for analysis of acoustic effects on marine mammals consist of four parameters:1. Marine mammal population density (Appendix A)2. Marine mammal harassment criteria3. U.S. Navy training operations4. U.S. Navy sonar and underwater operational characteristics4.3.1.7.3 Marine Mammal Population DensityTo estimate marine mammal densities in the SOCAL Range Complex, three strata were identified andseparate density estimates calculated based on available data: 1,000-m depth north of30°N, and >1,000-m depth south of 30°N.Warm- and Cold-water Densities in Water 1,000 m DepthFor water depths >1,000 m, warm-water cetacean densities were calculated for two offshore areas, onenorth of 30N and one south of there. Data provided in Ferguson and Barlow (2001) differentiatedbetween estimated cetacean densities in the area north of 30N and the area south of 30N. Pinnipedswere not recorded by Ferguson and Barlow (2001), but the only pinnipeds known to occur in deep,4-17 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4offshore waters are adult male California sea lions and northern elephant seals during their migrationsbetween haul-out sites and feeding areas.Cold-water Densities in Water >1,000 m DepthAs the NMFS 1986–1996 ship-based surveys were conducted only during the warm-water season, coldseason densities for marine mammals in the SOCAL Range Complex were derived by multiplying thewarm season densities by ratios calculated using data collected during other studies in the area. For thefive species for which both warm and cold season densities were estimated for the SCIRC (i.e., thosespecies sighted during the aerial surveys of the SCIRC conducted by NMFS in 1998–1999), thosedensities were used individually. For another 13 species for which both warm and cold season densitieswere estimated for the Point Mugu Sea Range, one average ratio was calculated for each of warm- andcold-dominant species, and applied to the same species in the SOCAL Range Complex. For otherspecies, seasonal patterns in distribution in or near the SOCAL Range Complex are unknown, so the ratiowas assumed to be 1.0. Seasonal trends, data sources, and calculated warm-water: cold-water ratios forall species occurring in waters with depths >1,000 m in the SOCAL Range Complex are given in TableA3.4.3.1.7.4 Potential Acoustic EffectsThe Navy recognizes that the information regarding the effects of underwater sound on marine mammals,particularly the unique sources comprising mid-frequency active sonars, is incomplete. The Navy hasinvested and continues to invest funding in the continued research of these effects, and the analysis here isconducted consistent with the best available science. The methodology presented here is assumed toprovide an over-estimate of potential for acoustic effects associated with mid-frequency sonar, an analysispreliminarily supported by the lack of observed effects during major exercise events for which a reportingrequirement was established in a prior MMPA National Defense Exemption.Three of the activities occurring during COMPTUEX and JTFEX involve the use of mid-frequency activesonar which have the potential to affect marine mammals – these are ASW Operations, TrackingOperations, and Submarine Operations described in Chapter 2 of this document. The approach formodeling potential acoustic effects from COMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities on cetacean speciesmakes use of the methodology that was developed in cooperation with NMFS for the Navy’s DraftOverseas Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Statement, Undersea Warfare TrainingRange (OEIS/EIS) (U.S. Navy, 2005). The methodology includes the following topics and updates whichare discussed in detail below:Regulatory FrameworkMMPA Level A and Level B HarassmentCriteria and Thresholds for Physiological EffectCriteria and Thresholds for Behavioral EffectsApplication of Effect Thresholds to Beaked WhalesActive Acoustic Source DescriptionsAcoustic Exposure Calculation Methodology AssumptionsOther Effects ConsideredEstimated Annual Acoustic Effects on Marine MammalsFebruary 2007 4-18

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 44.3.1.7.5 Regulatory FrameworkA number of Navy actions and NOAA rulings have helped to qualify possible events deemed as“harassment” under the MMPA. Note that “harassment” under the MMPA includes both potential injuryand disruptions of natural behavioral patterns to a point where they are abandoned or significantly altered.The acoustic effects analysis and exposure calculations are based on the following premises:Harassment that may result from Navy operations described in the COMPTUEX/JTFEXEA/OEA is unintentional and incidental to those operations.The COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA uses an unambiguous definition of injury developed inprevious rulings (NOAA, 2001; 2002): injury occurs when any biological tissue is destroyedor lost as a result of the action.Behavioral disruption might result in subsequent injury and injury may cause a subsequentbehavioral disruption, so Level A and Level B (defined below) harassment categories canoverlap and are not necessarily mutually exclusive. However, by prior ruling (NOAA, 2001),the COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA assumes that Level A and B harassment exist on a singlecontinuum without overlap.An individual animal predicted to experience simultaneous multiple injuries, multipledisruptions, or both, is counted as a single take (see NOAA, 2001). An animal whosebehavior is disrupted by an injury has already been counted as a Level A harassment and willnot also be counted as a Level B harassment.The acoustic effects analysis is based on primary exposures of the action. Secondary, orindirect, effects, such as susceptibility to predation following injury and injury resulting fromdisrupted behavior, while possible, can only be reliably predicted in circumstances where theresponses have been well documented. Consideration of secondary effects would result inmuch Level A harassment being considered Level B harassment, and vice versa, since muchinjury (Level A harassment) has the potential to disrupt behavior (Level B harassment), andmuch behavioral disruption (Level B) could be conjectured to have the potential for injury(Level A). Consideration of secondary effects would lead to circular definitions ofharassment.Integration of Regulatory and Biological FrameworksThis section presents a biological framework within which potential effects can be categorized and thenrelated to the existing regulatory framework of injury (Level A) and behavioral disruption (Level B).Physiological and Behavioral EffectsSound exposure may affect multiple biological traits of a marine animal; however, MMPA and ESAregulations provide guidance as to which traits should be used when determining effects. Specifically,effects that qualify as Level A harassment (and ESA harm) should address injury. Effects that qualify asLevel B harassment (and ESA harassment) should address behavioral disruption. This guidance reducesthe number of traits that must be considered in establishing a biological framework of effect assessment.The biological framework proposed here is structured according to potential physiological and behavioraleffects resulting from sound exposure. The range of effects may then be assessed to determine whichqualify as harm or harassment under MMPA and ESA regulations. Physiology and behavior are chosenover other biological traits because:4-19 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4They are consistent with regulatory statements defining harm and harassment.They are components of other biological traits that may be relevant.They are a more sensitive and immediate indicator of effect.For example, ecology is not used as the basis of the framework because the ecology of an animal isdependent upon the interaction of an animal with the environment. The animal’s interaction with theenvironment is driven both by its physiological function and its behavior, and an ecological impact maynot be observable over short periods of observation. Anatomy is not used because disruption of ananimal’s anatomy would necessarily result in a change in physiological function.A “physiological effect” is defined here as one in which the “normal” physiological function of theanimal is altered in response to sound exposure. Physiological function is any of a collection of processesranging from biochemical reactions to mechanical interaction and operation of organs and tissues withinan animal. A physiological effect may range from the most significant of impacts (i.e., mortality andserious injury) to lesser effects that would define the lower end of the physiological impact range, such asthe non-injurious distortion of auditory tissues.A “behavioral effect” is one in which the “normal” behavior or patterns of behavior of an animal areovertly disrupted in response to an acoustic exposure. Examples of behaviors of concern can be derivedfrom the harassment definitions in the MMPA and ESA implementing regulations.In this EA/OEA request the term “normal” is used to qualify distinctions between physiological andbehavioral effects. Its use follows the convention of normal daily variation in physiological andbehavioral function without the influence of anthropogenic acoustic sources. As a result, this EA/OEAuses the following definitions:A physiological effect is a variation in an animal’s physiology that results from ananthropogenic acoustic exposure and exceeds the normal daily variation in physiologicalfunction.A behavioral effect is a variation in an animal’s behavior or behavior patterns that resultsfrom an anthropogenic acoustic exposure and exceeds the normal daily variation in behavior,but which arises through normal physiological process (it occurs without an accompanyingphysiological effect).The definitions of physiological effect and behavioral effect used here are specific to this EA/OEA andshould not be confused with more global definitions applied to the field of biology.It is reasonable to expect some physiological effects to result in subsequent behavioral effects. Forexample, a marine mammal that suffers a severe injury may be expected to alter diving or foraging to thedegree that its variation in these behaviors is outside that which is considered normal for the species. If aphysiological effect is accompanied by a behavioral effect, the overall effect is characterized as aphysiological effect; physiological effects take precedence over behavioral effects with regard to theirordering. This approach provides the most conservative ordering of effects with respect to severity,provides a rational approach to dealing with the overlap of the definitions, and avoids circular arguments.The severity of physiological effects generally decreases with decreasing sound exposure and/orincreasing distance from the sound source. The same generalization does not consistently hold forbehavioral effects because they do not depend solely on the received sound level. Behavioral responsesalso depend on an animal’s learned responses, innate response tendencies, motivational state, the patternFebruary 2007 4-20

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4of the sound exposure, and the context in which the sound is presented. However, to provide a tractableapproach to predicting acoustic effects that is relevant to the terms of behavioral disruption described inthe MMPA, it is assumed here that the severities of behavioral effects also decrease with decreasingsound exposure and/or increasing distance from the sound source.4.3.1.7.6 MMPA Level A and Level B HarassmentCategorizing potential effects as either physiological or behavioral effects allows them to be related to theharassment definitions. For military readiness activities, Level A harassment includes any act that injuresor has the significant potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild. Injurydefined in previous rulings (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA], 2001; 2002), isthe destruction or loss of biological tissue. The destruction or loss of biological tissue will result in analteration of physiological function that exceeds the normal daily physiological variation of the intacttissue. For example, increased localized histamine production, edema, production of scar tissue,activation of clotting factors, white blood cell response, etc., may be expected following injury.Therefore, this EA/OEA assumes that all injury is qualified as a physiological effect and, to be consistentwith prior actions and rulings (NOAA, 2001), all injuries (slight to severe) are considered Level Aharassment.Public Law 108-136 (2004) amended the definition of Level B harassment for military readinessactivities, which applies to this action. For military readiness activities, Level B harassment is defined as“any act that disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock by causingdisruption of natural behavioral patterns including, but not limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing,breeding, feeding, or sheltering to a point where such behaviors are abandoned or significantly altered.”Unlike Level A harassment, which is solely associated with physiological effects, both physiological andbehavioral effects may cause Level B harassment.MMPA Harassment ZonesThe volumes of ocean in which Level A and Level B harassment are predicted to occur are described asharassment zones. All marine mammals predicted to be in a zone are considered exposed to harassmentwithin the applicable harassment category. Figure 4.3-1 illustrates harassment zones extending from ahypothetical, directional sound source. (This figure is for illustrative purposes only and does not representthe sizes or shapes of the actual harassment zones).The Level A harassment zone extends from the source out to the distance and exposure at which theslightest amount of injury is predicted to occur. The acoustic exposure that produces the slightest degreeof injury is therefore the threshold value defining the outermost limit of the Level A harassment zone.Use of the threshold associated with the onset of slight injury as the most distant point and least injuriousexposure takes account of all more serious injuries by inclusion within the Level A harassment zone.4-21 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4This figure is intended to illustrate the general relationships between harassment zones and does not represent the sizes or shapes of the actual harassment zonesFigure 4.3-1. Summary of the Acoustic Effect FrameworkThe Level B harassment zone begins just beyond the point of slightest injury and extends outward fromthat point to include all animals that may possibly experience exposure of Level B harassment.Physiological effects extend beyond the range of slightest injury to a point where slight temporarydistortion of the most sensitive tissue occurs, but without destruction or loss of that tissue. The animalspredicted to be in this zone are assumed to experience Level B harassment by virtue of temporaryimpairment of sensory function (altered physiological function) that can disrupt behavior.Auditory Tissues as Indicators of Physiological EffectsExposure to continuous-type noise may cause a variety of physiological effects in mammals. Forexample, exposure to very high sound levels may affect the function of the visual system, vestibularsystem, and internal organs (Ward, 1997). Exposure to high-intensity, continuous-type sounds ofsufficient duration may cause injury to the lungs and intestines (e.g., Dalecki et al., 2002). Sudden,intense sounds may elicit a “startle” response and may be followed by an orienting reflex (Ward, 1997;Jansen, 1998). The primary physiological effects of sound, however, are on the auditory system (Ward,1997).The mammalian auditory system consists of the outer ear, middle ear, inner ear, and central nervoussystem. Sound waves are transmitted through the outer and middle ears to fluids within the inner ear. Theinner ear contains delicate electromechanical hair cells that convert the fluid motions into neural impulsesthat are sent to the brain. The hair cells within the inner ear are the most vulnerable to over-stimulationby noise exposure (Yost, 1994).Very high sound levels may rupture the eardrum or damage the small bones in the middle ear (Yost,1994). Lower level exposures may cause permanent or temporary hearing loss; such an effect is called anoise-induced threshold shift (NITS), or simply a threshold shift (TS) (Miller, 1974). A TS may be eitherpermanent, in which case it is called a permanent threshold shift (PTS), or temporary, in which case it iscalled a temporary threshold shift (TTS). Still lower exposures may result in auditory masking, whichmay interfere with an animal’s ability to hear other concurrent sounds.February 2007 4-22

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Because the tissues of the ear appear to be the most susceptible to the physiological effects of sound andTSs tend to occur at lower exposures than other more serious auditory effects, PTS and TTS are used hereas the biological indicators of physiological effects. The remainder of this subchapter is, therefore,focused on TSs, including PTSs and TTSs. Since masking (without a resulting TS) is not associated withabnormal physiological function, it is not considered a physiological effect in this authorization request,but rather a potential behavioral effect.Noise-Induced Threshold ShiftsThe amount of TS depends on the amplitude, duration, frequency, and temporal pattern of the soundexposure. Threshold shifts will generally increase with the amplitude and duration of sound exposure.For continuous sounds, exposures of equal energy will lead to approximately equal effects (Ward, 1997).For intermittent sounds, less TS will occur than from a continuous exposure with the same energy (somerecovery will occur between exposures) (Kryter et al., 1966; Ward, 1997).The magnitude of a TS normally decreases with the amount of time post-exposure (Miller, 1974). Theamount of TS just after exposure is called the initial TS. If the TS eventually returns to zero (thethreshold returns to the pre-exposure value), the TS is a TTS. Since the amount of TTS depends on thetime post-exposure, it is common to use a subscript to indicate the time in minutes after exposure(Quaranta et al., 1998). For example, TTS2 means a TTS measured two minutes after exposure. If theTS does not return to zero but leaves some finite amount of TS, then that remaining TS is a PTS. Thedistinction between PTS and TTS is based on whether there is a complete recovery of a TS following asound exposure. Figure 4.3-2 shows two hypothetical TSs, one that completely recovers, a TTS, and onethat does not completely recover, leaving some PTS.Figure 4.3-2. Hypothetical Temporary and Permanent Threshold ShiftsPTS, TTS and Harassment ZonesPTS is non-recoverable and, by definition, must result from the destruction of tissues within the auditorysystem. PTS therefore qualifies as an injury and is classified as Level A harassment under the wording ofthe MMPA. In the Draft EIS/OEIS, the smallest amount of PTS (onset-PTS) is taken to be the indicatorfor the smallest degree of injury that can be measured. The acoustic exposure associated with onset-PTSis used to define the outer limit of the Level A harassment zone.TTS is recoverable and, as in recent rulings (NOAA, 2001, 2002a), is considered to result from thetemporary, non-injurious distortion of hearing-related tissues. Because it is considered non-injurious, theacoustic exposure associated with onset-TTS is used to define the outer limit of the portion of the Level Bharassment zone attributable to physiological effects. This follows from the concept that hearing losspotentially affects an animal’s ability to react normally to the sounds around it. Therefore, the potential4-23 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4for TTS is considered as a Level B harassment that is mediated by physiological effects upon the auditorysystem.Marine Mammal Protection ActMarine mammals predicted to receive a sound exposure with energy flux density level (EL) of 215 dB re1 μPa 2 -s or greater are assumed to experience PTS and are counted as Level A harassment. Marinemammals predicted to receive a sound exposure with EL greater than or equal to 195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s butless than 215 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s are assumed to experience TTS and are counted as Level B harassment. Inaddition, all cetaceans predicted to receive a sound exposure with EL greater than or equal to 190 dB re 1μPa 2 -s but less than 195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s are assumed to experience behavioral disturbance and are alsocounted as Level B harassment. The only exception to this approach is the post-modeling considerationfor beaked whales. All beaked whale harassment is considered Level A. Harassment levels are shown inTable 4.3-2.Table 4.3-2. Harassment Levels for Active Sonar - CetaceansCriterionThresholdLevel A Harassment (onset PTS) onset TTS + 20 dB = 215 dB re 1 Pa 2 ·sLevel B Harassment (onset TTS) 195 dB re 1 Pa 2 ·sLevel B Harassment (Behavioral) 190 dB re 1 Pa 2 ·sCalifornia sea lions predicted to receive sound exposures EL 226 dB re 1 μPa 2·s or greater, northernelephant seals predicted to receive sound exposures EL 224 dB re 1 μPa 2·s or greater, and harbor sealspredicted to receive sound exposures EL 203 dB re 1 μPa 2·s or greater are assumed to experience PTS andare counted as Level A harassment. California sea lions predicted to receive sound exposures of EL 206 -226 dB re 1 μPa 2·s, northern elephant seals predicted to receive sound exposures EL 204-224 dB re 1μPa 2·s or greater, and harbor seals predicted to receive sound exposures of EL 183-203 dB re 1 μPa 2·s areassumed to experience TTS and are counted as Level B harassment. Harassment levels are shown inTable 4.3-3.Table 4.3-3. Harassment Levels for Active Sonar - PinnipedsCriterionLevel A Harassment (onset PTS)Level B Harassment (onset TTS)ThresholdsCA sea lions - 226 dB re 1 Pa 2 ·s*Elephant seals - 224 dB re 1 Pa 2 ·s*Harbor seals - 203 dB re 1 Pa 2 ·s*CA sea lions - 206 dB re 1 Pa 2 ·s*Elephant seals - 204 dB re 1 Pa 2 ·s*Harbor seals - 183 dB re 1 Pa 2 ·s*Marine mammals may be harassed due to noise from operations involving underwater and near-surfacedetonations. Criteria for non-injurious harassment are temporary (auditory) threshold shift (TTS), a slight,recoverable loss of hearing sensitivity (U.S. Navy, 2001). The dual criteria for TTS are 182 dB re 1 Pa 2 -s maximum EFD level in any 1/3-octave band at frequencies above 100 Hz for toothed whales (1/3-octaveband above 10 Hz is used for impact assessments on baleen whales) AND 23 psi. Non-lethal injuriousimpacts are defined as eardrum rupture (i.e., tympanic-membrane (TM) rupture) and the onset of slightFebruary 2007 4-24

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4lung injury. These are considered indicative of the onset of injury. The threshold for TM rupturecorresponds to a 50 percent rate of rupture (i.e., 50 percent of animals exposed to the level are expected tosuffer TM rupture); this is stated in terms of an EFD value of 1.17 in-lb/in 2 , which is about 205 dB re 1Pa 2 -s. This recognizes that TM rupture is not necessarily a life-threatening injury, but is a useful indexof possible injury that is well-correlated with measures of permanent hearing impairment (e.g., Ketten(1998) indicates a 30 percent incidence of permanent threshold shift (PTS) at the same threshold). Athreshold level of 13 psi-ms has been established as an indicator of onset of slight lung injury, the secondcriteria used to indicate non-lethal injurious impacts. Harassment levels are shown in Table 4.3.4.Table 4.3-4. Underwater Detonations – Pinnipeds and CetaceansLethality Level A Harassment Level B HarassmentOnset of extensive lunginjuryInjurious;tympanicmembrane ruptureOnset of slight lunginjuryNon-injurious;onset temporary threshold shift (TTS)30/5 psi-ms at the surface 205 dB re1 Pa 2 -s** Note: In greatest 1/3-octave band above 10 Hz or 100 Hz13 psi-ms at thesurface182 dB re 1 Pa 2 -s1/3 max. octave band >100Hz for toothed and>10Hz for mysticetes and 23 psiEndangered Species ActPotential for injury constituting harm under the ESA—ESA regulations define harm as “an act whichactually kills or injures” fish or wildlife (50 CFR § 222.102). Based on this definition, the criterionapplied here is PTS, a permanent noise-induced hearing loss. PTS is non-recoverable and as definedwithin this analysis, must result from the destruction of tissues within the auditory system. In thisanalysis, the smallest amount of PTS (onset-PTS) is taken to be the indicator for the smallest degree ofinjury that can be measured. The acoustic exposure associated with onset-PTS (EL of 215 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sor greater) is used to define the outer limit of the zone within which listed species are considered topotentially experience harm.Potential for non-injurious physiological effects constituting harassment under the ESA—ESAregulations define harassment as an “intentional or negligent act or omission which creates the likelihoodof injury to wildlife by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patternswhich include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering” (50 CFR § 17.3). In thisassessment, the smallest measurable amount of TTS, onset-TTS, is taken as the best indicator for slighttemporary sensory impairment. TTS is recoverable and, as in recent rulings (NOAA 2001; 2002), isconsidered to result from the temporary, non-injurious distortion of hearing-related tissues. Because it isconsidered non-injurious, the acoustic exposure associated with onset-TTS (EL greater than or equal to195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s) is used to define the outer limit of the zone within which listed species are predictedto experience harassment attributable to physiological effects. This follows from the concept that eventemporary hearing loss at a single frequency potentially affects an animal’s ability to react normally to thesounds around it.Potential for behavioral effects without physiological effects constituting harassment under the ESA—Acoustic exposure may result in behavioral effects that exceed the normal daily variation in behavior, butwhich arise without an accompanying physiological effect. In this assessment, these effects are alsoconsidered “harassment” under the ESA. This “zone” extends to a point at which no significant disruptionin normal behavioral patterns occurs. The acoustic exposure of EL greater than or equal to 190 dB re 14-25 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4μPa 2 -s is used to define the outer limit of the zone within which listed species are considered topotentially experience harassment attributable to behavioral effects without physiological effects.4.3.1.7.7 Criteria and Thresholds for Physiological EffectsThis section presents the effect criteria and thresholds for physiological effects of sound leading to injuryand behavioral disturbance. Previous sections identified the tissues of the ear as being the mostsusceptible to physiological effects of underwater sound. PTS and TTS were determined to be the mostappropriate biological indicators of physiological effects that equate to the onset of injury (Level Aharassment) and behavioral disturbance (Level B harassment), respectively. This section is, therefore,focused on criteria and thresholds to predict PTS and TTS in marine mammals.Marine mammal ears are functionally and structurally similar to terrestrial mammal ears; however, thereare important differences (Ketten, 2000). The most appropriate information from which to developPTS/TTS criteria for marine mammals would be experimental measurements of PTS and TTS frommarine mammal species of interest. TTS data exist for several marine mammal species and may be usedto develop meaningful TTS criteria and thresholds. PTS data do not exist for marine mammals and areunlikely to be obtained. Therefore, PTS criteria must be developed from TTS criteria and estimates of therelationship between TTS and PTS.This section begins with a review of the existing marine mammal TTS data. The review is followed by adiscussion of the relationship between TTS and PTS. The specific criteria and thresholds for TTS andPTS used in this authorization request are then presented. This is followed by discussions of soundenergy flux density level (EL), the relationship between EL and sound pressure level (SPL), and the useof SPL and EL in previous environmental compliance documents.Table 4.3-5. Energy Flux Density and Sound Pressure LevelsEnergy Flux Density Level and Sound Pressure LevelEnergy Flux Density Level (EL is the measure of sound energy flow per unit area expressed in dB. EL isstated in dB re 1 μPa 2 -s for underwater sound and dB re (20 μPa) 2 -s for airborne soundSound Pressure Level (SPL) is a measure of the root-mean square, or “effective,” sound pressure indecibels. SPL is expressed in dB re 1 μPa for underwater sound and dB re 20 μPa for airborne sound.TTS in Marine MammalsA number of investigators have measured TTS in marine mammals. These studies measured hearingthresholds in trained marine mammals before and after exposure to intense sounds. Some of the moreimportant data obtained from these studies are onset-TTS levels – exposure levels sufficient to cause ajust-measurable amount of TTS, often defined as 6 dB of TTS (for example, Schlundt et al., 2000). Theexisting cetacean TTS data are summarized in the following bullets.Schlundt, et al. (2000) reported the results of TTS experiments conducted with bottlenosedolphins and white whales exposed to 1-second tones. This paper also includes a reanalysisof preliminary TTS data released in a technical report by Ridgway et al. (1997). Atfrequencies of 3, 10, and 20 kHz (frequencies relevant to USWTR), SPLs necessary to inducemeasurable amounts (6 dB or more) of TTS were between 192 and 201 dB re 1 μPa (EL =192 to 201 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s). The mean exposure SPL and EL for onset-TTS were 195 dB re 1μPa and 195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s, respectively. The sound exposure stimuli (tones) and relativelyFebruary 2007 4-26

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4large number of test subjects (five dolphins and two white whales) make the Schlundt et al.(2000) data the most directly relevant TTS information for the sonar activities that will beemployed during COMPTUEX/JTFEX.Finneran, et al. (2001, 2003, 2005) described TTS experiments conducted with bottlenosedolphins exposed to 3-kHz tones with durations of 1, 2, 4, and 8 seconds. Small amounts ofTTS (3 to 6 dB) were observed in one dolphin after exposure to ELs between 190 and 204 dBre 1 μPa 2 -s. These results were consistent with the data of Schlundt et al. (2000) and showedthat the Schlundt et al. (2000) data were not significantly affected by the masking noise used.These results also confirmed that, for tones with different durations, the amount of TTS isbest correlated with the exposure EL rather than the exposure SPL.Natchigall, et al. (2003a, 2003b) measured TTS in a bottlenose dolphin exposed to octavebandnoise centered at 7.5 kHz. Nachtigall et al. (2003a) reported TTSs of about 11 dBmeasured 10 to 15 minutes after exposure to 30 to 50 minutes of noise with SPL 179 dB re 1μPa (EL about 213 dB re μPa 2 -s). No TTS was observed after exposure to the same noise at165 and 171 dB re 1 μPa. Nachtigall et al. (2003b) reported TTSs of around 4 to 8 dB 5minutes after exposure to 30 to 50 minutes of noise with SPL 160 dB re 1 μPa (EL about 193to 195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s). The difference in results was attributed to faster post-exposurethreshold measurement – TTS may have recovered before being detected by Nachtigall et al.(2003a). These studies showed that, for long-duration exposures, lower sound pressures arerequired to induce TTS than are required for short-duration tones. These data also confirmedthat, for the cetaceans studied, EL is the most appropriate predictor for onset-TTS.Finneran, et al. (2000, 2002) conducted TTS experiments with dolphins and white whalesexposed to impulsive sounds similar to those produced by distant underwater explosions andseismic waterguns. These studies showed that, for very short-duration impulsive sounds,higher sound pressures were required to induce TTS than for longer-duration tones.Kastak, et al. (1999, 2005) conducted TTS experiments with three species of pinnipeds,California sea lion, northern elephant seal and a Pacific harbor seal, exposed to continuousunderwater sounds at levels of 80 and 95 dB SL at 2.5 and 3.5 kHz for up to 50 minutes.Mean TTS shifts of up to 12.2 dB occurred with the harbor seals showing the largest shift of28.1 dB. Increasing the noise duration had a greater effect on TTS than increasing the soundlevel from 80 to 95 dB.In summary, the existing marine mammal TTS data show that, for the species studied and sounds (nonimpulsive)of interest, the following is true:The growth and recovery of TTS are analogous to those in land mammals. This meansthat, as in land mammals, cetacean TTS depend on the amplitude, duration, frequencycontent, and temporal pattern of the sound exposure. Threshold shifts will generally increasewith the amplitude and duration of sound exposure. For continuous sounds, exposures ofequal energy will lead to approximately equal effects (Ward, 1997). For intermittent sounds,less TS will occur than from a continuous exposure with the same energy (some recovery willoccur between exposures) (Kryter et al., 1965; Ward, 1997).SPL by itself is not a good predictor of onset-TTS, since the amount of TTS depends onboth SPL and duration.4-27 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Exposure EL is correlated with the amount of TTS and is a good predictor for onset-TTSfor single, continuous exposures with different durations. This agrees with human TTS datapresented by Ward et al. (1958, 1959).An energy flux density level of 195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s is the most appropriate predictor for onset-TTS from an accumulated equivalent exposure.Relationship between TTS and PTSSince marine mammal PTS data do not exist, onset-PTS levels for these animals must be estimated usingTTS data and relationships between TTS and PTS. Much of the early human TTS work was directedtowards relating TTS2 after 8 hours of noise exposure to the amount of PTS that would exist after yearsof similar daily exposures (e.g., Kryter et al., 1965). Although it is now acknowledged that susceptibilityto PTS cannot be reliably predicted from TTS measurements, TTS data do provide insight into theamount of TS that may be induced without a PTS. Experimental studies of the growth of TTS may alsobe used to relate changes in exposure level to changes in the amount of TTS induced. Onset-PTSexposure levels may therefore be predicted by:Estimating the largest amount of TTS that may be induced without PTS. Exposures causing aTS greater than this value are assumed to cause PTS.Estimating the additional exposure, above the onset-TTS exposure, necessary to reach themaximum allowable amount of TTS that, again, may be induced without PTS. This isequivalent to estimating the growth rate of TTS – how much additional TTS is produced byan increase in exposure level.Experimentally induced TTSs in marine mammals have generally been limited to around 2 to 10 dB, wellbelow TSs that result in some PTS. Experiments with terrestrial mammals have used much larger TSsand provide more guidance on how high a TS may rise before some PTS results. Early human TTSstudies reported complete recovery of TTSs as high as 50 dB after exposure to broadband noise (Ward etal., 1958, 1959, 1960). Ward et al. (1959) also reported slower recovery times when TTS2 approachedand exceeded 50 dB, suggesting that 50 dB of TTS2 may represent a “critical” TTS. Miller et al. (1963)found PTS in cats after exposures that were only slightly longer in duration than those causing 40 dB ofTTS. Kryter et al. (1966) stated: “A TTS2 that approaches or exceeds 40 dB can be taken as a signal thatdanger to hearing is imminent.” These data indicate that TSs up to 40 to 50 dB may be induced withoutPTS, and that 40 dB is a reasonable upper limit for TS to prevent PTS.The small amounts of TTS produced in marine mammal studies also limit the applicability of these datato estimates of the growth rate of TTS. Fortunately, data do exist for the growth of TTS in terrestrialmammals. For moderate exposure durations (a few minutes to hours), TTS2 varies with the logarithm ofexposure time (Ward et al., 1958, 1959; Quaranta et al., 1998). For shorter exposure durations the growthof TTS with exposure time appears to be less rapid (Miller, 1974; Keeler, 1976). For very long-durationexposures, increasing the exposure time may fail to produce any additional TTS, a condition known asasymptotic threshold shift (ATS) (Saunders et al., 1977; Mills et al., 1979).Ward et al. (1958, 1959) provided detailed information on the growth of TTS in humans. Ward et al.presented the amount of TTS measured after exposure to specific SPLs and durations of broadband noise.Since the relationship between EL, SPL, and duration is known, these same data could be presented interms of the amount of TTS produced by exposures with different ELs.February 2007 4-28

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4An estimate of 1.6 dB TTS2 per dB increase in exposure EL is the upper range of values from Ward et al.(1958, 1959) and gives the most conservative estimate – it predicts a larger amount of TTS from the sameexposure compared to the lines with smaller slopes. The difference between onset-TTS (6 dB) and theupper limit of TTS before PTS (40 dB) is 34 dB. To move from onset-TTS to onset-PTS, therefore,requires an increase in EL of 34 dB divided by 1.6 dB/dB, or approximately 21 dB. An estimate of 20 dBbetween exposures sufficient to cause onset-TTS and those capable of causing onset-PTS is a reasonableapproximation.To summarize:In the absence of marine mammal PTS data, onset-PTS exposure levels may be estimatedfrom marine mammal TTS data and PTS/TTS relationships observed in terrestrial mammals.This involves:ooEstimating the largest amount of TTS that may be induced without PTS. Exposurescausing a TS greater than this value are assumed to cause PTS.Estimating the growth rate of TTS – how much additional TTS is produced by anincrease in exposure level.A variety of terrestrial mammal data sources point toward 40 dB as a reasonable estimate ofthe largest amount of TS that may be induced without PTS. A conservative assumption isthat continuous-type exposures producing TSs of 40 dB or more always result in someamount of PTS.Data from Ward et al. (1958, 1959) reveal a linear relationship between TTS2 and exposureEL. A value of 1.6 dB TTS2 per dB increase in EL is a conservative estimate of how muchadditional TTS is produced by an increase in exposure level for continuous-type soundsThere is a 34 dB TS difference between onset-TTS (6 dB) and onset-PTS (40 dB). Theadditional exposure above onset-TTS that is required to reach PTS is therefore 34 dB dividedby 1.6 dB/dB, or approximately 21 dB.Exposures with ELs 20 dB above those producing TTS may be assumed to produce a PTS.This number is used as a conservative simplification of the 21 dB number derived above.Derivation of Effect ThresholdsThe TTS threshold is for cetacean is based on TTS data from Schlundt et al. (2000). Since these testsused short-duration tones similar to sonar pings, they are the most directly relevant data. The meanexposure EL required to produce onset-TTS in these tests was 195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s. This result iscorroborated by the short-duration tone data of Finneran et al. (2000, 2003a) and the long-duration noisedata from Nachtigall et al. (2003 a, b). Together, these data demonstrate that TTS in cetaceans iscorrelated with the received EL and that onset-TTS exposures are fit well by an equal-energy line passingthrough 195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s.The TTS threshold for pinnipeds is based on TTS day from Kastak et al. (1999; 2005). Although theirdata is from continuous noise rather than short duration tones, pinniped TTS can be extrapolated usingequal energy curves. Continuous sound at a lower intensity level can produce TTS similar to shortduration but higher intensity sounds such as sonar pings.The PTS threshold is based on a 20 dB increase in exposure EL over that required for onset-TTS. The 20dB value is based on estimates from terrestrial mammal data of PTS occurring at 40 dB or more of TS,4-29 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4and on TS growth occurring at a rate of 1.6 dB/dB increase in exposure EL. This estimate is conservativebecause: (1) 40 dB of TS is actually an upper limit for TTS used to approximate onset-PTS, and (2) the1.6 dB/dB growth rate is the highest observed in the data from Ward et al. (1958, 1959).Use of EL for Physiological Effect ThresholdsEffect thresholds are expressed in terms of total received EL. Energy flux density is a measure of theflow of sound energy through an area. Marine and terrestrial mammal data show that, for continuous-typesounds of interest, TTS and PTS are more closely related to the energy in the sound exposure than to theexposure SPL.The EL for each individual ping is calculated from the following equation:EL = SPL + 10log10 (duration)The EL includes both the ping SPL and duration. Longer-duration pings and/or higher-SPL pings willhave a higher EL.If an animal is exposed to multiple pings, the energy flux density in each individual ping is summed tocalculate the total EL. Since mammalian TS data show less effect from intermittent exposures comparedto continuous exposures with the same energy (Ward, 1997), basing the effect thresholds on the totalreceived EL is a conservative approach for treating multiple pings; in reality, some recovery will occurbetween pings and lessen the effect of a particular exposure. Therefore, estimates are conservativebecause recovery is not taken into account – intermittent exposures are considered comparable tocontinuous exposures.The total EL depends on the SPL, duration, and number of pings received. The TTS and PTS thresholdsdo not imply any specific SPL, duration, or number of pings. The SPL and duration of each received pingare used to calculate the total EL and determine whether the received EL meets or exceeds the effectthresholds. For example, the TTS threshold would be reached through any of the following exposures:A single ping with SPL = 195 dB re 1 μPa and duration = 1 second.A single ping with SPL = 192 dB re 1 μPa and duration = 2 seconds.Two pings with SPL = 192 dB re 1 μPa and duration = 1 second.Two pings with SPL = 189 dB re 1 μPa and duration = 2 seconds.Comparison to SURTASS LFA Risk FunctionsThe effect thresholds described in this authorization request should not be confused with criteria andthresholds used for the Navy’s Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System Low Frequency Active(SURTASS LFA) Sonar. SURTASS LFA features pings lasting many tens of seconds. The sonars ofconcern for use on the USWTR emit pings lasting a few seconds at most. SURTASS LFA risk functionswere expressed in terms of the received “single ping equivalent” SPL. Effect thresholds in thisauthorization request are expressed in terms of the total received EL. The SURTASS LFA risk functionparameters cannot be directly compared to the effect thresholds proposed in the SCIRC Draft EIS/OEIS.Comparisons must take into account the differences in ping duration, number of pings received, andmethod of accumulating effects over multiple pings.Previous Use of EL for Physiological EffectsEnergy measures have been used as a part of dual criteria for cetacean auditory effects in shock trials,which only involve impulsive-type sounds (U.S. Navy, 1997, 2001a). These actions used 192 dB re 1February 2007 4-30

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4μPa 2 -s as a reference point to derive a TTS threshold in terms of EL. A second TTS threshold, based onpeak pressure, was also used. If either threshold was exceeded, effect was assumed.The 192 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s reference point differs from the threshold of 195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s used in theSCIRC Draft EIS/OEIS. The 192 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s value was based on the minimum observed by Ridgwayet al. (1997) and Schlundt et al. (2000) during TTS measurements with bottlenose dolphins exposed to 1-second tones. At the time, no impulsive test data for marine mammals were available and the 1-secondtonal data were considered to be the best available. The minimum value of the observed range of 192 to201 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s was used to protect against misinterpretation of the sparse data set available. The 192dB re 1 μPa 2 -s value was reduced to 182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s to accommodate the potential effects of pressurepeaks in impulsive waveforms.The additional data now available for onset-TTS in small cetaceans confirm the original range of valuesand increase confidence in it (Finneran et al., 2001, 2003a; Nachtigall et al., 2003a, 2003b). The SCIRCDraft EIS/OEIS, therefore, uses the more complete data available and the mean value of the entireSchlundt et al. (2000) data set (195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s), instead of the minimum of 192 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s. Fromthe standpoint of statistical sampling and prediction theory, the mean is the most appropriate predictor –the “best unbiased estimator” – of the EL at which onset-TTS should occur; predicting the number oftakes in future actions relies (in part) on using the EL at which onset-TTS will most likely occur. Whenthat EL is applied over many pings in each of many sonar operations, that value will provide the mostaccurate prediction of the actual number of takes by onset-TTS over all of those operations. Use of theminimum value would overestimate total harassment numbers because many animals counted would nothave experienced onset-TTS. Further, there is no logical limiting minimum value of the distribution thatwould be obtained from continued successive testing. Continued testing and use of the minimum wouldproduce more and more erroneous estimates.4.3.1.7.8 Criteria and Thresholds for Behavioral EffectsThis section presents the effect criterion and threshold for behavioral effects of sound leading tobehavioral disturbance without accompanying physiological effects. Since TTS is used as the biologicalindicator for a physiological effect leading to behavioral disturbance, the behavioral effects discussed inthis subchapter may be thought of as behavioral disturbance occurring at exposure levels below thosecausing TTS.A large body of research on terrestrial animal and human response to airborne noise exists, but resultsfrom those studies are not readily extendible to the development of effect criteria and thresholds formarine mammals. For example, “annoyance” is one of several criteria used to define impact to humansfrom exposure to industrial noise sources. Comparable criteria cannot be developed for marine mammalsbecause there is no acceptable method for determining whether a non-verbal animal is annoyed. Further,differences in hearing thresholds, dynamic range of the ear, and the typical exposure patterns of interest(e.g., human data tend to focus on 8-hour-long exposures) make extrapolation of human noise exposurestandards inappropriate.Behavioral observations of marine mammals exposed to anthropogenic sound sources exist; however,there are few observations and no controlled measurements of behavioral disruption of cetaceans causedby sound sources with frequencies, waveforms, durations, and repetition rates comparable to thoseemployed by the tactical sonars to be used during COMPTUEX/JTFEX. At the present time there is noconsensus on how to account for behavioral effects on marine mammals exposed to continuous-typesounds (National Research Council, 2003).4-31 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4This EA/OEA uses behavioral observations of trained cetaceans exposed to intense underwater soundunder controlled circumstances to develop a criterion and threshold for behavioral effects of sound.These data are described in detail in Schlundt et al. (2000) and Finneran and Schlundt (2004). These dataare the most applicable because they are based on controlled, tonal sound exposures within the tacticalsonar frequency range, and because the species studied are closely related to the majority of animalsexpected to be located within the SOCAL OPAREA.This section begins by presenting the behavioral effects threshold that is used for the harassmentauthorization request based on input from the NMFS. The section then describes the scientific basis forthe derivation of a different threshold that Navy believes reflects the current status of the science for midfrequencysonar sources. The section ends by addressing the likelihood for exposure of mammals tosound over extended periods of time (regarding the issue of potentially displacing a resident population)and the potential for auditory masking.Threshold Level for Harassment from Behavioral EffectsFor this specified action, based on coordination with NMFS, the threshold for behavioral response (sub-TTS) modeled in the acoustic exposure analysis for cetacea in this EA/OEA includes an analysis of thepotential for exposures at or above a received sound level of 173 dB re 1 μPa 2 . Therefore, the thresholdfor behavioral effect for this specified action is:173 dB re 1 µPa 2 -s at 1 m (received EL)NMFS recommended Navy include analysis of this threshold based on NMFS’ evaluation of databehavioral observations of marine mammals under controlled conditions, described in the next subsection,plus NMFS’ interpretation of two additional studies (Nowacek et al, 2004 and NMFS 2005). While thisbehavioral effects threshold continues to undergo discussion, Navy is presenting an analysis of potentialfor behavioral effects and requesting harassment authorization at the NMFS-required level. Additionally,Navy is providing the analyses to the 190 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s, presented below, which Navy believes to mostaccurately reflect scientifically-derived behavioral reactions from sound sources that are most similar tomid-frequency sonars.The use of the 173 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s was required by NMFS as a precautionary measure given there remainunique circumstances present in attempting to quantitatively predict the potential effects of sonar oncetaceans. These unique factors are: (1) the newness of the quantitative modeling approach, and (2) theanimals affected are wild animals vice animals in captivity. The Navy has agreed to the use of the 173 dBre 1 μPa 2 -s threshold for this EA/OEA. Establishment of an appropriate threshold will continue to becoordinate between Navy and NMFS.For this EA/OEA, all marine mammals predicted to receive a sound exposure with EL greater than orequal to 173 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s but less than 195 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s are considered as potentially experiencingbehavioral effects that NMFS considers may cause Level B harassment. These raw acoustic exposuresare evaluated in consideration of species’ behavioral ecology, their expected occurrence in the exercisesareas, and the use of mitigation measures to determine the species and number of harassment incidents.Behavioral Effects in Cetaceans Exposed to Sonar-Like SoundsAs described above, Navy believes behavioral observations of trained cetaceans exposed to intenseunderwater sound under controlled circumstances are an important data set in evaluating and developing acriterion and threshold for behavioral effects of sound. Behavioral observations are described in detail inFebruary 2007 4-32

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Schlundt et al. (2000) and Finneran and Schlundt (2004). These data are considered the most applicableto mid-frequency sonar because they are based on controlled, tonal sound exposures within the tacticalsonar frequency range.These behavioral response data are an important foundation for the scientific basis of the Navy’spreferred onset behavioral effects at 190 dB re 1 μPa 2 because of the (1) finer control over acousticconditions; (2) greater quality and confidence in recorded sound exposures; and (3) the exposure stimuliclosely match those of interest for COMPTUEX/JTFEX. Since no comparable data exist, or are likely tobe obtained in the near-term, the relationship between the behavioral results reported by Finneran andSchlundt (2004) and wild animals is not known. Although experienced, trained subjects may toleratehigher sound levels than inexperienced animals; it is also possible that prior experiences and resultantexpectations may have made some trained subjects less tolerant of sound exposures. Potential differencesbetween trained subjects and wild animals are accounted for by deriving a conservative proposedthreshold for effect compared to the regulatory definition of harassment (see Section 6.2.2.2).Behavioral Effects to Cetaceans Exposed to Sonar-Like SoundsResearchers conducting TTS experiments with marine mammals have noted certain “behavioralalterations,” or changes from the subjects’ trained behaviors, that tended to occur as the subjects wereexposed to sounds of increasing intensity. Behavioral alterations were generally attempts by the subjectsto avoid the site of previous noise exposures (Schlundt et al., 2000), or attempts to avoid an exposure inprogress (Kastak et al., 1999). On some occasions, subjects became aggressive or refused to furtherparticipate in the test (Schlundt et al., 2000).Schlundt et al. (2000) and Finneran et al. (2001) reported behavioral alterations, defined as deviationsfrom subjects’ normal trained behaviors, and the exposure levels above which they were observed duringcetacean TTS experiments using 1-second tones. Finneran and Schlundt (2004) analyzed the behavioraldata and provided a statistical summary relating altered behaviors to exposure levels. A summary of the3-, 10-, and 20-kHz results from Finneran and Schlundt (2004) – the frequencies most directly relevant toCOMPTUEX/JTFEX – is provided below.A probit analysis technique (Finney, 1971) was used to fit a smooth dose-response curve to the percentaltered behavior versus exposure level data for the pooled dolphin/white whale data set (upper panel).The exposure levels corresponding to specific percentages of sessions with altered behavior were foundby interpolating within the dose-response curve. Exposure levels corresponding to sessions with 25, 50,and 75% altered behavior were 180, 190, and 199 dB re 1 μPa SPL (or 180, 190, and 199 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sEL), respectively. More detailed statistical results are provided in Finneran and Schlundt (2004).To summarize:Behaviors of subjects during intense sound exposures were compared to subjects’ normalbehaviors without intense sound exposures.Each test session was subjectively classified as “normal” or “altered” behavior.The percentage of sessions with altered behavior was calculated as a function of exposure level.The percentage of sessions with altered behavior generally increased with increasing exposurelevel.A smooth dose-response curve was fit to the resulting data.The exposure levels required to produce 25, 50, and 75% behavioral alteration were determinedby interpolating within the dosage-response curve.4-33 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4 For pooled white whale and dolphin data at 3, 10, and 20 kHz, exposure SPLs of 180, 190, and199 dB re 1 μPa (ELs of 180, 190, and 199 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s) corresponded with the 25, 50, and75% altered behavior points, respectively.Navy Derivation of Effect ThresholdThe Navy supports a behavioral effects threshold based primarily on the behavioral observations reportedin Schlundt et al. (2000) and Finneran et al. (2000, 2003b, 2005). Finneran and Schlundt (2004)summarize these data and provide the statistical analysis used in development of this threshold. Thesestudies are applicable because they used short-duration tones and frequencies similar to the sonar usemodeled in this assessment. The most compelling reason for the use of this experimental data usingcaptive animals was the considerable number of studies involved and the absence of any other data usingrepresentative sound characteristics and experimental controls.The behavior of a subject during intense sound exposure experiments was subjectively compared to thesubject’s “normal” behaviors to determine whether a subject exhibited altered behavior during a session.In this context, altered behavior means a deviation from a subject’s typical trained behaviors. Thesubjective assessment was only possible because behavioral observations were made with the samesubjects during many baseline hearing sessions with no intense sound exposures. This allowedcomparisons to be made between how a subject usually acted and how it acted during test sessions withintense sound exposures. Each exposure session was then categorized as “normal behavior” or “alteredbehavior.” The behavioral alterations primarily consisted of reluctance on the part of the subjects, duringa test session, to return to the site of a previous intense sound exposure. All instances of altered behaviorwere included in the statistical summary. An example of the results is as follows: At 192 dB re 1 μPaexposure SPL, 7 of 13 white whale sessions and 16 of 32 dolphin sessions were categorized as alteredbehavior. The pooled percentage is therefore 51%, or 23 of 45 total sessions.Exposure levels corresponding to sessions with 25, 50, and 75% altered behavior were 180, 190, and 199dB re 1 μPa SPL (or 180, 190, and 199 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s EL), respectively. More detailed statistical resultsare provided in Finneran and Schlundt (2004).The use of the 50% point to estimate a single numeric “all-or-nothing” threshold from a psychometricfunction is a common and accepted psychophysical technique (e.g., Nachtigall, 2000; Yost, 1994). The50% altered point from these data is a conservative approach to predicting Level B harassment because itactually represents the sensory threshold point where the sound was strong enough to potentially result inaltered behavior 50% of the time; however, it may not result in significantly altered behavior as isrequired to be considered Level B harassment as defined for military readiness activities. Furthermore,Level B harassment for military readiness activities is defined as any act that disturbs or is likely todisturb a marine mammal indicating either a certainty of occurrence or that an occurrence is likely. It canbe argued that phenomena with occurrences below 50% are “not likely” since in the majority of the times,they by definition will not occur.Use of EL for Behavioral EffectsThe behavioral effect threshold is stated in terms of EL. If an animal is exposed to multiple pings, theenergy flux density in each individual ping is summed to calculate the total EL. EL is used for threereasons:EL takes both the exposure SPL and duration into account. Both SPL and duration ofexposure affect behavioral responses to sound, so a behavioral effect threshold must includeexposure duration. Use of SPL by itself in other effect scenarios relied on a known or fixedFebruary 2007 4-34

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4exposure duration (for example, SURTASS LFA or seismic surveys). In the proposedCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training scenarios, the behavioral effect thresholds include duration as wellas SPL.EL takes into account the effects of multiple pings. Effect thresholds based on SPL predict thesame effect regardless of the number of received sounds. Previous actions using SPL-basedcriteria included implicit methods to account for multiple pings, such as the single-pingequivalent used in SURTASS LFA. The use of EL for this specified activity takes into accountthe effects of multiple pings, and does so in a conservative manner, since all the energy inreceived pings is summed up with no benefit allowed for recovery between pings. EL allows a rational ordering of behavioral effects with physiological effects. The effectthresholds for physiological effects are stated in terms of EL because experimental data show thatthe observed effects (TTS and PTS) are correlated best with the sound energy, not the SPL.Using EL for behavioral effects allows the behavioral and physiological effects to be placed on asingle exposure scale, with behavioral effects occurring at lower exposures than physiologicaleffects. If physiological thresholds were given in EL and behavioral effects in terms of SPL, itmight be possible for distances associated with physiological effects to be greater than thoseassociated with behavioral effects, which violates the assumptions of the biological framework.Likelihood of Prolonged ExposureThe proposed ASW activities during COMPTUEX/JTFEX would not result in prolonged exposurebecause the vessels are constantly moving, and the flow of the activity in the SOCAL OPAREA whenASW training occurs reduces the potential for prolonged exposure. The implementation of the protectivemeasures described in Chapter 5 would further reduce the likelihood of any prolonged exposure.Likelihood of MaskingNatural and artificial sounds can disrupt behavior by masking, or interfering with an animal’s ability tohear other sounds. Masking occurs when the receipt of a sound is interfered with by a second sound atsimilar frequencies and at similar or higher levels. If the second sound were artificial, it could bepotentially harassing if it disrupted hearing-related behavior such as communications or echolocation. Itis important to distinguish TTS and PTS, which persist after the sound exposure, from masking, whichoccurs during the sound exposure.Historically, principal masking concerns have been with prevailing background noise levels from naturaland manmade sources (for example, Richardson et al., 1995). Dominant examples of the latter are theaccumulated noise from merchant ships and noise of seismic surveys. Both cover a wide frequency bandand are long in duration.COMPTUEX/JTFEX ASW activities occur in areas are away from harbors or heavily traveled shippinglanes. The loudest underwater sounds in the proposed action area are those produced by sonars and otheracoustic sources that are in the mid-frequency or higher range. The sonar signals are likely within theaudible range of most cetaceans, but are very limited in the temporal, frequency, and spatial domains. Inparticular, the pulse lengths are short, the duty cycle low, the total number of hours of operation per yearsmall, and the tactical sonars transmit within a narrow band of frequencies (typically less than one-thirdoctave). Finally, high levels of sound are confined to a volume around the source and are constrained bypropagation attenuation rates at mid- and high frequencies, as well as by limited beam widths and pulselengths.For the reasons outlined above, the chance of sonar operations causing masking effects is considerednegligible.4-35 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 44.3.1.7.9 Application of Effect Thresholds to Beaked WhalesRecent beaked whale strandings have prompted inquiry into the relationship between high-amplitudecontinuous-type sound and the cause of those strandings. In the one stranding where U.S. Navy midfrequencysonar has been identified as the most plausible contributory source to the stranding event, theNavy participated in an extensive investigation of the stranding with NMFS.The Navy analyzed the known range of operational, biological, and environmental factors involved in theBahamas stranding and focused on the interplay of these factors to reduce risks to beaked whales fromASW training operations. Consequently, the planned use and location in which COMPTUEX/JTFEXASW would occur would maximize both training fidelity (readiness) and the protection of beaked whales.The Bahamas exercise entailed multiple ships using mid-frequency active sonar during transits of aconstricted channel. COMPTUEX/JTFEX ASW activities within the SOCAL OPAREA differ from thecircumstances surrounding the Bahamas stranding because the SOCAL OPAREA does not have thecombination of environmental conditions most likely to have contributed to the stranding.In contrast to the Bahamas exercise, the COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events involving multiple surfaceships and would not include multiple transits across a constricted channel. Additionally, the nominalsource level for COMPTUEX/JTFEX training would be limited to 235 dB re 1Pa 2 -s @ 1 m for the SQS-53C.A review of stranding incidents and ASW training practices has led the Navy to conclude that theproposed nominal source levels for training activities taking place during COMPTUEX/JTFEX wouldreduce possible effects to marine mammals while providing training realism. From a tactical perspective,higher source levels for shallow water ASW increase the likelihood of detection by enemy submarinesand the amount of reverberation (reflections), which negatively impacts the ability to detect enemysubmarines.The interaction of unique environmental factors involved in the Bahamas and at the sites of other beakedwhale stranding events are not present in the SOCAL OPAREA. The “Joint Interim Report, BahamasMarine Mammal Stranding Event of 15-16 March 2000” (Department of Commerce [DOC] and U.S.Navy, 2001) concluded that environmental and biological factors, including the presence of a strongsurface duct, unusual underwater bathymetry, a constricted channel with limited egress, and the presenceof beaked whales were contributory factors to the stranding. Beaked whales are expected in the deeperportions of the SOCAL OPAREA; however, the combination of environmental factors contributing to theBahamas stranding event is not present in the SOCAL OPAREA.Since the exact causes of the stranding events are unknown, separate, meaningful impact thresholdscannot be derived specifically for beaked whales. The Navy, in consideration of the repetitive use of midfrequencysonar proposed for USWTR operations on the east coast, took a conservative approach andtreated all behavioral disturbances of beaked whales as a potential injury. All predicted Level Bexposures of beaked whales were counted as non-lethal Level A exposures.4.3.1.7.10 Active Acoustic Source DescriptionsThis section describes the active acoustic sources that could be associated with each training platform(aircraft, ships, submarines, etc.) during COMPTUEX and JTFEX. When selecting the sonar systems tomodel, several considerations were factored:Although the AN/AQS 13 dipping sonar is still in use, it is being replaced with a newer system,the AN/AQS-22, and therefore, the newer was modeled.February 2007 4-36

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Although the AN/SQS 53 and AN/SQS 56 are hull-mounted sonar systems, their operatingcharacteristics are different, and therefore were modeled separately.If there exists far more of one type of system than another, as in the case of the submarine wherepresently there are only 3 BSY-2 systems but over 40 BQQ-5/BSY-1 systems in the submarinefleet, then the more prevalent system was modeled. The acoustic capability of the AN/BQQ-10 is similar to the AN/BQQ-5. The major difference liesin improved processing capabilities; therefore, the AN/BQQ-5 was modeled.Surface Ship SONARAN/SQS-26CX— hull-mounted passive and active sonar system, which operates in a variety ofactive modes.AN/SQS-53A/B/C— advanced hull-mounted surface ship ASW sonar. Operating in manydifferent modes, this sonar system can detect, identify, and track multiple targets. AN/SQS-56—a hull-mounted direct-path sonar of the Oliver Hazard Perry-class ships.Surface Ship FathometersFathometer is used to measure the depth of water from the ship’s keel to the ocean floor, and is used forsafe operational navigation.Submarine Sonar AN/BQQ-5 - the current U.S. Navy standard submarine sonar suite. The basic AN/BQQ-5consists of a transmitting and receiving sphere, and towed passive arrays. The BSY-1 activesystem is basically comparable to the BQQ-5. These two systems are most prevalent in thesubmarine fleet. AN/BQQ-10—the acoustic capability of this sonar is analogous to the AN/BQQ-5. The majordifference lies in improved processing capabilities; therefore, it was not separately analyzed.AN/BSY-1 (V)—an integrated system for the mid-frequency, bow-mounted Submarine ActiveDetection Sonar (SADS) system and the high-frequency active Mine/Ice Detection andAvoidance System (MIDAS) mounted on the sail. AN/BSY-2—the combat system of the Seawolf-class submarine; its design is based on theAN/BSY-1(V). The major system sensors are a large spherical array (LSA), a low-frequency bowarray (LFBA), an active hemispherical array (AHA) below the LFBA, a high-frequency array(HA) in the sail, a wide aperture array (WAA—TB-16 or TB-23), and MIDAS. The AN/BSY-2exists on only three submarines in the Fleet, so it was not included in the modeling.Submarine FathometerThe fathometer is used to measure the depth of water from the submarine’s keel to the ocean floor for safeoperational navigation.Submarine Auxiliary Sonar Systems AN/BQS-14/15 - under-ice navigation and mine-hunting sonar, operating at mid to highfrequency that employs a receiver as well as a projector. Later versions, named the SubmarineActive Detection Sonar (SADS) have been integrated as part of the AN/BSY-1 and 2.AN/WQC-2A - sonar underwater communications system that has two frequency bands: midfrequency(MF) (1.45 to 3.1 kHz); and high-frequency (HF) (8.3 to 11.1 kHz). The HF band willprimarily be used for range communications.4-37 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Aircraft Sonar SystemsThe aircraft sonar systems that operate in SOCAL are composed of sonobuoys and dipping sonars. P-3Caircraft may deploy sonobuoys while helicopters may deploy both sonobuoys and dipping sonars. Asonobuoy is a dispensable device used by aircraft for the detection of underwater acoustic energy and forconducting vertical water column temperature measurements. Most sonobuoys are passive but some cangenerate active acoustic signals, as well as listen passively. The dipping sonar is an active or passivesonar device lowered on cable by helicopters to detect or maintain contact with underwater targets.AN/AQS-13 Helicopter Dipping Sonar - active scanning sonar that detects and maintains contactwith underwater targets through a transducer lowered into the water from a hovering helicopter.AN/AQS-13F – most recent version of helicopter dipping sonar AN/AQS-13.AN/SSQ-62C Directional Command Active Sonobuoy System (DICASS) - operates under directcommand from ASW fixed-wing aircraft (P-3C). The system can determine the range andbearing of the target relative to the sonobuoy’s position. After water entry, the sonobuoytransmits sonar pulses (continuous waveform (CW) or linear frequency modulation (FM)) uponcommand from the aircraft. The echoes from the selected activating signal are processed in thebuoy before being transmitted to the receiving station onboard the launching aircraft.AN/AQS-22 - Navy dipping sonar system deployed on the SH-60F and MH-60R helicoptersAN/AQS-22 employs both deep and shallow water capabilities and operates between frequenciesof 3 and 5 kHz. Extended Echo Ranging/Improved Extended Echo Ranging (EER/IEER) System - The IEERsystem is used to conduct “large area” searches for submarines and is usually deployed by a P-3Caircraft. The system is comprised of electronics as well as two sonobuoy types, passive andactive. Once the system enters the water column, the active sonobuoy emits a sound pulse. Thispulse travels through the water column until it is reflected off one or more objects. The echo isthen detected by the passive sonobuoy and sent to the aircraft for further processing. Theacoustic source for EER/IEER is a ribbon charge. Note – currently, EER/IEER are not usedduring COMPTUEX and JTFEX, and therefore, results of acoustic modeling efforts were notcarried forward in this EA/OEA.TorpedoesTorpedoes are the primary ASW weapon used by surface ships, aircraft, and submarines. Whentorpedoes operate actively, they transmit an acoustic signal to ensonify the target and use the receivedechoes for guidance. All torpedoes activities in SOCAL occur on the instrumented Southern CaliforniaASW Range west of SCI. All torpedoes are exercise torpedoes, and include the MK 48 advancedcapability (ADCAP) heavy weight torpedoes, and MK 46, MK 50 and MK 54 advanced lightweight(ALW) torpedoes. Exercise torpedoes (EXTORPs) are inert units (no warhead) with operating sonar andengines. Recoverable Exercise Torpedoes (REXTORPs) are inert training units that have no mobility oracoustic capability to search, detect and pursue targets.Acoustic Device Counter MeasuresSeveral types of counter measure (CM) devices are used including the Acoustic Device Countermeasure(ADC) MK 1, MK 2, MK 3, and MK 4. CM devices are submarine simulators and act as decoys to avertlocalization and torpedo attacks. Countermeasures may be towed or free-floating sources.February 2007 4-38

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Remoter Mine Hunting SystemRemote Mine Hunting System (RMS) is a self-contained Unmanned Underwater Vehicle (UUV)deployed on Guided Missile Destroyers (DDG–91 through –101). Prior to deployment the RMS ispreprogrammed with a search pattern. Using low-power (

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4countermeasures, underwater telephones, MK 30 and MK 39 EMATT targets, DICASS sonobuoy, RMS,and MK 46.\/MK 50/MK 54 lightweight torpedoes.Modeling Assumptions - Sonar Operations DescriptionSurface Ship Sonar (AN/SQS- 53C) - The AN/SQS-53C, one of two surface ship sonar systems modeled,would be employed by surface ships. The AN/SQS-53C is in use on approximately 70 percent of thesurface ships that employ active sonar. It also has a higher source level and unique operatingcharacteristics relative to the other surface ship sonar (AN/SQS-56). The surface ship sonar was modeledas a moving source with a fixed depth. Two modes of operation are modeled: search and track. Thedistribution between the search time and track time has been defined as 67% and 33% respectively. Thesource characteristics were adjusted in the analysis for each mode of operation.Surface Ship Sonar (AN/SQS-56) - The AN/SQS-56, the second surface ship sonar that was modeledwould be employed by surface ships. The AN/SQS-56 is employed on approximately 30 percent of thesurface ships that employ active sonar. As with the 53C this sonar was modeled in both search and trackmodes with the source characteristics adjusted for each.Submarine Sonar - The AN/BQQ-5 submarine sonar is used by submarines to locate and track submergedtargets (submarines, MK 30, MK 39 EMATT) and surface vessels. Modeling assumed the submarinewould ping two times during operations that occurred in W-291. However, the model did not depict activesonar from submarines on SOAR because submarines do not use active sonar on SOAR. Although thesubmarine moves during an exercise, it was modeled as a stationary source to reflect the fact that itsactive sonar is rarely used.Torpedoes - MK 48 Advanced Capability (ADCAP) exercise torpedoes are used on SOAR in conjunctionwith some ASW Operations, Tracking, and Sub Operations. All exercise torpedoes are inert. The MK-48is considered a moving source operating at two different depths on SOAR but the active transmissions ofthe torpedo were considered as a number of distinct pings per shot. Over the course of a 15-minutetorpedo run, the MK 48 would emit an active signal for a total of 30-sec cumulated pinging.Dipping Sonar – AN/AQS-22 dipping sonar would be used during ASW and Tracking Operations.Modeling assumed that the helicopter would be dipping 50% of the time; the remaining 50% of the time,the helicopters would use DICASS sonobuoys. Dipping sonar was modeled as a stationary source.Three mid-frequency active sonar operations occur during the course of COMPTUEX and/or JTFEX:Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Operations, Tracking Operations (ship, sub, air), and SubmarineOperations (Sub Ops). The following operational assumptions were incorporated into modeling:ASW Operations Conducted during CSG JTFEXIncorporates search, track and attack components of anti-submarine warfareFive (5) surface ships (3 AN/SQS-53 and 2 AN/SQS-56 hull-mounted surface ships)Sonar transmission - 67% of the sonar operated in search mode and remaining 33% operated intrack mode Dipping sonar (AN/AQS-22) operated in 5 minute on/5 minute off cycle extended over a 30minute periodSubmarines (AN/BQQ-5) do not emit an active sonar signal on SOAR; outside SOAR, subs emit5 pings.February 2007 4-40

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4 All MK 48 ADCAP exercise torpedoes are inert; out of a 15 minute run, torpedo emitted 30-secaccumulated pinging; both shallow and deep depths were modeled and used in total energycalculation.Tracking Operations Conducted during CSG COMPTUEX and ESG COMPTUEXTracking operations test search and tracking abilities, so rarely involves attack portion of antisubmarinewarfare. When MK 48 torpedoes are incorporated into this training, all torpedoes areinert; emit 30-sec of accumulated pinging throughout a 15 minute run (30 pings); and weremodeled for both shallow and deep depths.Outside SOAR, Tracking Operations did not include MK 48 torpedoes.Ship - AN/SQS-53 and AN/SQS-5675% of the operations will utilize AN/SQS-53 and 25% of the ship operations will use AN/SQS-56 sonar system.Sonar transmission - 67% of the sonar operated in search mode and remaining 33% operated intrack modeAir - AN/AQS-22Dipping sonar (AN/AQS-22) operated in 5 minute on/5 minute off cycle.Six dips per hourHelicopter is stationary during active sonar transmission but changes locations throughout thecourse of the operation.Sub – AN/BQQ-5Submarine does not ping on SOAR Outside of SOAR, submarine emits 15 pings in both shallow an deep water over the duration ofthe operationSubmarine Operations Conducted during CSG COMPTUEX, ESG COMPTUEX, CSG JTFEX, ESG JTFEX30 pings per MK 48 ADCAP exercise torpedo firing (SOAR only)Both shallow and deep water runs were modeledSubmarine emits 5 pings per three hour period (outside SOAR)Modeling Assumptions - Underwater Detonations Operations DescriptionUnderwater Detonations, Mining Operations, and Ship Mine Countermeasures Ordnance net explosive weight: 1-20 lbs Explosive depth: 40 ft (mid source) and 150 ft (deep source) Average sediment (silt) depth – 935 m deep March and September sound velocity profiles modeled4-41 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Energy flux density estimates obtained at following depths and ranges:Depth: 5, 15, 50, 100, 150, 200, 300, 450, 600, and 750m Range: 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 nmSINKEX Occurs in water depth greater than 1000 fathoms (3000 m)Occurs greater than 50 nm from coastlineMK 82 and/or MK 83 bombs are usedAnalyzed the larger of the two (MK 83) for modeling purposesOrdnance net explosive weight: 445 lb H6Average sediment (silt) depth: 4212 mMarch and September sound velocity profiles modeledModeled one annual MK 48 sub-surface detonationEnergy flux density estimates obtained at following depths and ranges:o Depth: 5, 15, 50, 100, 150, 200, 300, 450, 600, and 750moRange: 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 nmAir-to-Surface Missile Exercise Primarily occurs in the Impact Areas in SHOBA on SCIOn rare occasions, may occur against a target on the ocean surfaceMK 82 and/or MK 83 bombs are usedAnalyzed the larger of the two (MK 83) for modeling purposesOrdnance net explosive weight: 445 lb H6Explosive depth: five ft under the surfaceAverage sediment (silt) depth: 4212 mMarch and September sound velocity profiles modeledEnergy flux density estimates obtained at following depths and ranges:o Depth: 5, 15, 50, 100, 150, 200, 300, 450, 600, and 750moRange: 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 nmModeling Assumptions - Marine Mammal BehaviorSeveral assumptions were integrated into the exposure calculations. Inherent to the harassment predictionmodel was the consideration of mammal distribution, hearing and diving behavior. Marine mammalswere distributed with a static, uniform density across the range area. Marine mammal data does notprovide a basis for reflecting greater resolution in the location and prediction of animal movements;therefore, changes in density distributions that can’t be substantiated. It was also assumed that mammalshave omni-directional hearing. This approach was used because there was no basis provided for themammal responses over time to the sources. Diving behavior of the marine mammals was not modeledFebruary 2007 4-42

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4but was a factor in the calculation of population densities. It was assumed that marine mammals wereexposed to the maximum receive levels calculated for the horizontal distance to the source. No attemptwas made to predict animal behavior in response to sound in the water or their location relative to thepoint where the source originates.Estimated marine mammal effects in which each acoustic source produced a total energy flux at or abovethe defined Level A and Level B harassment thresholds depend on a combination of the input data valuesfor each of the four parameters described above. Calculations based on the harassment thresholds wereperformed for each combination of operations, acoustic source, depth of water and season with resultssummarized by species, sonar system and operations. The goal was an unbiased prediction of the numberof exposures that are expected over the duration of one year’s training given these diverse and variablefactors.4.3.1.7.12 Other Effects ConsideredAcoustically Mediated Bubble GrowthOne suggested cause of injury to marine mammals is rectified diffusion (Crum and Mao, 1996), theprocess of increasing the size of a bubble by exposing it to a sound field. This process is facilitated if theenvironment in which the ensonified bubbles exist is supersaturated with gas. Repetitive diving bymarine mammals can cause the blood and some tissues to accumulate gas to a greater degree than issupported by the surrounding environmental pressure (Ridgway and Howard, 1979). Deeper and longerdives of some marine mammals (for example, beaked whales) are theoretically predicted to induce greatersupersaturation (Houser et al., 2001). Conversely, studies have shown that marine mammal lung structure(both pinnipeds and cetaceans) facilitates collapse of the lungs at depths below approximately 50 m thuspreventing nitrogen absorption (Kooyman et al., 1970). Collapse of the lungs would force air in to thenon-air exchanging areas of the lungs (in to the bronchioles away from the aveloli) thus significantlydecreasing nitrogen diffusion in to the body. Deep diving pinnipeds such as the northern elephant andWeddell seals typically exhale before long deep dives, further reducing air volume in the lungs (Kooymanet al., 1970). If rectified diffusion were possible in marine mammals exposed to high-level sound,conditions of tissue supersaturation could theoretically speed the rate and increase the size of bubblegrowth. Subsequent effects due to tissue trauma and emboli would presumably mirror those observed inhumans suffering from decompression sickness.It is unlikely that the short duration of sonar pings would be long enough to drive bubble growth to anysubstantial size, if such a phenomenon occurs. However, an alternative but related hypothesis has alsobeen suggested: stable bubbles could be destabilized by high-level sound exposures such that bubblegrowth then occurs through static diffusion of gas out of the tissues. In such a scenario the marinemammal would need to be in a gas-supersaturated state for a long enough period of time for bubbles tobecome of a problematic size. Yet another hypothesis has speculated that rapid ascent to the surfacefollowing exposure to a startling sound might produce tissue gas saturation sufficient for the evolution ofnitrogen bubbles (Jepson et al., 2003). In this scenario, the rate of ascent would need to be sufficientlyrapid to compromise behavioral or physiological protections against nitrogen bubble formation.Collectively, these hypotheses can be referred to as “hypotheses of acoustically mediated bubble growth.”Although theoretical predictions suggest the possibility for acoustically mediated bubble growth, there isconsiderable disagreement among scientists as to its likelihood (Piantadosi and Thalmann, 2004; Evansand Miller, 2003). To date, ELs predicted to cause in vivo bubble formation within diving cetaceans havenot been evaluated (NOAA, 2002b). Further, although it has been argued that traumas from recentbeaked whale strandings are consistent with gas emboli and bubble-induced tissue separations (Jepson et4-43 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4al., 2003), there is no conclusive evidence of this. Because evidence supporting it is debatable, no marinemammals addressed in this EA/OEA are given special treatment due to the possibility for acousticallymediated bubble growth. Beaked whales are, however, assessed differently from other species to accountfor factors that may have contributed to prior beaked whale strandings as set out in the previoussubchapter.ResonanceAnother suggested cause of injury in marine mammals is air cavity resonance due to sonar exposure.Resonance is a phenomenon that exists when an object is vibrated at a frequency near its naturalfrequency of vibration – the particular frequency at which the object vibrates most readily. The size andgeometry of an air cavity determine the frequency at which the cavity will resonate. Displacement of thecavity boundaries during resonance has been suggested as a cause of injury. Large displacements havethe potential to tear tissues that surround the air space (for example, lung tissue).Understanding resonant frequencies and the susceptibility of marine mammal air cavities to resonance isimportant in determining whether certain sonars have the potential to affect different cavities in differentspecies. In 2002, NMFS convened a panel of government and private scientists to address this issue(NOAA, 2002b). They modeled and evaluated the likelihood that Navy mid-frequency active sonarcaused resonance effects in beaked whales that eventually led to their stranding (DOC and U.S. Navy,2001). The conclusions of that group were that resonance in air-filled structures was not likely to havecaused the Bahamas stranding (NOAA, 2002b). The frequencies at which resonance was predicted tooccur were below the frequencies utilized by the sonar systems employed. Furthermore, air cavityvibrations due to the resonance effect were not considered to be of sufficient amplitude to cause tissuedamage. This EA/OEA assumes that similar phenomenon would not be problematic in other cetaceanspecies.4.3.1.7.13 Estimated Annual Acoustic Effects on Marine MammalsWhen analyzing the results of the acoustic exposure modeling to provide an estimate of effects, it isimportant to understand that there are limitations to the ecological data used in the model, and that themodel results must be interpreted within the context of a given species’ ecology. When reviewing theacoustic effects modeling results, it is also important to understand that the estimates of marine mammalsound exposures are presented without consideration of standard protective operating procedures or thefact that there have been no confirmed acoustic effects on any marine species in previousCOMPTUEX/JTFEX–type exercises or from any other mid-frequency active sonar training events withinthe SOCAL OPAREA.All Level B harassment would be short term and temporary in nature. In addition, the short-term noninjuriousexposures predicted to cause TTS or temporary behavioral disruptions are considered Level Bharassment in this EA/OEA even though it is highly unlikely that the disturbance would be to a pointwhere behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly altered. The modeling for COMPTUEX/JTFEXanalyzed the potential interaction of mid-frequency active tactical sonar and underwater explosives withmarine mammals that occur in SOCAL OPAREA. The potential exposure of all marine mammals in theCOMPTUEX/JTFEX area is summarized in tables 4.3-6 and 4.3-7. ESA-listed species noted in thesetables are sperm, blue, fin, humpback, and sei whales.February 2007 4-44

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS) and Behavioral Effects (without TTS)Modeling assumptions over-estimate the number of incidents of TTS exposures. Specifically, modelingassumes that marine mammals are static and evenly distributed throughout the operating area. Mitigationmeasures (Chapter 5) are in place to minimize or avoid the potential for exposure of marine mammals totemporary threshold shift or behavioral effects without TTS. Modeling results predict 80,733 sub-TTSexposures (Table 4.3-6) and 4,084 TTS exposures (Table 4.3-7). Acoustic exposure modeling resultsshown in Table 4.3-6 and Table 4.3-7 represent total annual exposures without consideration of mitigationmeasures. To accurately predict the total number of modeled exposures over the 2-year period addressedin this EA/OEA, exposure numbers in the tables below need to be doubled.Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS)As shown in Table 4.3-7 modeling indicates that one species, common dolphin, has the potential to beexposed to received sound levels that might result in Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS). Given the limitedrange-to-permanent threshold shift (PTS) distance of mid-frequency active sonar, and implementation ofmarine mammal mitigation measures (Chapter 6), predicted exposure of common dolphin to energyresulting in a permanent, acoustic threshold shift would be avoided. PTS zone of influence (ZOI) fortactical sonar are so small that on on-board observers would readily observe an approaching marinemammal. In addition, common dolphins travel in large pods, and are therefore, easily visible from anelevated platform; a ship or aircraft would readily see a marine mammal in sufficient time to observe anapproaching marine mammal. No ESA-listed marine mammals are exposed to acoustic energy levelswhich would result in a permanent threshold shift.Long-term EffectsCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities would be conducted in consistent areas on the SCIRC and throughoutSOCAL OPAREAs, so marine mammal populations could be exposed to repeated activities over time.However, as described earlier, this COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA assumes that short-term non-injurioussound exposure levels predicted to cause TTS or temporary behavioral disruptions qualify as Level Bharassment. Application of this criterion assumes an effect even though it is highly unlikely that allbehavioral disruptions or instances of TTS will result in long term impacts. This approach overestimateseffects because:There is no established scientific correlation between mid-frequency sonar use and long termabandonment or significant alteration of behavioral patterns in marine mammals in SouthernCalifornia.Acoustic exposures below TTS result in an insignificant, minor disruption of behavior.It is highly unlikely that a marine mammal (or group of animals) would experience any long-termeffects because the proposed training use within the COMPTUEX/JTFEX ASW modeling areasmakes individual mammals’ repeated and/or prolonged exposures to high-level sonar signalsunlikely. Specifically, mid-frequency sonars have limited marine mammal exposure ranges andrelatively high platform speeds. The number of animals potentially exposed to Level Aharassment from sonar is zero. The number of animals potentially exposed to Level Aharassment from underwater detonations is small, potentially affecting 30 common dolphins andwould be zero given implementation of proposed protective measures. Therefore, long termeffects on individuals, populations or stocks are unlikely.4-45 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Table 4.3-6. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Sub-TTS Marine Mammal Exposures forTraining Using Mid-Frequency Active SonarLevel B Exposures (Sub TTS 173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Table 4.3-7. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of TTS and PTS Marine Mammal Exposures forTraining Using Mid-Frequency Active SonarMarine Mammal SpeciesSUBOPSLevel B Exposures (TTS 195-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 44.3.1.7.14 Underwater Explosives - Acoustic Effects Analysis ModelingMarine mammals may be harassed due to noise from operations involving underwater and near-surfacedetonations. The potential numbers and species exposed by explosive noise are assessed in this Section.The operations are described in Chapter 2 and include Air-to-Surface Missile/Bombing (ASM)Operations, Mining Operation, SINKEXs, Demolition (DEMO), Ship Mine Countermeasures (SMCM)Operations. The three primary sources of information necessary for estimating potential acousticexposure on marine resources are: (1) the number of distinct firing or test events; (2) the zone of influence(ZOI) for noise exposure; and (3) the density of animals that potentially reside within the ZOI.For the acoustic analysis, the exploding charge is characterized as a point source. The impact thresholdsused for marine mammals relate to potential effects on hearing from underwater detonation pressure andenergy. The same noise thresholds will also be applied to ESA-listed species.For the explosives in question, actual detonation would occur at depths of 5, 40, 65, or 150 feet below thesurface. Potential exposure of a marine mammal to detonation noise could theoretically occur at thesurface or at any number of depths with differing consequences. The acoustic analysis assumed thegreatest direct path for the harassment ranges to estimate the greatest impact range for the injurythresholds.4.3.1.7.15 Criteria and ThresholdsCriteria and thresholds that are the basis of the analysis of COMPTUEX/JTFEX noise impacts tocetaceans were initially used in U.S. Navy Environmental Impact Statements for ship shock trials of theSEAWOLF submarine and the WINSTON S. CHURCHILL vessel (U.S. Department of the Navy, 1998;2001) and adopted by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (NOAA, 2001). Supplementalcriteria and thresholds have been introduced in the Eglin Gulf Test and Training ProgrammaticEnvironmental Assessment (U.S. Air Force, 2002) and subsequent Eglin Gulf Test and Training Letter ofAuthorization (LOA) (U.S. Air Force, 2003) permit request. Much of the information in this section istaken from the Eglin Air Force Base LOA permit request incidental to the Naval Explosive OrdnanceDisposal School testing within the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range (U.S. Air Force, 2004) and theNMFS IHA authorization for conducting Precision Strike Weapon Testing and Training by Eglin AirForce Base in the Gulf of Mexico (NMFS, 2005).4.3.1.7.16 MetricsStandard impulsive and acoustic metrics were used for the analysis of underwater pressure waves in thisdocument.Energy flux density (EFD) is the time integral of the squared pressure divided by the impedance.EFD levels have units of dB re 1 Pa 2 -s. 1/3-Octave is the energy flux density in a 1/3-octave frequency band; the 1/3 octave selected isthe hearing range at which the subject animals’ hearing is believed to be most sensitive.4.3.1.7.17 Criteria and Thresholds: LethalityThe criterion for mortality for marine mammals used in the CHURCHILL Final EIS is “onset of severelung injury.” This is conservative in that it corresponds to a 1 percent chance of mortal injury, and yetany animal experiencing onset severe lung injury is counted as a lethal take. The threshold is stated interms of the Goertner (1982) modified positive impulse with value “indexed to 31 psi-ms.'” Since theGoertner approach depends on propagation, source/animal depths, and animal mass in a complex way, theFebruary 2007 4-48

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4actual impulse value corresponding to the 31-psi-ms index is a complicated calculation. The acousticthreshold is derived from:Again, to be conservative, CHURCHILL used the mass of a calf dolphin (at 12.2 kg), so that the thresholdindex is 30.5 psi-ms.4.3.1.7.18 Criteria and Thresholds: InjuryNon-lethal injurious impacts are defined as eardrum rupture (i.e., tympanic-membrane (TM) rupture) andthe onset of slight lung injury. These are considered indicative of the onset of injury. The threshold forTM rupture corresponds to a 50 percent rate of rupture (i.e., 50 percent of animals exposed to the level areexpected to suffer TM rupture); this is stated in terms of an EFD value of 1.17 in-lb/in 2 , which is about205 dB re 1 Pa 2 -s. This recognizes that TM rupture is not necessarily a life-threatening injury, but is auseful index of possible injury that is well-correlated with measures of permanent hearing impairment(e.g., Ketten (1998) indicates a 30 percent incidence of permanent threshold shift (PTS) at the samethreshold).4.3.1.7.19 Criteria and Thresholds: Non-Injurious ImpactsThe CHURCHILL criteria for non-injurious harassment are temporary (auditory) threshold shift (TTS), aslight, recoverable loss of hearing sensitivity (U.S. Navy, 2001). The criterion for TTS used in thisdocument is 182 dB re 1 Pa 2 -s maximum EFD level in any 1/3-octave band at frequencies above 100 Hzfor toothed whales (e.g., dolphins). A 1/3-octave band above 10 Hz is used for impact assessments onbaleen whales.In Finneran et al. (2002), a watergun was substituted for the ES because it is capable of producingimpulses with higher peak pressures and total energy fluxes than the pressure waveforms produced usingthe ES. It was also preferable to other seismic sources because its impulses contain more energy at higherfrequencies, where odontocete hearing thresholds are relatively low (i.e., more sensitive). Hearingthresholds were measured at 0.4, 4 and 30 kHz. MTTSs of 7 and 6 dB were observed in the beluga at 0.4and 30 kHz, respectively, approximately 2 minutes following exposure to single impulses with peakpressures of 160 kPa (23 psi), pk-pk pressures of 226 dB re 1 Pa, and total EFD of 186 dB re 1 Pa 2 -s.Thresholds returned to within 2 dB of the pre-exposure value approximately 4 minutes post exposure. NoMTTS was observed in the single bottlenose dolphin tested at the highest exposure conditions: peakpressure of 207 kPa (30 psi), 228 dB re 1 Pa pk-pk pressure, and 188 dB re 1 Pa 2 -s total energy flux.NMFS determined in their 2005 Precision Strike Weapon IHA permit that the pressure criterion forexplosions can be amended from 12 psi to 23 psi. It was further noted in the 2005 IHA permit that settingthe pressure metric of the dual explosive criteria at 23 psi is conservative, while setting the pressuremetric at a higher level has not been scientifically validated at this time (NMFS, 2005).Due to an operational re-assessment of the Improved Extended Echo Ranging (IEER) sonobuoy, the Navyhas determined that EER/IEER sonobuoy will not be deployed during Jan 07 – Dec 07 major rangeactivities. Consequently, acoustic exposures associated with IEER have been omitted from underwaterexplosive calculation results. However, EER/IEER may be included in ASW Operations after December2007. Should EER/IEER be introduced into major range events after December 2007, the analysis ofpotential EER/IEER use in the EA/OEA can be used as the basis of regulatory consultation.Models of pressure propagation from underwater explosives predict the distances at which marinemammals may experience acoustic effects, and thus, are important in anticipating and mitigating potentialeffects. Exclusion distances depicted in Underwater Detonation mitigation distances (Chapter 5)4-49 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4incorporate the predicted propagation distance for the maximum size charge (20 lb), and an additionalbuffer zone around the detonation site. The population dynamics of species with potential to be affectedby underwater detonations, and implementation of protective measures provide for reliable and effectivemitigation of harm to marine mammals by means of visual clearance. As shown in Table 4.3-9, modelingpredicts 39 exposures to received sound levels that might result in TTS, and 27 exposures to sound levelsthat might result in PTS.The three species with potential for exposure to propagating pressure waves in excess of onset-TTS froma single, point source detonation include common dolphin, spotted dolphin, and striped dolphin. Becausethese three marine mammal species travel in large pods, they would be readily detected during the previsualsurvey period. This is particularly true in the shallower waters where Demolition and Ship MCMand Mining Operations take place. Modeling predicts Level A exposure of common dolphin to acousticenergy during Demolition and Air-to-Surface Missile (ASM) Operations, and TTS exposure of common,striped, and spotted dolphins during Demolition, ASM, SINKEX, and SMCM Operations., Modelingdoes not predict PTS or TTS exposures of marine mammals during Mining operations. Visual clearancemeasures encompassing the zone of influence associated with these operations would avoid PTS and TTSexposures of marine mammals during these operations. Of the dual criteria, the criterion that predicted thegreater impact range was used to predict zone of influence. Modeling results predict that the zone ofinfluence for SINKEX and ASM Operations for onset-TTS extend to 0.89 nm (1,780 yd) during the coldseason and 0.85 nm (1,700 yd) during the warm season. With implementation of a 2.5 nm (5,000 yd)exclusion zone and an additional 2.0 nm (4,000 yd) safety zone (totaling 9,000 yd), marine mammalswould be identified well outside the distance to onset-TTS. Demolition and SMCM Operations do notexceed 20 lbs, so zone of influence to onset-TTS extends to 0.07 nm (49 yds). The 0.35 nm (700 yd)exclusion zone implemented during Demolition and SMCM Operations would prohibit marine mammalexposures to onset-TTS. Therefore, for both the shallow water Demolition and SMCM Operations, andthe deep water SINKEX and ASM Operations, pods of common, striped and spotted dolphins would beobserved during the pre-survey period. Should a marine mammal be present within the survey area, theexercise would be paused until the animal voluntarily leaves the area; thereby, avoiding exposing themarine mammals to acoustic effects.Given the factors discussed above, marine mammals are not reasonably expected to be exposed toacoustic energy in excess of onset-TTS from single, point source detonations because of the following:1. high likelihood of visually identifying a marine mammal2. effective implementation of protective measures3. restricted zone of influence4. removal of IEER from the Proposed ActionTherefore, authorization under MMPA is not requested for underwater detonations training conducted aspart of COMPTUEX/JTFEX.February 2007 4-50

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Table 4.3-8. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Marine Mammal Exposures for TrainingUsing Underwater ExplosivesTTS Modeled at < 182 dB re 1 µPa 2 –s or 23 psiAnnual ExposuresMarine MammalSpeciesASMOperationsDEMOMiningOperationsSINKEXSMCMOperationsTTS182 dB23 psiSlightLung/TMInjuryBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Baird’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Common Dolphin 6 21 0 0 0 27 27Cuvier’s Beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf Sperm Whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0False Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphinPacificDolphinPantropicalDolphinWhite-sidedSpotted0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 6 0 6 0Pygmy Sperm Whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Rough Tooth Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Short Finned PilotWhale0 0 0 0 0 0 0Sperm Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Striped Dolphin 0 0 0 6 0 6 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0 0 0California Sea Lion N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0Northern Elephant Seal N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0Pacific Harbor Seal N/A N/A N/A 0 0 0 0Total 6 21 0 12 0 39 27Note: Revised (Oct 2006) summarize annual total without EER/IEER from Jan – Dec 07.Tables 4.3-9 through 4.3-38 represent marine mammal exposures without implementation of protectivemeasures. Implementation of protective measures (as listed in Chapter 5), will avoid and minimize4-51 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4effects of sonar and underwater detonations on marine mammals; however, these measures are notincorporated into Level B effects analysis conclusions.Protective measures are effective because odontocetes:Spend extended periods of time on the surfaceHave relatively short dive periodsTend to occur in large groups (pods)Have frequent surfacing and a high level of activity on the surfaceBased on the large geographic area and consideration of the estimated behavioral disturbance levels, eachpotentially affected marine mammal species was reviewed relative to recruitment and survival. In allcases, the conclusions are that COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities would have a negligible impact on marinemammals, and that no strategic marine mammal stocks would be affected.4.3.1.7.20 Estimated Acoustic Effects on Mysticetes not listed under ESABryde’s Whale (Balaenoptera edeni)The abundance estimate of Bryde’s whales is 493 (CV = 0.34) using the offshore water habitat (densityestimate of 0.0002/km2, Appendix A). The modeling efforts and harassment analysis for mid-frequencyactive sonar estimate that no Level A harassment of Bryde’s whales would occur. The analysis estimatesthat up to 2 incidents of non-injurious behavioral harassment (Level B harassment) may be experiencedby Bryde’s whales on annual basis (Table 4.3-9). No Bryde’s whales would be exposed to impulsivenoise or pressures from underwater detonations that would cause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-9. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Bryde’s WhaleBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4(Cummings et al., 1986). Bryde’s whales are easier to approach when feeding (Gallardo et al., 1983).Preliminary information on the diving of Bryde’s whales shows dives up to 15 minutes (Tershy et al.,1993).The exposures depicted in Table 4.3-9 would not necessarily occur to 2 different individuals. The sameindividual could experience behavioral disruption more than once over the course of a year, particularly ifthe animal is resident in the area of the range. Thus, the estimated number of individual Bryde’s whalesexperiencing Level B harassment may be fewer than 2. Mitigation measures detailed in Chapter 5 wouldfurther reduce the potential for any effect on Bryde’s whales. The Navy therefore concludes that theproposed action would not affect annual rates of recruitment or survival for Bryde’s whales, and wouldnot have a significant impact on this species and stock.Gray Whale (Eschrichtius robustus)The abundance estimate of the eastern North Pacific gray whales stock is 26,635 (CV = 0.1006). Themodeling efforts and harassment analysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimate that no Level Aharassment of gray whales would occur. The analysis estimates that up to 64 incidents of non-injuriousbehavioral harassment (Level B harassment) may be experienced by gray whales on annual basis (Table4.3-10). No gray whales would be exposed to impulsive noise or pressures from underwater detonationsthat would cause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-10. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Gray WhaleBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4The exposures depicted in Table 4.3-10 would not necessarily occur to 64 different individuals. The sameindividual could experience behavioral disruption more than once over the course of a year, particularly ifthe animal is resident in the area of the range. Thus, the estimated number of individual gray whalesexperiencing Level B harassment may be fewer than 64. Mitigation measures detailed in Chapter 5would further reduce the potential for any effect on gray whales. The Navy therefore concludes that theproposed action would not affect annual rates of recruitment or survival for gray whales, and would nothave a significant impact on this species and stock.Minke Whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata)The minke whale is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and the California/Oregon/ WashingtonStock and is not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. They occur year-round off California(Dohl et al. 1983; Barlow 1995; Forney et al. 1995). The minke whales found in waters off California,Oregon, and Washington appear to be resident in that area, and to have home ranges, whereas thosefarther north are migratory. The population abundance for offshore California, Oregon, and Washingtonas a whole was estimated to be 585 (CV=0.73) individuals (Carretta et al. 2005). The modeling effortsand harassment analysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimate that no Level A harassment of minkewhales would occur. The analysis estimates that up to 24 incidents of non-injurious behavioralharassment (Level B harassment) may be experienced by minke whales on annual basis (Table 4.3-11).No minke whales would be exposed to impulsive noise or pressures from underwater detonations thatwould cause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-11. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Minke WhaleBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4amplitude-modulated call with greatest energy at 1.4 kHz, with slight frequency modulation over aduration of 2.5 sec (Anonymous 2002; Rankin and Barlow 2003). While no data on hearing ability forthis species are available, Ketten (1997) hypothesized that mysticetes have acute infrasonic hearing.Based on this information, if they do no hear these sounds, they are not likely to respond physiologicallyor behaviorally to those received levels, such that effects would be insignificant.The exposures depicted in Table 4.3-11 would not necessarily occur to 24 different individuals. The sameindividual could experience behavioral disruption more than once over the course of a year, particularly ifthe animal is resident in the area of the range. Thus, the estimated number of individual minke whalesexperiencing Level B harassment may be fewer than 24. Mitigation measures detailed in Chapter 5would further reduce the potential for any effect on minke whales. The Navy therefore concludes that theproposed action would not affect annual rates of recruitment or survival for minke whales, and would nothave a significant impact on this species and stock.4.3.1.7.21 Estimated Acoustic Effects on Odontocetes not listed under ESABaird’s Beaked Whale (Berardius bairdii)Baird’s beaked whale is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and the California/Oregon/WashingtonStock is not considered strategic under the MMPA. The minimum population estimate for theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is 152 (CV=0.51) individuals (Carretta et al. 2005). The modelingefforts and harassment analysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimate that no Level A harassment ofBaird’s whales would occur. The analysis estimates that up to four incidents of non-injurious behavioralharassment (Level B harassment) may be experienced by Baird’s whales on annual basis (Table 4.3-12).Although modeling predicts non-injurious Level B exposures, all beaked whale exposures are counted asLevel A. No Baird’s whales would be exposed to impulsive noise or pressures from underwaterdetonations that would cause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-12. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Baird’s Beaked WhaleBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4sensitive than other cetaceans to low frequency sounds; however, as noted earlier, there is no directevidence to support this idea (MacLeod 1999).The exposures depicted in Table 4.3-12 would not necessarily occur to 4 different individuals. The sameindividual could experience behavioral disruption more than once over the course of a year, particularly ifthe animal is resident in the area of the range. Thus, the estimated number of individual Baird’s whalesexperiencing harassment may be fewer than four. Mitigation measures detailed in Chapter 5 wouldfurther reduce the potential for any effect on Baird’s whales. The Navy therefore concludes that theproposed action would not affect annual rates of recruitment or survival for Baird’s whales, and wouldnot have a significant impact on this species and stock.Bottlenose Dolphin California Coastal and Offshore Stock (Tursiops truncatus)The bottlenose dolphin is not listed as endangered under the ESA. In southern California, twopopulations occur: a coastal population within 0.5 nm (0.9 km) of shore and a larger offshore population(Hansen, 1990). There is a minimum population estimate of 186 (CV=0.12) for the California CoastalStock of the bottlenose dolphin, and 3,053 (CV=0.66) for the California/Oregon/Washington OffshoreStock (Carretta et al., 2005). Neither stock is considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. Themodeling efforts and harassment analysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimate that no Level Aharassment of bottlenose dolphins would occur. The analysis estimates that up to 516 incidents of noninjuriousbehavioral harassment (Level B harassment) may be experienced by bottlenose dolphins onannual basis (Table 4.3-13). Based on the distance of mid-frequency sonar activities from shore, allexposures are estimated to occur to the Offshore Stock, with no predicted exposure of the CaliforniaCoastal Stock of Bottlenose Dolphins. No bottlenose dolphins would be exposed to impulsive noises orpressures from underwater detonations that would cause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-13. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Bottlenose DolphinBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4exposure levels of 100 to 201 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s) in a laboratory setting (Schlundt et al., 2000, Finneran et al.,2005).The exposures depicted in Table 4.3-13 would not necessarily occur to 516 different individuals. Thesame individual could experience behavioral disruption more than once over the course of a year,particularly if the animal is resident in the area of the range. Thus, the estimated number of individualbottlenose dolphins experiencing Level B harassment may be fewer than 516. Mitigation measuresdetailed in Chapter 5 would further reduce the potential for any effect on bottlenose dolphins. The Navytherefore concludes that the proposed action would not affect annual rates of recruitment or survival forbottlenose dolphins, and would not have a significant impact on this species and stock.Common Dolphin (Long-beaked and Short-beaked) (Delphinus capensis and D. delphis)Two species of common dolphin occur off California, the more coastal long-beaked dolphin (D. capensis)and the more offshore short-beaked dolphin (D. delphis). Thus, much of the available information has notdifferentiated between the two species. The long and short-beaked common dolphins are not listed underthe ESA and are not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. The minimum populationestimates are 43,360 (CV = 0.72) (Carretta et al., 2005). The modeling efforts and harassment analysisfor mid-frequency active sonar estimate that Level A harassment of common dolphins could occur. Theanalysis estimates that up to 69,258 incidents of non-injurious behavioral harassment, 3,464 incidents ofnon-injurious physiological harassment (Level B harassment), and 8 incidents of Level A harassment maybe experienced by common dolphins on annual basis (Table 4.3-14). Twenty-seven common dolphinscould be exposed to impulsive noise or pressures from underwater detonations that could cause TTS andtwenty-seven could be exposed to impulsive noise or pressures that could cause slight physical injury.Table 4.3-14. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Common Dolphin(Long-beaked and Short-beaked)Behavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4common dolphins experiencing Level B harassment would be fewer than 72,722 for mid-frequency activesonar. Mitigation measures detailed in Chapter 5 would further reduce the potential for any effect oncommon dolphins. The Navy therefore concludes that the proposed action would not affect annual ratesof recruitment or survival for common dolphins, and would not have a significant impact on this speciesand stock.Modeling results indicate that common dolphins are not reasonably expected to be exposed to acousticenergy in excess of onset-TTS from single, point source detonations. Implementation of protectivemeasures listed in Chapter 5 will ensure effective mitigation such that this species would not be exposedto incidental Level A or Level B harassmentCuvier’s Beaked Whale (Ziphius cavirostris)The Cuvier’s beaked whale is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is not considered to be strategic under the MMPA. The minimumpopulation estimate for the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is 1,121 (CV=0.68) individuals (Carrettaet al., 2005). The modeling efforts and harassment analysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimate thatno Level A harassment of Cuvier’s beaked whales would occur. The analysis estimates that up to 208incidents of non-injurious behavioral harassment and 10 incidents of non-injurious physiologicalharassment (Level B harassment) may be experienced by Cuvier’s beaked whales on annual basis (Table4.3-15). Although modeling predicts non-injurious Level B exposures, all beaked whale exposures arecounted as Level A. No Cuvier’s beaked whales would be exposed to impulsive noises or pressures fromunderwater detonations that would cause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-15. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Cuvier’s Beaked WhaleBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4in California or adjacent waters. The best estimate of stock size for the Washington/Oregon/ CaliforniaStock is 75,915 (CV=0.33, Carretta et al., 2005). The modeling efforts and harassment analysis for midfrequencyactive sonar estimate that no Level A harassment of Dall’s porpoises would occur. Theanalysis estimates that up to 142 incidents of non-injurious behavioral harassment and 3 incidents of noninjuriousphysiological harassment (Level B harassment) may be experienced by Dall’s porpoise whaleson annual basis (Table 4.3-16). No Dall’s porpoises would be exposed to impulsive noises or pressuresfrom underwater detonation that would cause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-16. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Dall’s PorpoiseBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Little information is available on the acoustic abilities of dwarf sperm whales, but pygmy sperm whalesproduce sounds in the range of 60 to 200 kHz (Richardson et al., 1995) and may also produce somesounds in the range of 1.3 to 15 kHz (Thomas, 1990). Dwarf sperm whales dive for an average of 8.6minutes and can stay submerged for up to 43 minutes and are assumed to be deep divers (Breese andTershy, 1993, Baird, 1998). Dwarf sperm whales in the Gulf of Mexico tended to orient away fromsurvey boats or usually dove in the presence of low flying aircraft (Richardson et al., 1995). Dwarf spermwhales will likely dive and move away from the active sonar ship.The Navy therefore concludes that the proposed action would not affect annual rates of recruitment orsurvival for dwarf sperm whales, and would not have a significant impact on this species and stock.False Killer Whale (Pseudorca crassidens)The false killer whale is not listed under the ESA, and the individuals found off California are not part ofa strategic stock. There are no abundance estimates available for this species in the NOAA stockassessment report for this area of the Pacific. The modeling efforts and harassment analysis for midfrequencyactive sonar estimate that no Level A harassment of false killer whales would occur. Theanalysis estimates that up to 16 incidents of non-injurious behavioral harassment (Level B harassment)may be experienced by false killer whales on annual basis (Table 4.3-18). No false killer whales wouldbe exposed to impulsive noise or pressures from underwater detonations that would cause TTS orphysical injury.Table 4.3-18. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of False Killer WhaleBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4the proposed action would not affect annual rates of recruitment or survival for false killer whales, andwould not have a significant impact on this species and stock.Harbor Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena)Harbor porpoises are rarely within the northern range areas and therefore were not included in the marinemammal acoustic effects analysis.Killer Whale Offshore and Resident Stock (Orcinus orca)The abundance estimate of killer whales is 1,340 (CV = 0.31), using the offshore water habitat. Themodeling efforts and harassment analysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimate that no Level Aharassment of killer whales would occur. The analysis estimates that up to 12 incidents of non-injuriousbehavioral harassment and 1 incident of non-injurious physiological harassment (Level B harassment)may be experienced by killer whales on annual basis (Table 4.3-19). No killer whales would be exposedto impulsive noises or pressures from underwater detonations that would cause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-19. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Killer WhaleBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4California/Oregon/Washington Stock is 1,247 (CV=0.92) individuals (Caretta et al., 2005). The modelingefforts and harassment analysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimate that no Level A or Level Bharassment of Mesoplodon spp whales would occur (Table 4.3-20)..Table 4.3-20. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Mesoplodon spp. Beaked WhaleBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4The exposures depicted in Table 4.3-21 would not necessarily occur to 3,230 different individuals. Thesame individual could experience behavioral disruption more than once over the course of a year,particularly if the animal is resident in the area of the range. Thus, the estimated number of individualnorthern right whale dolphins experiencing Level B harassment may be fewer than 3,230. Mitigationmeasures detailed in Chapter 5 would further reduce the potential for any effect on northern right whaledolphins. The Navy therefore concludes that the proposed action would not affect annual rates ofrecruitment or survival for northern right whale dolphins, and would not have a significant impact on thisspecies and stock.Pacific White-sided Dolphin (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens)The Pacific white-sided dolphin is not listed under the ESA, and the California/Oregon/Washington Stockis not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. The best estimate of the size of theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock, derived from data collected during shipboard surveys conductedbetween 1996 and 2001, is 39,822 (CV=0.50, Carretta et al., 2005). The modeling efforts and harassmentanalysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimate that no Level A harassment of Pacific white-sideddolphins would occur. The analysis estimates that up to 1,949 incidents of non-injurious behavioralharassment and 101 incidents of non-injurious physiological harassment (Level B harassment) may beexperienced by northern right whale dolphins on annual basis (Table 4.3-22). No Pacific white-sideddolphins would be exposed to impulsive noises or pressures from underwater detonations that wouldcause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-22. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Pacific White-sided DolphinBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Pantropical Spotted Dolphin (Stenella attenuata)The pantropical spotted dolphin is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and is not considered to be astrategic stock under the MMPA. There are no abundance estimates available for this species in theNOAA stock assessment reports for this area of the Pacific. The modeling efforts and harassmentanalysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimate that no Level A harassment of pantropical spotteddolphins would occur. The analysis estimates that up to 547 incidents of non-injurious behavioralharassment (Level B harassment) may be experienced by pantropical spotted dolphins on annual basis(Table 4.3-23). Six pantropical spotted dolphins could be exposed to impulsive noises or pressures fromunderwater detonations that could cause TTS but would not cause physical injury.Table 4.3-23. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Pantropical Spotted DolphinBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Pygmy Sperm Whale (Kogia breviceps)The pygmy sperm whale is not listed under the ESA, and the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is notconsidered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. No population trends have been observed inCalifornia or adjacent waters. The best estimate of the size of the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is247 (CV = 1.06, Carretta et al., 2004). The modeling efforts and harassment analysis for mid-frequencyactive sonar estimate that no Level A harassment of pygmy sperm whales would occur. The analysisestimates that up to 859 incidents of non-injurious behavioral harassment and 56 incidents of noninjuriousphysiological harassment (Level B harassment) may be experienced by pygmy sperm whales onannual basis (Table 4.3-24). No pygmy sperm whales will be exposed to impulsive noises or pressuresfrom underwater detonations that would cause TTS or could cause physical injury.Table 4.3-24. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Pygmy Sperm WhaleBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4frequency active sonar estimate that no Level A harassment of Risso’s dolphins would occur. Theanalysis estimates that up to 2,050 incidents of non-injurious behavioral harassment and 96 incidents ofnon-injurious physiological harassment (Level B harassment) may be experienced by Risso’s dolphins onannual basis (Table 4.3-25). No Risso’s dolphins would be exposed to impulsive noises or pressures fromunderwater detonations that would cause TTS or cause physical injury.Table 4.3-25. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Risso’s DolphinBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Table 4.3-26. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Rough-toothed DolphinBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4operations with active sonar, therefore, short-finned pilot whales that migrate into the operating areawould be detected by visual observers. Implementation of protective measures and probability ofdetecting groups of short-finned pilot whales reduces the likelihood of exposure.There is little information on the acoustic abilities of short finned pilot whales, but they produce whistlesin the range of 0.5 to at least 20 kHz with the dominant frequencies at 2 to 14 kHz (Richardson et al.,1995). There is no information on the echolocation frequencies of short finned pilot whales, but longfinned pilot whales produce echolocation clicks in the range of 6 to 11 kHz (Au, 1993). Whalers aroundthe waters of the Faroe Islands use boat echo-sounders (15 to 200 kHz) to drive long finned pilot whalesin to the shore (Bloch, 1991). Like many other species of odontocetes, long finned pilot whales willlikely dive and move away from the active sonar ship.The Navy therefore concludes that the proposed action would not affect annual rates of recruitment orsurvival for short-finned pilot whales, and would not have a significant impact on this species and stock.Spinner Dolphin (Stenella longirostris)Spinner dolphins are not found in California but inhabit the warm waters of Central America, therefore,they are a possible summer visitor to southern California waters. The spinner dolphin is not listed asendangered under the ESA, and is not considered to be depleted or strategic under the MMPA. Spinnerdolphins were not included in the marine mammal acoustic effects analysis.Striped Dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba)The striped dolphin is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and the California/Oregon/WashingtonStock is not considered to be depleted or strategic under the MMPA. The best estimate of the size of theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is 13,934 (CV=0.53; Carretta et al., 2004). The modeling effortsand harassment analysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimate that no Level A harassment of stripeddolphins would occur. The analysis estimates that up to 1,554 incidents of non-injurious behavioralharassment and 72 incidents of non-injurious physiological (Level B harassment) may be experienced bystriped dolphins on annual basis (Table 4.3-28). Six striped dolphins could be exposed to impulsivenoises or pressures from underwater detonations that could cause TTS but would not cause physicalinjury.Table 4.3-28. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Striped DolphinBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4hearing from 0.5 to 160 kHz with maximum sensitivity between 29 and 123 kHz Kastelein et al., 2003).There is no information on the response of striped dolphins exposed to anthropogenic sounds butbottlenose dolphins exposed to mid-frequency sonar sounds in a laboratory setting had an increase inheart rate (Miksis et al., 2001) and a change in their trained behaviors such as moving away from or notreturning to the sound source station (Schlundt et al., 2000, Finneran et al., 2005).The exposures depicted in Table 4.3-28 would not necessarily occur to 1,626 different individuals. Thesame individual could experience behavioral disruption more than once over the course of a year,particularly if the animal is resident in the area of the range. Thus, the estimated number of individualstriped dolphins experiencing Level B harassment may be fewer than 1,626. Mitigation measures detailedin Chapter 5 would further reduce the potential for any effect on striped dolphins. The Navy thereforeconcludes that the proposed action would not affect annual rates of recruitment or survival for stripeddolphins, and would not have a significant impact on this species and stock.Modeling results indicate that striped dolphins are not reasonably expected to be exposed to acousticenergy in excess of onset-TTS from single, point source detonations. The Level A zone of influence ofthe largest detonations (MK 83) extends to 1,000 yards from the source. Implementation of protectivemeasures listed in Chapter 5 will ensure effective mitigation such that this species would not be exposedto incidental Level A or Level B harassment.Ziphiid Beaked WhalesThe Longman’s beaked whale is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and the Hawaiian Stock is notconsidered to be strategic under the MMPA. The population estimate for the Hawaiian Stock is 766(CV=1.05) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005). The modeling efforts and harassment analysis for midfrequencyactive sonar estimate that no Level A harassment of Ziphiid beaked whales would occur. Theanalysis estimates that up to 49 incidents of non-injurious behavioral and 3 non-injurious physiologicalharassment (Level B harassment) may be experienced by Ziphiid beaked whales on annual basis (Table4.3-29). Although modeling predicts non-injurious Level B exposures, all beaked whale exposures arecounted as Level A. No Ziphiid beaked whales would be exposed to impulsive noise or pressures fromunderwater detonations that would cause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-29. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Ziphiid Beaked WhaleBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 44.3.1.7.22 Estimated Acoustic Effects on Pinniped-Phocids not listed under ESANorthern Elephant Seal (Mirounga angustirostris)The northern elephant seal is not listed under the ESA, and the California Breeding Stock is notconsidered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. The California Breeding Stock has recovered fromnear extinction in the early 1900s to an estimated 60,547 (Carretta et al., 2005). The modeling efforts andharassment analysis for mid-frequency active sonar estimates that no Level A or Level B harassmentwould occur (Table 4.3-30). No northern elephant seals will be exposed to impulsive noises or pressuresfrom underwater detonations that would cause TTS or any impulsive noise that could cause physicalinjury.Table 4.3-30. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Northern Elephant SealBehavioral

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Table 4.3-31. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of Pacific Harbor SealLevel B183-203 dBUnderwater DetonationsTTS182 dB/23 psiInjuryTM/Lung6 0 0 0Harbor seals forage near their rookeries (usually within 50 km) therefore they tend to remain in theSouthern California area most of the time in comparison to northern elephant seals.Adult males produce low frequency vocalizations underwater during the breeding season (Hanggi andSchusterman, 1994; Van Parijs et al., 2003). Male harbor seals produce communication sounds in thefrequency range of 100 to 1,000 Hz (Richardson et al., 1995). The harbor seal hears almost equally wellin air and underwater (Kastak and Schusterman, 1998). Harbor seals hear best at frequencies from 1 to180 kHz; the peak hearing sensitivity is at 32 kHz in water and 12 kHz in air (Terhune and Turnball,1995; Kastak and Schusterman 1998; Wolski et al., 2003). Kastak and Schusterman (1996) observed aTTS of 8 dB at 100 Hz, with complete recovery approximately 1 week following exposure. Kastak et al.(1999) determined that underwater noise of moderate intensity (65 to 75 dB source level) and duration (20to 22 min) is sufficient to induce TTS in harbor seals.The exposures depicted in Table 4.3-31 would not necessarily occur to 6 different individuals. The sameindividual could experience behavioral disruption more than once over the course of a year, particularly ifthe animal is resident in the area of the range. Thus, the estimated number of individual Pacific harborseals experiencing Level B harassment may be fewer than 6. Mitigation measures detailed in Chapter 5would further reduce the potential for any effect on Pacific harbor seals. The Navy therefore concludesthat the proposed action would not affect annual rates of recruitment or survival for Pacific harbor seals,and would not have a significant impact on this species and stock.4.3.1.7.23 Estimated Acoustic Effects on Pinniped-Otarids not listed under ESACalifornia Sea Lion (Zalophus californianus)Nearly all of the U.S. stock (more than 95%) breeds and gives birth to pups on San Miguel, San Nicolas,and Santa Barbara islands, only one of which–Santa Barbara, the smallest–is in the SOCAL RangeComplex. Smaller numbers of pups are born on San Clemente Island, the Farallon Islands, and AñoNuevo Island (Lowry et al., 1992). The minimum population estimate of the U.S. Stock, based on a 2001census, is 138,881 (Carretta et al., 2005). The modeling efforts and harassment analysis for midfrequencyactive sonar estimates that no Level A or Level B harassment would occur (Table 4.3-32). NoCalifornia sea lion will be exposed to impulsive noises or pressures from underwater detonations thatwould cause TTS or any that could cause physical injury.4-71 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Table 4.3-32. Raw Annual Acoustic Model Output of California Sea LionBehavioral

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Table 4.3-33. Raw Acoustic Model Output of Blue Whale Exposures during Training ExercisesBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Given the large size (up to 78 ft [24 m]) of individual fin whales, pronounced vertical blow, meanaggregation of three animals in a group (probability of trackline detection = 0.90; Barlow 2003) it is verylikely that lookouts would detect a group of fin whales at the surface. Additionally, protective measurescall for continuous visual observation during operations with active sonar, therefore, fin whales thatmigrate into the operating area would be detected by visual observers. Implementation of protectivemeasures and probability of detecting a large fin whale reduces the likelihood of exposure, such thateffects would be discountable.In the unlikely event that fin whales are exposed to mid-frequency sonar, the information available on finwhales exposed to received levels of active mid-frequency sonar suggests that they are not likely to hearmid-frequency (1 kHz–10 kHz) sounds (Richardson et al. 1995; Ketten 1997). Fin whales primarilyproduce low frequency calls (below 1 kHz) with source levels up to 186 dB re 1μPa at 1 m, although it ispossible they produce some sounds in the range of 1.5 to 28 kHz (review by Richardson et al., 1995).There are no audiograms of baleen whales, but they tend to react to anthropogenic sound below 1 kHz,suggesting that they are more sensitive to low frequency sounds (Richardson et al., 1995). Based on thisinformation, if they do no hear these sounds, they are not likely to respond physiologically orbehaviorally to those received levels, such that effects would be insignificant.In the St. Lawrence estuary area, fin whales avoided vessels with small changes in travel direction, speedand dive duration, and slow approaches by boats usually caused little response (MacFarlane, 1981). Finwhales continued to vocalize in the presence of boat noise (Edds and Macfarlane, 1987). Even thoughany undetected fin whales transiting the proposed COMPTUEX/JTFEX ASW training areas may exhibita reaction when initially exposed to active acoustic energy, field observations indicate the effects wouldnot cause disruption of natural behavioral patterns to a point where such behavioral patterns would beabandoned or significantly altered.While acoustic modeling results indicate mid-frequency active sonar may expose fin whales toaccumulated acoustic energy levels in excess of 173 dB re 1 Pa 2 -s, these exposures will not result inabandonment or significant alteration of natural behavioral patterns. The final determination of affect willbe discussed through the ESA Section 7 process.Based on the model results, behavioral patterns, acoustic abilities of fin whales, results of pastCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training exercises, and implementation of protective measures, the Navy finds thatthe COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events may affect fin whales.Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae)Humpback whales in Southern Californian waters are considered to be from theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock (Caretta, 2004). There are an estimated 1,034 (CV = 0.11)individuals in this Stock (Angliss and Lodge, 2004). The acoustic effect analysis estimates thatCOMPTUEX/JTFEX mid-frequency sonar training events will result in 33 incidents of exposure ofhumpback whales to accumulated acoustic energy in excess of 173 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s (33 behavioral and 0physiological). No humpback whales would be exposed to impulsive noise or pressures from underwaterdetonations that would cause TTS or physical injury.February 2007 4-74

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Table 4.3-35. Raw Acoustic Model Output of Humpback Whale Exposures during TrainingExercisesBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Sei Whale (Balaenoptera borealis)The sei whale is listed as endangered under the ESA, and the Eastern North Pacific Stock is, therefore,considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. The current estimate for sei whales in California,Oregon, and Washington is 35 (CV=0.61) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005). The acoustic effectsanalysis estimates that COMPTUEX/JTFEX mid-frequency sonar training events will result in 2 incidentsof exposure of sei whales to accumulated acoustic energy in excess of 173 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s (2 behavioraland 0 physiological). No sei whales would be exposed to impulsive noise or pressure from underwaterdetonations that could cause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-36. Raw Acoustic Model Output of Sei Whale Exposures during Training ExercisesBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Sperm Whales (Physeter macrocephalus)The sperm whale is listed as endangered under the ESA and the California/Oregon/Washington Stock isconsidered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. There is a minimum population estimate of 885(CV=0.41) for the California/Oregon/Washington Stock based on ship-based surveys during summers of1991 and 1993 (Carretta et al. 2005). The acoustic effects analysis estimates that COMPTUEX/JTFEXmid-frequency sonar training events will result in 63 incidents of exposure of sperm whales toaccumulated acoustic energy in excess of 173 dB re 1 μPa 2 -s (59 behavioral and 4 physiological). Nosperm whales will be exposed to impulsive noise or pressures from underwater detonations that couldcause TTS or physical injury.Table 4.3-37. Raw Acoustic Model Output of Sperm Whale Exposures During Training ExercisesBehavioral173-

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4measures implemented during mid-frequency active sonar training effectively reduce the potentialharassment of marine mammals, all predicted exposures of beaked whale species sub-TTS and TTS areconservatively considered as potential injury. Table 4.3-38 summarizes results of acoustic effectsmodeling for marine mammals during activities using mid-frequency active sonar.Table 4.3-38. Total Annual Harassment Incidents (for Sonar and Underwater Detonations)Marine Mammal SpeciesTotal Annual Harassment IncidentsLevel B(Sub TTS173 -

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 44.3.1.8 Summary of Regulatory Framework4.3.1.8.1 Endangered Species Act (ESA)The EA/OEA analyzes potential effects to species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Inaccordance with ESA requirements, the Navy completed consultation under Section 7 of the ESA with theNational Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on the potential that COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities mayaffect listed species in the action area. In concluding the Section 7 consultation, NMFS issued aBiological Opinion (BO) (February 9, 2007) finding that conduct of the JTFEX and COMPTUEX mayaffect but are not likely to adversely affect the white abalone (Haliotis sorenseni), four sea turtles(loggerhead [Caretta caretta], leatherback [Dermochelys coriacea], eastern Pacific green [Cheloniaagassizi], and olive ridley [Lepidochelys olivacea]), listed fish (Chinook salmon [Oncorhynchustshawytscha], steelhead [Oncorhynchus mykiss], and green sturgeon [Acipenser medirostris]), the NorthPacific right whale (Eubalaena japonica), the Southern Resident killer whale (Orcinus orca), or theStellar sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus). The opinion further concludes that conduct of these exercises willnot likely result in fitness consequences for the blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) and is not likely tojeopardize the continued existence of the fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus), the sei whale (Balaenopteraborealis), the humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), the sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) orthe Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi). In addition, NMFS issued the Navy an incidental takestatement requiring terms and conditions to be implemented in order to be exempt from the prohibitionsof Section 9 of the ESA. In accordance with these terms and conditions the Navy will implement“measures to reduce the probability of exposing” any endangered mammals, implement a monitoringprogram in association with COMPTUEX/JTFEX to evaluate assumptions contained in the BiologicalOpinion, and to provide NMFS with reports (verbal and written) regarding the observed marine mammalsduring the exercises. Land-based activities will be conducted in accordance with existing biologicalopinions. Based on receipt of the BO, the Navy concludes that no significant impacts to Federally-listedspecies will occur as a result of COMPTUEX/JTFEX.4.3.1.8.2 Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)No incidental harassment of marine mammals is expected as a result of underwater detonations. Thepredicted incidents of harassment from the acoustic modeling were considered in the context of themitigation measures in Chapter 5. As a result, takes of marine mammals associated with underwaterdetonations are not reasonably foreseeable.As a result of acoustic effects associated with mid-frequency active sonar use, the proposed action mayresult in incidental Level B harassment of 23 species of marine mammals. By Navy policy developed inconjunction with NMFS, modeled Level B harassment of beaked whale species are considered aspotential Level A harassment. In addition, common dolphins may be exposed to Level A harassmentfrom mid-frequency active sonar. Mitigation measures are expected to be effective in reducing thepotential for Level A harassment. No serious injury or mortality of any marine mammal species isreasonably foreseeable. No adverse effects on the annual rates of recruitment or survival of any of thespecies and stocks assessed in this document are expected as a result of the estimated incidents of Level Band very limited estimated Level A harassment. In addition, the mitigation measures presented inChapter 5 result in the action having the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks.Title 16 United States Code, Section 1371(f) of the MMPA provides that [t]he Secretary of Defense, afterconferring with the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of the Interior or both as appropriate, mayexempt any action or category of actions undertaken by the Department of Defense or its componentsfrom compliance with any requirement of this chapter, if the Secretary determines that it is necessary for4-79 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4national defense. (Section 1371 (f) (1)). An exemption is effective for the period specified by theSecretary of Defense not to exceed two years.(Section 1371 (f) (2)). Compliance with the MMPA for this action is satisfied due to the issuance onJanuary 23, 2007, of a National Defense Exemption (NDE) from the Requirements of the MMPA forCertain DoD Military Readiness Activities That Employ Mid-Frequency Active Sonar or ImprovedExtended Echo Ranging Sonobuoys (NDE). The NDE is to last for a period of two years, or the date atwhich the Department of the Navy is granted authorization under the MMPA for one, or both of thecategories now covered by the NDE.The 2007 NDE further stipulates that all exempted military readiness activities employing mid-frequencyactive sonar shall employ the "Mid-Frequency Active Sonar Mitigation Measures during Major TrainingExercises or within Established DoD Maritime Ranges and Established Operating Areas." As detailed inChapter 5, these measures will be implemented as part of the Proposed Action.4.3.1.8.3 Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)The Navy found that 5 of the 45 activities conducted as part of the COMPTUEX/JTFEX had effects oncoastal uses or resources. These five activities are: Naval Surface Fire Support; Amphibious Operations;Demolition Operations; Mining Operations; and Ship Mine Countermeasures. Analysis of the other 40activities, in particular those that use mid-frequency sonar, found that those activities will not have effectson California’s coastal uses or resources. The Navy prepared and submitted a Coastal ConsistencyDetermination (CCD) to the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for the five activities. The CCD andassociated correspondence are provided in (Appendix O).As demonstrated in this analysis (Section 4.3.1.5), exposure to mid-frequency active sonar may result intemporary, short-term effects on individual marine mammals. These temporary, short-term effects are notexpected to result in a fitness consequence to these marine species, therefore the No Action Alternativeand the Proposed Action would not affect the maintenance of healthy populations of marine species inCalifornia coastal waters, nor affect the long-term enjoyment of these marine species for scientific,recreational, commercial, or educational purposes. For those actions in which the Navy requested a CCD,the CCC concurred that those actions could be conducted in a manner that is consistent to the maximumextent practicable with the California Coastal Management Program.4.3.1.8.4 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA)Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. at 1801 et seq., Section 305 (b)(2) requires Federal agencies to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service on activities that mayadversely affect Essential Fish Habitat EFH. The Proposed Action would not reduce the quality orquantity of EFH and therefore does not adversely affect EFH. As a result, consultation on the ProposedAction per 50 CFR Part 600 is not required.4.3.1.8.5 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Executive Order 12114Based on the analyses presented in this section including the analyses and compliance with otherregulations, the No Action and the Proposed Action will not significantly impact or significantly harmmarine resources.4.3.2 Terrestrial ResourcesAll onshore training events for a COMPTUEX/JTFEX take place on existing DoD bases, facilities, andranges. Through legislation and a commitment to stewardship, the military Services are responsible forthe management of natural resources, including biological resources, on these installations. As a result,February 2007 4-80

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4the Services continually assess the environmental impacts of training activities on their respective ranges.Where impacts are identified, the Services pursue a variety of management measures to avoid, reduce, ormitigate significant impacts to biological resources.Although environmental analysis is often conducted for a particular event or set of activities being carriedout on an installation, an inclusive review of natural resources management at each installation is alsomandated by the Sikes Act Improvement Act (SAIA). Under this Act, Services must develop andimplement Integrated Natural Resources Management Plans (INRMPs) for each installation. INRMPsaddress all elements of natural resources management applicable to an installation, including compliancewith the terms and conditions of relevant Biological Opinions issued by the U.S. Fish and WildlifeService (USFWS) through Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 consultation. Consistent with theuse of military installations to ensure the preparedness of the Armed Forces, each INRMP must, to theextent appropriate and applicable, provide for:Fish and wildlife management, land management, forest management, and fish and wildlifeorientedrecreationFish and wildlife habitat enhancement or modificationsWetland protection, enhancement, and restoration, where necessary for support of fish, wildlife,or plantsIntegration of, and consistency among, the various activities conducted under the planEstablishment of specific natural resource management goals and objectives, and time frames forProposed ActionSustainable use by the public of natural resources to the extent that the use is not inconsistentwith the needs of fish and wildlife resourcesEnforcement of applicable natural resource laws and regulationsTo reduce the potential impact of military operations on installation lands, commanders consult themanagement approaches available within applicable INRMPs when developing operational guidelines,plans, and orders. Each INRMP is scheduled for reauthorization every 5 years (DoD and USFWS, 2002).4.3.2.1 Land Areas4.3.2.1.1 San Clemente IslandCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities are currently being conducted at SCIRC. An INRMP (U.S. Navy, 2002a)has been completed for the facilities on SCI. In addition, there are four Biological Opinions (BOs) thathave been issued by the USFWS regarding training activities on SCI (BO 1-6-97-F-21, updated 7/23/02Re-initiation of Consultation on Naval Training Activities that Cause Fires on SCI; BO 1-6-97-F-21 andAmendment, Biological/Conference Opinion on Training Activities on SCI; BO 1-6-00-F-19, TrainingArea Ranges on SCI; and BO 1-6-97-F-58, Impacts to Island Night Lizard Caused by Existing andProposed Naval Activities on SCI. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities using ranges located on SCI adhere torules and procedures developed in accordance with the INRMP and existing BOs. Therefore, nosignificant impacts to terrestrial biological resources would occur as a result of implementation of the NoAction Alternative or Proposed Action.4.3.2.1.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities are currently being conducted at NB Coronado. An INRMP (U.S. Navy,2002a) has been completed for the facilities on NB Coronado. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities conductedusing ranges located onshore will adhere to rules and procedures developed in accordance with the4-81 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4INRMP and other environmental requirements. Therefore, no significant impacts to terrestrial biologicalresources would occur as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action.4.3.2.2 Summary of Regulatory Framework4.3.2.2.1 Sikes Act Improvement Act (SAIA)The Sikes Act of 1960, 16 U.S.C. 670a-670o, as amended by the Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997,Pub. L. No. 105-85, requires, at Section 101 (a), military installations, except those without significantnatural resources, to prepare and implement integrated plans. All Department of the Navy and UnitedStates Army installation training areas where COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities will take place, have anIntegrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP). COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities will beimplemented in accordance with the management and conservation criteria developed within eachINRMP. Where a plan remains to be developed or updated, the action proponent will comply with allapplicable law for the protection of natural resources found on the installation or operating area.4.3.2.2.2 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)The Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. 703-711, directs the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)to ensure the perpetuation of migratory bird populations and their habitat. The Department of Defense,pursuant to the 2003 National Defense Authorization Act, is allowed to incidentally take migratory birdsduring military readiness training activities.Section 315 of the Authorization Act also provided that the Secretary of the Interior would prescriberegulations for the Armed Forces for the incidental taking of migratory birds during military readinessactivities authorized by the Secretary of Defense. During the interim period while the regulations arebeing developed, incidental take which may occur by implementation of the proposed action, is notsubject to the take provisions within the MBTA. While the final rule implementing Congress' mandate isexpected to be promulgated soon, the proposed action is not expected to present adverse impacts onmigratory birds or a population of migratory birds species.4.3.2.2.3 Endangered Species Act (ESA)Section 7 of the ESA requires all Federal agencies to use their authorities to conduct conservationprograms and to consult with NMFS or USFWS concerning the potential effects of their actions on anyspecies listed under the ESA. The purpose of consultation is to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the impactsof their activities on listed species. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2004 (H.R.1588) addresses the designation of critical habitat on DoD lands that are subject to an INRMP, whilereaffirming the obligation of DoD to comply with Section 9 of the ESA to prevent extinction and takingof endangered and threatened species.The Navy has determined that COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities at San Clemente Island, Naval BaseCoronado, and MCB Camp Pendleton are consistent with terms and conditions of existing BOs.Therefore, no re-initiation of Section 7 consultation with USFWS is required. COMPTUEX/JTFEXactivities on these installations would adhere to standard operating procedures developed in accordancewith INRMPs and existing BOs.4.3.2.2.4 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Executive Order 12114Based on the analyses presented in this section including the analyses and compliance with otherregulations, the No Action and the Proposed Action will not significantly impact or significantly harmterrestrial resources.February 2007 4-82

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 44.4 CULTURAL RESOURCESImpacts on cultural resources could result from COMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities. The greatestpotential for adverse effects as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternative or ProposedAction would be to terrestrial archaeological sites. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities that involve groundimpacts, however, such as those caused by air-to-ground operation (STRIKE) training, occur only onestablished ordnance ranges where ground disturbance has been routine and ongoing for an extendedperiod. Impacts to known or undiscovered submerged archaeological resources, such as shipwrecks, arenot anticipated as a result of normal COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities. Potential impacts on submergedresources are limited to training expendables (sonobuoys, inert bombs, missiles, and other ordnance)falling into the ocean and affecting submerged resources. Potential impacts are not considered significantbecause there are few underwater historic period cultural resources and it is highly unlikely that theseresources would be affected by training expendables because they occur at very low densities and at suchdepths that expendables are unlikely to land on any resources.Structures constituting architectural resources are located within the cantonment areas, and were mostlyconstructed to support the ongoing, routine installation missions. Impacts on architectural resources arealso not anticipated as a result of short-term, occasional use for COMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities.No traditional cultural resources have been identified that would be adversely affected byCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternative orProposed Action.Under the Proposed Action, no additional effects on cultural resources have been identified forconducting two major range events concurrently, beyond those effects normally resulting from a singleCOMPTUEX/JTFEX (baseline conditions). Degradation of cultural sites is cumulative and, unlikenatural resources, cultural sites tend not to recover over time. The cultural resources impacts of theProposed Action would thus be indistinguishable from the impacts of the No Action Alternative.4.4.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)COMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities in the SOCAL OPAREA will use both ships and aircraft. Noterrestrial cultural resources exist within SOCAL OPAREA that could potentially be affected as a resultof implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action. As noted above,COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities are of a nature that would not adversely affect submerged shipwrecks orother marine cultural resources. No effect to historic properties would occur. Therefore, implementationof either the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action would not result in significant impacts on culturalresources.4.4.2 Land Areas4.4.2.1 San Clemente IslandSan Clemente Island (SCI) contains hundreds of recorded archaeological sites, most of which date toprehistory. SCI supports COMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities, such as Amphibious Operations, whichland Marines and equipment on the island beaches to maneuver inland. A program of archaeological siteavoidance in place on SCI prevents damage to the archaeological resources. These avoidance measuresinclude posting known site locations and restricting entry to, or training activities in, those areas, asappropriate. COMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities associated with implementation of the No ActionAlternative or Proposed Action will take place on existing training lands in a manner consistent withestablished procedures for protecting terrestrial archaeological resources. No effect to historic properties4-83 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4would occur. Consequently, no significant impacts to cultural resources would occur as a result ofimplementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action.4.4.2.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCCommander, Navy Region Southwest (CNRSW) has a Cultural Resources Management Program(CRMP) responsible for appropriate compliance under applicable statutes, regulations, and DoD policy.The Region’s CRMP is the context within which all cultural resource identification, evaluation, andmanagement occurs. Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on archaeologicaland architectural inventories is undertaken to clarify when mission activities and preservation of a sitelisted, or eligible to be listed, on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) may be in conflict,requiring an assessment of effects and mitigation measures.COMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities associated with the No Action Alternative and Proposed Actionwill take place on existing training lands in a manner consistent with established procedures for protectingterrestrial archaeological resources. No effect to historic properties would occur. Therefore, nosignificant impacts to cultural resources would occur as a result of implementation of the No ActionAlternative or Proposed Action.4.5 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTESShipboard and land-based activities associated with Navy training operations require the storage and useof a variety of hazardous materials, principally petroleum fuels. Hazardous materials are stored and usedin accordance with Navy procedures. Personnel responsible for conduction COMPTUEX/JTFEXactivities would make use of existing logistical processes and facilities for transporting and storinghazardous materials prior to use, as well as existing hazardous materials safety, handling, and spillresponse equipment, facilities, plans, and personnel training.Shipboard and land-based activities associated with Navy training operations also generate streams ofsolid wastes, recyclable materials, and hazardous wastes, mostly from the maintenance of ships, aircraft,vehicles, and equipment. Waste is containerized, collected, stored, and disposed of in accordance withState and Federal laws and Navy regulations. Hazardous waste generated at sea is off-loaded in port, anddisposed in the same manner as waste collected at shore facilities.Hazardous constituents are deposited in the offshore waters by ordnance, sonobuoys, and targets. Solidand liquid detonation products are generated from the expenditure of ordnance. Most of these materialsare not hazardous. According to the preliminary analysis, the constituents of concern (e.g., explosives,ordnance, small arms rounds) from training devices and training operations appear to have little or noenvironmental effect. Long-term degradation of marine, surface, or ground water quality fromunrecovered Navy training devices and materials and from routine ship emissions and discharges appearsto be insignificant. Previous studies, such as AAAV EIS/OEIS, also assert the absence of significantimpacts from these sources.All COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events are conducted in accordance with range operating proceduresdeveloped in compliance with management plans, spill prevention and waste minimization plans, NEPAanalyses, and other environmental planning and compliance requirements. As new environmentalrequirements are incorporated into the range operating procedures, COMPTUEX/JTFEX trainingactivities are updated to comply with the new requirements.Implementation of the Proposed Action would not increase the overall annual number ofCOMPTUEX/JTFEX events, but instead would provide the flexibility to conduct two major range eventsFebruary 2007 4-84

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4concurrently. Therefore, the Proposed Action would not increase the annual rate at which hazardousmaterials are consumed nor the amount of hazardous waste generated on an annual basis. No additionalhazardous wastes or constituents (e.g., metals leaching from abandoned sonobuoys or targets) would beintroduced into the affected areas as a result implementation of either the No Action Alternative orProposed Action. Hazardous materials would continue to be used in accordance with the Navy’s safetypolicies and procedures, which have proven to be effective.4.5.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)The SOCAL OPAREA, including Warning Area 291, currently hosts COMPTUEX/JTFEXs on a regularbasis. The core activities of the COMPTUEX/JTFEX exercises occur in SOCAL OPAREA. Most of theSOCAL OPAREA is within 200 nm (370 km) of the California coast, where shipboard hazardous wastedisposal is prohibited. The potential for hazardous materials and hazardous waste impacts within theSOCAL OPAREA are primarily in those waters adjacent to SCIRC, NB Coronado, and MCB CampPendleton. Hazardous materials transport, storage, handling, and consumption and hazardous wastegeneration, storage, transport, and disposal for the COMPTUEX/JTFEX exercises are the same processesused by other Navy units in other training areas. Only the scale, timing, and locations of these activitiesmay be different.The general findings of the PMSR EIS/OEIS and AAAV EIS/OEIS regarding impacts associated withhazardous materials and wastes may reasonably be applied to the SOCAL OPAREA. The PMSREIS/OEIS demonstrated that up to three Fleet Exercises per year would result in less-than-significanthazardous materials and hazardous wastes impacts. The AAAV EIS/OEIS came to a similar conclusionregarding the at-sea impacts of training operations offshore of SCI and Camp Pendleton.The PMSR EIS/OEIS constituent of concern analysis can be applied to the SOCAL OPAREA. Based onthe analysis presented in that EIS, the SOCAL OPAREA would experience less-than-significant impactson water quality from introduction of constituents of concern. In addition, all COMPTUEX/JTFEXtraining events will be conducted in accordance with range operating procedures developed in compliancewith management plans, spill prevention and waste minimization plans, NEPA analyses, and otherenvironmental planning and compliance requirements. Therefore, hazardous materials use, hazardouswaste generation, and releases of constituents of concern as a result of implementation of the No ActionAlterative or Proposed Action would have no significant impact on people or natural resources.4.5.2 Land Areas4.5.2.1 San Clemente IslandBased on the analysis presented in the AAAV EIS as described above for the SOCAL OPAREA,hazardous materials use, hazardous waste generation, and releases of hazardous constituents as a result ofimplementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action would have no significant impact onpeople or natural resources. Utilization of SCIRC for COMPTUEX/JTFEX related training activities willnot result in an appreciable increase in hazardous materials over what is normally produced by routineNavy activities. Handling and storage of hazardous materials would continue to be controlled and wouldremain in compliance with Federal, state, and local requirements and with Navy policy. No newprocedures would be required to store or use any hazardous materials associated withCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities. Therefore, hazardous materials use, hazardous waste generation, andreleases of hazardous constituents as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternative or ProposedAction would have no significant impact on people or natural resources.4-85 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 44.5.2.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities are currently conducted at NB Coronado and include:Amphibious Operations, SMCM Operations, and DEMO. Utilization of NB Coronado for existingCOMPTUEX/JTFEX-related training activities will not result in an appreciable increase in hazardousmaterials over what is normally produced by routine Navy activities. Handling and storage of hazardousmaterials at NB Coronado would continue to be controlled and would remain in compliance with Federal,state, and local requirements and with Navy policy. No new procedures would be required to store or useany hazardous materials associated with COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities. Therefore, hazardous materialsuse, hazardous waste generation, and releases of hazardous constituents as a result of implementation ofthe No Action Alternative or Proposed Action would have no significant impact on people or naturalresources.4.6 SOCIOECONOMICSThe socioeconomic analysis addresses the potential for COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities to affect, eitherpositively or negatively, the basic attributes and resources associated with the human environment,particularly population and economic activity. Economic activity typically encompasses employment,personal income, and industrial growth.4.6.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities are currently conducted in the SOCAL OPAREA. Commercial shipping,commercial fishing, sport fishing/diving, and tourist-related activities occur within the SOCALOPAREA. These activities make a significant contribution to the overall economy of SouthernCalifornia. Temporary range clearance procedures for safety purposes do not adversely affect theseeconomic activities. During COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities, fisherman and recreational users operatewithin the area and typically maintain a safe distance from the activities. The Navy has performedmilitary operations within this region in the past and has not conflicted with fishing or recreational uses,even during peak fishing seasons. When range clearance is required, a Notice to Mariners (NOTMAR) isprovided in advance which allows boats to select an alternate destination without substantially affectingtheir activities. To help manage competing demands and maintain public access in the SOCALOPAREAS, the Navy conducts its offshore operations in a manner that minimizes restrictions tocommercial fisherman.Commercial shipping passes near SCIRC and commercial fishing, sport fishing and diving, and touristrelated activities occur regularly within the offshore and nearshore waters of SCIRC. Temporary rangeclearance procedures for safety purposes do not adversely affect these economic activities. DuringCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities, fisherman and recreational users operate within the area and typicallymaintain a safe distance from the activities. The Navy has performed military operations within thisregion in the past and has not conflicted with fishing or recreational uses, even during peak fishingseasons. When range clearance is required, a NOTMAR is provided in advance which allows boats toselect an alternate destination without substantially affecting their activities. The frequency of rangeclearance actions would remain unchanged as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternative andProposed Action. To minimize potential military/civilian interactions, the Navy will continue to publishscheduled operation times and locations up to six months in advance. This ensures that commercial andrecreational users are aware of the Navy’s plans, and allows them to plan their trips to avoid thescheduled activity.February 2007 4-86

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4Both the Tanner and Cortes Banks and the nearshore and offshore areas west and south of SCI areproductive commercial fishing areas. These areas’ relatively shallow waters make them more productivefor a number of harvested fish and invertebrate species than deeper offshore waters nearby. Averageannual Tuna (all species) catch within California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) statistical blockscontribute substantially to the overall catch in SCI waters. Catches of pacific mackerel, pacific sardine,squid and sea urchin are higher immediately south of SCI than in most of the other CDFG statisticalblocks in and around the SCIRC. Seasonally, the overall fish catch is heavily biased towards the springand summer months, while invertebrate catches are largest in the fall and winter. Economic impactscould result if commercial fishermen’s access to these areas were reduced by Navy activities. However,the Navy cannot and will not close offshore waters to other users. To help manage competing demandsand maintain public access in SCIRC offshore areas, the Navy plans to conduct its offshore operations ina manner that will minimize access restrictions to commercial fishermen. Long-range advance notice ofscheduled operations times and areas to be used within the SCIRC are made available to the public andthe commercial fishing community via the worldwide web, NOTAMs and NOTMARs. These providecommercial fishermen, recreational boaters and other SCI area users notice that the military will beoperating in a specific area, and will allow them to plan their own activities accordingly. Schedules willbe updated when changes occur up until the date of the operation. If operations are cancelled at any time,this information will be posted and the area will again be identified as clear for public use. If fishingvessels are within a scheduled area at the time of a scheduled operation, the operation will avoid them if itis feasible to do so. If avoidance is not feasible, the military units participating in the operation will eitherrelocate or delay the start of the operation to ensure there are no conflicts. In selected instances wheresafety requires exclusive use of a specific area, fishermen may be asked to relocate to a safer area nearbyfor the duration of the exercise.Therefore, no significant socioeconomic impacts would occur as a result of implementation of the NoAction Alternative or Proposed Action.4.6.2 Land Areas4.6.2.1 San Clemente IslandCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities do not impact population centers at SCI. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activitieswould have no impact on jobs, housing, or infrastructure needs at SCI. No changes in the number ofpermanent or transient military and civilian personnel involved in COMPTUEX/JTFEX would occur as aresult of implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action. Therefore, no significantsocioeconomic impacts would occur as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternative orProposed Action.4.6.2.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training currently occurs in the NB Coronado. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities donot impact population centers in and around NB Coronado. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities would haveno impact on jobs, housing, or infrastructure needs in San Diego County. No changes in the number ofpermanent or transient military and civilian personnel involved in COMPTUEX/JTFEX would occur as aresult of implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action. Therefore, no significantsocioeconomic impacts would occur as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternative orProposed Action.4-87 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 44.7 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDRENPotential impacts that would result in disproportionately high and adverse human or environmental effectson minority and low-income populations are discussed in this section. This analysis is required by EO12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-IncomePopulations. EO 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks requires the analysis ofthe Proposed Action's potential to generate disproportionately high environmental health and safety risksto children and is addressed in this section.4.7.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)Environmental justice and protection of children is not applicable to the SOCAL OPAREA because thearea consists of open water and no permanent human populations exist. Therefore, implementation of theNo Action Alternative or Proposed Action would not result in impacts to minority populations and lowincomepopulations as defined by EO 12898 or expose children to environmental health risks as definedby EO 13045.4.7.2 Land Areas4.7.2.1 San Clemente IslandEnvironmental justice and protection of children is not applicable to SCIRC because no permanentcivilian populations reside on SCIRC. SCIRC is owned and operated by the Navy and access isrestricted. Therefore, implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action would not resultin impacts to minority populations and low-income populations as defined by EO 12898 or exposechildren to environmental health risks as defined by EO 13045.4.7.2.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCNB Coronado is located within San Diego County., an ethnically diverse population. Implementation ofthe No Action Alternative or Proposed Action do not have the potential to result in a disproportionatelyhigh or adverse environmental health or safety impacts to minority or low-income populations, orchildren because no significant adverse environmental effects have been identified for any resource areaor population analyzed in this EA/OEA. Therefore, implementation of the No Action Alternative orProposed Action would not result in impacts to minority populations and low-income populations asdefined by EO 12898 or expose children to environmental health risks as defined by EO 13045.4.8 TRANSPORTATIONCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities could produce impacts on transportation and circulation if training eventsresulted in significantly greater ocean, air, or surface traffic that increased congestion or caused conflictswith existing private and commercial traffic.Virtually all of the airspace and sea space in the affected areas is available for co-use by civilian andmilitary traffic the majority of the time. Military use of airspace, sea space, and surface routes iscompatible with civilian use provided that careful attention is paid to the potential to cause disruption orcongestion of transportation patterns. Disruption can be in the form of deterioration of existing levels ofservice or a reduction in the existing level of transportation safety.Impacts on air traffic would be a concern if the Proposed Action leads to an increase of flight operationsthat could not be accommodated within established operational procedures and flight patterns. TheFebruary 2007 4-88

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4impact would be significant if the Navy’s flight activities degrade the FAA’s ability to control air trafficin the SOCAL OPAREA or provide necessary safety of flight services.Impacts on vessel traffic are of concern if the flow of commercial surface shipping or recreationalfishing/boating is seriously disrupted. A serious disruption occurs when a vessel is precluded fromreaching its destination; however, the need to use alternate routes to reach a destination does no constitutea serious disruption.4.8.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities under the No Action Alternative and Proposed Action include activitiesthat are and have been routinely conducted in the area for decades.The FAA has established Warning Areas for military operations. When military aircraft are conductingoperations that are not compatible with civilian activity (e.g., weapons firing), the military aircraft areconfined to Warning Areas that are specifically designated for this purpose. Hazardous air operations arecommunicated to commercial airlines and general aviation by NOTAMS published by the FAA. Noadditional impacts on FAA’s capabilities would be created.Military use of the offshore ocean is also compatible with civilian use. Where naval vessels areconducting operations that are not compatible with other uses (e.g., hazardous weapons firing), they areconfined to operations areas away from shipping lanes. Hazardous operations are communicated to allvessels and operators by use of NOTMARs published by the Coast Guard.Since the majority of COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities are located within the charted, designated militaryexercise boundaries, there would be minimal potential for conflict with non-military shipping. Onlyweapons-related activities are exclusive use, and these times are scheduled and broadcast by each rangethrough a NOTMAR and NOTAM, or publication on a webpage. The offshore areas are outside of themain shipping lanes, and access restrictions are announced in advance of operations in order that thepublic may adjust their routes away from the military training activities. Therefore, no significantimpacts would occur as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action.4.8.2 Land Areas4.8.2.1 San Clemente IslandCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities are currently conducted at SCIRC. There is no road network, in aregional context, on SCI. SCI is owned by the Navy, and the small numbers of vehicles on the island areroutinely subject to controls needed to accommodate military training activities. Therefore, no significantimpacts to surface transportation would occur as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternativeor Proposed Action.4.8.2.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities are currently conducted at NB Coronado and are confined to theexisting range areas. No increase in the overall tempo of training activity at NB Coronado is proposed.Therefore, no significant impacts to the surface transportation network at NB Coronado would occur as aresult of implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action.4.9 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETYCOMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities with a potential effect on public health and safety include aircraftoperations, vessel movement, munitions handling/storage and weapons usage. These activities are strictly4-89 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 4monitored and controlled by DoD and Navy regulations in place to insure the maximum level of safety.These training activities are part of long-standing, routine and ongoing activities that are central to, andsupported by, the missions of the installations at which they take place.All COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events are conducted in accordance with range operating proceduresdeveloped in compliance with management plans, safety plans, Air Installation Compatible Use Zone(AICUZ) and Range AICUZ studies, and environmental planning and compliance requirements. As newsafety and environmental requirements are incorporated into the range operating procedures,COMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities are updated to comply with the new requirements.COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities would use existing land and ocean ranges currently used by the Navy fortraining. No new activities would be introduced into the affected areas as a result of implementation ofthe No Action Alternative or Proposed Action. Furthermore, the Proposed Action would not increase theoverall annual number of COMPTUEX/JTFEX events or other training operations. Instead, it wouldprovide the flexibility to conduct two major range events concurrently.4.9.1 Ocean Area (Southern California Operating Area)COMPTUEX/JTFEXs are currently conducted in the SOCAL OPAREA. Implementation of the NoAction Alternative or Proposed Action would not result in an increased threat to public health or publicsafety. The Navy will continue to notify the public of hazardous operations through the use of NOTAMsand NOTMARs. With respect to recreational diving activities, there are known diving sites within theOPAREA. Because the locations of popular diving sites are well-documented, dive boats are typicallywell-marked, and diver-down flags would be visible from the ships conducting the proposed training,possible interactions between COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities and scuba diving would be minimized.COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities within the SOCAL OPAREA, including W-291, closely reflect theactivities evaluated in the PMSR EIS/OEIS and AAAV EIS/OEIS. The general findings of the PMSREIS/OEIS and AAAV EIS/OEIS may reasonably be applied to the SOCAL OPAREA. No significantpublic health or safety impacts from FLEETEX events were identified in the PMSR EIS/OEIS, and nosignificant public health or safety impacts from amphibious operations were identified in the AAAVEIS/OEIS. Therefore, no significant public health or safety impacts are expected to occur in the SOCALOPAREA as a result of implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action.4.9.2 Land Areas4.9.2.1 San Clemente IslandCOMPTUEX/JTFEXs are currently conducted in the SCIRC. Implementation of the No ActionAlternative or Proposed Action would not result in an increased threat to public health or public safety.COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities within the SCIRC closely reflect the activities evaluated in the PMSREIS/OEIS and AAAV EIS/OEIS. The general findings of the PMSR EIS/OEIS and AAAV EIS/OEIS mayreasonably be applied to COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities occurring in SCIRC. No significant publichealth or safety impacts were identified in the PMSR EIS/OEIS, and no significant public health or safetyimpacts from amphibious operations were identified in the AAAV EIS/OEIS. In addition,COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events will be conducted in accordance with range operating proceduresdeveloped in compliance with management plans, safety plans, Air Installation Compatible Use Zone(AICUZ) and Range AICUZ studies, and environmental planning and compliance requirements.Therefore, no significant public health or safety impacts are expected to occur as a result ofimplementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action.February 2007 4-90

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 44.9.2.2 Naval Base Coronado - SSTCCOMPTUEX/JTFEXs are currently conducted at NB Coronado. Implementation of the No ActionAlternative and Proposed Action would not result in an increased threat to public health or public safety.COMPTUEX/JTFEX training activities at NB Coronado include: Amphibious Operations, SMCMOperations, and DEMO. The DEMO training consists of detonating blasting caps in a bermed pit onNavy property well away from public areas, and also is considered to have no potential for significantpublic health or safety impacts. The Amphibious Operations and SMCM Operations activities would notresult in an increased threat to public heath or public safety because all events will be conducted inaccordance with range operating procedures developed in compliance with management plans and safetyplans at NB Coronado. Therefore, no significant public health or safety impacts are expected to occur as aresult of implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action.4-91 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 5CHAPTER 5PROTECTIVE MEASURES RELATED TO ACOUSTIC EFFECTSEffective training in the proposed COMPTUEX/JTFEX ASW areas dictates that ship, submarine, andaircraft participants utilize their sensors and exercise weapons to their optimum capabilities as required bythe mission. The Navy recognizes that such use has the potential to cause behavioral disruption of somemarine mammal species in the vicinity of an exercise (as outlined in Chapter 4). Although any disruptionof natural behavioral patterns is not likely to be to a point where such behavioral patterns are abandonedor significantly altered, this chapter presents the Navy’s protective measures, outlining steps that wouldbe implemented to protect marine mammals and Federally-listed species during COMPTUEX/JTFEXoperations. It should be noted that these protective measures have been standard operating procedures forunit level ASW training since 2004. In addition, the Navy coordinated with the National MarineFisheries Service (NMFS) to further develop measures for protection of marine mammals during theperiod of the National Defense Exemption (NDE) and those mitigations for mid-frequency active sonarare detailed in this section. This chapter also presents a discussion of other measures that have beenconsidered and rejected because they are either: (1) not feasible; (2) present a safety concern; (3) provideno known or ambiguous protective benefit; or (4) impact the effectiveness of the required ASW trainingmilitary readiness activity.5.1 MID-FREQUENCY ACTIVE SONAR OPERATIONS5.1.1 General Maritime Protective Measures: Personnel Training1. All lookouts onboard platforms involved in ASW training events will review the NMFS-approvedMarine Species Awareness Training (MSAT) material prior to use of mid-frequency active sonar.2. All Commanding Officers, Executive Officers, and officers standing watch on the Bridge willhave reviewed the MSAT material prior to a training event employing the use of mid-frequencyactive sonar.3. Navy lookouts will undertake extensive training in order to qualify as a watchstander inaccordance with the Lookout Training Handbook (NAVEDTRA, 12968-B).4. Lookout training will include on-the-job instruction under the supervision of a qualified,experienced watchstander. Following successful completion of this supervised training period,Lookouts will complete the Personal Qualification Standard program, certifying that they havedemonstrated the necessary skills (such as detection and reporting of partially submergedobjects). This does not forbid personnel being trained as lookouts from being counted as thoselisted in previous measures so long as supervisors monitor their progress and performance.5. Lookouts will be trained in the most effective means to ensure quick and effectivecommunication within the command structure in order to facilitate implementation of protectivemeasures if marine species are spotted.5.1.2 General Maritime Protective Measures: Lookout and Watchstander Responsibilities6. On the bridge of surface ships, there will always be at least three people on watch whose dutiesinclude observing the water surface around the vessel.5-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 57. All surface ships participating in ASW exercises will, in addition to the three personnel on watchnoted previously, have at all times during the exercise at least two additional personnel on watchas lookouts.8. Personnel on lookout and officers on watch on the bridge will have at least one set of binocularsavailable for each person to aid in the detection of marine mammals.9. On surface vessels equipped with mid-frequency active sonar, pedestal mounted “Big Eye”(20x110) binoculars will be present and in good working order to assist in the detection of marinemammals in the vicinity of the vessel.10. Personnel on lookout will employ visual search procedures employing a scanning methodology inaccordance with the Lookout Training Handbook (NAVEDTRA 12968-B).11. After sunset and prior to sunrise, lookouts will employ Night Lookouts Techniques in accordancewith the Lookout Training Handbook.12. Personnel on lookout will be responsible for reporting all objects or anomalies sighted in thewater (regardless of the distance from the vessel) to the Officer of the Deck, since any object ordisturbance (e.g., trash, periscope, surface disturbance, discoloration) in the water may beindicative of a threat to the vessel and its crew or indicative of a marine species that may need tobe avoided as warranted.5.1.3 Operating Procedures13. A Letter of Instruction, Mitigation Measures Message or Environmental Annex to the OperationalOrder will be issued prior to the exercise to further disseminate the personnel trainingrequirement and general marine mammal protective measures.14. Commanding Officers will make use of marine species detection cues and information to limitinteraction with marine species to the maximum extent possible consistent with safety of the ship.15. All personnel engaged in passive acoustic sonar operation (including aircraft, surface ships, orsubmarines) will monitor for marine mammal vocalizations and report the detection of anymarine mammal to the appropriate watch station for dissemination and appropriate action.16. During mid-frequency active sonar operations, personnel will utilize all available sensor andoptical systems (such as Night Vision Goggles to aid in the detection of marine mammals.17. Navy aircraft participating in exercises at sea will conduct and maintain, when operationallyfeasible and safe, surveillance for marine species of concern as long as it does not violate safetyconstraints or interfere with the accomplishment of primary operational duties.18. Aircraft with deployed sonobuoys will use only the passive capability of sonobuoys when marinemammals are detected within 200 yards of the sonobuoy.19. Marine mammal detections will be immediately reported to assigned Aircraft Control Unit forfurther dissemination to ships in the vicinity of the marine species as appropriate where it isreasonable to conclude that the course of the ship will likely result in a closing of the distance tothe detected marine mammal.February 2007 5-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 520. Safety Zones - When marine mammals are detected by any means (aircraft, shipboard lookout, oracoustically) within 1,000 yards of the sonar dome (the bow), the ship or submarine will limitactive transmission levels to at least 6 dB below normal operating levels.(i) Ships and submarines will continue to limit maximum transmission levels by this 6-dBfactor until the animal has been seen to leave the area, has not been detected for 30minutes, or the vessel has transited more than 2,000 yards beyond the location of the lastdetection.(ii) Should a marine mammal be detected within or closing to inside 500 yards of thesonar dome, active sonar transmissions will be limited to at least 10 dB below theequipment's normal operating level. Ships and submarines will continue to limitmaximum ping levels by this 10-dB factor until the animal has been seen to leave thearea, has not been detected for 30 minutes, or the vessel has transited more than 2000yards beyond the location of the last detection.(iii) Should the marine mammal be detected within or closing to inside 200 yards of thesonar dome, active sonar transmissions will cease. Sonar will not resume until the animalhas been seen to leave the area, has not been detected for 30 minutes, or the vessel hastransited more than 2,000 yards beyond the location of the last detection.(iv) Special conditions applicable for dolphins and porpoises only: If, after conducting aninitial maneuver to avoid close quarters with dolphins or porpoises, the Officer of theDeck concludes that dolphins or porpoises are deliberately closing to ride the vessel'sbow wave, no further mitigation actions are necessary while the dolphins or porpoisescontinue to exhibit bow wave riding behavior.(v) If the need for power-down should arise as detailed in “Safety Zones” above, Navyshall follow the requirements as though they were operating at 235 dB - the normaloperating level (i.e., the first power-down will be to 229 dB, regardless of at what levelabove 235 sonar was being operated).21. Prior to start up or restart of active sonar, operators will check that the Safety Zone radius aroundthe sound source is clear of marine mammals.22. Sonar levels (generally) - Navy will operate sonar at the lowest practicable level, not to exceed235 dB, except as required to meet tactical training objectives.23. Helicopters shall observe/survey the vicinity of an ASW Operation for 10 minutes before the firstdeployment of active (dipping) sonar in the water.24. Helicopters shall not dip their sonar within 200 yards of a marine mammal and shall ceasepinging if a marine mammal closes within 200 yards after pinging has begun.25. Submarine sonar operators will review detection indicators of close-aboard marine mammalsprior to the commencement of ASW operations involving active mid-frequency sonar.26. Increased vigilance during major ASW training exercises with tactical active sonar when criticalconditions are present.Based on lessons learned from strandings in Bahamas 2000, Madeiras 2000, Canaries 2002 andSpain 2006, beaked whales are of particular concern since they have been associated with mid-5-3 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 5frequency active sonar operations. Navy should avoid planning major ASW training exerciseswith mid-frequency active sonar in areas where they will encounter conditions which, in theiraggregate, may contribute to a marine mammal stranding event.The conditions to be considered during exercise planning include:(i) Areas of at least 1000 m depth near a shoreline where there is a rapid change inbathymetry on the order of 1000-6000 meters occurring across a relatively shorthorizontal distance (e.g., 5 nm).(ii) Cases for which multiple ships or submarines ( 3) operating mid-frequency activesonar in the same area over extended periods of time ( 6 hours) in close proximity ( 10nm apart).(iii) An area surrounded by land masses, separated by less than 35 nm and at least 10 nmin length, or an embayment, wherein operations involving multiple ships/subs ( 3)employing mid-frequency active sonar near land may produce sound directed toward thechannel or embayment that may cut off the lines of egress for marine mammals.(iv) Though not as dominant a condition as bathymetric features, the historical presenceof a significant surface duct (i.e. a mixed layer of constant water temperature extendingfrom the sea surface to 100 or more feet).If the major exercise must occur in an area where the above conditions exist in their aggregate,these conditions must be fully analyzed in environmental planning documentation. Navy willincrease vigilance by undertaking the following additional protective measure:A dedicated aircraft (Navy asset or contracted aircraft) will undertake reconnaissance of theembayment or channel ahead of the exercise participants to detect marine mammals that may bein the area exposed to active sonar. Where practical, advance survey should occur within abouttwo hours prior to mid-frequency active sonar use, and periodic surveillance should continue forthe duration of the exercise. Any unusual conditions (e.g., presence of sensitive species, groupsof species milling out of habitat, any stranded animals) shall be reported to the Office in TacticalCommand (OTC), who should give consideration to delaying, suspending or altering the exercise.All safety zone power down requirements described above apply.The post-exercise report must include specific reference to any event conducted in areas wherethe above conditions exist, with exact location and time/duration of the event, and noting resultsof surveys conducted.Note that these conditions were reviewed for preparation of this EA/OEA and it was found thatthe conditions are not present in their aggregate during COMPTUEX/JTFEX.5.1.4 Coordination and Reporting27. Navy will coordinate with the local NMFS Stranding Coordinator for any unusual marinemammal behavior and any stranding, beached live/dead or floating marine mammals that mayoccur at any time during or within 24 hours after completion of mid-frequency active sonar useassociated with ASW training activities.28. Navy will submit a report to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, within 120 days of thecompletion of a Major Exercise. This report must contain a discussion of the nature of theeffects, if observed, based on both modeled results of real-time events and sightings of marineFebruary 2007 5-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 5mammals. Monitoring reports provided to NMFS, unless classified, also shall be provided to theCalifornia Coastal Commission.29. If a stranding occurs during an ASW exercise, NMFS and Navy will coordinate to determine ifmid-frequency active sonar should be temporarily discontinued while the facts surrounding thestranding are collected.5.1.5 Alternative Protective Measures Considered but EliminatedPotential marine mammal acoustic exposures that may result in harassment and/or a behavioral reactionor rarely injury (tissue damage or PTS) are further reduced by the protective measures described above.Therefore, the Navy concludes that the Proposed Action and protective measures achieve the leastpractical adverse impact on species or stocks of marine species.Several additional measures were analyzed and dismissed from primary consideration given unknown,questionable, or limited effectiveness as a protective measure, known or likely detrimental consequencesto personnel safety and the effectiveness of the military readiness activity, and based on the practicality ofimplementation. These measures include:Using non-Navy personnel onboard Navy vessels to provide surveillance of ASW or otherexercise events.ooooooSecurity clearance issues would have to be overcome to allow non-Navy observersonboard exercise participants.Use of non-Navy observers is not necessary given that Navy lookouts are extensivelytrained in spotting items at or near the water surface. Navy lookouts receive more hoursof training, and utilize their skills more frequently, than many third party trainedpersonnel.Use of Navy lookouts is the most effective means to ensure quick and effectivecommunication within the command structure and facilitate implementation of protectivemeasures if marine species are spotted. A critical skill set of effective Navy training iscommunication. Navy lookouts are trained to act swiftly and decisively to ensure thatinformation is passed to the appropriate supervisory personnel.Navy and NMFS have not developed the necessary lengthy and detailed procedures thatwould be required to facilitate the integration of information from non-Navy observersinto the command structure.Some training events during COMPTUEX/JTFEX will span one or more 24-hour periodwith operations underway continuously in that timeframe. It is not feasible to maintainnon-Navy surveillance of these operations given the number of non-Navy observers thatwould be required onboard.Surface ships having active mid-frequency sonar have limited berthing capacity.Exercise planning includes careful consideration of this limited capacity in the placementof exercise controllers, data collection personnel, and Afloat Training Group personnelon ships involved in the exercise. Inclusion of non-Navy observers onboard these shipswould require that in some cases, there would be no additional berthing space foressential Navy personnel required to fully evaluate and efficiently use the trainingopportunity to accomplish the exercise objectives.5-5 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 5Visual monitoring or surveillance using non-Navy observers from non-military aircraft orvessels to survey before, during, and after exercise events.oooooooUse of non-Navy observers in the air or on civilian vessels compromises security due tothe requirement to provide advance notification of specific times/locations of Navyplatforms (this information is Classified).The areas where COMPTUEX/JTFEX events will mainly occur (the representative areasmodeled) covers approximately 46,000 nm2. Contiguous ASW events may cover manyhundreds of square miles. The number of civilian ships and/or aircraft required tomonitor the area of these events would be considerable. It is, thus, not feasible to surveyor monitor the large exercise areas in the time required to ensure these areas are devoid ofmarine mammals. In addition, marine mammals may move into or out of an area, ifsurveyed before an event, or an animal could move into an area after an exercise tookplace. Given that there are no adequate controls to account for these or other possibilitiesand there are no identified research objectives, there is no utility to performing either abefore or an after-the-event survey of an exercise area.Survey during an event raises safety issues with multiple, slow civilian aircraft operatingin the same airspace as military aircraft engaged in combat training activities. Inaddition, most of the training events take place far from land, limiting both the timeavailable for civilian aircraft to be in the exercise area and presenting a concern shouldaircraft mechanical problems arise.Scheduling civilian vessels or aircraft to coincide with COMPTUEX/JTFEX eventswould impact training effectiveness since exercise event timetables can not be preciselyfixed and are instead based on the free-flow development of tactical situations. Waitingfor civilian aircraft or vessels to complete surveys, refuel, or be on station would slow theunceasing progress of the exercise and impact the effectiveness of the military readinessactivity.The vast majority of COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events involve a Navy aerial assetwith crews specifically training to hone their detection of objects in the water. Thecapability of sighting from both surface and aerial platforms provides excellent surveycapabilities using the Navy’s existing exercise assets.Multiple events may occur simultaneously in areas at opposite ends of the SouthernCalifornia range areas and then continue for up to 96 hours. There are not enoughqualified third-party personnel to accomplish the monitoring task.There is no identified research design, sampling procedures, or purpose for any survey ormonitoring effort.Seasonal, problematic complex/steep bathymetry, or habitat avoidance.oThe habitat requirements for most of the marine mammals in the Southern CalifornianIslands are unknown. Accordingly, there is no information available on possiblealternative exercise locations or environmental factors that would otherwise be lessimportant to marine mammals in the Southern Californian Islands. In addition, exerciselocations were very carefully chosen by exercise planners based on training requirementsand the ability of ships and submarines to operate safely. Moving the exercise events toFebruary 2007 5-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 5alternative locations would impact the effectiveness of the training and has no knownutility.Using active sonar with output levels as low as possible consistent with mission requirementsand use of active sonar only when necessary.ooOperators of sonar equipment are always cognizant of the environmental variablesaffecting sound propagation. In this regard the sonar equipment power levels are alwaysset consistent with mission requirements.Active sonar is only used when required by the mission since it has the potential to alertopposing forces to the sonar platform’s presence. Passive sonar and all other sensors areused in concert with active sonar to the maximum extent practical when available andwhen required by the mission.Suspending the exercise at night, periods of low visibility, and in high sea-states when marinemammals are not readily visible.oIt is imperative that the Navy be able to operate at night, in periods of low visibility, andin high sea-states. The Navy must train as we are expected to fight, and adopting thisprohibition would eliminate this critical military readiness requirement.Scaling down the exercise to meet core aims.oTraining exercises are always constrained by the availability of funding, resources,personnel, and equipment with the result being they are always scaled down to meet onlythe core requirements.Limiting the active sonar event locations.ooAreas where events are scheduled to occur are carefully chosen to provide for the safetyof operations and to allow for the realistic tactical development of the exercise scenario.Otherwise limiting the exercise to a few areas would adversely impact the effectivenessof the training.Limiting the exercise areas would concentrate all sonar use, resulting in unnecessarilyprolonged and intensive sound levels vice the more transient exposures predicted by thecurrent planning that makes use of multiple exercise areas.Passive Acoustic Monitoring.oAs noted in the preceding section, passive detection capabilities are used to the maximumextent practicable consistent with the mission requirements to alert exercise participantsto the presence of marine mammals in an event location.Using ramp-up to attempt to clear an area prior to the conduct of exercises.oRamp-up procedures involving slowly increasing the sound in the water to necessarylevels, have been utilized in other non-Department of Defense activities. Ramp-upprocedures are not a viable alternative for training exercises, as the ramp-up would alertopponents to the participants’ presence and not allow the Navy to train, thus adverselyimpacting the effectiveness of the military readiness activity.5-7 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 5oRamp-up for sonar as a protective measure is also an unproven technique. The implicitassumption is that animals would have an avoidance response to the low power sonar andwould move away from the sound and exercise area; however, there is no data to indicatethis assumption is correct. Given there is no data to indicate that this is even minimallyeffective and because ramp-up would have an impact on the effectiveness of the militaryreadiness activity, it was eliminated from further consideration.Reporting marine mammal sightings to augment scientific data collection.oShips, submarines, aircraft, and personnel engaged in the COMPTUEX/JTFEX areintensively employed throughout the duration of the exercise. Their primary duty isaccomplishment of the exercise goals, and they should not be burdened with additionalduties, unrelated to that task. Any additional workload assigned that is unrelated to theirprimary duty would adversely impact the effectiveness of the military readiness activitythey are undertaking.5.1.6 Conservation MeasuresThe Navy will continue to fund ongoing marine mammal research in the field of acoustic responses andpopulation dynamics, abundance and density. Results of conservation efforts by the Navy in otherlocations will also be used to support efforts in the Southern California range areas. The Navy iscoordinating long term monitoring/ studies of marine mammals on various established ranges andoperating areas.The Navy is implementing a long-term monitoring program of marine mammal populations includingabundance and distribution in the Southern California Operating Areas, including evaluation of trends andresponse to anthropogenic sound sources. The Navy will continue its internal Navy marine mammalresearch and the Navy’s contribution to university/external research to improve the state of the scienceregarding marine species biology and acoustic effects. In addition, the Navy will continue to share datawith NMFS and inform NMFS on current research and development efforts.The Navy has contracted with a consortium of researchers from Duke University, University of NorthCarolina at Wilmington, University of St. Andrews, and the NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science Center toconduct a pilot study analysis and develop a proposed survey and monitoring plan that lays out therecommended approach for surveys (aerial/shipboard, frequency, spatial extent, etc.) and data analysis(standard line-transect, spatial modeling, etc.) necessary to establish a baseline of protected speciesdistribution and abundance and monitor for changes that might be attributed to ASW operations on theAtlantic Fleet Undersea Warfare Training Range, Southern California and Hawaiian range areas.5.2 UNDERWATER DETONATIONSTo ensure protection of marine mammals and sea turtles during underwater explosives training andMining Operations, the operating area must be determined to be clear of marine mammals and sea turtlesprior to detonation. Implementation of the following protective measures continue to ensure that marinemammals would not be exposed to TTS, PTS or injury from physical contact with training mine shapesduring major range eventsFebruary 2007 5-8

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 55.2.1 Demolition and Ship MCM Operations (up to 20 lbs)5.2.1.1 Exclusion ZonesAll mine warfare and mine countermeasure operations involving the use of explosive charges mustinclude exclusion zones for marine mammals and sea turtles to prevent physical and/or acoustic effects tothose species. These exclusion zones shall extend in a 700-yard arc radius around the detonation site.5.2.1.2 Pre-Exercise SurveysFor DEMO and SMCM Operations, pre-exercise survey shall be conducted within 30 minutes prior to thecommencement of the scheduled explosive event. The survey may be conducted from the surface, bydivers, and/or from the air, and personnel shall be alert to the presence of any marine mammal or seaturtle. Should such an animal be present within the survey area, the exercise shall be paused until theanimal voluntarily leaves the area.5.2.1.3 Post-Exercise SurveysSurveys within the same radius shall also be conducted within 30 minutes after the completion of theexplosive event.5.2.1.4 ReportingAny evidence of a marine mammal or sea turtle that may have been injured or killed by the action shall bereported immediately to Commander, Pacific Fleet and Commander, Navy Region Southwest,Environmental Director.5.2.1.5 Mining OperationsAs described in the COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA, Mining Operations involve aerial drops of inerttraining shapes on floating targets. Aircrews are scored for their ability to accurately hit the target.Although this operation does not involve live ordnance, marine mammals have the potential to be injuredif they are in the immediate vicinity of a floating target; therefore, the safety zone shall be clear of marinemammals and sea turtles around the target location. Pre- and post - surveys and reporting requirementsoutlined for underwater detonations shall be implemented during Mining Operations. To the maximumextent feasible, the Navy shall retrieve inert mine shapes dropped during Mining Operations.5.2.2 SINKEX and ASM Site SelectionThe selection of sites suitable for SINKEXs involves a balance of operational suitability, requirementsestablished under the MPRSA permit granted to the Navy (40 CFR 229.2), and the identification of areaswith a low likelihood of encountering ESA listed species. To meet operational suitability criteria,locations must be within a reasonable distance of the target vessels’ originating location. The locationsshould also be close to active military bases to allow participating assets access to shore facilities. Forsafety purposes, these locations should also be in areas that are not generally used by non-military air orwatercraft. The MPRSA permit requires vessels to be sunk in waters which are at least 1000 fathoms(3000 m) deep and at least 50 nm from land.In general, most listed species prefer areas with strong bathymetric gradients and oceanographic fronts forsignificant biological activity such as feeding and reproduction. Typical locations include the continentalshelf and shelf-edge. Sites in W-291 and on SOAR used for SINKEX and ASM Operation are not knownto contain the bathymetric features, which create prime listed species habitats.5-9 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 55.2.2.1 Mitigation PlanThe Navy has developed a mitigation plan to maximize the probability of sighting any ships or protectedspecies in the vicinity of an exercise. In order to minimize the likelihood of taking any threatened orendangered species that may be in the area, the following monitoring plan would be adhered to:1. All weapons firing would be conducted during the period 1 hour after official sunrise to 30minutes before official sunset.2. Extensive range clearance operations would be conducted in the hours prior tocommencement of the exercise, ensuring that no shipping is located within the hazard rangeof the longest-range weapon being fired for that event.3. Prior to conducting the exercise, remotely sensed sea surface temperature maps would bereviewed. SINKEX and ASM Operations would not be conducted within areas where strongtemperature discontinuities are present, thereby indicating the existence of oceanographicfronts. These areas would be avoided because concentrations of some listed species, or theirprey, are known to be associated with these oceanographic features.4. An exclusion zone with a radius of 1.0 nm would be established around each target. Thisexclusion zone is based on calculations using a 449 kg H6 NEW high explosive sourcedetonated 5 feet below the surface of the water, which yields a distance of 0.85 nm (coldseason) and 0.89 nm (warm season)) beyond which the received level is below the 182 dB re:1Pa sec 2 threshold established for the WINSTON S. CHURCHILL (DDG 81) shock trials. Anadditional buffer of 0.5 nm would be added to account for errors, target drift, and animalmovements. Additionally, a safety zone, which extends from the exclusion zone at 1.0 nmout an additional 0.5 nm, would be surveyed. Together, the zones extend out 2 nm from thetarget.5. A series of surveillance over-flights would be conducted within the exclusion and the safetyzones, prior to and during the exercise, when feasible. Survey protocol would be as follows:a. Overflights within the exclusion zone would be conducted in a manner that optimizes thesurface area of the water observed. This may be accomplished through the use of theNavy’s Search and Rescue (SAR) Tactical Aid (TACAID). The SAR TACAID providesthe best search altitude, ground speed, and track spacing for the discovery of small,possibly dark objects in the water based on the environmental conditions of the day.These environmental conditions include the angle of sun inclination, amount of daylight,cloud cover, visibility, and sea state.b. All visual surveillance activities would be conducted by Navy personnel trained in visualsurveillance. At least one member of the mitigation team would have completed theNavy’s marine mammal training program for lookouts.c. In addition to the overflights, the exclusion zone would be monitored by passive acousticmeans, when assets are available. This passive acoustic monitoring would be maintainedthroughout the exercise. Potential assets include sonobuoys, which can be utilized todetect any vocalizing marine mammals (particularly sperm whales) in the vicinity of theexercise. The sonobuoys would be re-seeded as necessary throughout the exercise.Additionally, passive sonar onboard submarines may be utilized to detect any vocalizingmarine mammals in the area. The OCE would be informed of any aural detection ofmarine mammals and would include this information in the determination of when it issafe to commence the exercise.February 2007 5-10

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 5d. On each day of the exercise, aerial surveillance of the exclusion and safety zones wouldcommence 2 hours prior to the first firing.e. The results of all visual, aerial, and acoustic searches would be reported immediately tothe OCE (Officer Conducting the Exercise). No weapons launches or firing wouldcommence until the OCE declares the safety and exclusion zones free of marinemammals and threatened and endangered species.f. If a protected species observed within the exclusion zone is diving, firing would bedelayed until the animal is re-sighted outside the exclusion zone, or 30 minutes haselapsed. After 30 minutes, if the animal has not been re-sighted it would be assumed tohave left the exclusion zone. This is based on a typical dive time of 30 minutes fortraveling listed species of concern. The OCE would determine if the listed species is indanger of being adversely affected by commencement of the exercise.g. During breaks in the exercise of 30 minutes or more, the exclusion zone would again besurveyed for any protected species. If protected species are sighted within the exclusionzone, the OCE would be notified, and the procedure described above would be followed.h. Upon sinking of the vessel, a final surveillance of the exclusion zone would be monitoredfor 2 hours, or until sunset, to verify that no listed species were harmed.6. Aerial surveillance would be conducted using helicopters or other aircraft based on necessityand availability. The Navy has several types of aircraft capable of performing this task;however, not all types are available for every exercise. For each exercise, the available assetbest suited for identifying objects on and near the surface of the ocean would be used. Theseaircraft would be capable of flying at the slow safe speeds necessary to enable viewing ofmarine vertebrates with unobstructed, or minimally obstructed, downward and outwardvisibility. The exclusion and safety zone surveys may be cancelled in the event that amechanical problem, emergency search and rescue, or other similar and unexpected eventpreempts the use of one of the aircraft onsite for the exercise.7. Every attempt would be made to conduct the exercise in sea states that are ideal for marinemammal sighting, Beaufort Sea State 3 or less. In the event of a 4 or above, survey effortswould be increased within the zones. This would be accomplished through the use of anadditional aircraft, if available, and conducting tight search patterns.8. The exercise would not be conducted unless the exclusion zone could be adequatelymonitored visually.9. In the unlikely event that any listed species are observed to be harmed in the area, a detaileddescription of the animal would be taken, the location noted, and if possible, photos taken.This information would be provided to NOAA Fisheries via the Navy’s regionalenvironmental coordinator for purposes of identification.10. An after action report detailing the exercise’s time line, the time the surveys commenced andterminated, amount, and types of all ordnance expended, and the results of survey efforts foreach event would be submitted to NOAA Fisheries.5.3 CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE BIOLOGICAL OPINIONThe Navy will comply with the reasonable and prudent measures and terms and conditions issued byNMFS in their February 9, 2007 Biological Opinion (BO) for these COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities. Inparticular, the terms and conditions specify a monitoring program and process for feedback to NMFSfollowing the completion of each exercise event.5-11 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 5February 2007 5-12

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 5This Page Intentionally Left Blank5-13 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 6CHAPTER 6CUMULATIVE IMPACTSFederal and Department of the Navy (DON) regulations implementing National Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA) (42 USC § 4321 et seq. and 32 CFR 775 respectively) require that the cumulative impacts ofa Proposed Action be assessed. Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations implementing theprocedural provisions of NEPA define cumulative impacts as: “‘Cumulative impact’ is the impact on theenvironment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present,and reasonably foreseeable future action regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or personundertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectivelysignificant actions taking place over a period of time” (40 CFR § 1508.7).The relationship of a proposed action to the overall cumulative impacts in an ROI can be that a singleproject may have individually minor impacts; however, when considered together with other projects, theeffects may be collectively significant. A cumulative impact is, therefore, the additive effect of allprojects in the same geographic area. In general, the effects of a particular action or group of actionsmust meet all of the following criteria to be considered cumulative impacts:Effects of several actions occur in a common locale or regionEffects on a particular resource are similar in nature, such that the same specific element of aresource is affected in the same specific wayEffects are long-term as short-term impacts dissipate over time and cease to contribute tocumulative impacts6.1 LAND AREA CUMULATIVE IMPACTSThe COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities are short-term, intermittent, and do not involve land acquisition, newconstruction, or expansion of military presence in Southern California. Shore-based activities associatedwith COMPTUEX/JTFEX training events would have no significant cumulative impacts. Minor impactsassociated with implementation of the No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action would not beexpected to result in cumulative impacts when added to impacts from other activities at the designatedshore-based training ranges.6.2 AIR QUALITY IMPACTSImplementation of the No Action Alternative and Proposed Action would result in no long-term increasesin emissions in the exercise areas. Units that participate in COMPTUEX/JTFEX events have beenaccounted for either in the participation of units normally using the ranges evaluated, or were accountedfor in the specific EIS evaluations for the ranges in which the COMPTUEX/JTFEX events would occur.The emissions would therefore not be subject to the General Conformity Rule and a conformitydetermination is not required. Emissions associated with the No Action Alternative and Proposed Actionboth within and outside U.S. Territory would be below the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)thresholds. Therefore, cumulative impacts to air quality would not be considered significant.6-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 66.3 OTHER PAST,PRESENT, AND REASONABLY FORESEEABLE FUTURE ACTIVITIES6.3.1 Commercial FishingNOAA estimates that approximately 6,000 marine mammals die annually as a result of by catch fromU.S. fisheries (Waring et al., 2002). In addition, commercial fisheries may accidentally entangle anddrown or injure cetaceans by lost and discarded fishing gear (e.g., Northridge and Hofman, 1999).National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 2007 proposed List of Fisheries (LOF) categorizes fisheriesby their level of impact on marine mammals. The LOF was proposed in the Federal Register onDecember 4, 2006, and is an MMPA-required annual list consisting of a two-tiered, stock-specificapproach that addresses the total impact of all fisheries on each marine mammal stock, and the impact ofindividual fisheries on each stock. The approach is based on consideration of the rate, in numbers ofanimals per year, of incidental mortalities and serious injuries of marine mammals due to commercialfishing operations relative to potential biological removal (PBR) level for each marine mammal stock.The Federal Register provides the list of marine mammals that are subject to incidental mortality andserious injury as a result of fisheries interactions in the Pacific Ocean.The impact of the proposed actions is not expected to cumulatively increase the serious injury or mortalityof Pacific stocks impacted by fisheries interactions as proposed in the 2007 LOF.6.3.2 Vessel TrafficShip strikes, or ship collisions with whales are a recognized source of whale mortality worldwide. Of the11 species known to be hit by ships, the most frequently reported is the fin whale (Laist et al., 2001). Onthe east coast of North America, ship strikes remain a significant threat to some whale populations. InNorth Atlantic right whales, for example, ship strikes are believed to be a significant factor limiting therecovery of this species (Knowlton & Kraus, 2001).A review of recent reports on ship strikes provides some insight regarding the types of whales, locationsand vessels involved, but also reveals significant gaps in the data. The Large Whale Ship Strike Databaseprovides a summary of the 292 worldwide confirmed or possible whale/ship collisions from 1975 through2002 (Jenson and Silber, 2003). The report notes that the database represents a minimum number ofcollisions, because the vast majority probably goes undetected or unreported.All types of ships can hit whales, and much of the time the animal is either seen too late, not observeduntil the collision occurs, or not detected. The ability of a ship to avoid a collision and to detect acollision depends on a variety of factors, including environmental conditions, ship design, size, andmanning.Note that smaller ships, such as Navy destroyers and Coast Guard cutters, have a number of advantagesfor avoiding ship strike as compared to most merchant vessels.The Navy and Coast Guard ships have their bridges positioned forward, offering goodvisibility ahead of the bow.Crew size is much larger than merchant ships, and there are dedicated lookouts posted duringeach watch.These vessels are generally twin screw and much more maneuverable than single screwcommercial craft.February 2007 6-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 6Due to smaller ship size and higher deck manning, Navy and Coast Guard vessels are likelyto detect any strike that does occur, and these agencies’ standard operating proceduresinclude reporting of ship strikes.Overall, the percentages of Navy traffic relative to overall large shipping traffic are verysmall (on the order of 2%).NOAA continues to review all shipping activities and their relationship to cumulative effects, in particularon large whale species. According to the NOAA report, the factors that contribute to ship strikes ofwhales are not clear, nor is it understood why some species appear more vulnerable than others.Nonetheless, the number of known ship strikes indicates that deaths and injuries from ships and shippingactivities remain a threat to endangered large whale species, right whales in particular.6.3.3 Coastal Development ActivitiesHabitat loss and degradation is now acknowledged to be a significant threat to cetacean populations(Kemp, 1996). The impact of coastal development on whales has not been thoroughly investigated.Habitat alteration has the potential to disrupt the social behavior, food supply, and health of whales. Suchactivities may stress the animals and cause them to avoid traditional feeding and breeding areas, ormigratory routes. The most serious threat to cetacean populations from habitat destruction may ultimatelyprove to be its impact on the lower trophic levels in their food chains (Kemp, 1996).6.3.4 Environmental Contamination and BiotoxinsInsufficient information is available to determine how, or at what levels and in what combinations,environmental contaminants may affect cetaceans (Marine Mammal Commission [MMC], 2003). Thereis growing evidence that high contaminant burdens are associated with several physiologicalabnormalities, including skeletal deformations, developmental effects, reproductive and immunologicaldisorders, and hormonal alterations (Reijnders and Aguilar, 2002). It is possible that anthropogenicchemical contaminants initially cause immunosuppression, rendering whales susceptible to opportunisticbacterial, viral, and parasitic infection (De Swart et al., 1995).Several mortality events (die-offs) have been reported for cetaceans. Biotoxins, viruses, bacteria, or ElNiño events have been implicated in recent mass mortality events (Domingo et al., 2002). A massmortality event for humpback whales, apparently associated with biotoxins, occurred along the beaches ofMassachusetts in 1987 through 1988. Geraci et al. (1989) concluded that the whales had died fromsaxitoxin poisoning after consumption of Atlantic mackerel containing the toxin. During the summer of2003, 17 humpback whales, 3 fin whales, 1 minke whale, 1 long finned pilot whale, and 3 whales ofundetermined species were found dead in the vicinity of Georges Bank. Although a biotoxin (saxitoxin)was found in several samples collected, it was not at lethal levels. Domoic acid was also detected andsuspected as a probable cause, but because no brain samples were collected the role of this biotoxin couldnot be confirmed (MMC, 2004).6.3.5 Other Navy Training Activities at SeaCurrently, other Navy training activities that occur at sea are listed in Table 6.3-1. Table 6.3-2summarizes major range events.6-3 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 6Table 6.3-1. Navy Training OperationsOperationsLocation/OPAREA(s)SOCAL OPAREAsInsertion/ExtractionLeon_DZSINKEX W-291Gunnery Operation (S-S)FLETA HOTASW Tracking Operation – MPA W-291ASW Tracking Operation - Surface W-291ACMPAPA AreasAD Operations W-291AAM Operations W-291EC Ops W-291Gunnery Operation (S-A)FLETA HOTMissile Operation (S-A) W-291San Clemente IslandInsertion/ExtractionSHOBAMCM/Small Object AvoidanceKingfisherUnderwater DemolitionsSWAT-2Mining OperationMTRLand DemolitionsSWAT-1Visit Board Search and Seizure 3803Expeditionary RaidWest CoveDirect ActionSHOBANSW OpsSCIOTBSHOBAGunnery Operation (A-S)SOARASM OperationLTR1,2Bombing Operation (Sea)SOARTorpedo Operation (Sub-S)SOARGunnery Operation (S-S)SOARASW Tracking Operation - HeloSOARASW Tracking Operation - MPASOARASW Tracking Operation - SubSOARASW Tracking Operation - SurfaceSOARTorpedo Operation - HeloSOARTorpedo Operation - MPASOARTorpedo Operation - SubSOARFebruary 2007 6-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 6OperationsTorpedo Operation - SurfaceLocation/OPAREA(s)SOARAD Operations W-291EC OpsMissile Operation (A-G)Bombing Operation (Land)Missile Operation (S-A)CASFiring Operation (Land)Laser TargetingMarksmanshipCSARFinal Battle ProblemSilver Strand Training ComplexMine NeutralizationAmphibious OperationsSPECWAROPSConstruct, Maintain, and Operate LogisticsOver-The-ShoreMission Area QualPhysical Fitness Qual TrainingCommunicate InformationCamp Pendleton Offshore OPAREAsEWRSHOBASHOBAMSLXSHOBASHOBALTR1,2SWAT1,2,4VC-3SHOBASSTCSSTCSSTCSSTCSSTCSSTCSSTCAmphibious OperationsCPAAAPoint Mugu Sea RangeGunnery Operation (S-S)ACMAD OperationsAAM OperationsEC OpsGunnery Operation (S-A)Missile Operation (S-A)Direct ActionGunnery Operation (A-S)ASM OperationsEC OpsLaser TargetingPMSRPMSRPMSRPMSRPMSRPMSRPMSRPMSRPMSRPMSRPMSRPMSR6-5 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 6Table 6.3-2. Major Range EventsOperationsMajor Range EventsMITT/IAC IICOMPTUEXJTFEXSurging OperationESGINT/EFEXJTFEX CERTEX EFEXAreaSCIRCSCIRC, PMSRAll SOCAL& PMSRSCISHOBASHOBA6.4 MARINE FISH CUMULATIVE IMPACTSCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities would result in an insignificant contribution in the overall health andviability of commercial, recreational, and other fish stocks. Although underwater detonations could havean affect on individual fish, these activities would occur infrequently and in sandy bottom areas. Theywould not occur in kelp forest areas or rocky bottom habitat. Therefore, the incremental impacts of theNo Action Alternative and Proposed Action would be localized and temporary and would not have anysignificant contribution to the cumulative effects on marine fish or their habitat when added to other past,present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions.6.5 MARINE MAMMAL CUMULATIVE IMPACTSThe analysis of potential effects of mid-frequency active sonar from COMPTUEX/JTFEX training eventsdetermined there is a potential for incidental Level B harassment of marine mammals as well as a limitedpotential for Level A harassment of beaked whale species and common dolphins.It is possible that harassment in any form may cause a stress response (Fair and Becker, 2000). Cetaceanscan exhibit some of the same stress symptoms as found in terrestrial mammals (Curry, 1999).Disturbance from ship traffic, noise from ships, aircraft, and/or exposure to biotoxins and anthropogeniccontaminants may stress animals, weakening their immune systems, making them more vulnerable toparasites and diseases that normally would not be fatal. It is possible that the temporary harassmentincidents associated with COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities would result in a minimal incrementalcontribution to cumulative impacts on marine mammals. The Protective Measures identified in Chapter 5would be implemented for COMPTUEX/JTFEX in order to minimize any potential adverse effects tomarine mammals. Impacts from the No Action Alternative and Proposed Action are not likely to affectthe species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival. Therefore, the incrementalimpacts of the No Action Alternative and Proposed Action would not have any significant contribution tothe cumulative effects on marine mammals when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeablefuture actions.February 2007 6-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 7CHAPTER 7POSSIBLE CONFLICTS BETWEEN THE ACTION AND THEOBJECTIVES OF FEDERAL, REGIONAL, STATE, AND LOCAL PLANS,POLICIES, AND CONTROLSVarious Federal and State laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, and policies are pertinent toimplementation of the No Action Alternative and Proposed Action. Table 7-1 provides a summary ofenvironmental compliance for the No Action Alternative and Proposed Action. Based on the EA/OEA’sevaluation of the No Action and Proposed Action with respect to consistency to land use andenvironmental guidelines for the southern California area, implementation of the No Action Alternative orProposed Action would not conflict with the objectives of Federal, regional, state, and local land useplans, policies, and controls.Table 7-1. Summary of Environmental Compliance for the No Action and Proposed ActionAlternativesPlans, Policies, and Controls Responsible Agency Status of ComplianceNational Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C § 4321 etseq.)The Council on Environmental Quality(CEQ) Regulations for Implementing theProcedural Provisions of NEPA (Title 40C.F.R. § 1500-1508)Department of the Navy Procedures forImplementing NEPA (32 C.F.R. 775)Executive Order 12114 (EO 12114),Environmental Effects Abroad of MajorFederal ActionsClean Air Act, 42 USC 7401 et seq.Clean Air Act (CAA) General ConformityAnalysis in order to make anapplicability determination pursuant tothe General Conformity Rule(40 C.F.R. § 93[B])State Implementation Plan (SIP)Department of the NavyDepartment of the NavyU.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency(USEPA)South Coast Air QualityManagement District(SCAQMD)The Proposed Action would not result insignificant impacts.The Proposed Action would not result insignificant harm to the global commons.The Proposed Action would result in no long-termincreases in emissions. Emissions the ProposedAction would be below the de minimis thresholds.Clean Water Act(33 USC 1344)U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency(USEPA)Neither a Section 401, 402, or 404 (b) (1) permitin compliance with the Clean Water Act nor aSection 10 permit in compliance with the Riverand Harbors Act is required.7-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 7Plans, Policies, and Controls Responsible Agency Status of ComplianceCoastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)(16 C.F.R. § 1451 et seq.)Magnuson-Stevens FisheryConservation and Management Act(16 U.S.C. § 1801-1802)California CoastalCommissionNational Marine FisheriesService (NMFS)A Coastal Consistency Determination (CCD) wasprepared in compliance with the CZMA, whichstates that Federal actions must be consistent tothe maximum extent practicable with theenforceable policies of approved state coastalmanagement programs. Applicable sections ofthe California Coastal Act (CCA) of 1976 (14California Code of Regulations [C.C.R.] § 13001et seq.) were thoroughly analyzed against theproposed action. The Navy determined thattraining activities conducted in SOCAL OPAREAduring COMPTUEX and JTFEX are consistent tothe maximum extent practicable with theenforceable policies of the California CoastalManagement Program (CCMP), pursuant to therequirements of CZMA.The CCD focused on five (5) operations that hadan effect on coastal use or resources out of a totalof forty-five (45) operations included inJTFEX/COMPTUEX. (15 C.F.R. 930.39 (a-e)).The No Action Alternative and the ProposedAction will be conducted in a manner that isconsistent to the maximum extent practicable withthe enforceable policies of the CCMP.The Proposed Action would not adversely affectEFH and will not decrease the available area orquality of EFH.February 2007 7-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 7Plans, Policies, and Controls Responsible Agency Status of ComplianceEndangered Species Act(16 U.S.C. § 1531)Department of the NavyU.S. Fish and WildlifeService (USFWS)National Marine FisheriesService (NMFS)The EA/OEA analyzes potential effects to specieslisted under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).In accordance with ESA requirements, the Navycompleted consultation under Section 7 of theESA with the National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS) on the potential that COMPTUEX/JTFEXactivities may affect listed species in the actionarea. In concluding the Section 7 consultation,NMFS issued a Biological Opinion (BO) (February9, 2007) finding that conduct of the JTFEX andCOMPTUEX may affect but are not likely toadversely affect the white abalone (Haliotissorenseni), four sea turtles (loggerhead [Carettacaretta]; leatherback [Dermochelys coriacea];eastern Pacific green [Chelonia agassizi]; andolive ridley [Lepidochelys olivacea]), listed fish(Chinook salmon [Oncorhynchus tshawytscha],steelhead [Oncorhynchus mykiss], and greensturgeon [Acipenser medirostris]), the NorthPacific right whale (Eubalaena japonica), theSouthern Resident killer whale (Orcinus orca), orthe Stellar sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus). Theopinion further concludes that conduct of theseexercises will not likely result in fitnessconsequences to the blue whale (Balaenopteramusculus) and is not likely to jeopardize thecontinued existence of the fin whale(Balaenoptera physalus), the sei whale(Balaenoptera borealis), the humpback whale(Megaptera novaeangliae), the sperm whale(Physeter macrocephalus) or the Guadalupe furseal (Arctocephalus townsendi). In addition,NMFS issued the Navy an incidental takestatement requiring terms and conditions to beimplemented in order to be exempt from theprohibitions of Section 9 of the ESA. Inaccordance with these terms and conditions theNavy will implement “measures to reduce theprobability of exposing” any endangeredmammals, implement a monitoring program inassociation with COMPTUEX/JTFEX to evaluateassumptions contained in the Biological Opinion,and to provide NMFS with reports (verbal andwritten) regarding the observed marine mammalsduring the exercises. Land-based activities will beconducted in accordance with existing biologicalopinions. Based on receipt of the BO, the Navyconcludes that no significant impacts to Federallylistedspecies will occur as a result ofCOMPTUEX/JTFEX.COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities using terrestrialranges adhere to standard operating proceduresdeveloped in accordance with INRMPs andexisting BOs.7-3 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 7Plans, Policies, and Controls Responsible Agency Status of ComplianceMarine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)(16 U.S.C. § 1431 et seq.)The National Marine Sanctuaries Act,Title 16 U.S.C. Chapter 32 Sections1431 et. seq., at Section 304 (d) (1-4).The Sikes Act of 1960, 16 U.S.C. 670a-670o, as amended by the Sikes ActImprovement Act of 1997, Pub. L. No.105-85, requires, at Section 101 (a),military installations, except thosewithout significant natural resources, toprepare and implement integratedplans.National Marine FisheriesService (NMFS)National Oceanic andAtmosphericAdministrationDepartment of DefenseNo incidental harassment of marine mammals isexpected as a result of underwater detonations.The predicted incidents of harassment from theacoustic modeling were considered in the contextof the mitigation measures in Chapter 5. As aresult, takes of marine mammals associated withunderwater detonations are not reasonablyforeseeable.As a result of acoustic effects associated withmid-frequency active sonar use, the proposedaction may result in incidental harassment ofmarine mammals. No adverse effects on theannual rates of recruitment or survival of any ofthe species and stocks assessed in this documentare expected. In addition, the mitigation measurespresented in Chapter 5 result in the action havingthe least practicable adverse impact on species orstocks.Compliance with the MMPA for this action issatisfied due to the issuance on January 23,2007, of a National Defense Exemption (NDE)from the Requirements of the MMPA for CertainDoD Military Readiness Activities That EmployMid-Frequency Active Sonar or ImprovedExtended Echo Ranging Sonobuoys (NDE).The 2007 NDE further stipulates that all exemptedmilitary readiness activities employing midfrequencyactive sonar shall employ the "Mid-Frequency Active Sonar Mitigation Measuresduring Major Training Exercises or withinEstablished DoD Maritime Ranges andEstablished Operating Areas." As detailed inChapter 5, these measures will be implementedas part of the Proposed Action.The Proposed Action has no effect on sanctuaryresources in the off-shore environment ofSouthern California where the proposed action willtake place, to include resources of the ChannelIslands National Marine Sanctuary. As theproposed action is not likely to destroy, cause theloss of, or injure any sanctuary resource, there isno required review of agency actions underSection 304.The Proposed Action would be implemented inaccordance with the management andconservation criteria developed within eachINRMP. Where a plan remains to be developed orup-dated, the action proponent would comply withall applicable law for the protection of naturalresources found on the installation or operatingarea.February 2007 7-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 7Plans, Policies, and Controls Responsible Agency Status of ComplianceNational Historic Preservation Act(NHPA) (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.)EO 12898, Federal Actions to AddressEnvironmental Justice in MinorityPopulations and Low-IncomePopulations(59 Federal Register 7629)Department of the NavyDepartment of the NavyThe Proposed Action would have no effect onhistoric properties.The Proposed Action would not result indisproportionately high and adverse human healthor environmental effects on minority or lowincomepopulations.EO 13045, Protection of Children fromEnvironmental Health Risks and SafetyRisks(62 Federal Register 1985)Department of the NavyThe Proposed Action would not result indisproportionate risks to children fromenvironmental health risks or safety risks.7-5 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 71This Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 7-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 8CHAPTER 8OTHER NEPA CONSIDERATIONS8.1 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF NATURAL OR DEPLETABLERESOURCESNEPA requires that environmental analysis include identification of “…any irreversible and irretrievablecommitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented.”Irreversible and irretrievable resource commitments are related to the use of non-renewable resources andthe effects that the uses of these resources have on future generations. Irreversible effects primarily resultfrom the use or destruction of a specific resource (e.g., energy or minerals) that cannot be replaced withina reasonable time frame. Irretrievable resource commitments involve the loss in value of an affectedresource that cannot be restored as a result of the action (e.g., the disturbance of a cultural site).For the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action, most resource commitments are neither irreversiblenor irretrievable. Most impacts are short-term and temporary, or long lasting but negligible. Noculturally significant resources are known to occur in the area proposed for training activities. No habitatassociated with threatened or endangered species would be lost as result of implementation of the NoAction Alternative or Proposed Action. Since there would be no building or facility construction, theconsumption of materials typically associated with construction (e.g., concrete, metal, sand, fuel) wouldnot occur. Energy typically associated with construction activities would not be expended andirreversibly lost.Implementation of the No Action Alternative or Proposed Action would require fuels used by aircraft,ships, and ground-based vehicles. Since fixed- and rotary-wing flight and ship activities could increaserelative, total fuel use would increase. Fuel use by ground-based vehicles involved in training activitieswould also increase. Therefore, total fuel consumption would increase and this nonrenewable resourcewould be considered irreversibly lost.8.2 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES OF MAN’S ENVIRONMENT ANDMAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTIVITYNEPA requires an analysis of the relationship between a project’s short-term impacts on the environmentand of the effects that these impacts may have on the maintenance and enhancement of the long-termproductivity of the affected environment. Impacts that narrow the range of beneficial uses of theenvironment are of particular concern. This refers to the possibility that choosing one developmentoption reduces future flexibility in pursuing other options, or that giving over a parcel of land or otherresource to a certain use eliminates the possibility of other uses being performed at the site. Since theCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities are conducted within existing military OPAREAs, associated activitiesare compatible with other activities that occur in the area. Implementation of the No Action Alternativeor Proposed Action would not result in any impacts that would reduce environmental productivity,permanently narrow the range of beneficial uses of the environment, or pose long-term risks to health,safety, or the general welfare of the public.8-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 8This Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 8-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 9CHAPTER 9PREPARERSKaren M. WallerProgram ManagerSRS Technologies, San Diego, CaliforniaB.S. Public and Environmental AffairsMore than 19 years experience in preparing Navy NEPA Compliance Documents.Tammy J. MitnikDeputy Program ManagerSRS Technologies, Colorado Springs, ColoradoM.B.A. Business AdministrationB.S. Justice and Public SafetyA Certified Environmental Professional and Registered Environmental Manager with over 20 yearsenvironmental planning experience.Philip H. Thorson, Ph.D.Senior BiologistSRS Technologies, Santa Cruz, CaliforniaPh. D. BiologyB.A. BiologyExperienced research biologist with over 25 years experience studying various aspects of marinemammal acoustics and acoustic risk assessment, behavior, and population dynamics.Kerry A. SawyerEnvironmental PlannerSRS Technologies, Arlington, VirginiaM.E.S.M. Environmental Science & ManagementB.A. Social Science3 years experience with environmental analysis and policy and 10 years experience with militaryspace and range operations.Matthew HahnMilitary Operations SpecialistSRS Technologies, San Diego, CaliforniaB.A. Business15 years experience in military operations including extensive range and exercise development andsupport for naval and joint exercises.Steffanie ChanTerrestrial BiologistSRS Technologies, Arlington, VirginiaB.S. BiologyB.B.A. International Business5 years experience in endangered species management and trade policy; ESA Section 7consultations and NEPA documentation.9-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 9Bruce CampbellPrincipal ScientistParsons Infrastructure & Technology, Encinitas, CaliforniaM.S. Environmental ManagementB.S. Environmental Biology26 years experience in environmental impact analysis, project management, report preparation, andnatural resources management.Valorie L. ThompsonAir Quality SpecialistScientific Resources Associated, San Diego, CaliforniaPh. D. Chemical EngineeringM.S. Chemical EngineeringB.S. ChemistryOver 15 years experience in air quality studies and analysis for environmental planning projects forgovernment, commercial, and industrial clients.William CrossMarine BiologistLGL Limited, Ontario, CanadaM.Sc Marine SciencesMarine Biology/Marine Fish and Sea Turtles/Marine Mammals Specialist.February 2007 9-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10CHAPTER 10REFERENCESAburto, A., D.J., Roundtry, and D.L. Danzer, 1997. Behavioral response of blue whales to active signals. TechnicalReport, Naval Command, Control and Ocean Surveillance Center, San Diego, CA.Andersen, S., 1970. Auditory sensitivity of the harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena. Investigations on Cetacea2:255-259.André, M., M. Terada, and Y. Watanabe, 1997. “Sperm Whale (Physeter macrocephalus) Behavioral ResponseAfter the Playback of Artificial Sounds.” Reports of the 15 International Whaling Commission 47:499-504.Angliss, R.P. and K.L. Lodge, 2004. Alaska Marine Mammal Stock Assessments, 2003. NOAA TechnicalMemorandum NMFS-AFSC-144. Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service.Angliss, R.P., and R. Outlaw, 2005. Draft Alaska Marine Mammal Stock Assessments, 2005. Alaska FisheriesScience Center, National Marine Fisheries Service.Anonymous. 2002. Baffling boing identified. Science 298:2125.Anonymous, 1970. Report of the Working Group to Study Characteristics of Fishing Vessels in Terms of theirEffect on Fishing Effort Measurement. ICES C.M. 1970/B:3.Antonelis, G.A. and C.H. Fiscus, 1980. The pinnipeds of the California Current. CalCOFI Reports 21:68-78.Apple, R.M. and R. Allen, 1996. Cultural Resource Phase I Survey Inventory Report.Apple, R.M., C. Dolan, and Roy Pettus, 2003. San Clemente Island Cultural Resources Summary Report. ContractNumber N68711096-C-21-64, Subconsultant Contract SRS-NPB98-002. Prepared for SRS Technologies,Newport Beach. Prepared by KEA Environmental, Inc. San Diego. On file, Navy Region SouthwestEnvironmental Department, Fleet ASW Training Center, San Diego, California.Au, W.W.L., 2000. Hearing in whales and dolphins: An overview. Pages 1-42 in W.W.L. Au, A.N. Popper, andR.R. Fay, eds. Hearing by whales and dolphins New York: Springer-Verlag.Au, W.W.L., 1993. The sonar of dolphins. Springer-Verlag, New York. 277 pp.Au, W.W.L., J.K.B. Ford, J.K. Horne, K.A. Newman Allman, 2004. Echolocation signals of free-ranging killerwhales (Orcinus orca) and modeling of foraging for Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchust shawytscha). Journal ofthe Acoustical Society of America 115:901-909.Au, W.W.L., J. Darling, and K. Andrews, 2001. High-frequency harmonics and source level of humpback whalesongs. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 110:2770.Au, D.W.K. and W.L. Perryman, 1985. Dolphin habitats in the eastern tropical Pacific. Fishery Bulletin 83(4):623-643.Babushina, E.S., 1999. Sound reception in marine mammals: Effects of stimulus parameters and transmissionpathways. Biophysics 44:1064-1071. Translated from Biofizika 44:1101-1108.Babushina, E.S., G.L. Zaslavsky, and L.I. Yurkevich, 1991. Air and underwater hearing of the northern fur sealaudiograms and auditory frequency discrimination. Biofizika 36:904-907. (In Russian with English abstract).Baird, R.W., 2005. Sightings of dwarf (Kogia sima) and pygmy (K. breviceps) sperm whales from the mainHawaiian Islands. Pacific Science 59:461-466.Baird, R.W., D.J. McSweeney, D.L. Webster, A.M. Gorgone, and A.D. Ligon, 2003. Studies of odontocetepopulation structure in Hawaiian waters: Results of a survey through the main Hawaiian Islands in May andJune 2003. Report prepared for the National Marine Fisheries Service, National Marine Mammal Laboratory,Seattle, Washington.Baird, R.W., A.M. Gorgone, A.D. Ligon, and S.K. Hooker, 2001. Mark-recapture abundance estimate of bottlenosedolphins (Tursiops truncatus) around Maui and Lanai, Hawaii, during the winter of 2001. Report preparedunder Contract #40JGNFO-00262 for the National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, California.10-1 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Ballance, L.T., 2002. “Sighting of a north Pacific right whale, documented in the weekly report of the NOAA surveyvessel McArthur.” Accessed on 27 February 2006 at:http://swfsc.nmfs.noaa.gov/PRD/2002%20Cruises/NorthPac/WeeklyReports/weekly8.pdf.Ballance, L.T. and R.L. Pitman, 1998. Cetaceans of the western tropical Indian Ocean: Distribution, relativeabundance, and comparisons with cetacean communities of two other tropical ecosystems. Marine MammalScience 14(3):429-459.Barlow, J., 1999. Trackline detection probability for long-diving whales. Pages 209-221 in G.W. Garner, S.C.Amstrup, J.L. Laake, B.F.J. Manly, L.L. McDonald, and D.G. Robertson, eds. Marine mammal survey andassessment methods. Brookfield, Vermont: A.A. Balkema.Barlow, J., 1997. Preliminary estimates of cetacean abundance off California, Oregon and Washington based on a1996 ship survey and comparisons of passing and closing modes. NMFS-SWFSC Admin. Rep. LJ-97-11.Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Barlow, J., 2003. Cetacean abundance in Hawaiian waters during summer/fall of 2002. Southwest Fisheries ScienceCenter Administrative Report LJ-03-13. La Jolla, California: National Marine Fisheries Service.Barlow, J., 1995. The abundance of cetaceans in California waters. Part 1: ship surveys in summer and fall of 1991.Fisheries Bulletin 93:1-14.Barlow, J., 1994. Abundance of large whales in California coastal waters: a comparison of ship surveys in 1979/80and in 1991. Reports of the International Whaling Commission 44:399-406.Barlow, J., S. Rankin, E. Zele, and J. Appler, 2004. Marine mammal data collected during the Hawaiian Islandscetacean and ecosystem assessment survey (HICEAS) conducted aboard the NOAA ships McArthur andDavid Starr Jordan, July–December 2002. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-362. SouthwestFisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Barlow, J., P.S. Hill, K.A. Forney, and D.P. DeMaster, 1998. U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments:1998. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-258. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NationalMarine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Barlow, J. and T. Gerrodette, 1996. Abundance of cetaceans in California waters based on 1991 and 1993 shipsurveys. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-233. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NationalMarine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Barlow, J., P. Boveng, M.S. Lowry, B.S. Stewart, B.J. Le Boeuf, W.J. Sydeman, R.J. Jameson, S.G. Allen, andC.W. Oliver, 1993. Status of the northern elephant seal population along the U.S. west coast in 1992.Administrative Report LJ-93-01. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, LaJolla, CA.Barlow, J., K.A. Forney, P.S. Hill, R.L. Brownell Jr., J.V. Carretta, D.P. DeMaster, F. Julian, M.S. Lowry, T. Ragen,and R.R. Reeves, 1997. U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments: 1996. NOAA TechnicalMemorandum NMFS-SWFSC-248. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, LaJolla, CA.Barlow, J. and T. Gerrodette, 1996. Abundance of cetaceans in California waters based on 1991 and 1993 shipsurveys. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-233. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NationalMarine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Barlow, J., P.S. Hill, K.A. Forney, and D.P. DeMaster, 1998. U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments:1998. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-258. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NationalMarine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Barlow, J., S. Rankin, E. Zele, and J. Appler, 2004. Marine mammal data collected during the Hawaiian Islandscetacean and ecosystem assessment survey (HICEAS) conducted aboard the NOAA ships McArthur andDavid Starr Jordan, July–December 2002. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-362. SouthwestFisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.February 2007 10-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Barros, N.B., D.A. Duffield, P.H. Ostrom, D.K. Odell and V.R. Cornish, 1998. Nearshore vs. offshore ecotypedifferentiation of Kogia breviceps and K. simus based on hemoglobin, morphometric and dietary analyses.Abstract. World Marine Mammal Science Conference, Monaco, 20-24 January.Bartholomew, G.A., and N.E. Collias. 1962. The role of vocalization in the social behavior of the northern elephantseal. Animal Behaviour 10:7-14.Bartol, S.M., J.A. Musick, and M.L. Lenhardt. 1999. Auditory evoked potentials of the loggerhead sea turtle(Caretta caretta). Copeia 1999:836-840.Baumgartner, M.F., 1997. The distribution of Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus) with respect to the physiographyof the northern Gulf of Mexico. Marine Mammal Science 13:614-638.Baumgartner, M.F., and B.R. Mate. 2003. Summertime foraging ecology of North Atlantic right whales. MarineEcology Progress Series 264:123-135.Baumgartner, M.F., K.D. Mullin, L.N. May, and T.D. Leming, 2001. Cetacean habitats in the northern Gulf ofMexico. Fishery Bulletin 99:219-239.Beamish, P., and E. Mitchell. 1973. Short pulse length audio frequency sounds recorded in the presence of a minkewhale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata). Deep-Sea Research 20:375-386.Bernard, H.J. and S.B. Reilly, 1999. Pilot whales Globicephala Lesson, 1828. In: Ridgway SH, Harrison RJ (eds)Handbook of marine mammals, Vol 6. Academic Press, San Diego, p 245–279.Best, P.B. and C.H. Lockyer, 2002. Reproduction, growth and migrations of sei whales Balaenoptera borealis offthe west coast of South Africa in the 1960s. South African Journal of Marine Science 24:111-133.Bibikov, N.G., 1992. Auditory brainstem responses in the harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena). Pages 197-211 inJ. Thomas, R.A. Kastelein, and A. Ya. Supin, eds. Marine mammal sensory systems. New York: PlenumPress.Bigg, M.A., 1981. Harbour seal Phoca vitulina Linnaeus, 1758 and Phoca largha Pallas, 1811. Pages 1-27 in S.H.Ridgway and R. Harrison, eds. Handbook of marine mammals, Volume 2: Seals. San Diego: Academic Press.Black, N.A., A. Schulman-Janiger, R.L. Ternullo, and M. Guerrero-Ruiz, 1997. Killer whales of California andwestern Mexico: A catalog of photo-identified individuals. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-247. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Bonnell, M.L. and M.D. Dailey, 1993. Marine mammals. Pages 604-681 in M. D. Dailey, D. J. Reish, and J. W.Anderson (eds.), Ecology of the Southern California Bight. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.926 pp.Bonnell, M. L. and R. G. Ford, 1987. California sea lion distribution: a statistical analysis of aerial transect data.Journal of Wildlife Management 51:13-20.Braham, H.W., 1984. Distribution and migration of gray whales in Alaska. Pages 249-266 in M. L. Jones, S.L.Swartz, and S. Leatherwood (eds.), The gray whale, Eshcrichtius robustus. San Diego: Academic Press.600 pp.Braham, H.W., 1991. Marine mammals. Pages 77-95, in Loh-Lee Low (eds.), Status of living marine resources offAlaska as assessed in 1991, U.S. Department of Commerce, Seattle. NOAA Technical Memorandum. NMFS-F/NWC-211.Braham, H.W. and D.W. Rice, 1984. The right whale (Eubalaena glacialis). Marine Fisheries Review 46(4):38-44.Brownell, Jr., R.L., P.J. Clapham, T. Miyashita, and T. Kasuya, 2001. Conservation status of North Pacific rightwhales. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, Special Issue 2:269-286.Bureau of Land Management, 2006. “Public Lands USA: Definitions of Plant Status.”http://www.blm.gov/ca/pa/ssp/Main_Status.htlml.______, 2004. Resource Management Plan/Record of Decision for the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR)and Environmental Impact Statement, July.10-3 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Burgess, W.C., P.L. Tyack, B.J. Le Boeuf, and D.P. Costa, 1998. A programmable acoustic recording tag and firstresults from free-ranging northern elephant seals. Deep-Sea Research II 45:1327-1351.Burtenshaw, J.C., E.M. Oleson, J.A. Hildebrand, M.A. McDonald, R.K. Andrew, B.M. Howe, and J.A. Mercer,2004. Acoustic and satellite remote sensing of blue whale seasonality and habitat in the northeast Pacific.Deep Sea Research II 15:967-986.Calambokidis, J., 1995. Blue whales off California. Whalewatcher, Journal of the American Cetacean Society29(1):3-7.Calambokidis, J., E. Oleson, M. McDonald, B. Burgess, J. Francis, G. Marshall, M. Bakhtiari, and J. Hildebrand,2003. Feeding and vocal behavior of blue whales determined through simultaneous visual-acoustic monitoringand deployment of suction-cap attached tags. Abstract in Abstracts, Fifteenth Biennial Conference on theBiology of Marine Mammals; 2003 14–19 December; Greensboro, NC. p. 27.Calambokidis, J., G.H. Steiger, and J. Barlow, 1993. Estimates of humpback and blue whale abundance along theU.S. west coast using mark-recapture of identified individuals. Abstract in Abstracts of the 10th BiennialConference on the Biology of Marine Mammals; 1993 November; Galveston, TX. p. 34.Calambokidis, J., G.H. Steiger, J.C. Cubbage, K.C. Balcomb, C. Ewald, S. Kruse, R. Wells, and R. Sears, 1990.Sightings and movements of blue whales off central California, 1986–88 from photo-identification ofindividuals. Reports of the International Whaling Commission, Special Issue 12:343-348.Calambokidis, J., G.H. Steiger, D.K. Ellifrit, B.L. Troutman, and C.E. Bowlby, 2004. Distribution and abundance ofhumpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and other marine mammals off the northern Washington coast.Fishery Bulletin 102:563-580.Calambokidis, J., G.H. Steiger, J.M. Straley, L.M. Herman, S. Cerchio, D.R. Salden, J. Urbán R., J.K. Jacobsen, O.von Ziegesar, K.C. Balcomb, C.M. Gabrielle, M.E. Dahlheim, S. Uchida, G. Ellis, Y. Miyamura, P.L. deGuevara P., M. Yamaguchi, F. Sato, S.A. Mizroch, L. Schlender, K. Rasmussen, J. Barlow, and T.J. Quinn II,2001. Movements and population structure of humpback whales in the North Pacific. Marine Mammal Science17(4):769-794.Caldwell, D.K. and M.C. Caldwell, 1989. Pygmy sperm whale Kogia breviceps (de Blainville, 1838): dwarf spermwhale Kogia simus (Owen, 1866). Pages 235-260, in S. H. Ridgway and R. Harrison (eds.), Handbook ofmarine mammals. Vol. 4. River dolphins and the larger toothed whales. London, U.K.: Academic Press.442 pp.California Environmental Protection Agency and State Water Resources Control Board, 2001. Ocean Waters ofCalifornia Water Quality Control Plan.California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB), 2002. List of Impaired Water Bodies._______, 1994. Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin. As amended through 2006.Campbell, G.S., R.C. Gisiner, D.A. Helweg, and L.L. Milette, 2002. Acoustic identification of female Steller sealions (Eumetopias jubatus). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 111:2920-2928.Carretta, J.V., K.A. Forney, M.M. Muto, J. Barlow, J. Baker, B. Hanson, and M.S. Lowry, 2005. U.S. PacificMarine Mammal Stock Assessments: 2004. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-375. SouthwestFisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA. 316 pp.Carretta, J.V., K.A. Forney, M.M. Muto, J. Barlow, J. Baker, B. Hanson, and M.S. Lowry, 2006. U.S. PacificMarine Mammal Stock Assessments: 2005. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-388. SouthwestFisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA. 317 pp.Carretta, J.V., K.A. Forney, and J. Barlow, 1995. Report of 1993–1994 marine mammal aerial surveys conductedwithin the U.S. Navy Outer Sea Test Range off southern California. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-217. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Carretta, J.V., M.S. Lowry, C.E. Stinchcomb, M.S. Lynn, and R.E. Cosgrove, 2000. Distribution and abundance ofmarine mammals at San Clemente Island and surrounding offshore waters: results from aerial and groundsurveys in 1998 and 1999. Administrative Report LJ-00-02. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NationalMarine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.February 2007 10-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Carretta, J.V., J. Barlow, K.A. Forney, M.M. Muto, and J. Baker, 2001. U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal StockAssessments: 2001. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-317. Southwest Fisheries Science Center,National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Carretta, J.V., J. M.M. Muto, J. Barlow, J. Baker, K.A. Forney, and M. Lowry, 2002. U.S. Pacific Marine MammalStock Assessments: 2002. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-358. Southwest Fisheries ScienceCenter, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Carretta, J.V., K.A. Forney, M.M. Muto, J. Barlow, J. Baker and M. Lowry, 2004. U.S. Pacific Marine MammalStock Assessments: 2003. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-358. Southwest Fisheries ScienceCenter, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Carretta, J.V., K.A. Forney, M.M. Muto, J. Barlow, J. Baker, B. Hanson, and M.S. Lowry, 2005. U.S. PacificMarine Mammal Stock Assessments: 2005. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-375. SouthwestFisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.CeTAP, 1982. A Characterization of Marine Mammals and Turtles in the Mid- and North Atlantic Areas of the U.S.Outer Continental Shelf. Final Report of the Cetacean and Turtle Assessment Program, University of RhodeIsland, Kingston, RI. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Washington, DC. ContractAA551-CT-48. 450 pp.Charif, R.A., D.K. Mellinger, K.J. Dunsmore, K.M. Fristrup, and C.W. Clark, 2002. Estimated source levels of finwhale (Balaenoptera physalus) vocalizations: Adjustments for surface interference. Marine Mammal Science18:81-98.Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), 2000. OPNAV Instruction 3000.13B, Personnel Tempo of Operations. 11February.City of San Diego, 2005. Annual Receiving Waters Monitoring Report for the South Bay Ocean Outfall, 2004.Clapham, P.J. and J.G. Mead, 1999. Megaptera novaeangliae. Mammalian Species 604:1-9.Clapham, P.J., C. Good, S.E. Quinn, R.R. Reeves, J.E. Scarff, and R.L. Brownell, Jr., 2004. Distribution of NorthPacific right whales (Eubalaena japonica) as shown by 19th and 20th century whaling catch and sightingrecords. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 6(1):1-6.Clark, C.W. and K.M. Fristrup, 1997. Whales ‘95: A combined visual and acoustic survey of blue and fin whales offSouthern California. Reports of the International Whaling Commission 47:583-600.Clark, C.W., P. Tyack., and W.T. Ellison, 1998. Quicklook/low-frequency sound scientific research program/Phase1: Responses of blue and fin whales to SURTASS LFA, Southern California Bight, 5 September – 21 October,1997. Report from Bioacoustics Research Program, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY; WHOI, Woods Hole,MA; and Marine Acoustics Inc., Middletown, RI. P. 36.Corkeron, P.J., and S.M. Van Parijs. 2001. Vocalizations of eastern Australian Risso’s dolphins, Grampus griseus.Canadian Journal of Zoology 79:160-164.Crane, N.L., and K. Lashkari, 1996. Sound production of gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, along their migrationroute: A new approach to signal analysis. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 100:1878-1886.Croll, D.A., B.R. Tershy, R.P. Hewitt, D.A. Demer, P.C. Fiedler, S.E. Smith, W. Armstrong, J.M. Popp, T.Kiekhefer, V.R. Lopez, J. Urban, and D. Gendron, 1998. An integrated approach to the foraging ecology ofmarine birds and mammals. Deep-Sea Research II 45:1353-1371.Croll, D.A., A. Acevedo-Gutiérrez, B.R. Tershy, and J. Urbán-Ramírez, 2001. The diving behavior of blue and finwhales: Is dive duration shorter than expected based on oxygen stores? Comparative Biochemistry andPhysiology Part A 129:797-809.Croll, D.A., C.W Clark,.A. Acevedo, B. Tershy, S. Flores, J. Gedamke, and J. Urban, 2002. Only male fin whalessing loud songs. Nature 417: 809.Cross, J.N., and L.G. Allen, 1993. Fishes. Pages 459-540 in M.D. Dailey, D.J. Reish, and J.W. Anderson,eds.Ecology of the Southern California Bight. Berkeley: University of California Press.10-5 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Crum, L.A., and Y. Mao, 1996. Acoustically enhanced bubble growth at low frequencies and its implications forhuman diver and marine mammal safety. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 99:2898-2907.Culik, B. , S. Koschinski1, N. Tregenza2, and G.M. Ellis. 2001. Reactions of harbor porpoises Phocoena phocoenaand herring Clupea harengus to acoustic alarms. Marine Ecology Progress Series. 211:255-260.Cummings, W.C., P.O. Thompson, and R. Cook, 1968. Underwater sounds of migrating gray whales, Eschrichtiusglaucus (Cope). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 44:1278-1281.Cummings, W. C., 1985. Bryde’s whale Balaenoptera edeni (Anderson, 1878). Pages 137-154 in S. H. Ridgway andR. Harrison (eds.), Handbook of marine mammals. Vol. 3. The Sirenians and baleen whales. London, U.K.:Academic Press. 362 pp.Curry, B.E. 1999. Stress in mammals: the potential influence of fishery-induced stress on dolphins in the easterntropical Pacific Ocean. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS, NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-260. SouthwestFisheries Science Center, La Jolla, CA, 121 pp.Dahlheim, M.E., H.D. Fisher, and J. Schempp, 1984. Sound production by the gray whale and ambient noise levelsin Laguna San Ignacio, Baja California Sur, Mexico. Pages 511-541 in M.L. Jones, S.L. Swartz, and S.Leatherwood, The gray whale, Eschrichtius robustus. San Diego: Academic Press.Dahlheim, M.E., and D.K. Ljungblad, 1990. Preliminary hearing study on gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) in thefield. Pages 335-346 in J. Thomas and R. Kastelein, eds. Sensory abilities of cetaceans: Laboratory and fieldevidence. New York: Plenum Press.Dahlheim, M.E., D. Ellifrit, and J. Swenson, 1997. Killer whales of southeast Alaska: a catalogue of photoidentifiedindividuals. Seattle, WA: Day Moon Press. 82 pp.Dahlheim, M.E., and J.E. Heyning, 1999. Killer whale Orcinus orca (Linnaeus, 1758). Pages 281-322 in S.H.Ridgway and R. Harrison, eds. Handbook of marine mammals. Volume 6: The second book of dolphins andthe porpoises. San Diego: Academic Press.Dailey, M.D., J.W. Anderson, D.J., Reish, and D.S. Gorsline, 1993. The Southern California Bight: Background andsetting. Pages 1-18 in M.D. Dailey, D.J. Reish, and J.W. Anderson, eds. Ecology of the SouthernCalifornia Bight. Berkeley: University of California Press.Dalebout, M.L., J.G. Mead, C.S. Baker, A.N. Baker, and A.L. van Helden, 2002. A new species of beaked whaleMesoplodon perrini spp. n. (Cetacea: Ziphiidae) discovered through phylogenetic analyses of mitochondrialDNA sequences. Marine Mammal Science 18(3):577-608.Dalecki, D., S.Z. Child, and C.H. Raeman, 2002. Lung damage from exposure to low-frequency underwater sound.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 111:2462A.Darling, J.D., 1984. Gray whales off Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Pages 267-287 in M.L. Jones, S.L.Swartz, and S. Leatherwood (eds.), The gray whale, Eschrichtius robustus. San Diego: Academic Press. 600pp.Davis, R.W., G.S. Fargion, N. May, T.D. Leming, M. Baumgartner, W.E. Evans, L.J. Hansen, and K. Mullin, 1998.Physical habitat of cetaceans along the continental slope in the north-central and western Gulf of Mexico.Marine Mammal Science 14(3):490-507.Dawson, S., J. Barlow, and D. Ljungblad, 1998. Sounds recorded from Baird’s beaked whale, Berardius bairdii.Marine Mammal Science 14:335-344.Defran, R.H. and D.W. Weller, 1999. Occurrence, distribution, site fidelity, and school size of bottlenose dolphins(Tursiops truncatus) off San Diego, California. Marine Mammal Science 15(2):366-380.Defran, R.H., D.W. Weller, D.L. Kelly, and M.A. Espinosa, 1999. Range characteristics of Pacific coast bottlenosedolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in the Southern California Bight. Marine Mammal Science 15(2):381-393.DeLong, R.L, 1982. Population Biology of Northern Fur Seals at San Miguel Island, California. Ph.D. Dissertation,University of California at Berkeley. 185 pp.February 2007 10-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Department of Defense (DoD) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2002. Integrated Natural ResourcesManagement Plan. Fact Sheet. March.De Swart, R. L., Ross, P. S., Timmerman, H. H., Hijman, W. C., De Ruiter, E., Liem, A. K. D., Brouwer, A., VanLoveren, H., Reijnders, P. J. H., Vos, J. G. and Osterhaus, A. D. M. E. (1995) Short-term fasting does notaggravate immunosuppression in harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) with high body burdens of orga-nochlorines.Chemosphere 31, 4289±4306.Dietz, R., J. Teilmann, M.-P.H. Jørgensen, and M.V. Jensen, 2002. Satellite tracking of humpback whales in WestGreenland. National Environmental Research Institute Technical Report 411:1-38. Copenhagen, Denmark:National Environmental Research Institute.Dohl, T.P., K.S. Norris, R.C. Guess, J.D. Bryant, and M.W. Honig, 1981. Summary of marine mammal and seabirdsurveys of the Southern California Bight area, 1975–1978. Volume III, Part II, Cetacea of the SouthernCalifornia Bight. Report from the Center for Coastal and Marine Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz,CA, for U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Washington, DC. 414 pp. NTIS PB81-248189.Dohl, T.P., R.C. Guess, M.L. Duman, and R.C. Helm, 1983. Cetaceans of central and northern California, 1980-1983: status, abundance and distribution. OCS Study MMS 84-0045. Report from the Center for MarineStudies, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA, for U.S. Minerals Management Service, Pacific RegionOCS, Los Angeles, CA. 284 pp. NTIS PB85-183861.Dolphin, W.F., 1987. Ventilation and dive patterns of humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, on their Alaskanfeeding grounds. Canadian Journal of Zoology 65:83-90.Domingo, M., Kennedy, S. and van Bressem, M. 2002. Marine mammal mass mortalities. pp. 425-456. In: Evans,P.G.H. and Raga, J.A. (eds.) Marine mammals: biological conservation, Kluwer, London.Department of the Navy (DON), 2002. Point Mugu Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas EnvironmentalImpact Statement. Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division. 712 pp.Donahue, M.A., W.L. Perryman, and J. L. Laake, 1995. Measurements of California gray whale day/night migrationpatterns with infrared sensors. Abstracts of the 11th Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals;1995 December; Orlando, FL. p. 32.Donovan, G. P., 1991. A review of IWC stock boundaries. Reports of the International Whaling Commission,Special Issue 13:39-68.D'Vincent, C.G., R.M. Nilson, and R.E. Hanna, 1985. Vocalization and coordinated feeding behavior of thehumpback whale in southeastern Alaska. Scientific Reports of the Whales Research Institute 36:41-47.Edds, P.L. and J.A.F. Macfarlane. 1987. Occurrence and general behavior of balaenopterid cetaceans summering inthe St. Lawrence Estuary, Canada. Bioacoustics. 1:131-149. 16.Estes, J.A. and R.J. Jameson, 1988. A double-survey estimate for sighting probability of sea otters in California.Journal of Wildlife Management 52:70-76.Evans, W.E., 1994. Common dolphin, white-bellied porpoise Delphinus delphis Linnaeus, 1758. Pages 191-224 inS.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison, eds. Handbook of marine mammals. Volume 5: The first book of dolphins.San Diego: Academic Press.Evans, G.H., and L.A. Miller. 2004. Proceedings of the Workshop on Active sonar and Cetaceans. EuropeanCetacean Society Newsletter. No. 42 Special Issue – February 2004. 21.Fahner, M., J. Thomas, K. Ramirez, and J. Boehm, 2004. Acoustic properties of echolocation signals by captivePacific white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens). Pages 53-59 in J.A. Thomas, C.F. Moss, and M.Vater, eds. Echolocation in bats and dolphins. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Fair, P.A. and P.R. Becker, 2000. Cetacean population density in the eastern Pacific Ocean: Analyzing patternswith predictive spFederal Interagency Committee on Noise, 1992. Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues.10-7 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Feldkamp, S.D., R.L. DeLong, and G.A. Antonelis. 1989. Diving patterns of California sea lions, Zalophuscalifornianus. Canadian Journal of Zoology 67:872-883.Ferguson, M.C. and J. Barlow, 2001. Spatial distribution and density of cetaceans in the eastern tropical PacificOcean based on summer/fall research vessel surveys in 1986-96. Administrative Report LJ-01-04. SouthwestFisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Ferrero, R.C., J. Hodder, and J. Cesarone, 1994. Recent strandings of rough-toothed dolphins (Steno bredanensis) onthe Oregon and Washington coasts. Marine Mammal Science 10(1):114-116.Ferrero, R.C. and W.A. Walker, 1996. Age, growth and reproductive patterns of the Pacific white-sided dolphin(Lagenorhynchus obliquidens) taken in high seas driftnets in the central North Pacific Ocean. CanadianJournal of Zoology 74(9):1673-1687.Fiedler, P.C., S.B. Reilly, R.P. Hewitt, D. Demer, V.A. Philbrick, S. Smith, W. Armstrong, D.A. Croll, B.R. Tershy,and B.R. Mate, 1998. Blue whale habitat and prey in the California Channel Islands. Deep-Sea Research II45:1781-1801.Finneran, J.J., C.E. Schlundt, D.A. Carder, J.A. Clark, J.A. Young, J.B. Gaspin, and S.H. Ridgway, 2000. Auditoryand behavioral responses of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and a beluga whale (Delphinapterusleucas) to impulsive sounds resembling distant signatures of underwater explosions. Journal of the AcousticalSociety of America. 108:417-431. 18.Finneran, J.J., D.A. Carder, and S.H. Ridgway, 2001. Temporary threshold shift (TTS) in bottlenose dolphinsTursiops truncatus exposed to tonal signals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1105:2749(A),142nd Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, Fort Lauderdale, FL. December. 22.Finneran, J.J., R. Dear, D.A. Carder, and S.H. Ridgway, 2002. Temporary shift in masked hearing thresholds inodontocetes after exposure to single underwater impulses from a seismic watergun. Journal of the AcousticalSociety of America. 111:2929-2940.Finneran, J.J., D.A. Carder, and S.H. Ridgway, 2003a. Temporary threshold shift measurements in bottlenosedolphins Tursiops truncatus, belugas Delphinapterus leucas, and California sea lions Zalophus californianus.Environmental Consequences of Underwater Sound (ECOUS) Symposium, San Antonio, TX, 12-16 May2003.Finneran, J.J., R. Dear, D.A. Carder and S.H. Ridgway, 2003b. Auditory and behavioral responses of California sealions (Zalophus californianus) to single underwater impulses from an arc-gap transducer. Journal of theAcoustic Society of America, 114:1667-1677.Finneran, J.J., and C.E. Schlundt, 2004. Effects of intense pure tones on the behavior of trained odontocetes. Spaceand Naval Warfare Systems Center, San Diego, Technical Document. September.Finneran, J.J., D.A. Carder, C.E. Schlundt and S.H. Ridgway. 2005. Temporary threshold shift in bottlenosedolphins (Tursiops truncatus) exposed to mid-frequency tones. Journal of Acoustical Society of America.118:2696-2705.Finney, D.J., 1971. Probit Analysis, Third Edition. London: Cambridge University Press. Goertner, J. F. 1982.Prediction of underwater explosion safe ranges for sea mammals. NSWC/WOL TR 82-188. SmithsonianInstitution Press, Silver Spring, Maryland.Fish, J.F. and C.W. Turl, 1976. Acoustic source levels of four species of small whales. NUC-TP 547, 14 pp.Fletcher, S., B.J. Le Boeuf, D.P. Costa, P.L. Tyack, and S.B. Blackwell, 1996. Onboard acoustic recording fromdiving northern elephant seals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 100:2531-2539.Ford, J.K.B., 2002. Killer whale Orcinus orca. Pages 669-676 in W.F. Perrin, B. Würsig, and J.G.M. Thewissen,eds. Encyclopedia of marine mammals. San Diego: Academic Press.Forney, K.A., 1994. Recent information on the status of odontocetes in Californian waters. NOAA TechnicalMemorandum NMFS-SWFSC-202. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, LaJolla, CA.February 2007 10-8

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Forney, K. A., 1997. Patterns of variability and environmental models of relative abundance for Californiacetaceans. Ph.D. Thesis, University of California at San Diego. 130 pp.Forney, K.A. and J. Barlow, 1998. Seasonal patterns in the abundance and distribution of California cetaceans,1991–92. Marine Mammal Science 14:460-489.Forney, K.A., J. Barlow, and J.V. Caretta, 1995. The abundance of cetaceans in California waters. Part 2: aerialsurveys in winter and spring of 1991 and 1992. Fisheries Bulletin 93:15-26.Forney, K.A., J. Barlow, M.M. Muto, M. Lowry, J. Baker, G. Cameron, J. Mobley, C. Stinchcomb, and J.V.Carretta, 2000. U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments: 2000. NOAA Technical MemorandumNMFS-SWFSC-300. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Gallo-Reynoso, J.-P, 1994. Factors affecting the population status of Guadalupe fur seal, Arctocephalus townsendi(Merriam, 1897), at Isla de Guadalupe, Baja California, Mexico. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California,Santa Cruz, CA. 199 pp.Gambell, R., 1985. Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis Lesson, 1828. Pages 155-170 in S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison(eds.), Handbook of marine mammals. Volume 3: The Sirenians and baleen whales. San Diego: AcademicPress. 362 pp.Gannier, A, 2000. Distribution of cetaceans off the Society Islands (French Polynesia) as obtained from dedicatedsurveys. Aquatic Mammals 26(2):111-126.Gearin, P.J., M.E. Gosho, J.L. Laake, L. Cooke, R.L. DeLong, and K.M. Hughes, 2000. Experimental Testing ofacoustic alarms (Pingers) to reduce bycatch of harbour porpoise, Phocoena phocoena, in the State ofWashington. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management. 2:1-9. 36Gedamke, J., D.P. Costa, and A. Dunstan, 2001. Localization and visual verification of a complex minke whalevocalization. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109:3038-3047.Gentry, R.L. 1998. Behavior and ecology of the northern fur seal. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Geraci, J.R., Anderson, D.M., Timperi, R.J., St Aubin, D.J., Early, G.A., Prescott, J.H. and Mayo, C.A. 1989.Humpback whales Megaptera novaeangliae fatally poisoned by dinoflagellate toxin. Can. J. Fish. Aq. Sci. 46:1895-1898.Gillespie, D., and R. Leaper, eds. 2001. Report of the workshop on right whale acoustics: Practical applications inconservation. Yarmouth Port, Massachusetts: International Fund for Animal Welfare.Gilmore, R.M., 1960. A Census of the California gray whale. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Special ScienceReport, Fisheries 342.Goddard, P. and D.J. Rugh, 1998. A group of right whales seen in the Bering Sea in July 1996. Marine MammalScience 14(2):344-349.Goertner, J.F., 1982. Prediction of underwater explosion safe ranges for sea mammals. NSWC/WOL TR-82-188.Naval Surface Weapons Center, White Oak Laboratory, Silver Spring, MD. 25 ppGoodyear, J.D., 1993. A sonic/radio tag for monitoring dive depths and underwater movements of whales. Journalof Wildlife Management 57:503-513.Goold, J.C. 2000. A diel pattern in vocal activity of short-beaked common dolphins, Delphinus delphis. MarineMammal Science 16:240-244.Green, G., J.J. Brueggeman, R.A. Grotefendt, C.E. Bowlby, M.L. Bonnell, and K.C. Balcomb, III, 1992. Cetaceandistribution and abundance off Oregon and Washington. Chapter I in Oregon and Washington marine mammaland seabird surveys. OCS Study 91-0093. Minerals Management Service, Los Angeles, CA.Gregr, E.J. and A.J. Trites, 2001. Predictions of critical habitat for five whale species in the waters of coastal BritishColumbia. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58:1265-1285.Gunther, E.R., 1949. The habits of fin whales. Discovery Reports. 24:115-141.10-9 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Gutmacher, C.E., W.R. Normack, S.L. Ross, B.D. Edwards, R. Sliter, P. Hart, B. Cooper, J. Childs, and J.A. Reid,2000. Cruise report for A1-00-SC Southern California Earthquake Hazards Project, Project A. Open-FileReport 00-516. U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA.Hamazaki, T., 2002. Spatiotemporal prediction models of cetacean habitats in the mid-western North Atlantic Ocean(from Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, U.S.A. to Nova Scotia, Canada). Marine Mammal Science 18(4):920-939.Hanan, D. A., 1996. Dynamics of abundance and distribution for Pacific harbor seal, Phoca vitulina richardsi, onthe coast of California. Ph.D. Thesis, University of California at Los Angeles. 158 pp.Hanggi, E.B., and R.J. Schusterman, 1994. Underwater acoustic displays and individual variation in male harbourseals, Phoca vitulina. Animal Behaviour 48:1275-1283.Hansen, L.J., 1990. California coastal bottlenose dolphins. Pages 403-420 in S. Leatherwood and R.R. Reeves(eds.), The bottlenose dolphin. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 653 pp.Hansen, L.J., K.D. Mullin and C.L. Roden, 1994. Preliminary estimates of cetacean abundance in the U.S. AtlanticExclusive Economic Zone from 1992 vessel surveys. Miami Laboratory Contribution MIA-93/94-58.Southeast Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, Miami, Fl.Hastings, M. C. and A.N. Popper. 2005. Effects of Sound on Fish. California Department of Transportation ContractNo. 43A0139, Task Order 1.Hastings, K.K., and W.J. Sydeman, 2002. Population status, seasonal variation in abundance, and longtermpopulation trends of Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) at the South Farallon Islands, California. FisheryBulletin 100:51-62.Haymes, G.T., Patrick, P.H. 1986. Exclusion of adult alewife Alosa pseudoharengus, using very low frequencysound for application at water intakes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 43:855-862.Heimlich, S.L., D.K. Mellinger, S.L. Nieukirk, and C.G. Fox. 2005. Types, distribution, and seasonal occurrence ofsounds attributed to Bryde’s whales (Balaenoptera edeni) recorded in the eastern tropical Pacific, 1999-2001.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 118, Part 1:1830-1837.Helweg, D.A., A.S. Frankel, J.R. Mobley, Jr., and L.M. Herman. 1992. Humpback whale song: Our currentunderstanding. Pages 459-483 in J.A. Thomas, R.A. Kastelein and A.Y. Supin, eds. Marine mammal sensorysystems. New York, New York: Plenum Press.Heyning, J.E. and T.D. Lewis, 1990. Entanglements of baleen whales in fishing gear off southern California.Reports of the International Whaling Commission 40:427-431.Heyning, J.E. and W.F. Perrin, 1994. Evidence for two species of common dolphins (genus Delphinus) from theeastern north Pacific. Contributions of the Science and Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County 442:1-35.Heyning, J.E., T.D. Lewis, and C.D. Woodhouse, 1994. A note on odontocete mortality from fishing gearentanglements off southern California. Reports of the International Whaling Commission Special Issue15:439-442.Hill, P.S. and J. Barlow, 1992. Report of a marine mammal survey of the California coast aboard the research vesselMcArthur, July 28–November 5, 1991. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-169. SouthwestFisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Hobbs, R.C. and D.J. Rugh, 1999. The abundance of gray whales in the 1997/98 southbound migration in the easternNorth Pacific. Unpublished document SC/51/AS10 submitted to the IWC Scientific Committee.Hobbs, R.C., D.J. Rugh, J.M. Waite, J.M. Breiwick, and D.P. DeMaster, 1996. Preliminary estimate of theabundance of gray whales in the 1995/96 southbound migration. Unpublished document SC/48/AS9 submittedto the IWC Scientific Committee.Hobday, A.J. and M.J. Tegner, 2000. Status review of white abalone (Haliotis sorenseni) throughout its range inCalifornia and Mexico. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWR-035.February 2007 10-10

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Horwood, J., 1987. The sei whale: Population biology, ecology & management. London, U.K.: Croom Helm. 375pp.Horwood, J., 1990. Biology and exploitation of the minke whale. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Houck, W.J., and T.A. Jefferson, 1999. Dall's porpoise Phocoenoides dalli (True, 1885). Pages 443-472 in S.H.Ridgway and R. Harrison, eds. Handbook of marine mammals. Volume 6: The second book of dolphins andthe porpoises. San Diego: Academic Press.Houser, D.S., R. Howard, and S.H. Ridgway, 2001. Can diving-induced tissue nitrogen supersaturation increase thechance of acoustically driven bubble growth in marine mammals? Journal of Theoretical Biology: 213:183-195.Huber, H. R., 1991. Changes in the distribution of California sea lions north of the breeding rookeries during the1982–83 El Niño. Pages 129-137 in F. Trillmich and K. A. Ono (eds.), Pinnipeds and El Niño: Responses toenvironmental stress. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag. 293 pp.Hui, C.A., 1979. Undersea topography and distribution of dolphins of the genus Delphinus in the SouthernCalifornia Bight. Journal of Mammalogy 60:521-527.Ivashin, M.V. and L.M. Votrogov, 1981. Minke whales, Balaenoptera acutorostrata davidsoni, inhabiting inshorewaters of the Chukotka coast. Reports of the International Whaling Commission 31:231.Jansen, G., 1998. Physiological effects of noise. In Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, 3rdEdition. New York: Acoustical Society of America.Jefferson, T.A., 1988. Phocoenoides dalli. Mammalian Species 319:1-7.Jefferson, T.A., S. Leatherwood, and M.A. Webber, 1993. Marine mammals of the world. FAO speciesidentification guide. Food and Agriculture Organization, United Nations, Rome, Italy. 320 pp.Jensen, A.S. and G.K. Silber, 2003. Large Whale Ship Strike Database. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAATechnical Memorandum NMFS-OPR-25.Jepson, P.D., M. Arbelo, R. Deaville, I.A.R. Patterson, P. Castro, J.R. Baker, E. Degollada., H.M. Ross, P. Herraez,A.M. Pocknell, E. Rodriguez, F.E. Howie, A. Espinosa, R.J. Reid, J.R. Jaber, V. Martin, A.A. Cunningham,and A Fernandez: 2003. Gas-bubble lesions in stranded cetaceans. Nature 425:575.Jones, M.L. and S. L. Swartz, 2002. Gray whale Eschrichtius robustus. Pages 524-536 in W.F. Perrin, B. Würsig,and J.G.M. Thewissen (eds.), Encyclopedia of marine mammals. San Diego: Academic Press. 1414 pp.JRP Historical Consulting Services, 1997. Inventory and Evaluation of National Register Eligible TAR 4, TAR 10,and TAR 17, San Clemente Island, Los Angeles County, California.Kajimura, H., 1984. Opportunistic feeding of the northern fur seal, Callorhinus ursinus, in the eastern North PacificOcean and eastern Bering Sea. NOAA Technical Report NMFS SSRF-779:1-49. National Marine FisheriesService, Seattle, WA.Kastak, D., B. L. Southall, R. J. Schusterman, and C. Reichmuth-Kastak, 2005. Underwater temporary thresholdshift in pinnipeds: effects of noise level and duration. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.118:3154-3163.Kastak, D., R. J. Schusterman, B. L. Southall, and C. J. Reichmuth, 1999. Underwater temporary threshold shiftinduced by octave-band noise in three species of pinniped. Journal of Acoustical Society of America.106:1142-1148.Kastak, D., and R.J. Schusterman, 2002. Changes in auditory sensitivity with depth in a free-diving California sealion (Zalophus californianus). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 112:329-333.Kastak, D., and R.J. Schusterman. 1998. Low-frequency amphibious hearing in pinnipeds: Methods, measurements,noise, and energy. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 103:2216-2228.Kastak, D. and Schusterman, R.J. 1996. Temporary thresholds shift in a harbor seal (Phoca vitulina). Journal of theAcoustical Society of America 100:1905-1908.10-11 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Kasuya, T., 2002. Giant beaked whales Berardius bairdii and B. arnuxii. Pages 519-522 in W.F. Perrin, B. Würsig,and J.G.M. Thewissen (eds.), Encyclopedia of marine mammals. San Diego: Academic Press. 1414 pp.Kasuya, T. and S. Ohsumi, 1984. Further analysis of the Baird’s beaked whale stock in the western North Pacific.Reports of the International Whaling Commission 34:587-595.Kastelein, R., P. Brunskoek, M. Hagedoorn, W.W.L. Au, and D. De Haan, 2002. Audiogram of a harbor porpoise(Phocoena phocoena) measured with narrrow-band frequency-modulated signals. Journal of the AcousticalSociety of America 112:334-344.Kastelein, R.A., M. Hagedorn, W.W.L. Au, and D. de Haan, 2003. Audiogram of a striped dolphin (Stenellacoeruleoalba). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 113:1130-1137.Kastelein, R.A., R. van Schie, W.C. Verboom, and D. de Haan, 2005. Underwater hearing sensitivity of a male and afemale Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 118, Part 1:1820-1829.Katona, S.K. and Kraus, S.D., 1999. Efforts to conserve the North Atlantic Right Whale. In: J.R. Twiss Jr. and R.R.Reeves (eds), Conservation and Management of Marine Mammals, pp. 311-331. Smithsonian InstitutionPress, Washington, DC.Keeler, J.S., 1976. Models for noise-induced hearing loss. In Effects of Noise on Hearing, ed. Henderson et al.,361–381. New York: Raven Press.Kemp, N.J., 1996. Habitat Loss and Degradation. The Conservation of Whales and Dolphins. M.P. Simmonds andJ.D. Hutchinson (eds.), John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Chichester, pp 263-280.Kenney, R. D. North Atlantic, North Pacific, and Southern Right Whales (Eubalaena glacialis, E japonica and Eaustralis). Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals. Academic Press. 2002. p.806-807.Kenney, R.D. and H.E. Winn, 1987. Cetacean biomass densities near submarine canyons compared to adjacentshelf/slope areas. Continental Shelf Research 7:107-114.Kenney, R.D., G.P. Scott, T.J. Thompson, and H.E. Winn, 1997. Estimates of prey consumption and trophic impactsof cetaceans in the USA northeast continental shelf ecosystem. Journal of Northwest Atlantic FisheriesScience 22:155-171.Kenyon, K.W, 1969. The sea otter in the eastern Pacific Ocean. North American Fauna 68.Kenyon, K.W. and D.W. Rice, 1961. Abundance and distribution of the Steller sea lion. Journal of Mammalogy42:223-234.Ketten, D.R., 2000. Cetacean Ears. In Hearing by Whales and Dolphins, eds. W.W.L. Au, A.N. Popper, and R.R.Fay. New York: Springer.Ketten, D.R., 1998. Marine mammal auditory systems: A summary of audiometric and anatomical data and itsimplications for underwater acoustic impacts. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-256, Department of Commerce.Ketten, D.R., 1997. Structure and functions in whale ears. Bioacoustics 8:103-135.Ketten, D.R. 1992. The marine mammal ear: Specializations for aquatic audition and echolocation. Pages 717-750 inD. Webster, R. Fay, and A. Popper, eds. The evolutionary biology of hearing. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Knowlton, A.R., C.W. Clark, and S.D. Kruse, 1991. Sounds recorded in the presence of sei whales, Balaenopteraborealis. Abstract, Ninth Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Chicago, IL. Pp. 76.Knowlton, A.R., and Krause, S.D., 2001. Mortality and serious injury of northern right whales (Eubalaenaglacialis) in the western North Atlantic Ocean. J. Cet. Res. Man. Special Issue 2:193-208.Kooyman, G.L., D.D. Hammond, and J.P. Schroeder. 1970. Brochogramks and tracheograms of seals underpressure. Science. 169:82-84.Kopelman, A.H., and S.S. Sadove, 1995. Ventilatory rate differences between surface-feeding and nonsurfacefeedingfin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) in the waters off eastern Long Island, NewYork, U.S.A., 1981-1987. Marine Mammal Science 11:200-208.February 2007 10-12

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Kryter, K.D. W.D. Ward, J.D. Miller, and D.H. Eldredge, 1966. Hazardous exposure to intermittent and steady-statenoise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 48:513-523.Kushner, David J. and Rich, Paula, 2005. Kelp Forest Monitoring Naval Auxiliary Landing Field San ClementeIsland Annual Report 2004 and Final Report, Channel Islands National Park, Technical Report CHIS 05-04.Laake, J. L., D. J. Rugh, J. A. Lerczak, and S. T. Buckland, 1994. Preliminary estimates of population size of graywhales from the 1992/93 and 1993/94 shore-based surveys. Unpublished document. Submitted to InternationalWhaling Commission. (SC/46/AS7).Lagerquist, B. A., K. M. Stafford, and B. R. Mate, 1995. Dive habits of satellite-monitored blue whales(Balaenoptera musculus) off the central California coast. Abstract in Abstracts of the 11th BiennialConference on the Biology of Marine Mammals; 1995 December; Orlando, FL. p. 65.Lafferty, K.D., 2001. Restoration of the white abalone in Southern California: Population assessment, brood stockcollection, and development of husbandry technology. NMFS 99-SWR-0004:1-14. Long Beach, California:National Marine Fisheries Service.Lafortuna, C.L., M. Jahoda, A. Azzellino, F. Saibene, and A. Colombini, 2003. Locomotor behaviours andrespiratory pattern of the Mediterranean fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus). European Journal of AppliedPhysiology 90:387-395.Laist, D.W., Knowlton, A.R., Mead, J.G., Collet, A.S. and Podesta, M., 2001. Collisions between ships and whales.Marine Mammal Science 17, 35–75.Larkman, V.E. and R.R. Veit, 1998. Seasonality and abundance of blue whales off southern California. CalCOFIReport 39:236-239.Laurinolli, M.H., A.E. Hay, F. Desharnais, and C.T. Taggart. 2003. Localization of North Atlantic right whalesounds in the Bay of Fundy using a sonobuoy array. Marine Mammal Science. 19:708- 723.Le Boeuf, B.J. and L.F. Petrinovich, 1974. Dialects of northern elephant seals, Mirounga angustirostris: Origin andreliability. Animal Behavior 22:656-663.Le Boeuf, B.J. and M.L. Bonnell, 1980. Pinnipeds of the California islands: abundance and distribution. Pages 475-493 in D.M. Power (ed.), The California Islands: Proceedings of a multidisciplinary symposium. SantaBarbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, CA. 787 pp.Le Boeuf, B. J., K. Ono, and J. Reiter, 1991. History of the Steller sea lion population at Año Nuevo Island, 1961-1991. Administrative Report LJ-91-45C. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine FisheriesService, La Jolla, CA.Le Boeuf, B.J., D.E. Crocker, D.P. Costa, S B. Blackwell, P.M. Webb, and D.S. Houser, 2000. Foraging ecology ofnorthern elephant seals. Ecological Monographs 70(3):353-382.Le Boeuf, B.J., D.E. Crocker, 2005. Ocean climate and seal condition. Bio-Medical Central Biology. 3:1-9Leatherwood, J.S., 1974. Aerial observations of migrating gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, off southernCalifornia, 1969–72. Marine Fisheries Review 36(4):45-49.Leatherwood, S. and R. R. Reeves, 1983. The Sierra Club handbook of whales and dolphins. San Francisco, CA:Sierra Club. 302 pp.Leatherwood, S. and W. A. Walker, 1979. The northern right whale dolphin Lissodelphis borealis Peale in theeastern north Pacific. Pages 85-141 in H. E. Winn, and B. L. Olla (eds.), Behavior of marine animals, Volume3. Cetaceans. New York, NY: Plenum. 438 pp.Leatherwood, S., L.J. Harrington-Coulombe, and C.L. Hubbs, 1978. Relict survival of the sea otter in centralCalifornia and evidence of its recent redispersal south of Point Conception. Bulletin of the Southern CaliforniaAcademy of Sciences 77(3):109-115.Leatherwood, S., W.F. Perrin, V.L. Kirby, C.L. Hubbs, and M. Dahlheim, 1980. Distribution and movements ofRisso’s dolphin, Grampus griseus, in the eastern north Pacific. Fisheries Bulletin 77:951-963.10-13 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Leatherwood, S., R.R. Reeves, W.F. Perrin, and W.E. Evans, 1982. Whales, dolphins and porpoises of the easternnorth Pacific and adjacent Arctic waters. A guide to their identification. NOAA Tech. Report, National MarineFisheries Service Circular 444.Leatherwood, S., R.R. Reeves, A.E. Bowles, B.S. Steward, and K.R. Goodrich, 1984. Distribution, seasonalmovements and abundance of Pacific white-sided dolphins in the eastern north Pacific. Scientific Reports ofthe Whaling Research Institute 35:129-157.Leatherwood, S., B.S. Stewart, and P.A. Folkens, 1987. Cetaceans of the Channel Islands National MarineSanctuary. U.S. NOAA, Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary and U.S. National Marine FisheriesService, Santa Barbara and La Jolla, CA. 69 pp.Lenhardt, M.L., 1994. Seismic and very low frequency sound induced behaviors in captive loggerhead marineturtles (Caretta caretta). Pages 238-241 in K.A. Bjorndal, A.B. Bolten, D.A. Johnson, and P.J. Eliazar, eds.Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation. NOAA TechnicalMemorandum NMFS-SEFSC-351.Lenhardt, M.L., S. Bellmund, R.A. Byles, S.W. Harkins, and J.A. Musick, 1983. Marine turtle reception of boneconductedsound. Journal of Auditory Research 23:119-123Loughlin, T.R., M.A. Perez, and M.L. Merrick, 1987. Eumetopias jubatus. Mammalian Species 283:1-7.Loughlin, T.R., A.S. Perlov, and V.V. Vladimirov, 1992. Range-wide survey and estimation of total number ofSteller sea lions in 1989. Marine Mammal Science 8:220-239.Lowry, M.S. and J.V. Carretta, 2003. Pacific harbor seal, Phoca vitulina richardii, census in California during May–July 2002. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-353. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NationalMarine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Lowry, M.S. and K.A. Forney, 2005. Abundance and distribution of California sea lions (Zalophus californianuscalifornianus) in central and northern California during 1998 and summer 1999. Fishery Bulletin 103:331-343.Lowry, M. S., P. Boveng, R. L. DeLong, C. W. Oliver, B. S. Stewart, H. DeAnda, and J. Barlow, 1992. Status of theCalifornia sea lion (Zalophus californianus) population in 1992. Administrative Report LJ-92-32. SouthwestFisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Lynn, S.K., and D.L. Reiss, 1992. Pulse sequence and whistle production by two captive beaked whales,Mesoplodon species. Marine Mammal Science 8:299-305.Macfarlane, J.A.F., 1981. Reactions of whales to boat traffic in the area of the confluence of the Saguenay and St.Lawrence rivers, Quebec. Manuscript cited in Richardson et al. 1995. 50 pp.MacLeod, C.D., 1999. A review of beaked whale acoustics, with inferences on potential interactions with militaryactivities. European Research on Cetaceans 13:35-38.MacLeod, C.D., N. Hauser, and H. Peckham, 2004. Diversity, relative density and structure of the cetaceancommunity in summer months east of Great Abaco, Bahamas. Journal of the Marine Biological AssociationU.K. 84:469-474.Malme, C.I., B. Würsig, J.E. Bird, and P. Tyack, 1986. Behavioral responses of gray whales to industrial noise:Feeding observations and predictive modeling. MMS OCS Study 88-0048. Anchorage: Minerals ManagementService.Mangels, K.F. and T. Gerrodette, 1994a. Report of cetacean sightings during a marine mammal survey in the easternPacific Ocean and the Gulf of California aboard the NOAA ships McArthur and David Starr Jordan, July 28–November 6, 1993. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-211. Southwest Fisheries Science Center,National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Maravilla-Chavez, M.O. and M.S Lowry, 1999. Incipient breeding colony of Guadalupe fur seals at Isla Benito delEste, Baja California, Mexico. Marine Mammal Science 15:239-241.Marine Air Ground Task Force Training Command (MAGTFTC), 2001. Integrated Natural Resources ManagementPlan and Environmental Assessment, Fiscal Years 2002-2006. NREA, MCAGCC Twentynine Palms, CA.October.February 2007 10-14

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Marine Mammal Commission, 2004. Annual Report to Congress, 2003.______, 2003. Annual Report to Congress, 2002.Marine Physical Laboratory Whale Acoustics (MPLWA), 2003. “Southern California Off-shore Range.”http://cetus.ucsd.edu/projects/score/projects_score.php. 13 April 2005Marten, K., 2000. Ultrasonic analysis of pygmy sperm whale (Kogia breviceps) and Hubbs’ beaked whale(Mesoplodon carlhubbsi) clicks. Aquatic Mammals 26:45-48.Mate, B.R., S.L. Nieukirk, and S.D. Kraus, 1997. Satellite-monitored movements of the northern right whale.Journal of Wildlife Management 61:1393-1405.Matthews, J.N., S. Brown, D. Gillespie, M. Johnson, R. McLanaghan, A. Moscrop, D. Nowacek, R. Leaper, T.Lewis, and P. Tyack. 2001. Vocalisation rates of the North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis).Journal of Cetacean Research and Management. 3:271-282.Mattila, D.K., L.N. Guinee, and C.A. Mayo, 1987. Humpback whale songs on a North Atlantic feeding ground.Journal of Mammalogy 68:880-883.Maybaum, H.L. 1990. Effects of a 3.3 kHz sonar system on humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, inHawaiian waters. Eos. 71:92.Maybaum, H.L. 1993. Responses of humpback whales to sonar sounds. Journal of the Acoustical Society ofAmerica. 94:1848-1849.McAlpine, D.F., 2002. Pygmy and dwarf sperm whales Kogia breviceps and K. sima. Pages 1007-1 009 in W.F.Perrin, B. Wursig, and J.G.M. Thewissen, eds. Encyclopedia of marine mammals. San Diego: AcademicPress.McCain, B., 2003. Essential fish habitat west coast groundfish draft revised appendix. Seattle, Washington: NationalMarine Fisheries Service.McCarthy, E., 2004. International Regulation of Underwater Sound, Establishing Rules and Standards to AddressOcean Noise Pollution. Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Kluwer AcademicPublishers,2:9-13.McDonald, M.A., and C.G. Fox, 1999. Passive acoustic methods applied to fin whale population density estimation.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 105:2643-2651.McDonald, M.A., J.C. Calambokidis,., A. Terinishi, , J.A., Hildebrand, 2001. The acoustic calls of blue whales offCalifornia with gender data. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109, 1728–1735. 91, 385–402.McDonald, M.A., and S.E. Moore, 2002. Calls recorded from North Pacific right whales (Eubalaena japonica) inthe eastern Bering Sea. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 4:261-266.Mead, J.G., 1981. First records of Mesoplodon hectori (Ziphiidae) from the Northern Hemisphere and a descriptionof the adult male. Journal of Mammalogy 62:430-432.Mead, J.G., 1989. Beaked whales of the genus Mesoplodon. Pages 349-430 in S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison (eds.),Handbook of marine mammals. Volume 4: River dolphins and the larger toothed whales. London: AcademicPress. 442 pp.Mead, J.G., W.A. Walker, and W.J. Houck, 1982. Biological observations on Mesoplodon carlhubbsi (Cetacea:Ziphiidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 344:1-25.Melin, S.R. and R.L. DeLong, 1999. Observations of a Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi) female andpup at San Miguel Island, California. Marine Mammal Science 15:885-888.Melin, S.R. and R.L. DeLong, 2000. At-sea distribution and diving behavior of California sea lion females from SanMiguel Island, California. Pages 409-412 in Proceedings of the Fifth California Islands Symposium. OCSStudy MMS 99-0038. Minerals Management Service, Camarillo, CA.10-15 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Melin, S.R., R.L. DeLong, J.R. Thomason, and G.R. VanBlaricom, 2000. Attendance patterns of California sea lion(Zalophus californianus) females and pups during the non-breeding season at San Miguel Island. MarineMammal Science 16(1):169-185.Mellinger, D.K., C.D. Carson, and C.W. Clark, 2000. Characteristics of minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata)pulse trains recorded near Puerto Rico. Marine Mammal Science 16(4):739-756.Mellinger, D.K., and C.W. Clark, 2003. Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) sounds from the North Atlantic.Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 114:1108-1119.Mellinger, D.K., K.M. Stafford, S.E. Moore, L. Munger, and C.G. Fox, 2004. Detection of North Pacific right whale(Eubalaena japonica) calls in the Gulf of Alaska. Marine Mammal Science 20:872-879.Mignucci-Giannoni, A.A., 1998. Zoogeography of cetaceans off Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. CaribbeanJournal of Science 34(3-4):173-190.Miller, G.S. 1991. The bow shock environment from a 16-inch projectile flyby. Naval Surface Weapons CenterTechnical Report TR91-621. Naval Surface Weapons Center, Silver Spring, Maryland.Miller, J.D., 1974. Effects of noise on people. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 56:729–764.Miller, J.D., C.S. Watson, and W.P. Covell, 1963. “Deafening effects of noise on the cat.”Acta Oto-Laryngologica Supplement 176:1–91.Mills, J.H., R.M. Gilbert, and W.Y. Adkins, 1979. Temporary threshold shifts in humans exposed to octave bands ofnoise for 16 to 24 hours. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 65:1238–1248.Mitchell, Jr., E.D., 1991. Winter records of the minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata acutorostrata Lacépède1804) in the southern North Atlantic. Reports of the International Whaling Commission 41:455-457.Mitchell, E. and M. Kozicki, 1975. Supplementary information on minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) fromNewfoundland fishery. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 32(7):985-994.Miyazaki, N. and W.F. Perrin, 1994. Rough-toothed dolphin–Steno bredanensis (Lesson, 1828). Pages 1-21 in S.H.Ridgway and R. Harrison (eds.), Handbook of marine mammals. Volume 5: The first book of dolphins. SanDiego, California: Academic Press. 416 pp.Moore, P.W.B., and R.J. Schusterman,. 1987. Audiometric assessment of northern fur seals, Callorhinus ursinus.Marine Mammal Science 3:31-53.Moore, S.E., J.M. Waite, L.L. Mazzuca, and R.C. Hobbs, 2000. Mysticete whale abundance and observations ofprey associations on the central Bering Sea shelf. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 2:227-234.Moore, S.E., and J.T. Clarke, 2002. Potential impact of offshore human activities on gray whales (Eschrichtiusrobustus). Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 4:19-25.Morejohn, G.V., 1979. The natural history of Dall’s porpoise in the north Pacific Ocean. Pages 45-83 in H.E. Winnand B.L. Olla (eds.), Behavior of marine animals, Volume 3. Cetaceans. New York, NY: Plenum. 438 pp.Morris and Lima, 1996. Channel Islands National Park and Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary SubmergedCultural Resources Assessment.Muñoz-Hincapié, M.F., D.M. Mora-Pinto, D.M. Palacios, E.R. Secchi, and A.A. Mignucci-Giannoni, 1998. Firstosteological record of the dwarf sperm whale in Colombia, with notes on the zoogeography of Kogia in SouthAmerica. Revista Academia Colombiana de Ciencias 22(84):433-444.Murphy, M.A., 1995. Occurrence and group characteristics of minke whales, Balaenoptera acutorostrata, inMassachusetts Bay and Cape Cod Bay. Fishery Bulletin 93:577-585.Nachtigall, P.E., W.W. L. Au, J.L. Pawloski, and P.W.B. Moore, 1995. Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus) hearingthresholds in Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii. In Sensory Systems of Aquatic Mammals, eds. R.A. Kastelein, J.A.Thomas, and P.E. Nachtigall. Woerden, Netherlands: De Spil Publishing.February 2007 10-16

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Nachtigall, P.E., D.W. Lemonds, and H.L. Roitblat, 2000. Psychoacoustic studies of dolphin and whale hearing.Pages 330-363 in W.W.L. Au, A.N. Popper, and R.R. Fay, eds. Hearing by whales and dolphins. New York:Springer-Verlag.Nachtigall, P.E., J.L. Pawloski, and W.W.L. Au, 2003a. Temporary threshold shift and recovery following noiseexposure in the Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). Journal of the Acoustical Society ofAmerica. 113:3425-3429.Nachtigall, P.E., A. Supin, J.L. Pawloski, and W.W.L. Au., 2003b. Temporary threshold shift after noise exposurein bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus). Marine Mammal Science (in review).Nachtigall, P.E., A.Y. Supin, J. Pawloski, and W.W.L. Au. 2004. Temporary threshold shifts after noise exposure inthe bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) measured using evoked auditory potentials. Marine MammalScience 20:673-687.National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), 2005. Notice of Issuance of an Incidental Harassment Authorization,Incidental to Conducting the Precisions Strike Weapon (PSW) Testing and Training by Eglin Air Force Basein the Gulf of Mexico. Federal Register,70(160):48675-48691.______,), 2002. Endangered and threatened species: Determination on a petition to revise critical habitat fornorthern right whales in the Pacific. Federal Register 67:7660-7665.______, 1998. Essential fish habitat: new marine fish habitat conservation mandate for Federal agencies. NationalMarine Fisheries Service Southwest Regional Office.______, 1997. Biological Opinion for Navy Activities off the Southeaster United States along the Atlantic Coast.Office of Protected Resources and the Southeast Regional Office, St. Petersburg, Florida.______, 1992. Recovery plan for the Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus). Prepared by the Steller sea lion RecoveryTeam for the National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD.______, 1991. Recovery plan for the northern right whale (Eubalaena glacialis). Prepared by the Right WhaleRecovery Team for the National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD. 86 pp.National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2006. Notice Small Takes of Marine MammalsIncidental to Specified Activities; Rim of the Pacific Antisubmarine Warfare Exercise Training Events Withinthe Hawaiian Islands Operating Area, Federal Register, Department of Commerce; NMFS, FR 71, 130,38710-38, 7 July.______, 2002b. Report of the workshop on acoustic resonance as a source of tissue trauma in cetaceans. NOAAFisheries, Silver Spring, Maryland. April 2002.______, 2001. Final Rule for the Shock Trial of the WINSTON S. CHURCHILL (DDG-81), Federal Register,Department of Commerce; NMFS, FR 66, No. 87, 22450-67.National Ocean Service (NOS), 2001. Environmental sensitivity index (ESI) atlas: Southern California. Available byNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration CD.National Research Council, 2003. Ocean noise and marine mammals. The National Academic Press, WashingtonD.C. 208 pp.Nedwell, J.R., B. Edwards, A.W.H. Turnpenny, and J. Gordon, 2004. Fish and marine mammal audiograms: Asummary of available information. Subacoustech Ltd. Report, Ref. 534R0213.Nerini, M., 1984. A review of gray whale feeding ecology. Pages 423-450 in M.L. Jones, S.L. Swartz, and S.Leatherwood (eds.), The gray whale, Eschrichtius robustus. San Diego: Academic Press. 600 pp.Norris, K.S. and J.H. Prescott, 1961. Observations on Pacific cetaceans of Californian and Mexican waters.University of California Publications in Zoology 63:291-402.Northridge, S. P. and R.J. Hofman, 1999. Marine mammal interactions with fisheries. Pages 99-119 in J.R. Twiss,Jr. and R.R. Reeves, eds. Conservation and management of marine mamammals. Washington, D.C.,Smithsonian Institution Press.10-17 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Notarbartolo-di-Sciara, G., M. Zanardelli, M. Jahoda, S. Panigada, and S.Airoldi, 2003. The fin whale Balaenopteraphysalus (L. 1758) in the Mediterranean Sea. Mammal Review 33(2):105-150.Nowacek, D.P., M.P. Johnson, and P.L. Tyack, 2003. North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena glacialis) ignore shipsbut respond to alerting stimuli. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Part B 271:227-231.Odell, D. K., 1974. Seasonal occurrence of the northern elephant seal, Mirounga angustirostris, on San NicolasIsland, California. Journal of Mammalogy 55:81-95.O’Hara, J. and J.R. Wilcox, 1990. Avoidance Responses of Loggerhead Turtles, Caretta caretta, to Low FrequencySound. Copeia 1990:564-567. 29Ohsumi, S., 1983. Population assessment of Baird’s beaked whales in the waters adjacent to Japan. Reports of theInternational Whaling Commission 33:631-641.O’Keeffe, D.J., and G.A. Young. 1984. Handbook on the environmental effects of underwater explosions. ReportNSWC TR 83-240. Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren, Virginia.Oleson, E., J. Barlow, C. Clark, J. Gordon, S. Rankin, and J. Hildebrand, 2003. Low frequency calls of Bryde’swhales. Marine Mammal Science 19:407-419.Oliver, C.W. and T.D. Jackson, 1987. Occurrence and distribution of marine mammals at sea from aerial surveysconducted along the U.S. west coast between December 15, 1980, and December 17, 1985. AdministrativeReport LJ-87-19. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Orr, R.T. and C.Helm, 1989. Marine mammals of California, revised edition. Berkeley, CA: University of CaliforniaPress. 93 pp.Oswald, J.N., J. Barlow, T.F. Norris, 2003. Acoustic identification of nine delphinid species in the eastern tropicalPacific Ocean. Marine Mammal Science 19:20-37.Palacios, D.M., 1996. On the specimen of the ginkgo-toothed beaked whale, Mesoplodon ginkgodens, from theGalápagos Islands. Marine Mammal Science 12(3):444-446.Panigada, S., M. Zanardelli, S. Canese, and M. Jahoda, 1999. Deep diving performances of Mediterranean finwhales. Page 144 in Abstracts, Thirteenth Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals. 28November-3 December 1999. Wailea, Maui.Parks, S.E., D.R. Ketten, J. Trehey O’Malley, and J. Arruda. 2004. Hearing in the North Atlantic right whale:Anatomical predictions. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 115 Part 2:2442Patten, D.R. and W.F. Samaras, 1977. Unseasonable occurrences of gray whales. Bulletin of the Southern CaliforniaAcademy of Science 76:205-208.Patter, L.L. 1981. Gun blast far field peak overpressure contours. Naval Systems Weapons Center. Dahlgren, VA.Report NSWC 79-442.Payne, K., P. Tyack, and R. Payne, 1983. Progressive changes in the songs of humpback whales (Megapteranovaengliae): A detailed analysis of two seasons in Hawaii. Pp. 9-57 in R. Payne, ed. Communication andbehavior in whales. Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science.Payne, P.M., J.R. Nicolas, L. O'Brien, and K.D. Powers, 1986. The distribution of the humpback whale, Megapteranovaeangliae, on Georges Bank and in the Gulf of Maine in relation to densities of the sand eel, Ammodytesamericanus. Fishery Bulletin 84:271-277.Payne, P.M., D.N. Wiley, S.B. Young, S. Pittman, P.J. Clapham, and J.W. Jossi, 1990. Recent fluctuations in theabundance of baleen whales in the southern Gulf of Maine in relation to changes in selected prey. FisheryBulletin 88:687-696.Perrin, W.F. and A.A. Hohn, 1994. Pantropical spotted dolphin–Stenella attenuata. Pages 71-98 in S.H. Ridgwayand R. Harrison (eds.), Handbook of marine mammals. Volume 5: The first book of dolphins. San Diego:Academic Press. 416 pp.February 2007 10-18

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Perrin, W. F., M. D. Scott, G. J. Walker and V. L. Cass, 1985. Review of geographical stocks of tropical dolphins(Stenella spp. and Delphinus delphis) in the eastern Pacific. NOAA Technical Report NMFS 28. Availablefrom NMFS, Southwest Fisheries Science Center, La Jolla, CA.Perrin, W.F. and W.A. Walker, 1975. The rough-toothed porpoise, Steno bredanensis, in the eastern tropical Pacific.Journal of Mammalogy 56:905-907.Perrin, W.F., C.E. Wilson, and F.I. Archer, 1994. Striped dolphin–Stenella coeruleoalba (Meyen, 1833). Pages 129-159 on S.H. Ridgway and R. Harrison (eds.) Handbook of marine mammals. Volume 5: The first book ofdolphins. San Diego: Academic Press. 416 pp.Perry, S.L., D.P. DeMaster, and G.K. Silber, 1999. The great whales: History and status of six species listed asendangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973. Marine Fisheries Review 61:1-74.Perryman, W.L., and T.C. Foster, 1980. Preliminary report on predation by small whales, mainly the false killerwhale, Pseudorca crassidens, on dolphins (Stenella spp. and Delphinus delphis) in the eastern tropical Pacific.Southwest Fisheries Science Center Administrative Report LJ-80-05. La Jolla, California: National MarineFisheries Service.Peterson, R.S., B.J. Le Boeuf and R.L. DeLong, 1968. Fur seals from the Bering Sea breeding in California. Nature.219:899-901.Pettus, R., 2000. Appendix L – Initial Inventory of Submerged Historic Cultural Resources for San Clemente IslandEnvironmental Impact Study. San Clemente Island Cultural Resources Summary Report, R. Apple, et al.,2000.Philips, J.D., P.E. Nachtigall, W.W.L. Au, J.L. Pawloski, and H.L. Roitblat, 2003. Echolocation in the Risso’sdolphin, Grampus griseus. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 113:605-616.Pitman, R.L., 2002. Mesoplodont whales Mesoplodon spp. Pages 738-742 in W.F. Perrin, B. Würsig, and J.G.M.Thewissen (eds.), Encyclopedia of marine mammals. San Diego: Academic Press. 1414 pp.Pianradosi, C.A. and Edward D. Thalmann. 2004. Whales, sonar, and decompression sickness. Nature. 15 April2004.Pitman, R.L. and M.S. Lynn, 2001. Biological observations of an unidentified Mesoplodont whale in the easterntropical Pacific and probable identity: Mesoplodon peruvianus. Marine Mammal Science 17(3): 648-657.Pivorunas, A., 1979. The feeding mechanisms of baleen whales. American Scientist 67:432-440.Popov, V.V., and V.O. Klishin, 1998. EEG study of hearing in the common dolphin, Delphinus delphis. AquaticMammals 24:13-20.Poulter, T.C. 1968. Underwater vocalization and behavior of pinnipeds. Pages 69-84 in R.J. Harrison, R.C. Hubbard,R.S. Peterson, C.E. Rice, and R.J. Schusterman, eds. The behavior and physiology of pinnipeds. New York:Appleton-Century-Crofts.Quaranta, A., P. Portalatini, and D. Henderson, 1998. Temporary and permanent threshold shift: An overview.Scandinavian Audiology 27:75–86. 8Ralls, K. and D.B. Siniff, 1990. Time budgets and activity patterns in California sea otters. Journal of WildlifeManagement 54:251-259.Ralls, K., B.B. Hatfield, and D.B. Siniff, 1995. Foraging patterns of California sea otters as indicated by telemetry.Canadian Journal of Zoology 73:523-531.Read, A.J., 1999. Harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena (Linnaeus, 1758). Pages 323-355 in S.H. Ridgway and R.Harrison, eds. Handbook of marine mammals. Volume 6: The second book of dolphins and the porpoises. SanDiego: Academic Press.Read, A.J., and A.J. Westgate, 1997. Monitoring the movements of harbour porpoises (Phocoenaphocoena) withsatellite telemetry. Marine Biology 130:315-322.Reeves, R.R., B.S. Stewart, and S. Leatherwood, 1992. The Sierra Club handbook of seals and sirenians. SanFrancisco, CA: Sierra Club. 359 pp10-19 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Reeves, R.R., B.S. Stewart, P.J. Clapham, and J.A. Powell, 2002. National Audubon Society guide to marinemammals of the world. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Reijnders, P.J.H., and Aguilar, A., 2002. Pollution and Marine Mammals. Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals. W.R.Würsig & J.G.M. Thewissen, Academic Press, San Diego: pp 948-956.Reilly, S., 1990. Seasonal changes in distribution and habitat differences among dolphins in the eastern tropicalPacific. Marine Ecology Progress Series 66:1-11.Reilly, S.B. and P.C. Fiedler, 1994. Interannual variability of dolphin habitats in the eastern tropical Pacific. I:Research vessel surveys, 1986-1990. Fishery Bulletin 92(2):434-450.Reyes, J.C., J.G. Mead, and K. Van Waerebeek, 1991. A new species of beaked whale Mesoplodon peruvianus spp.N. (Cetacea: Ziphiidae) from Peru. Marine Mammal Science 7:1-24.Rice, D.W., 1974. Whales and whale research in the eastern north Pacific. Pages 170-195 in W.E. Schevill (ed.), Thewhale problem: A status report. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Press.Rice, D. W., 1977. Synopsis of biological data on the sei whale and Bryde's whale in the eastern north Pacific.Reports of the International Whaling Commission Special Issue 1:92-97.Rice, D.W., 1998. Marine mammals of the world: Systematics and distribution. Society for Marine MammalogySpecial Publication 4:1-231.Rice, D. W., and A. A. Wolman, 1971. The life history and ecology of the gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus).American Society of Mammalogists Special Publication No. 3.Rice, D.W., A.A. Wolman, D.E. Withrow, and L.A. Fleischer, 1981. Gray whales on the winter grounds in BajaCalifornia. Reports of the International Whaling Commission 31:477-493.Richardson, W.J., C.R. Greene, C.I. Malme, and D.H. Thompson, 1995. Marine Mammals and Noise. AcademicPress, London, U.K. 576 pp.Ricketts, E.F. and J. Calvin, 1968. Between Pacific Tides, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA. 614 pp.Ridgway, S.H., and D.A. Carder, 2001. Assessing hearing and sound production in cetaceans not available forbehavioral audiograms: Experiences with sperm, pygmy sperm, and gray whales. Aquatic Mammals 27:267-276.Ridgway, S.H., D.A. Carder, R.R. Smith, T. Kamolnick, C. E. Schlundt, and W.R. Elsberry, 1997. BehavioralResponses and Temporary Shift in Masked Hearing Threshold of Bottlenose Dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, to1-second Tones of 141 to 201 dB re 1 Pa. Technical Report 1751, Revision 1, Naval Command, Control andOcean Surveillance Center NCCOSC, RDT&E DIV D3503, 49620 Beluga Road, San Diego, CA 92152.September.Ridgway, S.H., and R. Howard, 1979. Dolphin lung collapse and intramuscular circulation during free diving:evidence from nitrogen washout. Science 206:1182–1183.Ridgway, S.H., E.G. Wever, J.G. McCormick, J. Palin, and J.H. Anderson. 1969. Hearing in the giant sea turtle,Chelonia mydas. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 64:884-890.Riedman, M.L., J.A. Estes, M.M. Staedler, A.A. Giles, and D.R. Carlson, 1994. Breeding patterns and reproductivesuccess of California sea otters. Journal of Wildlife Management 58:391-399.Ritter, F. and B. Brederlau, 1999. Behavioral observations of dense beaked whales (Mesoplodon densirostris) off LaGomera, Canary Islands (1995–1997). Aquatic Mammals 25(2):55-61.Rivers, J.A., 1997. Blue whale, Balaenoptera musculus, vocalizations from the waters off central California. MarineMammal Science 13: 186-195.Robertson, K.M., and S.J. Chivers, 1997. Prey occurrence in pantropical spotted dolphins, Stenella attenuata, fromthe eastern tropical Pacific. Fishery Bulletin 95:334-348.Robson, B. W., 2002. Fur seal investigations, 2000-2001. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFSAFSC 134:1-80.February 2007 10-20

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Roden, C.L. and K.D. Mullin, 2000. Sightings of cetaceans in the northern Caribbean Sea and adjacent waters,Winter 1995. Caribbean Journal of Science 36(3-4):280-288.Ronald, K. and B.L. Gots, 2003. Seals: Phocidae, Otariidae, and Odobenidae. Pages 789-854 in G.A. Feldhamer,B.C. Thompson, and J.A. Chapman (eds.), Wild mammals of North America: Biology, management, andconservation. Second edition. Baltimore, Maryland: John Hopkins University Press.Ross, D., 1976. Mechanics of Underwater Noise. Pergamon, New York. 375 pp.Rugh, D.J., 1984. Census of gray whales at Unimak Pass, Alaska: November-December 1977–1979. Pages 225-248in M.L. Jones, S.L. Swartz, and S. Leatherwood (eds.), The gray whale Eschrichtius robustus. San Diego:Academic Press. 600 pp.Rugh, D.J., K.E.W. Shelden, and A. Schulman-Janiger, 2001. Timing of the gray whale southbound migration.Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 3(1):31-39.Sanvito, S., and F. Galimberti. 2003. Source level of male vocalizations in the genus Mirounga: Repeatability andcorrelates. Bioacoustics 14:47-59.Saunders, J.C., J.H. Mills, and J.D. Miller, 1977. Threshold shift in the chinchilla from daily exposure to noise forsix hours.” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 61:558–570.Scarff, J.E., 1986. Historic and present distribution of the right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) in the eastern northPacific south of 50°N and east of 180°W. Reports of the International Whaling Commission Special Issue10:43-63.Scarff, J.E., 1991. Historic distribution and abundance of the right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) in the north Pacific,Bering Sea, Sea of Okhotsk and Sea of Japan from the Maury whale charts. Reports of the InternationalWhaling Commission 41:467-489.Schlundt, C.E., J.J. Finneran, D.A. Carder, and S.H. Ridgway, 2000. Temporary shift in masked hearing hresholdsof bottlenose dolphins, Tursiops truncatus, and white whales, Delphinapterous leucas, after exposure tointense tones. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 107:3496-3508.Schoenherr, J. R., 1991. Blue whales feeding on high concentrations of euphausiids around Monterey submarinecanyon. Canadian Journal of Zoology69:583-594.Schilling, M.R., I. Seipt, M.T. Weinrich, S.E. Frohock, A.E. Kuhlberg, and P.J. Clapham, 1992. Behavior ofindividually-identified sei whales Balaenoptera borealis during an episodic influx into the southern Gulf ofMaine in 1986. Fishery Bulletin 90:749-755.Schotten, M., W.W.L. Au, M.O. Lammers, and R. Aubauer, 2004. Echolocation recordings and localization of wildspinner dolphins (Stenella longirostris) and pantropical spotted dolphins (S. attenuata) using a fourhydrophonearray. Pages 393-400 in J.A. Thomas, C.F. Moss and M. Vater, eds. Echolocation in bats anddolphins. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.Schreer, J.F., K.M. Kovacs, and R.J.O. Hines, 2001. Comparative diving patterns of pinnipeds and seabirds.Ecological Monographs 71(1):137-162.Schusterman, R.J., 1978. Vocal communication in pinnipeds. Pages 247-308 in H. Markowitz and V.J. Stevens, eds.Behavior of captive wild animals. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Schusterman, R.J., 1977. Brief report: Temporal patterning in sea lion barking (Zalophus californianus). BehavioralBiology 20:404-408.Schusterman, R.J., 1974. Auditory sensitivity of a California sea lion to airborne sound. Journal of the AcousticalSociety of America 56:1248-1251.Schusterman, R.J., R.F. Balliet, and J. Nixon, 1972. Underwater audiogram of the California sea lion by theconditioned vocalization technique. Journal of the Analysis of Behavior 17:339-350.Schusterman, R.J., R.F. Bailliet, and S. St. John, 1970. Vocal displays under water by the gray seal, the harbor seal,and the stellar [sic] sea lion. Psychonomic Science 18:303-305.10-21 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Schusterman, R.J. and R.F. Balliet, 1969. Underwater barking by male sea lions (Zalophus californianus). Nature,222:1179-1181.Schusterman, R.J., R. Gentry, and J. Schmook, 1967. Underwater sound production by captive California sea lions,Zalophus californianus. Zoologica 52:21-24.Schusterman, R.J., R. Gentry, and J. Schmook, 1966. Underwater vocalization by sea lions: Social and mirrorstimuli. Science 154:540-542.Schwemm, C.A., L.A.K. Mertes, and B. Waltenberger, 2000. “The status of GIS coordination efforts within theSouthern California Bight.” http://sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/ library/CI/ waltenberger.pdf. 13 April 2005Scott, M.D., A.A. Hohn, A.J. Westgate, J.R. Nicolas, B.R. Whitaker, and W.B. Campbell. 2001. A note on therelease and tracking of a rehabilitated pygmy sperm whale (Kogia breviceps). Journal of Cetacean Researchand Management 3:87-94.Scott, M.D., and K.L. Cattanach, 1998. Diel patterns in aggregations of pelagic dolphins and tuna in the easternPacific. Marine Mammal Science 14:401-428.Seagars, D.J., 1984.The Guadalupe fur seal: a status review. Administrative Report SWR-84-6. Southwest Region,National Marine Fisheries Service, Terminal Island, CA.Silber, G.K., 1986. The relationship of social vocalizations to surface behavior and aggression in the Hawaiianhumpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae). Canadian Journal of Zoology 64:2075-2080.Simão, S.M., and S.C. Moreira, 2005. Vocalizations of a female humpback whale in Arraial do Cabo (RJ, Brazil).Marine Mammal Science 21:150-153.Slijper, E.J., W.L. van Utrecht, and C. Naaktgeboren, 1964. Remarks on the distribution and migration of whales,based on observations from Netherlands ships. Bijdragen Tot de Dierkunde 34:3-93.Smith, S.C. and H. Whitehead, 1993. Variations in the feeding success and behaviour of Galápagos sperm whales(Physeter macrocephalus) as they relate to oceanographic conditions. Canadian Journal of Zoology71(10):1991-1996.South Coast Air Quality Management District. 1995. Final Supplemental Environmental Assessment for ProposedAmended Regulation XX – Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM) Program for Oxides ofNitrogen (NOx) and Oxides of Sulfur (Sox). August.Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, 2003. Southern California Bight 1998 Regional MonitoringProgram.Spikes, C.H. and C.W. Clark, 1996. Whales 95–Revolutionizing marine mammal monitoring technology. SeaTechnology 1996(4):49-56.Stafford, K.M. and S.E. Moore, 2005. Atypical calling by a blue whale in the Gulf of Alaska, Journal of theAcoustical Society of America 117: 2724-2727.Stafford, K.M., S.L. Nieukirk and C.G. Fox, 2001. Geographic and seasonal variations of blue whale calls in theNorth Pacific. Journal of Cetacean Resource Management 3:65–76.Stager, K.E. and W.G. Reeder, 1951. Occurrence of the false killer whale Pseudorca, on the California coast.Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 50:14-19.Steiger, G.H., J. Calambokidis, R. Sears, K.C. Balcomb, and J.C. Cubbage, 1991. Movement of humpback whalesbetween California and Costa Rica. Marine Mammal Science 7:306-310.Stewart, B.S., 1989. The ecology and population biology of the northern elephant seal, Mirounga angustirostris(Gill 1866), on the southern California Channel Islands. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California at LosAngeles. 195 pp.Stewart, B.S., 1997. Ontogeny of differential migration and sexual segregation in northern elephant seals. Journal ofMammalogy 78:1101-1116.February 2007 10-22

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Stewart, B.S. and R.L. Delong, 1993. Seasonal dispersion and habitat use of foraging northern elephant seals. Pages179-194 in I.L. Boyd (ed.), Marine mammals: Advances in behavioural and population biology. Symposiumof the Zoological Society of London 66. Oxford, U.K.: Clarendon Press. 404 pp.Stewart, B.S. and R.L. DeLong, 1995. Double migrations of the northern elephant seal, Mirounga angustirostris.Journal of Mammalogy 76:196-205.Stewart, B.S. and H.R. Huber, 1993. Mirounga angustirostris. Mammalian Species 449:1-10.Stewart, B. S. and Yochem, P. K., 1991. Northern Elephant Seals on the Southern California Channel Islands and ElNiño. Ecological studies: analysis and synthesis, Volume 88, pp 234-246.Stewart, B.S. and P.K. Yochem, 1994. Ecology of harbor seals in the Southern California Bight. Pages 123-134 inW.L. Halvorson and G.J. Maender (eds.), The Fourth California Islands symposium: Update on the status ofresources. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, CA. 530 pp.Stone, G.S., S.K. Katona, A. Mainwaring, J.M. Allen, and H.D. Corbett, 1992. Respiration and surfacing rates forfinback whales (Balaenoptera physalus) observed from a lighthouse tower. Reports of the InternationalWhaling Commission 42:739-745.Szymanski, M.D., D.E. Bain, K. Kiehl, S. Pennington, S. Wong, and K.R. Henry, 1999. Killer whale (Orcinus orca)hearing: auditory brainstem response and behavioral audiograms. Journal of the Acoustical Society ofAmerica 106:1134-1141.Teranishi, A.M., J.A. Hildebrand, M.A. McDonald, S.E. Moore, and K. Stafford, 1997. Acoustic and visual studiesof blue whales near the California Channel Islands. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 102:3121.Terhune, J., and S. Turnball, 1995. Variation in the psychometric functions and hearing thresholds of a harbour seal.Pages 81-93 in R.A. Kastelein, J.A. Thomas, and P.E. Nachtigall, eds. Sensory systems of aquatic mammals.Woerden, The Netherlands: De Spil Publishers.Tershy, B.R., D. Breese and C.S. Strong, 1990. Abundance, seasonal distribution and population composition ofbalaenopterid whales in the Canal de Ballenas, Gulf of California, Mexico. Reports of the InternationalWhaling Commission Special Issue 12: 369-375.Thomas, J.A., J.L. Pawloski, and W.W.L. Au, 1990. Masked hearing abilities in a false killer whale (Pseudorcacrassidens). Pages 395-404 in J. Thomas and R. Kastelein, eds. Sensory abilities of cetaceans: Laboratory andfield evidence. New York: Plenum Press.Thomas, J., N. Chun, W. Au, and K. Pugh, 1988. Underwater audiogram of a false killer whale (Pseudorcacrassidens). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 84:936-940.Thompson, T.J., H.E. Winn, and P.J. Perkins, 1979. Mysticete sounds. In Behavior of marine animals, Volume 3.H.E. Winn and B.L. Olla, (eds.), Plenum, NY. 438 pp.Thornback, J. and M. Jenkins, 1982. The IUCN Mammal Red Data Book, Part 1: Threatened Mammalian Taxa ofthe Americas and the Australian Zoogeography Region (Excluding Cetacea). Cambridge, UK: IUCNConservation Monitoring Centre.Thorson, P.H., J.K. Francine, E.A. Berg, L.E. Meyers, D.A. Eidson, and G.W. Oliver, 1999. Quantitative Analysisof Behavioral Responses for Selected Pinnipeds on Vandenberg Air Force Base and San Miguel Island,California and Acoustic Measurement of the 24 September 1999 Athena 2 IKONOS-II Launch. SRSTechnologies technical report submitted to the National Marine Fisheries Service, November 1999. 35 pp.Tremel, D.P., J.A. Thomas, K.T. Ramirez, G.S. Dye, W.A. Bachman, A.N. Orban, and K.K. Grimm, 1998.Underwater hearing sensitivity of a Pacific white-sided dolphin, Lagenorhynchus obliquidens. AquaticMammals 24:63-69.Trillmich, F., Ono, K.A., Costa, D.P., DeLong, R.L., Feldkamp, S.D., Francis, J.M., Gentry, R.L., Heath, C.B., LeBoeuf, B.J., Majluf, P. and A.E. York. 1991. The effects of El Niño on pinniped populations in the easternPacific. In F. Trillmih and K.A. Ono (editors). Pinnipeds and El Niño: Responses to environmental stress, p.247-270. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.10-23 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Turl, C.W., 1993. Low-frequency sound detection by a bottlenose dolphin. Journal of the Acoustical Society ofAmerica 94:3006-3008.Tutschulte, T.C. 1976. The comparative ecology of three sympatric abalone. Ph.D. dissertation. University ofCalifornia, San Diego.Tyack, P. 1981.. Interactions between singing Hawaiian humpback whales and conspecifics nearby. BehavioralEcology and Sociobiology. 8:105-116.Tyack, P. and H. Whitehead. 1983. “Male competition in large groups of wintering humpback whales.” Behavior.83:132-154.Tynan, C.T., D.P. DeMaster, and W.T. Peterson, 2001. Endangered right whales on the southeastern Bering Seashelf. Science 294:1894.U.S. Air Force (USAF), 2006. Expeditionary Readiness Training (ExpeRT) Course Expansion EnvironmentalAssessment, Nellis Air Force Base, April.______, 2005. Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the Demolition and Abandonment of Atlas andTitan Facilities at Vandenberg Air Force Base. September.______, 2003. Vandenberg Air Force Base Draft Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan: Plan Period2003-2008. February.______, 2003. Request for a Letter of Authorization for the incidental harassment of marine mammals resultingfrom the Programmatic Mission Activities within the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range (EGTTR) Eglin AirForce Base, Florida. 36 pp.______, 2002. Environmental Assessment for the West Coast Combat Search and Rescue Beddown. HeadquartersAir Combat Command.______, 2002. Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment. RangeEnvironmental Planning Office Eglin Air Force Base FL. 277 pp.______, 1999. Vandenberg Air Force Base Bird-Aircraft Strike Hazard Plan.______, 1999. Renewal of the Nellis Air Force Range Land Withdrawal, Legislative Environmental ImpactStatement. March.U.S. Army, 2006. Record of Decision for Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Statement (SFEIS) for theProposed Addition of Maneuver Training Land at Fort Irwin, CA. 3 Mar.______, 2002. Finding of No Significant Impact, Programmatic Environmental Assessment (EA) U.S. Joint ForcesCommand (JFCOM), Millennium Challenge.______, 2001. Fort Irwin Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan and Environmental Assessment, 2001-2005, National Training Center and Fort Irwin, California.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1996. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Section3.3, Gasoline and Diesel Industrial Engines. October.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2005. Environmental Compliance History On-Line (ECHO).______, 2002. National Recommended Water Quality Criteria: 2002.U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2005. Draft Supplemental Impact Statement - Translocation of SouthernSea Otters. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, Ventura, California 242 pp.______, 2004. Amendment to the Programmatic Biological Opinion for Activities on the South Range of Nellis AirForce Base, Nevada Test and Training Range, and the Nevada Training Initiative. Clark and LincolnCounties, Nevada. File Number 1-5-02-F-522.AMD1, June 30.______, 2003. Programmatic Biological Opinion for Activities on the South Range of Nellis Air Force Base,Nevada Test and Training Range, and the Nevada Training Initiative. Clark and Lincoln Counties, Nevada.File Number 1-5-02-F-522. June 17.February 2007 10-24

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10______, 1997. Biological Opinion on the Reinitiation of Formal Consultation for Continuing Current WeaponsTesting and Training on U.S. Department of the Air Force’s Weapons and Tactics Center Range Complex.Nellis AFB, Nevada.______, 1996. Southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis): California and Washington Stocks. Appendix 5 inCarretta, J.V., K.A. Forney, M.M. Muto, J. Barlow, J. Baker and M. Lowry, 2004. U.S. Pacific MarineMammal Stock Assessments: 2003. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-358. Southwest FisheriesScience Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA. 291 pp.______, 1994. Biological Opinion for Continuing Current Weapons Testing/Training at the U.S. Department of theAir Force’s Weapons and Tactics Center Range Complex. File No. 1-5-94-F-162. July 19.______, 1984. Desert Tortoise (Mojave Population) Recovery Plan, United States Department of Interior, Fish andWildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 73pp and appendices A through I.U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 1999. Request by the U.S. Geological Survey for an incidental harassmentauthorization, under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, to use a small airgun near marine mammals in theSouthern California Bight. U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA.U.S. Marine Corps (USMC), 2003a. Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Ongoing and ProposedTraining Activities at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms, CA. Prepared by TheEnvironmental Company, Marine Corps Air Ground Command Center, Twentynine Palms, CA. May.______, 2003b. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle (AAAV).Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton and San Clemente Island Range Complex, Volumes I and II. May.______, 2003c. Environmental Assessment for Installation of a 1,100 Yard Sniper Range at Camp Billy Machen,Naval Special Warfare Desert warfare Training Facility, Niland CA.______, 2000. Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan. Marine Corps Air Station Miramar. Prepared byDames & Moore, Inc. San Diego, CA. May.______, 2001a. Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Yuma Training Range Complex, Yuma, AZ.______, 2001b. Riparian Ecosystem Conservation Plan.______, 1997. Environmental Impact Statement for Yuma Training Range Complex, Yuma, AZ.______, 1993. Environmental Assessment for P-179, Naval Special Warfare Desert warfare Training Facility,Niland CA.U.S. Navy, 2006 (Department of the Navy, Commander, THIRD Fleet). 2006 Supplement to the 2002 Rim of thePacific Programmatic Environmental Assessment. May.______, 2005a. Marine resources assessment for the Southern California Operating Area. Prepared for the PacificDivision, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pearl Harbor, HI, by Geo-Marine, Inc., Plano, TX. Contract# N62470-02-D-9997, CTO 0025.______, 2005b. Hazardous Waste Management Plan. Commander, Navy Region Southwest.______, 2005c. Final Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement for UnderseaWarfare Training Range.______, 2005d. Bob Stump Training Range Complex Management Plan. 75% Working Draft. Prepared by SRSTechnologies, Arlington, VA. September.______, 2005e. Population Monitoring of the San Clemente Sage Sparrow-2004 Final Report. Commander, NavyRegion Southwest. pp. 1-2.______, 2005. Fallon Range Complex Management Plan. Final Draft. Fallon, NV. Prepared by SRS Technologies,Arlington VA. May.______, 2005. Draft Overseas Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Statement, Undersea WarfareTraining Range (OEIS/EIS).10-25 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10______, 2004. Programmatic Environmental Assessment/Overseas Environmental Assessment. Commander,THIRD Fleet Joint Task Force Exercise, Southern California. Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet andCommander, THIRD Fleet. May.______, 2003. Record of Decision for the Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle. Marine Corps Base CampPendleton, CA. June.______, 2002a. Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan. San Clemente Island. Prepared for the U.S.Department of the Navy, Southwest Division (DON, SWDIV), San Diego, CA, by Tierra Data Systems,Escondido, CA. October.______, 2002b. Final Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement for the PointMugu Sea Range. Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division. Point Mugu, CA. March.______, 2002c. Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan. Naval Base Coronado. Navy Region Southwest.San Diego, CA. May.______, 2002d. Record of Decision for Proposed Future Operations and Facility Modernization. Naval Air WarfareCenter Weapons Division, Point Mugu Sea Range. Point Mugu, CA. August.______, 2001. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Shock Trial of the Winston S. Churchill (DDG 81). NavalSea Systems Command, Washington, DC.______, 2001. Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. Yuma Training Range Complex. Yuma, Arizona.______, 2001. Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan. Marine Corps Base and Marine Corps Air StationCamp Pendleton. San Diego, CA. October.______, 2000. Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement. San Clemente IslandCommander, Navy Region Southwest.______, 1998. Point Mugu Sea Range marine mammal technical report. Point Mugu Sea Range EnvironmentalImpact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement. Prepared by LGL Limited, OgdenEnvironmental and Energy Services, Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division, and Southwest DivisionNaval Facilities Engineering Command. 281 pp.______, 1998. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Yuma Training Range Complex. Yuma, AZ. September.______, 1997. Environmental Impact Statement for Shock Testing the Seawolf Submarine______, 1996. Draft Environmental Assessment of the Use of Selected Navy Test Sites for Development Tests andFleet Training Exercises of the MK-46 and MK-50 Torpedoes. (U) (CONFIDENTIAL). Program ExecutiveOffice Undersea Warfare, Program Manager for Undersea Weapons.______, 1993. Operational/Land Use Compatibility Study for NALF San Clemente Island.______, 1978. Planning in the Noise Environment. NAVFAC P-970.______, 1954. Feasibility Study at San Clemente Island.______. No Date. Programmatic Wildland Fire Management Environmental Assessment-Marine Corps Air StationMiramar. San Diego, CA.U. S. Navy and Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 2004. Final Environmental Impact Statement for ProposedMilitary Operational Increases and Implementation of Associated Comprehensive Land Use and IntegratedNatural Resources Management Plans, Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, CA and Bureau of LandManagement, Ridgecrest, CA. February.______, 2001. Bureau of Land Management and Navy Resource Management Plan for Certain Federal Lands inChurchill County, Nevada: Navy Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan, Amendment to the BLMLahontan Resource Management Plan, and Environmental Assessment. September.______, 2000. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Fallon Range Training Complex Requirements. Naval AirStation Fallon, NV. January.February 2007 10-26

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Urban R., J., L. Rojas-Bracho, H. Perez-Cortes, A. Gomez-Gallardo, S.L. Swartz, S. Ludwig, and R.L. Brownell, Jr.,2003. A review of gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) on their wintering grounds in Mexican waters. Journalof Cetacean Research and Management 5(3):281-295.Urbán-Ramírez, J. and D. Aurioles-Gamboa, 1992. First record of the pygmy beaked whale Mesoplodon peruvianusin the North Pacific. Marine Mammal Science 8(4):420-425.Vanderlaan, A.S.M., A.E. Hay, and C.T. Taggart, 2003. Characterization of North Atlantic right-whale (Eubalaenaglacialis) sounds in the Bay of Fundy. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering 28:164-173.Van Parijs, S.M., P.J. Corkeron, J. Harvey, S.A. Hayes, D.K. Mellinger, P.A. Rouget, P.M. Thompson, M.Wahlberg, and K.M. Kovacs, 2003. Patterns in the vocalizations of male harbor seals. Journal of theAcoustical Society of America 113:3403-3410.Verboom, W.C., and R.A. Kastelein. 1995. Acoustic signals by harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena). Pages 1-39in P.E. Nachtigall, J. Lien, W.W.L. Au, and A.J. Read, eds. Harbour porpoises–laboratory studies to reducebycatch. Woerden, The Netherlands: DeSpil Publishers. British Columbia.Veirs, V. 2004. Source levels of free-ranging killer whale (Orcinus orca) social vocalizations. Journal of theAcoustical Society of America 116:2615.Wada, S., 1973. The ninth memorandum on the stock assessment of whales in the north Pacific. Reports of theInternational Whaling Commission 23:164-169.Wade, P.R. and T. Gerrodette, 1993. Estimates of cetacean abundance and distribution in the eastern tropical Pacific.Reports of the International Whaling Commission 43:477-493.Waite, J.M., K. Wynne, and D.K. Mellinger, 2003. Documented sighting of a North Pacific right whale in the Gulfof Alaska and post-sighting acoustic monitoring. Northwestern Naturalist 84:38-43.Waltenberger, B. and M. Pickett, 2000. “Integration of NOAA aerial monitoring and GIS programs for research,education, and management within the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary.”http://www.sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/library/CI/waltpick.pdf. 13 April 2005.Wang, M.-C., W.A. Walker, K.T. Shao, and L.S. Chou, 2002. Comparative analysis of the diets of pygmy spermwhales and dwarf sperm whales in Taiwanese waters. Acta Zoologica Taiwanica 13(2):53-62.Ward, W.D., 1997. Effects of high-intensity sound. In Encyclopedia of Acoustics, ed. M.J. Crocker, 1497-1507.New York: WileyWard, W.D., A. Glorig, and DL. Sklar. 1958. Dependence of temporary threshold shift at 4 kc on intensity andtime. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 30:944–954.Ward, W.D., A. Glorig, and D.L. Sklar, 1959. Temporary threshold shift from octave-band noise: Applications todamage-risk criteria. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 31: 522–528.Waring, G.T., J.M. Quintal, and C.P. Fairfield, 2002. U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal StockAssessments: 2002. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-169. Northeast Fisheries Science Center,National Marine Fisheries Service, Woods Hole, MA.Watkins, W.A., P. Tyack, K.E. Moore, and J.E. Bird, 1987. The 20-Hz signals of finback whales (Balaenopteraphysalus). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 82:1901-1912.Watkins, W.A., K.E. Moore, and P. Tyack, 1985. Sperm whale acoustic behaviors in the southeast Caribbean.Cetology. 49: 1-15.Watkins, W.A., and W.E. Schevill, 1979. Aerial observation of feeding behavior in four baleen whales:Eubalaenaglacialis, Balaenoptera borealis, Megaptera novaeangliae, and Balaenoptera physalus. Journal ofMammalogy 60:155-163.Watkins, W.A., and W.E. Schevill, 1976. Right whale feeding and baleen rattle. Journal of Mammalogy 57:58-66.Weller, D.W., B. Würsig, H. Whitehead, J.C. Norris, S.K. Lynn, R.W. Davis, N. Clauss, and P. Brown, 1996.Observations of an interaction between sperm whales and short-finned pilot whales in the Gulf of Mexico.Marine Mammal Science 12:588-594.10-27 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Chapter 10Wells, R.S., T.P. Dohl, L.J. Hansen, D.L. Kelly, A. Baldridge, and R.H. Defran, 1990. Northward extension of therange of bottlenose dolphins along the California coast. Pages 421-431 in S. Leatherwood and R.R. Reeves(eds.), The bottlenose dolphin. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 653 pp.Westgate, A.J., A.J. Read, P. Berggren, H.N. Koopman, and D.E. Gaskin, 1995. Diving behaviour of harbourporpoises, Phocoena phocoena. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 52:1064-1073.Westgate, A.J., and A.J. Read. 1998. Applications of new technology to the conservation of porpoises. MarineTechnology Society Journal 32:70-81.Whitehead, H., S. Brennan, and D. Grover, 1992. Distribution and behaviour of male sperm whales on the ScotianShelf, Canada. Canadian Journal of Zoology 70:912-918.Whitehead, H., W.D. Bowen, S.K. Hooker and S. Gowans, 1998. Marine mammals. Pages 186-221 in W.G.Harrison and D.G. Fenton (eds.), The Gully: a scientific review of its environment and ecosystem. Departmentof Fisheries and Oceans, Ottawa, ON. Canadian Stock Assessment Secretariat Research Document 98/83.Wiggins, S.M., M.A. McDonald, L.M. Munger, S.E. Moore, and J.A. Hildebrand, 2004. Waveguide propagationallows range estimates for North Pacific right whales in the Bering Sea. Canadian Acoustics 32:146-154.Williams, T.M., R.W. Davis, L.A. Fuiman, J. Francis, B.L. Le Boeuf, M. Horning, J. Calambokidis, and D.A. Croll,2000. Sink or swim: strategies for cost-efficient diving by marine mammals. Science 288(5463):133-136.Willis, P.M. and R.W. Baird, 1998. Sightings and strandings of beaked whales on the west coast of Canada. AquaticMammals 24:21-25.Winn, H.E., and P.J. Perkins, 1976. Distribution and sounds of the minke whale, with a review of mysticete sounds.Cetology 19:1-12.Winn, H.E., J.D. Goodyear, R.D. Kenney, and R.O. Petricig, 1995. Dive patterns of tagged right whales in the GreatSouth Channel. Continental Shelf Research 15:593-611.Wolski, L.F., R.C. Anderson, A.E. Bowles, and P.K. Yochem, 2003. Measuring hearing in the harbor seal (Phocavitulina): Comparison of behavioral and auditory brainstem response techniques. Journal of the AcousticalSociety of America 113:629-637.Würsig, B., S.K. Lynn, T.A. Jefferson, and K.D. Mullin, 1998. Behaviour of cetaceans in the northern Gulf ofMexico relative to survey ships and aircraft. Aquatic Mammals 24:41-50.Yelverton, J. T. 1981. Underwater explosion damage risk criteria for birds, fish and mammals. Paper presented atthe 102 nd of the Acoustical Society of America. Miami Beach, FL. Pp. 19.Yelverton, J. T., Richmond, D. R., Hicks, W., Saunders, K., and Fletcher, E. R. 1975. "The Relationship BetweenFish Size and Their Response to Underwater Blast." Report DNA 3677T, Director, Defense Nuclear Agency,Washington, DC.Yelverton, J. T., Richmond, D. R., Fletcher, E. R., and Jones, R. K. 1973. Safe distances from underwaterexplosions for mammals and birds. DNA 3114T, Lovelace Foundation for Medical Education and Research,Albuquerque, New Mexico.Yost, W.A., 1994. Fundamentals of Hearing: An Introduction. San Diego: Academic Press.Young, G. A. 1991. Concise methods for predicting the effects of underwater explosions on marine life. NAVSWCNO 91-220. Naval Surface Warfare Center. Silver Spring, Maryland.Yu, H-Y., H-K. Mok, R-C. Wei, and L-S., Chou, 2003. Vocalizations of a rehabilitated rough-toothed dolphin,Steno bredanensis. Page 183 in Abstracts, Fifteenth Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals.14–19 December 2003. Greensboro, North CarolinaFebruary 2007 10-28

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AINTRODUCTIONAPPENDIX AMARINE MAMMAL DENSITY ESTIMATESDefinition of ResourcesMarine mammals addressed within this Environmental Assessment/Overseas Environmental Assessment(EA/OEA) include members of two orders: Cetacean, which includes whales, dolphins, and porpoises;and Carnivora, which includes true seals (family Phocidae), sea lions (family Otariidae), and sea otters (amember of the Mustelidae family). Cetaceans spend their lives entirely at sea. Pinnipeds (seals and sealions) hunt and feed exclusively in the ocean, and some of the species occurring in the SOCAL RangeComplex come ashore to rest, mate, and bear young. Although most mustelids (a family which includesotters, weasels, skunks, and wolverines) are terrestrial, sea otters primarily swim, feed, and sleep in theocean and rarely haul-out.Regional SettingThe status of populations of cetaceans and pinnipeds that occur in the SOCAL Range Complex in relationto populations found off the entire California coast is summarized in Tables A-1 and A-2. A largeproportion of the California gray whale population migrates through waters of the SOCAL RangeComplex during their northward and southward migrations. For most other species, the waters of theSOCAL Range Complex constitute a relatively small portion of their total range, although in some casesnumbers within the study area may be high, at least at certain times of year. Species-by-species detailsare given in later sections.CetaceansA total of 33 species of cetaceans could be encountered in the SOCAL Range Complex (Table A-1).They include 24 species of toothed whales (odontocetes) and eight species of baleen whales (mysticetes).At least 10 species generally can be found in the SOCAL Range Complex in moderate or high numberseither year-round or during annual migrations into or through the area: gray whale (Eschrichtiusrobustus), pygmy sperm whale (Kogia breviceps), bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus), pantropicalspotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata), striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba), short-beaked commondolphin (Delphinus delphis), Pacific white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens), Risso’s dolphin(Grampus griseus), northern right whale dolphin (Lissodelphis borealis), and Dall’s porpoise(Phocoenoides dalli). Other species are represented by either small numbers, moderate numbers duringpart of the year, occasional sightings, or strandings. Not included in the 24 species are species consideredto be extralimital in the SOCAL Range Complex.Six species of cetaceans occurring in the SOCAL Range Complex are listed as endangered. Mostendangered baleen whales that occur in California waters were once commercially hunted to the point thattheir populations were severely depleted. The northern right whale (Eubalaena glacialis), humpbackwhale (Megaptera novaeangliae), blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus), fin whale (B. physalus), and seiwhale (B. borealis) are currently listed as endangered species and protected by the Endangered SpeciesAct (ESA) (16 U.S.C. § 1531). Gray whales were removed from the endangered list in 1994 because ofan increase in population numbers (Carretta et al., 2005). The one toothed whale that is listed asendangered is the sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus). Stocks of all species listed as endangeredunder the ESA are automatically considered ‘depleted’ and ‘strategic’ under the Marine MammalProtection Act (MMPA).A-1 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 A-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix ATable A-1. Summary of Information on Cetaceans that may be Encountered in the SOCAL Range Complex. Based on Marine MammalStock Assessments Prepared by Barlow et al. (1997), Forney et al. (2000), and Carretta et al. (2001, 2005).Species Status¹Order CetaceaSuborder Mysticeti (baleen whales)North Pacific right whale(Eubalaena japonica )Humpback whale (Megapteranovaeangliae )Minke whale (Balaenopteraacutorostrata )Bryde’s whale (Balaenopteraedeni )Sei whale (Balaenopteraborealis )Fin whale (Balaenopteraphysalus )Blue whale (Balaenopteramusculus )Gray whale(Eschrichtius robustus )Endangered,depleted,strategicEndangered,depleted,strategicEndangered,depleted,strategicEndangered,depleted,strategicEndangered,depleted,strategicDelisted in1994Minimum StockSize (CV)²N/A; Pacificpopulation ~100-200 Rare N/A943 (N/A)CA/Mexico Uncommon585 (0.73)CA/OR/WA Un-common N/A11,163 (0.20)Eastern TropicalAbundancein SOCAL Population Trend Seasonality Habitat Preference? increase 1979–1993, ?decrease 1996–2001, ?increasing presentlySightings from March toMayUnknown, recent sightingsnearshoreMigratory during spring andautumn; feeding in summer Nearshore watersMigratory, peak in spring &summer, a few present yearroundPacific Rare N/A Possible throughout the year35 (0.61)CA/OR/WA Rare N/A2,541 (0.31)CA/OR/WA Uncommon1,384 (0.28)Eastern NorthPacific Uncommon24,477 (0.10)Eastern NorthPacificMost passthrough theSRC duringmigration IncreasingPossible increases1979–1991, 1991–1996Increasing or steady to2000, partly because ofchange in distribution?;declined 2001–2003 (onsmall samples)Migratory, possible inspring, likely in summerA few present year-round inSRC; peak in summerPrimarily over continentalshelf but some offshoreTropical to subtropicalwatersPrimarily offshore,temperate watersContinental slope andoffshore watersMigratory, residentJun–Nov Primarily offshoreSouthbound migrationDec–Feb, peaking in Jan;northbound Feb–May,peaking in MarchMostly coastal but offshoreroutes are used near theChannel IslandsA-3 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable A-1 (continued). Summary of Information on Cetaceans that may be Encountered in the SOCAL Range Complex. Based onMarine Mammal Stock Assessments Prepared by Barlow et al. (1997), Forney et al. (2000), and Carretta et al. (2001, 2005).Species Status¹Suborder Odontoceti (toothed whales)Sperm whale(Physeter macrocephalus )Pygmy sperm whale(Kogia breviceps )Endangered,depleted,strategicMinimum StockSize (CV)²Abundancein SOCAL Population Trend Seasonality Habitat PreferenceMost common in autumnbut seasonal abundancevariesUsually pelagic; water>15ºC; inshore when squidare abundant885 (0.41)CA/OR/WA Un-common Variable but no trends119 (0.67)CA/OR/WA Rare N/A Possible year round Seaward of continental shelfDwarf sperm whale(Kogia sima ) N/APossiblevisitor N/A Possible year round Continental shelfCuvier’s beaked whale1,121 (0.68)Unknown; chatches by(Ziphius cavirostris )CA/OR/WA Un-common N/Awhalers near SRC Oct–Jan. PelagicMesoplodont beaked whales645 (0.92)(Mesoplodon spp.)³CA/OR/WA Rare N/A Unknown PelagicBaird’s beaked whale152 (0.51)Continental slope and(Berardius bairdii )CA/OR/WA Rare N/A Possible throughout the year pelagicRough-toothed dolphin(Steno bredanensis ) N/A Rare N/A Possible throughout the year Warm nearshore watersBottlenose dolphin186 (0.12) CAYear-round resident of(Tursiops truncatus ) coastalonly Rare No trend, stable. coastal areas Within 0.5 NM of shoreBottlenose dolphin(Tursiops truncatus ) offshore3,053 (0.66)CA/OR/WA Common N/AYear-round resident, no seasonal peakContinental shelf, slope, andoffshore watersPantropical spotted dolphin(Stenella attenuata ) N/A Rare N/A Possible throughout the year Pelagic, tropical, andtemperate watersStriped dolphin(Stenella coeruleoalba )Short-beaked common dolphin(Delphinus delphis )Long-beaked common dolphin(Delphinus capensis )9,165 (0.53)CA/WA/OR365,617 (0.25)CA/OR/WA25,163 (0.72) CAonly, no sightingsfrom OR and WAOccasionalvisitor fromoffshoreCommon,seasonallyabundantdespite efforts UncommonPossible increase overthe last decadeIncreased sightings likelydistribution changesattributable to variableProbably summer andautumnoceanography Year-round residentIncreased sightings likelydistribution changesattributable to variableoceanography100-300 nm or moreoffshoreCoast to 300 nm or fartherfrom shoreYear-round resident, peaknumbers in summer Coast to 50 nm from shoreFebruary 2007 A-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix ATable A-1 (continued). Summary of Information on Cetaceans that may be Encountered in the SOCAL Range Complex. Based onMarine Mammal Stock Assessments Prepared by Barlow et al. (1997), Forney et al. (2000), and Carretta et al. (2001, 2005).Species Status¹Pacific white-sided dolphin(Lagenorhynchus obliquidens )Minimum StockSize (CV)²Abundancein SCR Population Trend Seasonality Habitat Preference39,822 (0.5)CA/OR/WA Common No trend observedRisso’s dolphin(Grampus griseus ) 12,748 (0.28) Common No trend observedNorthern right whale dolphin(Lissodelphis borealis )16,417 (0.26)CA/OR/WA Common No trend observedYear round resident with N-S movements to colderwaterareas in late springand summerYear-round resident, peak inwinter, low numbers insummerResident in winter andspring, peak numbers inwinter, few in summerFalse killer whale(Pseudorca crassidens ) N/A Rare N/A Possible throughout the yearKiller whale (Orcinus orca )Eartern North Pacific SouthernResident StockKiller whale(Orcinus orca )Transient and offshorepopulationsDepleted,strategic, notconsidered aspecies, so notlisted underESAShort-finned pilot whale(Globicephalamacrorhynchus ) StrategicDall’s porpoise(Phocoenoides dalli )84 (census) S.Vancouver Isl. toN. WA is core ofrange, sightingsfrom S. WA to CA Un-commonIncreased 35% to 961973–1993 aftercessation of live captures,declined to 791995–2002, sinceincreased to 83Continental shelf, slope, andoffshore; prefers deepwatersMostly offshore, recentlyover continental shelfContinental slope; water 8-19ºCPelagic, tropical, and subtropicalwatersUnlikely in summer,possible in spring, autumn,winter Widely distributed1,038 (0.31)CA/OR/WA;361offshore, 677transient Un-common N/A Possible throughout the year Widely distributed149 (1.02)CA/OR/WACommonbefore 1982,nowuncommon.75,915 (0.33)CA/OR/WA Common N/APopulation shift fromregion occurred after1982 El Niño, but someanimals have returned.¹ All species are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.² CV (coefficient of variation) is a measure of a number's variability. The larger the CV, the higher the variability.³ Blainville’s, Perrin's, pygmy, gingko-toothed, and Hubbs’ beaked whalesYear-round resident buthigher numbers present inautumn and winter.Year round resident, peaknumbers in autumn/winter,low numbers in summerOffshore and shallowwaters.Continental shelf, slope, andoffshore water

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 A-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AThe specific definition of a strategic stock is complex, but in general it is a stock for which humanactivities may be having a deleterious effect on the population and may not be sustainable. In addition,the California/Oregon/Washington Stock of the short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus)has been designated as strategic. The killer whale is not listed under the ESA, but the Eastern NorthPacific Southern Resident Stock, members of which may occur off California, is considered depleted anda strategic stock. The stocks of minke whales and mesoplodont beaked whales off the coast ofCalifornia/Oregon/Washington have been reclassified as non-strategic (Barlow et al., 1998; Caretta et al.,2005). All marine mammals are protected by the MMPA (MMPA 1972, amended 1994 and 2004;16 C.F.R. § 1431 et seq.).Overall, a comparison of cetacean abundance in 1979/1980 vs. 1991 indicated that numbers of mysticetesand odontocetes increased in offshore California waters over the 12-year period. However, that is not sofor the short-finned pilot whale, which appears to have decreased in numbers (Barlow 1994, 1995; Forneyet al. 1995, 2000). Also, the increased abundance of blue whales reported previously in the ChannelIslands and elsewhere off southern California (e.g., Calambokidis et al., 1990; Barlow 1994, 1995) wasnot confirmed by certain long-term vessel-based surveys (Larkman and Veit, 1998), and there areindications, albeit based on small samples, of a decrease between 2001 and 2003 (Carretta et al., 2005).The status of cetacean stocks and their abundance estimates for California are summarized in Table 1from marine mammal stock assessments prepared by Barlow et al. (1997), Forney et al. (2000), andCarretta et al. (2001, 2005).PinnipedsSix species of pinnipeds may occur in the SOCAL Range Complex (Table A-2). Only one of the species,the California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), is abundant in the Southern California Bight. In theSOCAL Range Complex, a small rookery is located on Santa Barbara Island (Le Boeuf and Bonnell,1980; Bonnell and Dailey, 1993), and Guadalupe Island, just south of the Range Complex, is a majorhaul-out site (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993; Ronald and Gots, 2003; Lowry and Forney, 2005). The harborseal (Phoca vitulina) occupies haul-out sites on mainland beaches and all of the Channel Islands,including Santa Barbara and Santa Catalina Islands (Lowry and Carretta, 2003). Small colonies ofnorthern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) breed and haul out on Santa Barbara Island (Bonnelland Dailey, 1993; U.S. Navy, 1998; U.S. Navy, 2002a). All three species are more abundant on theChannel Islands north of the SOCAL Range Complex. The overall abundance of these species increasedrapidly on the Channel Islands between the end of commercial exploitation in the 1920s and the mid-1980s. The growth rates of populations of some species appear to have declined after the mid-1980s, andsome survey data suggested that localized populations of some species were declining. The declines mayhave been a result of either interspecific competition or population numbers having exceeded the carryingcapacity of the environment (Stewart et al., 1993; Hanan, 1996). More recently, most populations areincreasing (Carretta et al., 2004). The aforementioned pinniped species are not listed as endangered orthreatened under the ESA (Barlow et al., 1997).Three of the six pinniped species (the northern fur seal Callorhinus ursinus, the Guadalupe fur sealArctocephalus townsendi, and the Steller sea lion Eumetopias jubatus) that could be found in the SOCALRange Complex are less common. The northern fur seal breeds on San Miguel Island to the north, and isoccasionally seen feeding in offshore waters. The Guadalupe fur seal is an occasional visitor to theChannel Islands, and breeds only on Guadalupe Island, Mexico, just south of the SOCAL RangeComplex. This species is thought to have expanded its range from Guadalupe Island in recent years(Maravilla-Chavez and Lowry, 1999). The Steller sea lion was once abundant in the northern portion ofthe SOCAL Range Complex, but has declined rapidly since 1938. No adult Steller sea lions have beensighted since 1983 (NMFS, 1992). The northern fur seal is not listed as endangered or threatened underthe ESA.A-7 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAThe Guadalupe fur seal and the Steller sea lion are both designated as threatened under the ESA, and thusdepleted under the MMPA. Their stocks are considered to be strategic. The state of California also liststhe Guadalupe fur seal as threatened per the Fish and Game Commission California Code of Regulations(Title 14, Section 670.5, b, 6, H).Table A-2. Summary of information on pinnipeds and fissipeds that may be encountered in theSOCAL Range Complex. Based on Forney et al. (2000) and Caretta et al. (2001, 2005)Species Status¹MinimumStock Size(CV)²Order CarnivoraSuborder Pinnipedia (seals, sea lions, walruses)Abundancein SOCAL Population Trend SeasonalityHarbor seal (Phocavitulina richardsi ) 25,720 CA Common Increasing Year-roundCommon onNorthern elephantland,Abundant alongseal (Miroungauncommon Increasing in CA, stable or coast duringangustirostris )60,547 CA at sea declining in Mexico winterNorthern fur seal(Callorhinus ursinus ) 4,190 CA CommonGuadalupe fur seal(Arctocephalustownsendi )Steller sea lion(Eumetopias jubatus )Eastern StockCalifornia sea lion(Zalophuscalifornianus )Family Mustelidae (otters)Sea otter (Enhydralutris ) CaliforniaStockIncreased 8.3%/yr since1968 but still recoveringfrom severe pup mortalityfollowing 1983 and 1997El Niño eventsthreateneddepleted,strategic 3,028 CA Rare Increasing 13.7%/yrthreateneddepleted,strategic6,555CA/OR/WA Rare Declining May138,881 CAAbundantduringsummerIncreasing but pupproduction declines in ElNiño yearsDuring winterand springOccasionalvisitor duringsummerLarge summerconcentrations,low numbersduring winterthreateneddepleted 2,359 CA Rare Increasing 5.7%/yr in CA Year-round¹ All species are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.² CV (coefficient of variation) is a measure of a number's variability. The larger the CV, the higher the variability.HabitatPreferenceSandybeaches,continentalshelfSandybeaches,continentalshelfSandybeaches,continentalshelfSandybeaches,continentalshelfSandybeaches,continentalshelfRockybeaches,continentalshelfRockycoastlinewith kelpbedsSea OtterThe southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis) occurs along the coast of central California between PointAño Nuevo and Purisima Point, and a small experimental population has been translocated to San NicolasIsland, north of the SOCAL Range Complex. Sea otters were heavily harvested during the 18th and 19thcenturies and were nearly exterminated from California waters. The existing population is believed tohave expanded primarily from a remnant population at Bixby Creek along the coast of southern MontereyCounty (Leatherwood et al., 1978). These sea otters were protected in 1911, and the population hasFebruary 2007 A-8

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix Aslowly increased and expanded its range. Aside from the small translocated population at San NicolasIsland (under the jurisdiction of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), few sea otters are expected to occurwithin offshore areas of the SOCAL Range Complex because of their preference for relatively shallow(~66 ft [20 m] deep), coastal waters. The southern sea otter is listed as threatened under the ESA anddesignated as depleted under the MMPA.MAJOR DATA SOURCES FOR DISTRIBUTION MAPSSightings of marine mammals at sea within and near the SOCAL Range Complex have been described inmany reports and publications. The sources of information for the sightings on the maps included in thisEA/OEA are summarized below in Table A-3, and details are provided in Appendix A-3 of the SOCALMarine Resource Assessment (U.S. Navy, 2005). Tracklines and survey grid blocks for aerial andshipboard surveys conducted in and near the Range Complex during cold-water period and warm-waterperiods are given in Figures A-1 and A-2, respectively.In addition to the sightings, the maps also include three areas of occurrence: primary, secondary, and rare.Protected species biologists with the NMFS-SWFSC ultimately devised these qualitative terms. “Area ofprimary occurrence” is defined as the areas and habitats where the species is primarily found. “Area ofsecondary occurrence” is defined as the areas and habitats where the species may be found, especiallyduring “anomalous” environmental conditions. “Area of rare occurrence” is defined as the areas andhabitats where the species is not expected to be found regularly. “Unknown” (hatched) is defined as theareas and habitats for which insufficient information is available to establish occurrence because of lackof survey effort. The areas were designated using best judgment, including NMFS-SWFSC expertopinion (based on many years of survey experience in the area), known habitat preferences anddistribution of a species, and mathematical models.Table A-3. Sources of Information for Sightings of Marine Mammals at Sea within and Near theSOCAL Range ComplexNaval Undersea Center (now the Naval Ocean Systems Center NOSC ) aerial surveys over the continental shelf from Point Conceptionsouth to 31°30’N and offshore to 121°W, 1968–1975 (Leatherwood and Walker 1979; Dahlheim et al. 1982; Leatherwood et al. 1984).NMFS-SWFSC coastal bottlenose dolphin aerial surveys along the central and southern California coast (~32°N–38°N), 1990–2000(Carretta et al. 1998). Only data from 1990–1994 and 1999–2000 were included.NMFS-SWFSC California coastal cetacean surveys out to ~280 km offshore off southern California, March–April 1991 and February–April1992 (Carretta and Forney 1993; Forney and Barlow 1993; Forney et al. 1995).NMFS-SWFSC aerial surveys in a portion of the Navy Outer Sea Test Range (OSTR), west of San Nicolas Island in the Point Mugu SeaRange, January 1993–May 1994 (Carretta et al. 1995).Minerals Management Service (MMS) aerial surveys of seabirds and marine mammals in the waters of the Santa Barbara Channel and theSanta Maria Basin, November 1994 and August 1997 (Schmitt et al. 2003).Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (CINMS) aerial survey, June 1997–December 2003 (Waltenberger and Pickett 2000;Schwemm et al. 2000).NMFS-SWFSC aerial surveys of the San Clemente Island Range Complex, April 1998–July 1999 (Carretta et al. 2000). NOSC shipboardsurveys from Point Conception to the tip of Baja California, 1965–1975, each quarter of the year; and from San Diego to Kodiak, AK, in April(Leatherwood and Walker 1979; Dahlheim et al. 1982; Leatherwood et al. 1984).Pacific Ocean Biological Survey Program of the Smithsonian Institution shipboard surveys from the Mexican border towaters off British Columbia, 1967 and 1968 (Leatherwood and Walker 1979).A-9 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable A-3 (continued). Sources of Information for Sightings of Marine Mammals at Sea Withinand Near the SOCAL Range ComplexNMFS-SWFSC coastal marine mammal shipboard survey between Cape Mendocino and the tip of Baja California, 27 September–20October 1979 (Smith et al. 1986).NMFS-SWFSC California Marine Mammal Survey (CAMMS) shipboard surveys out to a distance of ~555 km offshore and around each ofthe Channel Islands at a distance of 1.85 km, 28 July–5 November 1991 (Hill and Barlow 1992; Barlow and Gerrodette 1996).NMFS-SWFSC Population of Delp in s Stocks (PODS) shipboard surveys along the U.S. and Mexican west coasts, 28 July–6 November1993 (Mangels and Gerrodette 1994a).Whales ’95, an acoustic and visual shipboard survey in the Southern California Bight, fall 1995 (Clark and Fristrup 1995).NMFS-SWFSC Cetacean Acoustic Detection and Dive Interval Studies (CADDIS) shipboard surveys in the southern Gulf of Californiaand along the western coast of Baja California, September–November 1995 (Barlow et al. 1997).NMFS-SWFSC Oregon, California, and Washington Line-Transect Expedition (ORCAWALE) shipboard surveys off the coasts ofCalifornia, Oregon, and Washington to a distance of ~556 km offshore, 1996 and 2001 (Appler et al. 2004).NMFS-SWFSC Monitoring of Porpoise Stocks (MOPS) shipboard surveys in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean, late July–earlyDecember 1986–1990 (Wade and Gerrodette 1993).NMFS-SWFSC Population of Delp in s Stocks (PODS) shipboard surveys in the eastern tropical Pacific, from 28 July–2 November 1992(Mangels and Gerrodette 1994b).NMFS-SWFSC Hawaiian Islands Cetacean and Ecosystem Assessment Survey (HICEAS) shipboard surveys around the HawaiianIslands, including transit from and to southern California, 27 July–9 December 2002 (Barlow et al. 2004).Bureau of Land Management (BLM) aerial and shipboard Marine Mammal and Seabird Surveys of the Southern California Bight Areafrom Point Conception to the U.S./Mexico border, May 1975–March 1978 (Bonnell et al. 1981; Dohl et al. 1981).NMFS-SWFSC and CDFG pilot whale aerial and shipboard surveys in the immediate vicinity of Santa Catalina Island, December 1980–March 1981 (Oliver and Jackson 1987) and January–November 1982 (Evans et al. 1984).DoD, NMFS, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, and Cascadia Research aerial and shipboard marine mammal surveys in theSouthern California Offshore Range (SCORE), shipboard surveys 4–6 times per year since 2000, aerial surveys quarterly since 2001(Calambokidis et al. 2002, 2003; MPLWA 2003).California Marine Mammal Stranding Network Database, 1995–2000, received from Mr. Joe Cordaro, Southwest Regional StrandingCoordinator with the NMFS-SWR.Marine mammal bycatch records from the California/Oregon drift gillnet fishery, 1990–2003, and the California set gillnet fishery, 1990–2000, received from the NMFS-SWFSC.North Pacific Right Whale Database, a review of all available 20th century records, provided by Ms. Caroline Good (Duke University) withthe permission of Dr. Phillip Clapham (NMFS-Alaska Fisheries Science Center).NMFS Platforms of Opportunity Program (POP) sighting data, provided by Dr. Sally Mizroch (NMML).USGS seismic-reflection surveys marine mammal monitoring off southern California near Los Angeles, August 1998, in coastal watersbetween Los Angeles and San Diego, 6–17 June 1999, and from the Santa Barbara Basin to the U.S./Mexico border, 7–27 June 2000 (Quanand Calambokidis 1999; USGS 1999; Gutmacher et al. 2000).Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) Atlas for Southern California, which includes pinniped haul-out sites located in the Channel Islandsand along the California mainland (NOS 2001).February 2007 A-10

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-1. On-effort Tracklines and Survey Grid Blocks for Aerial and Shipboard SurveysConducted in and Near the SOCAL Range Complex during the Cold-water PeriodA-11 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-2. On-effort Tracklines and Survey Grid Blocks for Aerial and Shipboard SurveysConducted in and Near the SOCAL Range Complex during the Warm-water PeriodFebruary 2007 A-12

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AMARINE MAMMAL DENSITY ESTIMATESIn order to estimate marine mammal densities specific to the operational areas addressed in theJTFEX/COMPTUEX EA/OEA and SOCAL EIS/OEIS, we used previously derived density estimates,namelyDensities calculated for the Point Mugu Sea Range EIS/OEIS (density estimates and a completedescription of the methods used to calculate them are included in the Point Mugu Sea Range EIS/OEISMarine Mammal Technical Report [U.S. Navy 1998]).Densities calculated for the SCIRC, which are based on NMFS aerial surveys conducted in 1998 and1999 over water depths from the shore of San Clemente Island to ~1,000 m depth (Carretta et al. 2000).There are separate estimates for cold- and warm-water periods.Density and effort data derived from NMFS 1986–1996 ship-based surveys, conducted in summer andfall (Ferguson and Barlow 2001). Ferguson and Barlow provided density estimates by species for blocks5° x 5° in area. The SOCAL OPAREA intersects 5 of those blocks (Figures 1 and 2).Point Mugu COMPTUEX/JTFEXIn order to assess potential impacts from COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities in the Point Mugu Sea Range,we will use the densities calculated for the Point Mugu Sea Range EIS/OEIS (see Appendix A, Table A-1in the Marine Mammal Technical Report [U.S. Navy, 1998]).SOCAL Range ComplexTo estimate marine mammal densities in the SOCAL Range Complex, we identified three strata for whichwe calculated separate density estimates based on available data: 1,000-m depth northof 30°N, and >1,000-m depth south of 30°N.Warm- and Cold-water Densities in Water 1,000 m DepthFor water depths >1,000 m, we calculated warm-water cetacean densities for two offshore areas, onenorth of 30N and one south of there. We used data provided in Ferguson and Barlow (2001) for Blocks58 and 59 to estimate cetacean densities in the area north of 30N, and the data for blocks 72, 73, and 88to estimate densities south of 30N. Pinnipeds were not recorded by Ferguson and Barlow (2001), but theonly pinnipeds known to occur in deep, offshore waters are adult male California sea lions and northernelephant seals during their migrations between haul-out sites and feeding areas.Blocks 58 and 59, from 30°N to 35°N and 115°W to 125°W, include water depths from shore to >4,000m. Cetacean density estimates calculated from the data of Ferguson and Barlow (2001) for those areasare relatively high (totals of 1.64/km² and 0.58/km² for Block 58 and 59, respectively). It is recognizedthat these estimates overestimate true densities of many species in deeper water and underestimate truedensities in shallower water because (1) the densities were calculated for the entire 5° x 5° blocks, and (2)many species are more abundant in relatively shallow water (i.e., 1,000–2,000 m) than in deep, oceanicwater. Densities from the two blocks were weighted by survey effort and size of the SOCAL RangeComplex in the block.Blocks 72 and 73 are due south of Blocks 58 and 59, and Block 88 is due south of Block 73. Blocks 73and 88 are entirely in deep (generally >4,000 m) water, and most of Block 72 is in deep water. Cetaceandensity estimates calculated from the data of Ferguson and Barlow (2001) for those areas are relativelyA-13 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAlow (totals of to 0.21/km², 0.18 km 2 , and 0.15/km² for Blocks 72, 73, and 88, respectively). Densitiesfrom the three blocks were weighted by survey effort and size of the SOCAL Range Complex in theblock.Cold-water Densities in Water >1,000 m DepthAs the NMFS 1986–1996 ship-based surveys were conducted only during the warm-water season, coldseason densities for marine mammals in the SOCAL Range Complex were derived by multiplying thewarm season densities by ratios calculated using data collected during other studies in the area. For thefive species for which both warm and cold season densities were estimated for the SCIRC (i.e., thosespecies sighted during the aerial surveys of the SCIRC conducted by NMFS in 1998–1999), thosedensities were used individually. For another 13 species for which both warm and cold season densitieswere estimated for the Point Mugu Sea Range, one average ratio was calculated for each of warm- andcold-dominant species, and applied to the same species in the SOCAL Range Complex. For otherspecies, seasonal patterns in distribution in or near the SOCAL Range Complex are unknown, so the ratiowas assumed to be 1.0. Seasonal trends, data sources, and calculated warm-water: cold-water ratios forall species occurring in waters with depths >1,000 m in the SOCAL Range Complex are given in TableA-4.Species Not Sighted during the Ferguson and Barlow (2001) SurveysSeveral species known to inhabit the region were not seen during the NMFS 1986–1996 ship-basedsurveys (Ferguson and Barlow, 2001), either through seasonal bias (the surveys were conducted onlyduring summer and fall), low survey effort, or the inability to distinguish between similar species. Thosespecies were assigned an arbitrary, low density for the lowest-weighted block in each of the northern andsouthern regions. That ensured that expected species were included in the prorating of unidentified didbelong to those two animals 1 . As an example, no Bryde’s or sei whales were identified to species.However, two unidentified categories–“Bryde’s or sei” and “unidentified rorqual”–undoubtedly referredto animals of those species. Had their initial density been kept at zero, none of the unidentified animalswould have been assigned to the species during prorating. Calculated density estimates for the warm- andcold water seasons in water depths >1,000 m north of 30°N and south of 30°N are given in Table A-5.Density estimates for water depths

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-3. Range Complex and the Ferguson and Barlow (2001) Survey Blocks in which it OccursA-15 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable A-4. Seasonal Trends, Data Sources, and Calculated Warm-water:Cold-water Ratios for AllSpecies Occurring in Depths >1,000 m in the SOCAL Range ComplexSpeciesDominant seasonin or near theSOCAL RCData SourceCold WarmWater RatioOdontoceti Sperm whale Warm Pt. Mugu 0.61Pygmy sperm whale Unknown 1Dwarf sperm whale Unknown 1Cuvier’s beaked whale None Pt. Mugu 1Ziphiid whales None Pt. Mugu 1Baird's beaked whale None Pt. Mugu 1Mesoplodon sp. None Pt. Mugu 1Rough-toothed dolphin Unknown 1Bottlenose dolphin Cold SCIRC 1.5Spotted dolphin Unknown 1Short-beaked common dolphin Warm SCIRC 0.38Long-beaked common dolphin Warm SCIRC 0.38Northern right-whale dolphin Cold Pt. Mugu 4.8Striped dolphin Warm Pt. Mugu 0.61Pacific white-sided dolphin None Pt. Mugu 1Risso’s dolphin Cold SCIRC 1Dall's porpoise Cold Pt. Mugu 4.8False killer whale Unknown 1Killer whale None Pt. Mugu 1Short-finned pilot whale Unknown 1Mysticeti Humpback whale Warm Pt. Mugu 0.61Minke whale None Pt. Mugu 1North Pacific right whale Cold SOCAL MRA N/A¹Sei whale Warm Pt. Mugu 0.61Fin whale Warm SCIRC 0.33Blue whale Warm SCIRC 0.1Bryde's whale Unknown 1¹ The North Pacific right whale occurs farther north in summer, so its density was estimated as 0 in summer.February 2007 A-16

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix ATable A-5. Calculated Density Estimates for Marine Mammals in the SOCAL Range Complexduring the Warm- and Cold-water Seasons in Water Depths >1,000 m North of 30°N and South of30°NSuborderSpeciesAverage Density north of30 N (no./km )WarmSeasonCold SeasonAverage Density south of30 N(no./km )WarmSeasonCold SeasonOdontoceti Sperm whale 0.0004927 0.0003005 0.0005026 0.0003066Pygmy sperm whale 0.0121867 0.0121867 0.0072295 0.0072295Dwarf sperm whale 0.0000012 0.0000012 0.0000049 0.0000049Cuvier’s beaked whale 0.0006315 0.0006315 0.0055839 0.0055839Ziphiid whales 0.0007578 0.0007578 0.0000553 0.0000553Baird’s beaked whale 0.0000234 0.0000234 0.0000068 0.0000068Mesoplodon spp. 0.0000012 0.0000012 0.0000000 0.0000000Rough-toothed dolphin 0.0000000 0.0000000 0.0000050 0.0000050Bottlenose dolphin 0.0054528 0.0081791 0.0017816 0.0026723Spotted dolphin 0.0000018 0.0000018 0.0820864 0.0820864Short-beaked common dolphin 1.2001396 0.4560530 0.0177109 0.0067301Long-beaked common dolphin 0.1587126 0.0603108 0.0000000 0.0000000Northern right-whale dolphin 0.0155904 0.0748340 0.0586521 0.0357778Striped dolphin 0.0093109 0.0056797 0.0000000 0.0000000Pacific white-sided dolphin 0.0281662 0.0281662 0.0003129 0.0003129Risso’s dolphin 0.0237676 0.0713029 0.0087937 0.0263812Dall’s porpoise 0.0000755 0.0003624 0.0010751 0.0051603False killer whale 0.0000018 0.0000018 0.0004646 0.0004646Killer whale 0.0000732 0.0000732 0.0000245 0.0000245Short-finned pilot whale 0.0000018 0.0000018 0.0000978 0.0000978Mysticeti Humpback whale 0.0000774 0.0000472 0.0000000 0.0000000Minke whale 0.0002465 0.0002465 0.0003395 0.0003395North Pacific right whale 0.0000019 0.0000019 0.0000000 0.0000000Sei whale 0.0000107 0.0000065 0.0000000 0.0000000Fin whale 0.0008659 0.0002858 0.0000000 0.0000000Blue whale 0.0056752 0.0005675 0.0000494 0.0000049Bryde’s whale 0.0000107 0.0000107 0.0000000 0.0000000A-17 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable A-6. Density Estimates for Marine Mammals in the SOCAL Range Complex during theWarm- and Cold-water Seasons in Water Depths

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AThe historic range of the North Pacific right whale included the entire North Pacific north of 35ºN, andincluded occasional sightings as far south as 20ºN. Thus, the SOCAL Range Complex is along thesouthern boundary of its expected range. Recent sightings have been near shore in continental shelfwaters, but it must be noted that there have been more opportunities for sightings in nearshore than inoffshore waters.Current distribution patterns and migration routes of North Pacific right whales are not known (Scarff1986; NMFS, 2002), nor is the extent to which they engage in north-south migrations in the eastern NorthPacific Ocean (Scarff, 1986). The location of winter calving grounds for the eastern North Pacificpopulation is unknown (Scarff, 1986; NMFS 2002; Clapham et al., 2004). In summer, the eastern BeringSea is used for foraging (NMFS 2002). Right whales have been observed each summer since 1996 in theeastern Bering Sea in roughly the same location (Goddard and Rugh, 1998; Moore et al., 2000; Tynan etal., 2001).In the North Pacific Ocean south of 50ºN, only 29 reliable sightings were recorded from 1900 to 1994(Scarff, 1986; Scarff, 1991; Carretta et al., 1994). Despite many miles of systematic aerial and ship-basedsurveys for marine mammals off the coasts of Oregon/Washington/California over the years, only sevendocumented sightings of right whales were made from 1990 to 2000 (Waite et al., 2003). Twenty-threereliable sightings of right whales in California waters have been reported, plus one additional stranding,for the years 1855–1982 (Scarff, 1986). Most of the sightings have been of single animals, and mostoccurred in winter or early spring (March–May) and very close to shore (Scarff, 1991). Two of therecords, one whale 38 nm (70 km) southwest of San Clemente Island on 24 March 1992 (Carretta et al.,1994) and one whale 8 nm (15 km) off Santa Catalina Island on 9 May 1990, were in the general vicinityof the SOCAL Range Complex.Since 1982, five additional sightings of right whales in California or Baja waters have been reported: One whale off La Jolla on 5 February 1988 (Scarff 1991) A stranding on Santa Cruz Island in 1916 (Scarff 1986) One whale WNW of Point Mugu on 17 April 1981 (Woodhouse and Strickley 1982) One whale off Piedras Blancas on 3 May 1995 (Rowlett et al. 1994) One whale 8 nm (15 km) off Cabo San Lucas by D. Gendron on 20 February 1996 (Gendron etal. 1999) Off the Big Sur coast on 27 February 1998 (Evans 1998 in Brownell et al. 2001)Humpback WhaleThe humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) is listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Mexico stock is, therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. Humpbackwhales occur worldwide, migrating from tropical breeding areas to polar or sub-polar feeding areas(Jefferson et al. 1993). The California/Mexico stock inhabits waters from Costa Rica (Steiger et al.,1991) to southern British Columbia (Calambokidis et al., 1993). This stock is most abundant in coastalwaters off California during spring and summer and off Mexico during autumn and winter. The mostrecent estimate of population size for the California/Washington stock is 943 (Carretta et al., 2005).Although humpback whales typically travel over deep, oceanic waters during migration, their feeding andbreeding habitats are mostly in shallow, coastal waters over continental shelves (Clapham and Mead,1999). Shallow banks or ledges with high sea-floor relief characterize feeding grounds (Payne et al.,1990; Hamazaki, 2002). North Pacific humpback whales are distributed primarily in four more-or-lessdistinct wintering areas: the Ryukyu and Ogasawara (Bonin) Islands (south of Japan), Hawai’i, theRevillagigedo Islands off Mexico, and along the coast of mainland Mexico (Calambokidis et al., 2001).During summer months, North Pacific humpback whales feed in a nearly continuous band from southernCalifornia to the Aleutian Islands, Kamchatka Peninsula, and the Bering and Chukchi seas (Calambokidiset al., 2001).A-19 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAHumpback whales are found alone or in groups of two or three, but throughout their breeding and feedingranges they may congregate in groups of up to 12 or 15 (Leatherwood and Reeves, 1983).Humpback whale sightings in the SOCAL Range Complex are shown in Figure A-4.Minke WhaleThe minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock and is not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. In theNortheast Pacific Ocean, minke whales range from the Chukchi Sea south to Baja California(Leatherwood et al. 1987). They occur year-round off California (Dohl et al., 1983; Barlow, 1995;Forney et al., 1995). The minke whales found in waters off California, Oregon, and Washington appearto be resident in that area, and to have home ranges, whereas those farther north are migratory. Thepopulation abundance for offshore California, Oregon, and Washington as a whole was estimated to be585 (CV=0.73) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005).The minke whale generally occupies waters over the continental shelf, including inshore bays andestuaries (Mitchell and Kozicki, 1975; Ivashin and Vitrogov, 1981; Murphy, 1995; Mignucci-Giannoni1998; Calambokidis et al., 2004). However, based on whaling catches and surveys worldwide, there isalso a deep-ocean component to the minke whale’s distribution (Slijper et al., 1964; Horwood, 1990;Mitchell, 1991; Mellinger et al., 2000; Roden and Mullin, 2000).Minke whale abundance in the Southern California Bight fluctuates dramatically through the year, withwarm-water months being the period of greatest abundance (Dohl et al., 1981). Because of the apparentfluctuations in abundance, Bonnell and Dailey (1993) believed that some minke whales migratednorthward through the Southern California Bight in spring and returned southward through the same areain autumn. Leatherwood et al. (1987) suggested that minke whales may remain in the area throughout theyear, and that the scarcity of sightings during autumn and winter may be attributable to behavioral andenvironmental considerations. The lack of sightings in autumn and winter may also be attributable tomovements into offshore areas where there has been less survey effort. The surveys conducted in theSCIRC in 1998–1999 recorded minke whales during the cold-water but not the warm-water period(Carretta et al., 2000), whereas the densities calculated for the Point Mugu EIS/OEIS showed nopreference for cold or warm water (U.S. Navy, 1998).The summer distribution of minke whales was described by Bonnell and Dailey (1993). They are seencommonly along the shelves associated with the southern coasts of the Channel Islands and offshorefeatures south of there. Ship-based surveys during the summers of 1991 and 1993 seem to confirm theimportance of the Southern California Bight for minke whales. Three of the eight sightings made duringthose two extensive surveys were in or adjacent to the Southern California Bight despite relatively littlesurvey effort in that area.Few minke whales are present in the nearshore and continental slope parts of the Southern CaliforniaBight during winter, but they appear to be present in offshore waters. The few sightings in wintersometimes include newborn or small calves, suggesting that the Southern California Bight is part of, or atleast near, the calving grounds of this stock (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993).February 2007 A-20

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-4. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Humpback Whales in and Near the SOCALRange Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005A-21 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-5. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Minke Whales in and Near the SOCAL RangeComplex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-22

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AOff California, minke whales are usually seen alone or in groups of two or three animals. Only one whalewas seen during the 1998–1999 surveys (Carretta et al., 2000). The mean size of 89 groups reported byU.S. Navy (1998) was 1.4, and the largest group was 17. Their diets in other areas are diverse, but in theSOCAL Range Complex they probably feed on euphausiids and small, shoaling fish. They are not knownto make prolonged deep dives (Leatherwood and Reeves, 1983).In the SOCAL Range Complex, during both the warm-water and cold-water periods, the minke whaleappears to be concentrated near shore and over the continental shelf and slope in the northern part of theRange Complex (Fig. A-5). Data from acoustic surveys indicate that minke whales also occur furtheroffshore on the westernmost fringe of the SOCAL Range Complex (Barlow et al., 2004).Bryde’s WhaleBryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni) is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and the Eastern TropicalPacific Stock is not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. The best estimate of the easterntropical Pacific population size is 11,163 (CV=0.20) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005).Bryde’s whale is found in tropical and subtropical waters, generally not moving poleward of 40° in eitherhemisphere (Jefferson et al., 1993). Long migrations are not typical of Bryde’s whales, though limitedshifts in distribution toward and away from the equator, in winter and summer, respectively, have beenobserved (Cummings, 1985). Bryde’s whales are year-round residents of the inshore waters on the westcoast of Baja California south to at least as far as the Islas Tres Marias, at 21°N (Rice, 1977). The speciesis rarely seen near the SOCAL Range Complex. None were sighted either in the Point Mugu Sea Rangeor in the SCIRC during recent studies (U.S. Navy, 1998; Carretta et al., 2000). Only one Bryde’s whalehas ever been positively identified in surveys of California coastal waters (Barlow, 1994).It is not known how many of the eastern tropical Pacific population could occur in California waters. Oneestimate is 12 (CV=2.0) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005), another is 160 (Tershy et al., 1990). Bryde’swhales are more likely to be found in non-territorial waters but are occasionally sighted in nearshoreareas.Sei WhaleThe sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis) is listed as endangered under the ESA, and the Eastern NorthPacific Stock is, therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. The current estimate forsei whales in California, Oregon, and Washington is 35 (CV=0.61) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005).Sei whales are most often found in deep, oceanic waters of the cool temperate zone. They appear toprefer regions of steep bathymetric relief, such as the continental shelf break, canyons, or basins situatedbetween banks and ledges (Kenney and Winn, 1987; Schilling et al., 1992; Gregr and Trites, 2001; Bestand Lockyer, 2002). On feeding grounds, the distribution is largely associated with oceanic frontalsystems (Horwood, 1987). In the North Pacific, sei whales are found feeding particularly along the coldeastern currents (Perry et al., 1999).Historically, sei whales occurred in the California Current off central California (37ºN–39ºN), and theymay have ranged as far south as the area west of the Channel Islands (32º47’N) (Rice 1977). A few earlysightings were made in May and June, but they were encountered there primarily during July–September,and had left California waters by mid-October.Three sightings were made north of the SOCAL Range Complex in the Point Mugu Sea Range during thewarm-water months (June–September); there were two sightings north of Point Conception and onesighting south of the western tip of Santa Cruz Island (U.S. Navy, 1998). Recently, only one confirmedsighting of sei whales and five possible sightings (identified as either sei or Bryde’s whales) were made inCalifornia waters during extensive ship and aerial surveys during 1991–1993 (Mangels and Gerrodette,1994; Barlow, 1995; Forney et al., 1995). The confirmed sighting was more than 200 nm (370 km) offA-23 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAnorthern California. No sei whales were sighted during the recent NMFS/SWFSC surveys in 1998–1999(Carretta et al., 2000).Fin WhaleThe fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) is listed as endangered under the ESA, and the California/Oregon/Washington stock is, therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. Fin whales have aworldwide distribution with two distinct stocks recognized in the North Pacific: the East China Sea stockand “the rest of the North Pacific stock” (Donovan, 1991). Currently, there are considered to be threestocks in the North Pacific for management purposes: an Alaska stock, a Hawaii stock, and aCalifornia/Oregon/Washington stock (Barlow et al. 1997). Currently, the best estimate for theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is 2,541 (CV=0.31), based on ship-based surveys (Carretta et al.,2005).The fin whale is found in continental shelf and oceanic waters (Gregr and Trites, 2001; Reeves et al.,2002). Globally, it tends to be aggregated in locations where populations of prey are most plentiful,irrespective of water depth, although those locations may shift seasonally or annually (Payne et al., 1986,1990; Kenney et al., 1997; Notarbartolo-di-Sciara et al., 2003). Fin whales in the North Pacific spend thesummer feeding along the cold eastern boundary currents (Perry et al., 1999).The North Pacific population summers from the Chukchi Sea to California, and winters from Californiasouthward (Gambell, 1985). Aggregations of fin whales are found year-round off southern and centralCalifornia (Dohl et al., 1983; Forney et al. 1995; Barlow 1997). In the NMFS 1998–1999 surveys inSCIRC, they were sighted most frequently during warm-water months (Carretta et al., 2000). The finwhale was the second most commonly-encountered baleen whale (after gray whales) during thosesurveys; there were 21 sightings, with most sightings on the western side of San Clemente Island. Finwhale sightings in the SOCAL Range Complex are shown in Figure A-6.Blue WhaleThe blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) is listed as endangered under the ESA, and the Eastern NorthPacific Stock is, therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. The population estimatefor blue whales in the Eastern North Pacific Stock is 1,384 (CV=0.28) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005).The blue whale has a worldwide distribution in circumpolar and temperate waters. The population incoastal waters of California is present primarily from June to November, with a peak in blue whale callingintensity observed in September (Burtenshaw et al., 2004). This population is thought to inhabit watersoff Central America from December to May (Calambokidis, 1995). During the cold-water months, veryfew blue whales are present in waters off California (Forney and Barlow, 1998; Larkman and Veit, 1998;U.S. Navy, 1998).A few blue whales were observed in or near the SOCAL Range Complex in early to mid spring (U.S.Navy, 1998), but were most common during July–September (Hill and Barlow, 1992; Mangels andGerrodette, 1994; Teranishi et al., 1997; Larkman and Veit, 1998; U.S. Navy, 1998). During theSWFSC/NMFS surveys in 1998–1999, blue whales arrived in late May and were common into August,with one whale seen as late as November (Carretta et al., 2000). In other years, blue whales werecommon in waters west of San Clemente Island as late as mid-October (e.g., in 1995) (Spikes and Clark,1996; Clark and Fristrup, 1997; Clark et al., 1998).Photographic studies have proven that blue whales remain in waters off California throughout thesummer, apparently to feed (Calambokidis, 1995; Larkman and Veit, 1998). Over 100 blue whales werepresent in the Santa Barbara Channel in 1992 and 1994 (Calambokidis, 1995). Concentrations of bluewhales have been seen elsewhere off southern California in some years. Blue whale sightings in theSOCAL Range Complex are shown in Figure A-7.February 2007 A-24

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-6. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Fin Whales in and Near the SOCAL RangeComplex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005A-25 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-7. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Blue Whales in and Near the SOCAL RangeComplex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-26

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix ABlue whales usually occur singly or in small groups (Leatherwood and Reeves 1983). In the SCIRC, asingle blue whale was seen in the cold season, and the mean size of 8 groups seen in the warm season was1.3 (Carretta et al., 2000). The mean size of 125 groups seen in the Point Mugu Sea Range was 2.5,excluding one large group of 240 (U.S. Navy, 1998).Blue whales feed almost exclusively on euphausiids concentrated in the deep scattering layer and indaytime surface swarms (Schoenherr, 1991; Calambokidis, 1995; Fiedler et al., 1998), or on verticallymigrating prey species that are near the surface at night (Lagerquist et al., 1995). Their diving behavior isvariable. In one study, 75 % of dives monitored with satellite tags were to depths of 52 ft (16 m) or less(Lagerquist et al., 1995). In other circumstances, whales commonly dove to depths of 330–660 ft (100–200 m), with dives averaging about 230 ft (70 m) (D. Croll, University of California at Santa Cruz,Institute of Marine Science, personal. communication).Gray WhaleThe gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus) is not listed under the ESA, nor is the eastern Pacific stockconsidered strategic under the MMPA. It was removed from the list of threatened and endangered speciesin 1994 because of increases in population size. The stock was believed to consist of ~24,477 (CV=0.10)individuals in 2002 (Carretta et al., 2005). This estimate is similar to previous estimates in 1997–1998(26,635; CV=0.101; Hobbs and Rugh [1999]), 1993–1994 (23,109; CV=0.054; Laake et al. [1994]) and1995–1996 (22,263; CV=0.093; Hobbs et al. [1996]).The gray whale makes a well-defined seasonal north-south migration (Fig. A-8). Most of the populationsummers in the shallow waters of the northern Bering Sea, the Chukchi Sea, and the western Beaufort Sea(Rice and Wolman, 1971), whereas some individuals also summer along the Pacific coast fromVancouver Island to central California (Rice and Wolman, 1971; Darling, 1984; Nerini, 1984). InOctober and November, the whales begin to migrate southeast through Unimak Pass and follow theshoreline south to breeding grounds on the west coast of Baja California and the southeastern Gulf ofCalifornia (Braham 1984; Rugh, 1984). The average gray whale migrates 7,500–10,000 km at a rate of147 km/d (Rugh et al., 2001; Jones and Swartz 2002). Although some calves are born along the coast ofCalifornia, most are born in the shallow, protected waters on the Pacific coast of Baja California fromMorro de Santo Domingo (28°N) south to Isla Creciente (24°N) (Urban et al. 2003). The main calvingsites are Laguna Guerrero Negro, Laguna Ojo de Liebre, Laguna San Ignacio, and Estero Soledad (Rice etal., 1981).Almost all of the population passes through the SOCAL Range Complex during both the northward andthe southward migration. Gray whales are common there only during cold-water months; none weresighted in the warm season (May–October) in the 1998–1999 NMFS surveys of the SCIRC (Carretta etal., 2000). Southbound and northbound migrations through the SOCAL Range Complex occur, for themost part, at predictable times. The southbound migration begins in the third week of December, peaks inJanuary, and extends through February (Gilmore, 1960; Leatherwood, 1974). The northbound migrationgenerally begins in mid-February, peaks in March, and lasts at least through May. Gray whales do notspend much time feeding in the Range Complex. Northbound mothers and calves travel more slowly thanother whales, and tend to be seen later in the season. Gray whales are typically absent from August toNovember (Rice et al., 1981), although there have been a few summer sightings in southern Californiawaters (Patten and Samaras, 1977).A mean group size of 2.9 gray whales was reported for both coastal (16 groups) and non-coastal (15groups) areas in the SCIRC (Carretta et al., 2000). The largest group reported was nine animals. A meangroup size of 3.2 was reported for 141 groups sighted within the Point Mugu Sea Range, and 2.7 for 428groups seen east of the Point Mugu Sea Range (U.S. Navy, 1998). The largest group reported by U.S.Navy (1998) was 27 animals. There is no apparent difference in group sizes between day and night(Donahue et al., 1995).A-27 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-8. General Major Migratory Routes of Gray Whales in the Eastern North Pacific Ocean.Map Adapted from: Jones et al. (1984) and Findley and Vidal (2002).Odontocete Cetaceans (Toothed Whales)Sperm WhaleThe sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) is listed as endangered under the ESA and theCalifornia/Oregon/ Washington stock is considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. Theavailable data suggest that sperm whale abundance has been relatively stable in California waters since1979 (Barlow, 1994), but there is uncertainty about both the population size and the annual mortalityrates. There is a minimum population estimate of 885 (CV=0.41) for the California/Oregon/Washingtonstock based on ship-based surveys during summers of 1991 and 1993 (Carretta et al., 2005). Spermwhale abundance in the eastern temperate North Pacific Ocean is estimated to be 32,100 and 26,300 byacoustic and visual detection methods, respectively (Barlow and Taylor, 2005).Sperm whales show a strong preference for deep waters (Rice, 1989), especially areas with high sea-floorrelief. Sperm whale distribution is associated with waters over the continental shelf edge, over thecontinental slope, and into deeper waters (Hain et al., 1985; Kenney and Winn, 1987; Waring and Finn,1995; Gannier, 2000; Gregr and Trites, 2001; Waring et al., 2001). However, in some areas, such as offNew England, on the southwestern and eastern Scotian Shelf, and in the northern Gulf of California, adultmales are reported to quite consistently use waters with bottom depths

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AThe sperm whale was reported to be rare over the continental shelf of the Southern California Bight, butabundant directly offshore of the Southern California Bight (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993). During the 1991and 1993 NMFS ship-based surveys, sperm whales were more abundant farther offshore and farther souththan they were in the Southern California Bight. There are widely scattered sightings of sperm whales indeep waters of the SOCAL Range Complex in the warm-water period, and few sightings in the cold-waterperiod (Fig. A-9). No sperm whales were sighted during the 1998–1999 NMFS aerial surveys of theSCIRC (Carretta et al., 2000).The mean size of 21 groups sighted in the Point Mugu Sea Range was 5.6; nine of those groups were ofsingle animals (primarily adult males), and the largest group encountered was 21 (U.S. Navy, 1998).These estimates are likely low because little time was spent observing groups.Pygmy and Dwarf Sperm WhalesThese two species of small whales are distributed widely in the world's oceans, but they are poorly known(Caldwell and Caldwell, 1989). Their small size, non-gregarious nature, and cryptic behavior makepygmy whales (Kogia breviceps) and dwarf sperm whales (Kogia sima) difficult to observe. The twospecies are also difficult to distinguish when sighted at sea, and are often jointly categorized as Kogia spp.Neither species of Kogia is listed as endangered under the ESA or considered depleted under the MMPA.The minimum population estimate for the California/Oregon/Washington stock of the pygmy spermwhale is 119 (CV=0.67), and there is no information available to estimate the population size of the dwarfsperm whale off the Pacific coast of the U.S (Carretta et al., 2005).Dwarf and pygmy sperm whales are sighted primarily along the continental shelf edge and over deeperwaters off the shelf (Hansen et al. 1994; Davis et al. 1998). However, along the U.S. west coast, sightingsof the whales have been rare, although that is likely a reflection of their pelagic distribution and small sizerather than their true abundance (Carretta et al., 2002). Several studies have suggested that pygmy spermwhales live mostly beyond the continental shelf edge, whereas dwarf sperm whales tend to occur closer toshore, often over the continental shelf (Rice, 1998; Wang et al., 2002; MacLeod et al., 2004). Barros etal. (1998), on the other hand, suggested that dwarf sperm whales might be more pelagic and dive deeperthan pygmy sperm whales.Another suggestion is that the pygmy sperm whale is more temperate, and the dwarf sperm whale moretropical, based at least partially on live sightings at sea from a large database from the eastern tropicalPacific Ocean (Wade and Gerrodette, 1993). There, the pygmy sperm whale was not seen in truly tropicalwaters south of the southern tip of Baja California, but the dwarf sperm whale was common in thosewaters. This idea is also supported by the distribution of strandings in South American waters (Muñioz-Hincapié et al., 1998). Also, in the western tropical Indian Ocean, the dwarf sperm whale was much morecommon than the pygmy sperm whale, which is consistent with this hypothesis (Balance and Pitman,1998).Cuvier’s Beaked WhaleCuvier’s beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris) is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington stock is not considered to be strategic under the MMPA. The minimumpopulation estimate for the California/Oregon/Washington stock is 1,121 (CV=0.68) individuals (Carrettaet al., 2005).Little is known about the habitat preferences of any beaked whale. Based on current knowledge, beakedwhales normally inhabit deep ocean waters (>2,000 m) or continental slopes (200–2,000 m), and onlyrarely stray over the continental shelf (Pitman, 2002). Cuvier’s beaked whale generally is sighted inwaters >200 m deep, and is frequently recorded at depths >1,000 m (Gannier, 2000; MacLeod et al.,2004). They are commonly sighted around seamounts, escarpments, and canyons. MacLeod et al. (2004)A-29 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAreported that Cuvier’s beaked whales occur in deeper waters than Blainville’s beaked whales in theBahamas.The distribution and abundance of beaked whales in the SOCAL Range Complex are not well knownbecause they are difficult to identify; many of the beaked whales that have been sighted have not beenidentified to species. Based on those that were identified, Cuvier’s beaked whale appears to be the mostabundant beaked whale in the area, representing almost 80% of the identified beaked whale sightings(Barlow and Gerrodette 1996). It was sighted only during the cold-water season. Figure A-10 shows allCuvier’s beaked whale sightings in and near the SOCAL Range Complex during the studies summarizedin Section 3.7.1.3. Cuvier’s beaked whales are probably found throughout offshore waters in the SOCALRange Complex.The mean size of 27 groups identified as Cuvier’s beaked whales in the Point Mugu Sea Range was 2.3(U.S. Navy, 1998). The largest group seen was 11 whales.Baird’s Beaked WhaleBaird’s beaked whale (Berardius bairdii) is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington stock is not considered strategic under the MMPA. The minimumpopulation estimate for the California/Oregon/Washington stock is 152 (CV=0.51) individuals (Carrettaet al., 2005).Baird’s beaked whales appear to occur mainly in deep waters over the continental slope, oceanicseamounts, and areas with submarine escarpments (Ohsumi, 1983; Kasuya and Ohsumi, 1984; Willis andBaird, 1998; Kasuya, 2002). They may be seen close to shore where deep water approaches the coast(Jefferson et al., 1993) and in shallow waters in the central Okhotsk Sea (Kasuya 2002).Baird’s beaked whales are infrequently encountered along the continental slope and throughout deepwaters of the eastern North Pacific (Forney et al., 1994; Barlow et al., 1997). Thirteen sightings (42individuals) were made within the Point Mugu Sea Range during recent studies (U.S. Navy, 1998). Nosightings were made during the 1998–1999 NMFS surveys of the SCIRC (Carretta et al., 2000). AllBaird’s beaked whales found in the SOCAL Range Complex are expected to be found in non-territorialwaters.Mesolplodon sppMesoplodonts are difficult to distinguish in the field. They are pelagic, spending most of their time indeep water far from shore, and are little known. Five species of Mesoplodon may occur off the coast ofsouthern California: Blainville’s beaked whale (M. densirostris), Hubb’s beaked whale (M. carlhubbsi),Perrin’s beaked whale (M. perrini), pygmy beaked whale (M. peruvianus), and ginkgo-toothed beakedwhale (M. ginkgodens) (Mead 1981). Until better methods are developed for distinguishing the differentMesoplodon species from one another, the management unit is defined to include all Mesoplodonpopulations. The minimum population estimate of California/Oregon/Washington Stock of mesoplodontbeaked whales is 645 (CV=0.92) individuals (Carretta et al., 2005).Blainville’s beaked whale is the Mesoplodon species with the widest distribution throughout the world(Mead, 1989), although it is generally limited to tropical and warmer temperate waters (Leatherwood andReeves, 1983). Occasional occurrences in cooler higher-latitude waters are presumably related to warmwaterincursions (Reeves et al. 2002). In the North Pacific Ocean, the northernmost documentedoccurrence of this species is a stranding off central California (Reeves et al., 2002). Seasonal movementsor migrations by Blainville’s beaked whales are not known to occur.February 2007 A-30

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-9. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Sperm Whales in and Near the SOCAL RangeComplex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005A-31 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-10. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Cuvier’s Beaked Whales in and Near theSOCAL Range Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-32

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix ABlainville’s beaked whale distribution is mainly derived from stranding data. It is mainly a pelagicspecies, and like other beaked whales, is generally found in deep slope waters ~500–1000 m deep (Daviset al.,1998; Reeves et al., 2002). However, it may also occur in coastal areas, particularly where deepwater gullies come close to shore. Most strandings involved single individuals, although groups of 3–7were observed in tropical waters (Jefferson et al., 1993). Ritter and Brederlau (1999) estimated groupsize to range from 2–9 (mean 3.44).Hubb’s beaked whale occurs in temperate waters of the North Pacific (Mead, 1989). Most (22 of 35) ofthe records are from California, including two records in Santa Barbara County (Mead, 1989). Thedistribution of the species appears to be correlated with the deep subarctic current (Mead et al., 1982).Hubb’s beaked whales are often killed in drift gillnets off California (Reeves et al., 2002).Perrin’s beaked whale was first discovered in 2002, when genetic analysis was carried out on four whalesstranded between 1975 and 1979 in California, all along

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEABottlenose DolphinThe bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) is not listed as endangered under the ESA. In southernCalifornia, two populations occur: a coastal population within 0.5 nm (0.9 km) of shore and a largeroffshore population (Hansen 1990). There is a minimum population estimate of 186 (CV=0.12) for theCalifornia Coastal Stock of the bottlenose dolphin, and 3,053 (CV=0.66) for theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Offshore Stock (Carretta et al., 2005). Neither stock is considereddepleted or strategic under the MMPA.The coastal population of bottlenose dolphins inhabits waters from Point Loma to San Pedro (Dohl et al.,1981; Hansen 1990). Occasionally, during warm-water incursions such as during the 1982–1983 El Niñoevent, their range extends as far north as Monterey Bay (Wells et al., 1990). Bottlenose dolphins in theSouthern California Bight appear to be highly mobile within a relatively narrow coastal zone (Defran etal., 1999), and exhibit no seasonal site fidelity to the region (Defran and Weller, 1999). Sightings ofcoastal bottlenose dolphins are common along the coast east of the SCIRC (Barlow et al., 1997).Offshore bottlenose dolphins are thought to have a continuous distribution in California (Mangels andGerrodette, 1994). They have been found in the Southern California Bight and in waters as far north as~41ºN (Barlow et al., 1997). During most of the year, a relatively large population of bottlenose dolphinsoccurs in offshore waters of the Southern California Bight centered around Santa Catalina Island and, to alesser degree, the eastern coast of San Clemente Island (Fig. A-11). The population may disperse morebroadly in summer than in winter (Dohl et al., 1981).Pantropical Spotted DolphinThe pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata) is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and is notconsidered to be a strategic stock under the MMPA. There are no abundance estimates available for thisspecies in the NOAA stock assessment report for this area of the Pacific.The pantropical spotted dolphin can be found throughout tropical and some subtropical oceans of theworld (Perrin and Hohn, 1994). In the eastern Pacific, its range is from 25ºN (Baja California, Mexico) to17ºS (southern Peru) (Perrin and Hohn, 1994). Pantropical spotted dolphins are associated with warmtropical surface water (Au and Perryman, 1985; Reilly, 1990; Reilly and Fiedler, 1994). Au andPerryman (1985) noted that the species occurs primarily north of the Equator, off southern Mexico, andwestward along 10ºN. They also noted its occurrence in seasonal tropical waters south of the GalápagosIslands.Pantropical spotted dolphins usually occur in deeper waters, and rarely over the continental shelf orcontinental shelf edge (Davis et al., 1998; Waring et al., 2002). They are extremely gregarious, forminggroups of hundreds or even thousands of individuals. In the ETP, spotted and spinner dolphins are oftenseen together in mixed groups (Au and Perryman, 1985).The SOCAL Range Complex is near the northern extent of the pantropical spotted dolphin’s range. Mostsightings in or near the SOCAL Range Complex have been offshore and at the southern extent of therange complex (Fig. A-12).Striped DolphinThe striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba) is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington stock is not considered to be depleted or strategic under the MMPA. Thebest estimate of the size of the California/Oregon/Washington stock is 9,165 (CV=0.53; Carretta et al.,2005).Striped dolphins have a cosmopolitan distribution in tropical to warm temperate waters (Perrin et al.,1994a). Their preferred habitat seems to be deep water (Davis et al. 1998) along the edge and seaward ofthe continental shelf, particularly in areas influenced by warm currents (Waring et al., 2002). This speciesis well documented in both the western and eastern Pacific off the coasts of Japan and North AmericaFebruary 2007 A-34

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix A(Perrin et al., 1994); the northern limits are the Sea of Japan, Hokkaido, Washington state, and alongroughly 40°N across the western and central Pacific (Reeves et al., 2002).Striped dolphins are gregarious (groups of 20 or more are common) and active at the surface (Whiteheadet al. ,1998). Wade and Gerrodette (1993) noted a mean group size of 61 in the ETP, and Smith andWhitehead (1999) reported a mean group size of 50 in the Galápagos.In and near the SOCAL Range Complex, striped dolphins are found mostly offshore, and are much morecommon in the warm-water period (Fig. A-13).Common DolphinTwo species of common dolphin occur off California, the more coastal long-beaked dolphin (D. capensis)and the more offshore short-beaked dolphin (D. delphis). The long-beaked common dolphin is lessabundant, and only recently has been recognized as a separate species (Heyning and Perrin, 1994). Thus,much of the available information has not differentiated between the two species. Neither species is listedunder the ESA, and neither the California/Oregon/Washington Stock of the short-beaked commondolphin nor the California Stock of the long-beaked common dolphin is considered depleted or strategicunder the MMPA. The minimum population estimates are 365,617 (CV=0.25) and 25,163 (CV=0.72),respectively (Carretta et al., 2005).Available data regarding trends in population size in California and adjacent waters suggest an increase innumbers of both the short-beaked and long-beaked forms, likely because of gradual warming of watersoff California (Heyning and Perrin, 1994; Barlow et al., 1997; Forney, 1997).Common dolphin distributions are related to bathymetry; high-relief areas known to be associated withhigh concentrations of anchovies (Hui, 1979) are used more frequently than are low-relief areas. Shortbeakedcommon dolphins have been sighted as far as 300 nm (556 km) from shore, and are likely presentfurther offshore (Barlow et al., 1997). Long-beaked common dolphins are usually found within 50 nm(92.5 km) of shore (Barlow et al., 1997) and have not been sighted further than 100 nm (185 km) fromshore (Perrin et al., 1985; Barlow, 1992 in Heyning et al., 1994).The short-beaked common dolphin is abundant in the waters of the SOCAL Range Complex (Fig. A-14),and the long-beaked common dolphin is much less common, occurring there mostly in the warm-waterperiod (Fig. 15). The abundance of common dolphins has been shown to change on both seasonal andinter-annual time scales in southern California (Dohl et al., 1986; Barlow, 1995; Forney et al., 1995;Forney and Barlow 1998). The common dolphin is the most abundant cetacean in the SCIRC; itcomprised 74.6% of the estimated number of cetaceans in cold-water months and 98.0% in warm-watermonths (Carretta et al., 2000).The available data show a mean group size of 353.6 animals (based on n=61 groups) within the SCIRC(Carretta et al., 2000). The largest group of common dolphins seen there was 2,700. A mean group sizeof 141 (based on 417 groups) was found within the Point Mugu Sea Range, and a mean group size of 306(based on 110 groups) was found in areas east of the Point Mugu Sea Range (U.S. Navy, 1998). Thelargest groups seen in the above areas were 2,000 (Point Mugu Sea Range) and 3,000 (Santa BarbaraChannel).A-35 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-11. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Bottlenose Dolphins in and Near the SOCALRange Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-36

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-12. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Pantropical Spotted Dolphins in and Near theSOCAL Range Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005A-37 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-13. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Striped Dolphins in and Near the SOCALRange Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-38

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-14. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Short-beaked Common Dolphins in and Nearthe SOCAL Range Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005A-39 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-15- Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Long-beaked Common Dolphins in and Nearthe SOCAL Range Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-40

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix APacific White-sided DolphinThe Pacific white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens) is not listed under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington stock is not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. Nopopulation trends have been observed in California or adjacent waters. The best estimate of the size ofthe California/Oregon/ Washington Stock, derived from data collected during shipboard surveysconducted between 1996 and 2001, is 39,822 (CV=0.50, Carretta et al, 2005).There is conflicting evidence concerning seasonal shifts in distribution and numbers of Pacific whitesideddolphins in the Southern California Bight. Analyses of many years of data suggest that peaknumbers probably occur in and near the SOCAL Range Complex in the cold-water months (Leatherwoodet al. 1984). Most wintertime Pacific white-sided dolphin sightings within the SCIRC occurred in coastalwaters on the western side of San Clemente Island (Carretta et al., 2000).The Pacific white-sided dolphin is most common in waters over the continental shelf and slope. Sightingrecords and captures in pelagic driftnets indicate that this species occurs in oceanic waters well beyondthe shelf and slope (Leatherwood et al., 1984; Ferreo and Walker, 1999). The Pacific white-sided dolphinoccurs across temperate Pacific waters, to latitudes as low as (or lower than) 38°N, and northward to theBering Sea and coastal areas of southeast Alaska (Leatherwood et al., 1984). Surveys suggest a seasonalnorth-south movement of Pacific white-sided dolphins in the eastern North Pacific, with animals foundprimarily off California during the colder water months and shifting northward into Oregon andWashington as water temperatures increase during late spring and summer (Green et al., 1992; Forney,1994; Carretta et al., 2005). Peak abundance in California waters occurs from November to April(Leatherwood et al., 1984). Most cold-water period Pacific white-sided dolphin sightings in the SCIRCoccurred in coastal waters on the western side of San Clemente Island (Carretta et al., 2000).Pacific white-sided dolphin sightings in the SOCAL Range Complex are given in Figure A-16. Pacificwhite-sided dolphins are highly gregarious. Group size varies from one to 6,000, with a mean group sizeof 88 (Leatherwood et al., 1984). The mean size of 26 groups recorded in and near the SCIRC was 24.2(Carretta et al., 2000). The mean size of 348 groups recorded in and near the Point Mugu Sea Range was80, and the largest group size was 2,500 (U.S. Navy, 1998).Risso’s DolphinRisso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus), or grampus, is not listed under the ESA, and theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington stock is not considered depleted or strategic. There are no quantitativedata regarding trends in population size in California or adjacent waters, although sightings have becomemore frequent in the past 20 years. The minimum population estimate of theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington stock is 12,748 (CV=0.28), based on ship surveys conducted between1991 and 1996 (Carretta et al., 2005).A comprehensive study of the distribution of Risso’s dolphin in the Gulf of Mexico found that they usedthe steeper sections of the upper continental slope in waters 1,150–3,200 ft (350–975 m) deep(Baumgartner, 1997). Risso’s dolphins have been sighted in waters of the SOCAL Range Complexduring all seasons (Fig. A-17). However, in most years, higher numbers are present during the cold-watermonths than during other times of the year (Forney and Barlow, 1998). Most sightings in the study areahave been well offshore, but Risso’s dolphins have been sighted close to the eastern shore of SanClemente Island during the cold season (Carretta et al., 2000).Risso’s dolphins occur individually or in small to moderate-sized groups, normally ranging in numbersfrom 2 to nearly 250. The majority of groups contain fewer than 50 (Leatherwood et al., 1980; Carretta etal., 1995; 2000), however group sizes may reach as high as 2,500. The mean size of 320 groups sightedin the Point Mugu Sea Range was 42 (U.S. Navy, 1998). Excluding the five largest groups, the meangroup size was 25.A-41 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-16. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Pacific White-sided Dolphins in and Near theSOCAL Range Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-42

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-17. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Risso’s Dolphins in and Near the SOCALRange Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005A-43 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEANorthern Right Whale DolphinThe northern right whale dolphin (Lissodelphis borealis) is not listed under the ESA, and the California/Oregon/Washington Stock is not considered depleted or strategic. There are no available data regardingtrends in population size in California or adjacent waters. The minimum population estimate of theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington Stock is 16,417 (CV=0.26), based on ship surveys conducted between1991 and 1996 (Carretta et al., 2005).This species is endemic to the North Pacific Ocean, and is found primarily in temperate (8–19ºC)continental shelf and slope waters (Leatherwood and Walker, 1979; Barlow et al., 1997). There is strongevidence of seasonal movements, probably related to water temperature. Peak numbers of northern rightwhale dolphins are seen in southern California in December and January. Numbers decline toward latespring and early summer, and few are seen from June to September (Fig. A-18).Northern right whale dolphins were dispersed throughout offshore waters in the SCIRC during the coldwater months, with several sightings near San Clemente Island. They were rare in the continental slopewaters of the SCIRC during the warm-water months (Forney, 1997; Carretta et al., 2000).The mean size of 11 groups in the SCIRC was 12.4 (Carretta et al., 2000). The mean size of 214 groupssighted in the Point Mugu Sea Range was 89 and the largest group seen there included 2,500 individuals(U.S. Navy, 1998).False Killer WhaleThe false killer whale (Pseudorca crassidens) is not listed under the ESA, and the individuals found offCalifornia are not part of a strategic stock. There are no abundance estimates available for this species inthe NOAA stock assessment report for this area of the Pacific.False killer whales (Pseudorca crassidens) occur predominantly in tropical to subtropical pelagic waters(Leatherwood et al., 1987; Bonnell and Dailey, 1993). In the eastern North Pacific Ocean, the species hasbeen reported rarely north of Baja California (Leatherwood et al., 1982, 1987; Mangels and Gerrodette,1994). There are four stranding records from San Nicolas Island (Stager and Reeder, 1951), and a reportof a probable capture of this species off the west end of Santa Catalina Island (Norris and Prescott, 1961).The only sightings in the five Ferguson and Barlow (2001) survey blocks that contain parts of the SOCALRange Complex were two sightings in Block 72, which includes the southeast corner of the SOCALRange Complex.Killer WhaleKiller whales are segregated socially, genetically, and ecologically into three distinct groups: residents,transients, and offshore animals. Offshore whales do not appear to mix with the other types of killerwhales (Black et al., 1997; Dahlheim et al., 1997). Most of the killer whales off California are fromtransient and offshore groups. The minimum population estimate for all killer whales along the coasts ofCalifornia, Oregon and Washington is 1,038 (CV=0.31; Carretta et al., 2005). That includes an estimated361 offshore whales and 677 transients.Killer whales from another stock recognized within the Pacific U.S. EEZ, the Eastern North PacificSouthern Resident Stock, could occur in the SOCAL Range Complex. The range of that stock in spring,summer, and fall includes the inland waterways of Puget Sound, Strait of Juan de Fuca, and SouthernGeorgia Strait. Their occurrence in the coastal waters off Oregon, Washington, Vancouver Island, andmore recently off the coast of central California has been documented. Little is known about the wintermovements and range of the Southern Resident Stock (NMFS, 2004). The killer whale is not listed underthe ESA, but the Southern Resident Stock is considered depleted and a strategic stock. It has an estimatedminimum population size of 83 (Carretta et al., 2005).Killer whales (Orcinus orca) are sighted occasionally in California waters, but no resident populationshave been identified (Forney et al. 1995). During 1974–1984, 35 confirmed sightings were reported inFebruary 2007 A-44

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix Athe Southern California Bight (Leatherwood et al., 1987). No killer whales were sighted during the 1998–1999 NMFS surveys of the SCIRC (Carretta et al., 2000). The only sightings in the five Ferguson andBarlow (2001) survey blocks that contain parts of the SOCAL Range Complex were two sightings inBlock 59 and one sighting in Block 72 (Fig. A-3). Relatively few have been sighted in the SOCALRange Complex (Fig. A-19).Short-finned Pilot WhaleThe short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus) is not listed under the ESA. However, theCalifornia/Oregon/Washington stock is considered strategic under the MMPA because the averagehuman-caused mortality may not be sustainable (Barlow et al. 1997). A recent calculation of theminimum population size for the California/Oregon/Washington stock is 149 (CV=1.02; Carretta et al.,2005).The range of the short-finned pilot whale in the eastern North Pacific extends from the tropics to the Gulfof Alaska. However, sightings north of Point Conception are uncommon (Forney, 1994). Prior to the1982–1983 El Niño event, short-finned pilot whales were commonly seen off southern California, with anapparently resident population around Santa Catalina Island (Dohl et al., 1981). After the El Niño event,they virtually disappeared from the region, and few sightings were made from 1984 to 1992. The reasonfor the decrease in numbers is unknown (Heyning et al., 1994b), but the El Niño event apparentlydisrupted their distribution pattern, and they have not returned as residents to waters off southernCalifornia (Forney, 1994).No short-finned pilot whales were sighted during the 1998–1999 NMFS surveys of the SCIRC (Carrettaet al., 2000). The only sightings in the five Ferguson and Barlow (2001) survey blocks that contain partsof the SOCAL Range Complex were two sightings in Block 72, which includes the southeast corner ofthe SOCAL Range Complex. The majority of sightings in the SOCAL Range Complex have been in itsnortheast corner (Fig. A-20).Dall’s PorpoiseDall’s porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli) is not listed as endangered under the ESA, and theWashington/Oregon/ California Stock is not considered depleted or strategic. No specific data areavailable regarding trends in population size in California or adjacent waters. The best estimate of stocksize for the Washington/Oregon/ California Stock is 75,915 (CV=0.33, Carretta et al., 2005).Dall’s porpoise’s range in the eastern North Pacific extends from Alaska south to Baja California(Morejohn, 1979). It is probably the most abundant small cetacean in the North Pacific Ocean. Itsabundance changes seasonally, probably in relation to water temperature. It is considered to be a coldwaterspecies, and is rarely seen in areas where water temperatures exceed 17°C (Leatherwood et al.,1982). Its distribution shifts southward and nearshore in autumn, especially near the northern ChannelIslands, and northward and offshore in late spring (Dohl et al., 1981; Leatherwood et al., 1987; Barlow etal., 1997; Forney and Barlow, 1998).Although feeding aggregations of up to 200 have been sighted (Leatherwood et al., 1987), recentsightings in and near the Southern California Bight have been of groups averaging 3.1–3.4 (Barlow, 1995;Forney et al., 1995; Carretta et al., 2000). The average size of 401 groups seen within the Point MuguSea Range was 4.2, and the largest group contained 40. During the 1998–1999 NMFS surveys of theSCIRC, the mean size of 8 groups was 3.4 (Carretta et al., 2000).Dall’s porpoise was common in and near the northeast corner of the SOCAL Range Complex in bothwarm- and cold-water periods, but was more often sighted during the latter (Fig. A-21).A-45 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-18. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Northern Right Whale Dolphins in and Nearthe SOCAL Range Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-46

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-19. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Killer Whales in and Near the SOCAL RangeComplex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005A-47 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-20. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Short-finned Pilot Whales in and Near theSOCAL Range Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-48

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-21. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Dall’s Porpoises in and Near the SOCAL RangeComplex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005A-49 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAPinnipedsThree pinniped species (California sea lion, harbor seal, and northern elephant seal) are found regularly inthe SOCAL Range Complex. The California sea lion is the most abundant; while at sea, juveniles andadult females stay close to their rookeries, whereas adult males occupy offshore waters only whilemigrating between haul-out sites and feeding areas to the north. Northern elephant seals spend little timenearshore, and pass through offshore waters four times a year as they travel to and from breeding,pupping, and molting areas on various Channel Islands. Small numbers of harbor seals are found hauledout on land and in nearshore waters of the Range Complex, but because of their preference for shallowcoastal waters, few are found in moderate numbers. Three additional species, the Steller sea lion,northern fur seal, and Guadalupe fur seal, are also seen occasionally. Steller sea lions and Guadeloupe furseals are rarely encountered. Relatively few northern fur seals may be found in offshore waters during thewinter and spring, when animals from northern populations may feed there. During the rest of the year,moderate numbers of fur seals are found in offshore waters north of the SOCAL Range Complex. Theyinclude only the animals that breed and raise their young on San Miguel Island.Harbor SealThe harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) is not listed under the ESA, and the California stock is not considereddepleted or strategic under the MMPA. The California population has increased from the mid-1960s tothe mid-1990s, although the rate of increase may have slowed during the 1990s (Hanan, 1996). Theminimum population estimate of the California Stock is 25,720 (Carretta, 2005).Harbor seals are considered abundant throughout most of their range from Baja California to the easternAleutian Islands. The Southern California Bight is near the southern limit of their range (Bonnell andDailey, 1993). Some harbor seals haul out and breed on Santa Barbara and Santa Catalina islands withinthe SOCAL Range Complex, but most harbor seals haul out north of the SOCAL Range Complex. Theygenerally favor sandy, cobble, and gravel beaches (Stewart and Yochem, 1994), and most haul out on themainland (Carretta et al., 2005).Most information on harbor seals comes from the periods when they are hauled out on land; however,over the period of a year they spend more time in the water than they do on land (Fig. A-22). Theirdistribution and movements while at sea are poorly known. The few sightings during NMFS aerial andship-based surveys indicate that harbor seals are primarily found in coastal or nearshore areas. During the1998–1999 NMFS survey of the SCIRC, all nine sightings of harbor seals were in territorial waters,mostly on the west side of San Clemente Island where haul-out sites are found. Harbor seals frequentterritorial waters primarily to remain close to haul-out sites. In the SOCAL Range Complex, all sightingswere in the northeast corner (Fig. A-22).Peak numbers of harbor seals haul out on land during late May to early June, which coincides with thepeak of their molt (Fig. 24). When at sea during May and June (and March to May for breeding females),they generally remain in the vicinity of haul-out sites and forage close to shore in relatively shallowwaters. Nursing of pups begins in late February, and pups start to become weaned in May. Breedingoccurs between late March and early May.While feeding, harbor seals dive to depths of 33–130 ft (10–40 m) in the case of females with nursingpups, and 260–390 ft (79–119 m) in the case of other seals. Dives as deep as 1,463 ft (446 m) have beenrecorded, although dives greater than 460 ft (140 m) are infrequent.Northern Elephant SealThe northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris) is not listed under the ESA, and the CaliforniaBreeding Stock is not considered depleted or strategic under the MMPA. The California Breeding Stockhas recovered from near extinction in the early 1900s to an estimated 60,547 (Carretta et al., 2005).February 2007 A-50

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix ANorthern elephant seals molt, breed, and give birth primarily on offshore islands off Baja California andCalifornia. Rookeries are found as far north as the South Farallon Islands and Point Reyes (Barlow et al.,1993). The California population is demographically isolated from the Baja California population, and isconsidered a separate stock, although genetically the two populations are indistinguishable (Barlow et al.,1997). About two thirds of the California population hauls out on San Miguel Island, about 32% on SanNicolas Island, and the remaining seals use Santa Rosa (1%), Santa Cruz, Anacapa, Santa Barbara, andSan Clemente islands (Bonnell and Dailey, 1993; U.S. Navy, 1998; Carretta et al., 2000).Table A-7. Seasonal Activities of Pinnipeds in and Near the SOCAL Range ComplexJan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecHarbor Sealadult males B M Madult females N B N N M Mpups N N Njuveniles M MNorthern elephant sealadult males B B M M Madult females B N B N M N M M Npups N N N Njuveniles M M MCalifornia sea lionadult males B B Badult females N B N B N B N N M N N Npups N N N N N N N NjuvenilesGreen indicates not in complex, Yellow indicates found in the complex at sea and hauled out periodically, but not engaged insensitive activities, and Red indicates found in the complex at sea and hauled out for prolonged periods engaged in sensitiveactivities: M = molting, B = Breeding, N = Nursing.They haul out on land to give birth and breed from December through March, and pups remain hauled outthrough April (Fig. A-23). After spending time at sea to feed (post-breeding migration), they generallyreturn to the same areas to molt (Odell 1974; Stewart and Yochem 1984; Stewart 1989; Stewart andDeLong 1995). However, they do not necessarily return to the same beach. . Adult males tend to haulout to molt between June and August (peaking in July), whereas females and juveniles haul out to mostbetween March and May (peaking in April).For much of the year, northern elephant seals feed mostly in deep, offshore waters, and their foragingrange extends thousands of kilometers offshore from the breeding range into the eastern and central NorthPacific (Stewart and DeLong 1995; Stewart 1997; Le Bouef et al. 2000). Adult males and femalessegregate while foraging and migrating; females mostly range west to about 173°W, between the latitudesof 40°N and 45°N, whereas males range further north into the Gulf of Alaska and along the AleutianIslands, to between 47°N and 58°N (Stewart and Huber 1993; Stewart and DeLong 1995; Le Bouef et al.2000). Both sexes routinely dive deep (492–2,625 ft [150–800 m]) (Le Boeuf et al. 2000); dives average15–25 min, depending on time of year, and surface intervals between dives are 2–3 min. The deepestdives recorded for both sexes are over 5,000 ft (1,524 m) (e.g., Le Boeuf et al. 2000; Williams et al. 2000;Schreer et al. 2001). Females remain submerged ~86–92% of the time and males ~88–90% (Le Boeuf etal. 1988; Stewart and DeLong 1993, 1995). Feeding juvenile northern elephant seals dive for slightlyshorter periods (13–18 min), but they dive to similar depths (980–1,500 ft [300–450 m]) and spend asimilar proportion (86–92%) of their time submerged (Le Boeuf et al. 1996).A-51 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEANorthern elephant seal distribution in and near SOCAL Range Complex is given in Figure A-23. Fewwould be in the waters of the Range Complex except while moving between their haul-out sites andfeeding ranges.Northern Fur SealThe northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus) is not listed under the ESA. The range of the northern fur sealextends from southern California north to the Bering Sea, and west to the Okhotsk Sea and the Sea ofJapan (Antonelis and Fiscus 1980). Two separate stocks of northern fur seals are recognized within U.S.waters: the Eastern Pacific Stock and the San Miguel Island Stock (Barlow et al. 1998). The San MiguelIsland Stock, which occurs north of the SOCAL Range Complex, is not considered depleted or strategicunder the MMPA. A minimum population estimate for the San Miguel Island Stock is 4,190 (Carretta etal. 2005).The Eastern Pacific Stock spends May–November in northern waters and at northern breeding colonies.In late November, females and young begin to arrive in offshore waters of California, with some animalsmoving south into continental shelf and slope waters. Maximum numbers are found in waters from 34ºNto 42ºN during February–April; most are found offshore of the continental slope. By early June, mostseals of the eastern Pacific stock have migrated back to northern waters (Antonelis and Fiscus 1980).Adult males from the Eastern Pacific Stock generally migrate only as far south as the Gulf of Alaska(Kajimura 1984). The Eastern Pacific stock of northern fur seal is classified as a strategic stock because itis designated as depleted under the MMPA. The minimum population estimate for the Eastern PacificStock is 751,714 (Angliss and Lodge 2004).Northern fur seals were made locally extinct at San Miguel Island during the mid-1800s by commercialsealing operations. After an absence of over 100 years, they recolonized the island during the late 1950sor early 1960s (DeLong 1982). The population at San Miguel Island has been increasing steadily since1972, except for a drop in numbers during the El Niño events of 1982 (Barlow et al. 1998) and 1997–1998 (Barlow et al. 1999). The 1997 live pup count was the highest since the colony was reported in1968, but up to 75% of those pups died within 5 months of birth. A 1998 pup count resulted in a totalcount of 627 pups, a 79.6% decrease from the 1997 count of 3,068 (Melin and DeLong 2000). In 1999,the population began to recover, and by 2002 the total pup count was 1,946 (Carretta et al. 2005).Although they feed primarily in deep offshore waters, average depths of dives of lactating females arerelatively shallow (223 ft [68 m]) with an average dive duration of 2.6 min (Reeves et al. 1992).During warm-water months, few northern fur seals are present at sea within the SOCAL Range Complex(Fig. 30), because most remain near and on San Miguel Island, where they haul out for breeding andpupping. During summer, adult males and most adult females feed in offshore waters, mostly north of theSOCAL Range Complex. Most juveniles and pups haul out on San Miguel Island to nurse (pups) or tomolt (juveniles). More northern fur seals have been sighted in the SOCAL Range Complex in the coldwaterperiod, and in both periods, sightings were all in the northeast corner of the range complex (Fig. A-24).February 2007 A-52

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-22. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Harbor Seals in and Near the SOCAL RangeComplex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005A-53 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-23. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Northern Elephant Seals in and Near theSOCAL Range Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-54

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AFigure A-24. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of Northern Fur Seals in and Near the SOCALRange Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005A-55 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAGuadalupe Fur SealThe Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi) is listed as threatened under the ESA and is, therefore,considered a depleted and strategic stock under the MMPA. The Guadalupe fur seal population hasincreased at an average annual rate of 13.7% from 1954 to 1993 (Fig. A-25) (Gallo-Reynoso, 1994;Carretta et al., 2004), and it may be expanding its range (Gallo-Reynoso, 1994; Le Boeuf and Bonnell,1980; Maravilla-Chavez and Lowry, 1999). The most recent minimum population estimate of 3,028 isfrom 1993 data (Carretta et al., 2005).Guadalupe fur seals mainly breed at Isla Guadalupe, Mexico, ~10 km south of the SOCAL RangeComplex. In 1997, a second rookery was discovered at Isla Benito del Este, Baja California (Maravilla-Chavez and Lowry, 1999), and a pup was born at San Miguel Island, California (Melin and DeLong,1999). A few Guadalupe fur seals are known to inhabit California sea lion rookeries in the ChannelIslands, primarily San Nicolas and San Miguel islands (Stewart et al., 1987). Sightings have also beenmade at Santa Barbara and San Clemente islands (Stewart et al., 1987). Distribution at sea is unknown(Reeves et al., 1992), but Guadalupe fur seals may migrate at least 600 km from the rookery sites, basedon pelagic observations of individuals in the SCB (Seagars, 1984).Unlike many other fur seals, the Guadalupe fur seal rarely lands on open sandy beaches, preferring shoreswith solid rock, often backed by towering cliffs. Also unlike many other pinniped species, the Guadalupefur seal can be found on shore year-round. Mating and the birth of young take place from May to Julyeach year (Peterson et al., 1968; Thornback and Jenkins, 1982).The Guadalupe fur seal is expected to be very rare in the SOCAL Range Complex, except perhaps for asmall area around Guadalupe Island.Figure A-25. Counts of Guadalupe Fur Seals at Guadalupe Island, Mexico, and the estimated PopulationGrowth Curve derived from Counts made during the breeding Season. From Forney et al., (2000)Steller Sea LionIn response to population declines, the Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus) was classified as threatenedunder the ESA in the eastern portion of its range (including California) and endangered in the westernportion in 1997 (U.S. Federal Register 62: 24345-24355). The stocks are divided at an east-westboundary near Cape Suckling, Alaska (144ºW). Both stocks are considered depleted and strategic underthe MMPA. The minimum population estimate for the Eastern Stock of the Steller sea lion is 31,028, andthe minimum estimate of the number of Steller sea lions in California, Oregon, and Washington is 6,555(Angliss and Lodge, 2004).February 2007 A-56

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AThe size of the eastern stock has increased in recent years (Hill and DeMaster 1998), but counts insouthern California have declined by over 50%. The size of the closest breeding colony to the SOCALRange Complex, which is on Año Nuevo Island, declined by 85% between 1970 and 1987 (LeBoeuf etal., 1991), and pup counts at Año Nuevo Island have been steadily declining at about 5% annually since1990 (Angliss and Lodge, 2004). Steller sea lions are rarely sighted in the SOCAL Range Complex.California Sea LionThe California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) is not listed under the ESA, and the U.S. stock, some ofwhich occurs in the SOCAL Range Complex, is not considered a strategic stock under the MMPA. TheU.S. stock has increased from the early 1900s to the present; the counts of pups increased at an annualrate of 5.4% between 1975 and 2001 (Carretta et al., 2005). The minimum population estimate of theU.S. Stock, based on a 2001 census, is 138,881 (Carretta et al., 2005).Nearly all of the U.S. stock (more than 95%) breeds and gives birth to pups on San Miguel, San Nicolas,and Santa Barbara islands, only one of which–Santa Barbara, the smallest–is in the SOCAL RangeComplex. Smaller numbers of pups are born on San Clemente Island, the Farallon Islands, and AñoNuevo Island (Lowry et al., 1992).The California sea lion is by far the most commonly-sighted pinniped species at sea or on land in thevicinity of the SOCAL Range Complex. In California waters, sea lions made up 87.7% (2,976 of 3,393)of identified pinniped sightings at sea during all of the studies summarized in the SCIRC EIS/OEIS.Similarly, they represented 97% (381 of 393) of identified pinniped sightings at sea during the 1998–1999NMFS surveys (Carretta et al., 2000). They were sighted during all seasons and were sighted in all areaswith survey coverage from near shore to offshore areas (Carretta et al., 2000). Their distribution in theSOCAL Range Complex is shown in Figure A-26.Survey data from 1975 to 1978 were analyzed to describe the seasonal shifts in the offshore distributionof California sea lions (Bonnell and Ford, 1987). During summer, the highest densities were foundimmediately west of San Miguel Island. During autumn, peak densities of sea lions were centered onSanta Cruz Island. During winter and spring, peak densities occurred just north of San Clemente Island.The seasonal changes in the center of distribution were attributed to changes in the distribution of the preyspecies. If California sea lion distribution is determined primarily by prey abundance, these same areasmight not be the center of sea lion distribution every year.The distribution and habitat use of California sea lions vary with the sex of the animals and theirreproductive phase. Adult males haul out on land to defend territories and breed from mid-to-late Mayuntil late July. Individual males remain on territories for 27–45 days without going to sea to feed. DuringAugust and September, after the mating season, the adult males migrate northward to feeding areas as faraway as Washington (Puget Sound) and British Columbia (Lowry et al., 1992). They remain there untilspring (March–May), when they migrate back to the breeding colonies. Thus, adult males are present inoffshore areas of the SOCAL Range Complex only briefly as they move to and from rookeries.The distribution of immature California sea lions is less well known, but some make northwardmigrations that are shorter in length than the migrations of adult males (Huber, 1991). However, mostimmature seals are presumed to remain near the rookeries, and thus remain in or near the SOCAL RangeComplex for most of the year (Lowry et al., 1992). Adult females remain near the rookeries throughoutthe year. Most births occur from mid-June to mid-July (peak in late June).A-57 February 2007

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAFigure A-26. Sightings and Areas of Occurrence of California Sea Lions in and Near the SOCALRange Complex. Source: U.S. Navy, 2005February 2007 A-58

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AHigher densities of California sea lions are observed during cold-water months (Table A-6 and Fig A-26).At-sea densities likely decrease during warm-water months because females spend more time ashore togive birth and attend their pups. Radio-tagged female California sea lions at San Miguel Island spentapproximately 70% of their time at sea during the non-breeding season (cold-water months) and pupsspent an average of 67% of their time ashore during their mother’s absence (Melin et al., 2000).Although adult male California sea lions feed in areas north of the SOCAL Range Complex, animals ofall other ages and sexes spend most, but not all, of their time feeding at sea during winter (Fig. A-26), sothe winter estimates likely are somewhat low. During warm-water months, a high proportion of the adultmales and females are hauled out at terrestrial sites during much of the period, so the summer estimatesare low to a greater degree.Information on movements and foraging at sea has been restricted to breeding females (adult males do notforage near the rookeries, do not feed during the breeding season, and migrate north after the breedingseason). Over one third of the foraging dives by breeding females are 1–2 min in duration; 75% of divesare

Appendix A Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAjuvenile males are longer than those of juvenile females. Nighttime dive durations of juvenile males andadult females with pups are longer than those of juvenile females and other adult females. As sea ottersare bottom foragers, it is reasonable to assume they reach bottom during these dives. Juvenile males oftenforage farther offshore (4,200 ft [1,280 m]) and in deeper waters (100 ft [30 m]) than do juvenile or adultfemales (Ralls et al., 1995).THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIESSix species of cetaceans occurring in waters of the SOCAL Range Complex are listed as endangered orthreatened: The sperm whale, North Pacific right whale, humpback whale, blue whale, fin whale, and seiwhale are currently listed as endangered species and protected by the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16U.S.C. §1531) (Braham 1991) and their stocks are, therefore, considered depleted and strategic under theMMPA. Gray whales were removed from the endangered species list in 1994 because of an increase inpopulation size (Caretta et al. 2004).Figure A-27. Trends in the California Sea Otter Population, 1914-92. From USFWS (1996)The three most common pinniped species found in the SOCAL Range Complex (California sea lion,northern elephant seal, and harbor seal) are not listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA (Barlowet al. 1997). Another three pinniped species are much less common. The Steller sea lion was onceabundant in the northern portion of the SOCAL Range Complex, but numbers have declined rapidly since1938. The Eastern Stock of the Steller sea lion is designated as threatened under the ESA and is,therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. The Guadalupe fur seal is listed asthreatened under the ESA and is, therefore, considered depleted and strategic under the MMPA. The stateof California also lists this species as threatened per the Fish and Game Commission California Code ofRegulations (Title 14, Section 670.5, b, 6, H).The southern sea otter (Enhydra lutris nereis) is listed as threatened under the ESA and the CaliforniaStock is, therefore, considered depleted under the MMPA. If the restrictions on the use of gill andtrammel nets in areas inhabited by southern sea otters were lifted, the southern sea otter population wouldbe designated as a strategic stock as defined by the MMPA.February 2007 A-60

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix AThis Page Intentionally Left BlankA-61 February 2007

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix BAPPENDIX BESTIMATED ANNUAL MARINE MAMMAL EXPOSURES DURING ACTIVE SONAR ACTIVITIESTable B-1. Summary of Annual Marine Mammal Exposure to Sub-TTS, TTS, PTSSPECIES LEVEL B HARASSMENT (SUB TTS AND TTS) TOTAL HARASSMENTSUBOPSASWEXTRACKEXAIRTRACKEXSUBTRACKEXSURF53TRACKEXSURF56SUB TTS173- 195 dBTTS195-215 dBPTS> 215 dBOdontocetesBaird’s Beaked Whale 0 (4)** 0 0 0 0 (4)** 0 (4)**Bottlenose Dolphin 0 387 0 0 153 6 516 30 0Common Dolphin 3,823 51,219 58 258 16,681 683 69,258 3,464 8Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 (128)** 0 0 (90)** 0 (208)** (10)** (218)**Dall’s Porpoise 0 39 0 0 100 6 142 3 0Dwarf Sperm Whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0False Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 16 0 16 0 0Killer Whale 0 13 0 0 0 0 12 1 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0No. Right Whale Dolphin 69 2,713 0 6 426 16 3,003 227 0Pacific White-sided Dolphin 137 1,370 0 6 510 27 1,949 101 0Pantropical Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 536 11 547 0 0Pygmy Sperm Whale 0 761 0 0 148 6 859 56 0Risso’s Dolphin 137 1,314 0 6 657 32 2,050 96 0Rough Tooth Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Short Finned Pilot Whale 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Sperm Whale* 0 47 0 0 16 0 59 4 0Striped Dolphin 0 1032 0 0 583 11 1,554 72 0Ziphiid Whales 0 (41)** 0 0 (11)** 0 (49)** (3)** (52)**B-1 February 2007

Appendix B Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEASPECIES LEVEL B HARASSMENT (SUB TTS AND TTS) TOTAL HARASSMENTSUBOPSASWEXTrackingOperationAIRTrackingOperationSUBTrackingOperationSURF53TrackingOperationSURF56SUB TTS173-195 dBTTS195-215 dBPTS> 215 dBMysticetesBlue Whale* 69 221 0 6 376 325 14 0Bryde’s Whale 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0Fin Whale* 137 67 0 11 47 11 263 10 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 58 6 64 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 11 0 0 16 6 33 0 0Minke Whale 0 20 0 0 6 0 24 2 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0PinnipedsCalifornia Sea Lion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Northern Elephant Seal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Pacific Harbor Seal 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0Totals 4,372 59,218 58 293 19,996 827 80,684 4,080 (282)*** Represents ESA-listed species.** All predicted Level B exposures for beaked whales are counted as Level A.February 2007 B-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix CSpeciesAPPENDIX CESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSEDTO SUBOPS ACTIVITYTable C-1. SUBOPS Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the SummerLevel A215

Appendix C Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesSpeciesTable C-2. SUBOPS Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the WinterLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix COdontocetesSpeciesTable C-3. SUBOPS Exposures for ESG JTFEX during the SummerLevel A215

Appendix C Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesSpeciesTable C-4. SUBOPS Exposures for ESG JTFEX during the WinterLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix COdontocetesSpeciesTable C-5. SUBOPS Exposures for CSG COMPTUEX during the SummerLevel A215

Appendix C Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesSpeciesTable C-6. SUBOPS CSG COMPTUEX Exposures during the WinterLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix COdontocetesSpeciesTable C-7. SUBOPS Exposures for ESG COMPTUEX during the SummerLevel A215

Appendix C Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesSpeciesTable C-8. SUBOPS Exposures for ESG COMPTUEX during the WinterLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix DAPPENDIX DESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO ASW OPERATIONACTIVITYSpeciesTable D-1. ASW Operation Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the SummerLevel A215

Appendix D Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesSpeciesTable D-2. ASW Operation Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the WinterLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix EAPPENDIX EESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO TRACKINGOPERATION AIR ACTIVITYTable E-1. Tracking Operation AIR Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the SummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix E Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesTable E-2. Tracking Operation AIR Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the WinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix EOdontocetesTable E-3. Tracking Operation AIR Exposures for CSG COMPTUEX during the SummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix E Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesTable E-4. Tracking Operation AIR Exposures for CSG COMPTUEX during the WinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix EOdontocetesTable E-5. Tracking Operation AIR Exposures for ESG COMPTUEX during the SummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix E Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesTable E-6. Tracking Operation AIR Exposures for ESG COMPTUEX during the WinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix FAPPENDIX FESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO TRACKINGOPERATIONSURF53 ACTIVITYTable F-1. Tracking Operation 53 SURFACE SHIP Exposures for CSG JTFEX during theSummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix F Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable F-2. Tracking Operation 53 SURFACE SHIP Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the WinterOdontocetesSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix FTable F-3. Tracking Operation 53 SURFACE SHIP Exposures for ESG JTFEX during theSummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix F Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable F-4. Tracking Operation 53 SURFACE SHIP Exposures for ESG JTFEX during the WinterOdontocetesSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix FTable F-5. Tracking Operation 53 SURFACE SHIP Exposures for CSG COMPTUEX during theSummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix F Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable F-6. Tracking Operation 53 SURFACE SHIP Exposures for CSG COMPTUEX during theWinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix FTable F-7. Tracking Operation 53 SURFACE SHIP Exposures for ESG COMPTUEX during theSummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix F Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable F-8. Tracking Operation 53 SURFACE SHIP Exposures for ESG COMPTUEX during theWinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix GAPPENDIX GESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO TRACKINGOPERATIONSURF56 ACTIVITYTable G-1. Tracking Operation 56 Surface Ship Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the SummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix G Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable G-2. Tracking Operation 56 Surface Ship Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the WinterOdontocetesSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix GTable G-3. Tracking Operation 56 Surface Ship Exposures for ESG JTFEX during the SummerOdontocetesSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix G Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable G-4. Tracking Operation 56 Surface Ship Exposures for ESG JTFEX during the WinterOdontocetesSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix GTable G-5. Tracking Operation 56 Surface Ship Exposures for CSG COMPTUEX during theSummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix G Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable G-6. Tracking Operation 56 Surface Ship Exposures for CSG COMPTUEX during theWinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix GTable G-7. Tracking Operation 56 Surface Ship Exposures for ESG COMPTUEX during theSummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix G Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable G-8. Tracking Operation 56 Surface Ship Exposures for ESG COMPTUEX during theWinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix HAPPENDIX HESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO TRACKINGOPERATION SUB ACTIVITYTable H-1. Tracking Operation SUB Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the SummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix H Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesTable H-2. Tracking Operation SUB Exposures for CSG JTFEX during the WinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix HOdontocetesTable H-3. Tracking Operation SUB Exposures for ESG JTFEX during the SummerSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix H Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesTable H-4. Tracking Operation SUB Exposures for ESG JTFEX during the WinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix HTable H-5. Tracking Operation SUB Exposures for CSG COMPTUEX during the SummerOdontocetesSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix H Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesTable H-6. Tracking Operation SUB Exposures for CSG COMPTUEX during the WinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix HTable H-7. Tracking Operation SUB Exposures for ESG COMPTUEX during the SummerOdontocetesSpeciesLevel A215

Appendix H Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesTable H-8. Tracking Operation SUB Exposures for ESG COMPTUEX during the WinterSpeciesLevel A215

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix IAPPENDIX IESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO SINKEX ACTIVITYSpeciesTable I-1. Average Marine Mammal Exposures during SINKEX ActivitiesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)OdontocetesBaird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0.04 0 0 0 0.01Common dolphin 0.34 0.04 0 0.11 0.01Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0.13 0.01 0 0.02 0Dall’s Porpoise 0.03 0 0 0.01 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0.03 0 0 0.01 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0.02 0 0 0.01 0Pygmy sperm whale 0.26 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.01Risso’s Dolphin 0.14 0.01 0 0.05 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0.01 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0.93 0.08 0 0.25 0.02Striped dolphin 0.78 0.08 0 0.24 0.02Ziphiid Whales 0.01 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0.01 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.I-1 February 2007

Appendix I Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesSpeciesTable I-2. CSG JTFEX Exposures during SINKEX ActivitiesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 4 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 4 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.February 2007 I-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix IOdontocetesSpeciesTable I-3. ESG JTFEX Exposures during SINKEX ActivitiesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.I-3 February 2007

Appendix I Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesSpeciesTable I-4. CSG COMPTUEX Exposures during SINKEX ActivitiesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 4 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 4 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.February 2007 I-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix ISpeciesOdontocetesTable I-5. ESG COMPTUEX Exposures during SINKEX ActivitiesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembrane RuptureOnset of slightlung injury (Animalmass 12.2. kg)Onset of extensivelung injury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphinPacific White-SidedDolphin0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 3 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 3 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific RightWhale*0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.I-5 February 2007

Appendix I Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 I-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix JAPPENDIX JESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO SMCM OPERATIONACTIVITYTable J-1. Marine Mammal Exposures during JTFEX SMCM Operation Activity at NB Coronado(177 dB)SpeciesCold Season %populationexposed to> 177 dBWarm Season %Cold SeasonpopulationDensity1000 km 2 exposed to> 177 dBExposuresWarm Season1000 km 2 SeasonDensity ColdExposuresWarmSeasonLarge Deep Diving WhalesSperm whale* 0.04 0.4990 0.10 0.8181 0.00 0.00Large Shallow Diving WhalesBlue Whale* 0.06 0.5889 0.03 5.8894 0.00 0.00Bryde’s Whale 0.06 0.0279 0.03 0.0279 0.00 0.00Fin Whale* 0.06 0.4790 0.03 1.4515 0.00 0.00Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0.06 0.1345 0.03 0.2205 0.00 0.00Minke Whale 0.06 0.2849 0.03 0.2849 0.00 0.00North Pacific RightWhale*0.06 0.0055 0.03 0.0000 0.00 0.00Sei Whale* 0.06 0.0170 0.03 0.0279 0.00 0.00Small Medium Si ed Deep Diving WhalesBaird's beaked whale 0.09 0.0678 0.04 0.0678 0.00 0.00Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0.09 1.8304 0.04 1.8304 0.00 0.00Dwarf sperm whale 0.09 0.0034 0.04 0.0034 0.00 0.00Mesoplodon spp 0.09 0.0034 0.04 0.0034 0.00 0.00Pygmy sperm whale 0.09 10.9325 0.04 10.9325 0.02 0.01Ziphiid Whales 0.09 0.5839 0.04 0.5839 0.00 0.00Small Medium Shallow DivingBottlenose dolphin 0.06 6.6304 0 4.4203 0.01 0Common dolphin 0.06 410.1582 0 1079.3637 0.57 0Dall’s Porpoise 0.06 0.9244 0 0.1926 0.00 0False killer whale 0.06 0.0047 0 0.0047 0.00 0Killer Whale 0.06 0.1875 0 0.1875 0.00 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0.06 63.3597 0 13.1999 0.09 0Pacific White-SidedDolphin0.06 19.6585 0 19.6585 0.03 0Risso’s Dolphin 0.06 18.8765 0 18.8765 0.03 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0.06 0.0045 0 0.0045 0.00 0Short-finned pilot whale 0.06 0.0047 0 0.0047 0.00 0Spotted Dolphin 0.06 0.0045 0 0.0045 0.00 0Striped dolphin 0.06 11.3051 0 18.5330 0.00 0PinnipedsCalifornia Sea Lion 0.06 190 0.06 60 0.26 0.08Northern Elephant Seal 0.03 10 0.07 50 0.01 0.08Pacific Harbor Seal 0.03 20 0.07 10 0.01 0.02* Represents ESA-listed species.J-1 February 2007

Appendix J Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable J-2. Marine Mammal Exposures during JTFEX SMCM Operation Activity at NB Coronado(>182 dB)SpeciesCold Season %populationexposed to> 182 dBCold SeasonDensity1000 km2Warm Season %populationexposed to >182dBWarm SeasonDensity1000 km2ExposuresColdSeasonExposuresWarmSeasonLarge Deep Diving WhalesSperm whale* 0.01 0.4990 0.01 0.8181 0 0Large Shallow Diving WhalesBlue Whale* 0.04 0.5889 0 5.8894 0.00 0.00Bryde’s Whale 0.04 0.0279 0 0.0279 0.00 0.00Fin Whale* 0.04 0.4790 0 1.4515 0.00 0.00Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0.04 0.1345 0 0.2205 0.00 0.00Minke Whale 0.04 0.2849 0 0.2849 0.00 0.00North Pacific RightWhale*0.04 0.0055 0 0.0000 0.00 0.00Sei Whale* 0.04 0.0170 0 0.0279 0.00 0.00Small Medium Si ed Deep Diving WhalesBaird's beaked whale 0 0.0678 0.04 0.0678 0 0.00Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 1.8304 0.04 1.8304 0 0.00Dwarf sperm whale 0 0.0034 0.04 0.0034 0 0.00Mesoplodon spp 0 0.0034 0.04 0.0034 0 0.00Pygmy sperm whale 0 10.9325 0.04 10.9325 0 0.01Ziphiid Whales 0 0.5839 0.04 0.5839 0 0.01Small Medium Shallow DivingBottlenose dolphin 0.03 6.6304 0 4.4203 0 0Common dolphin 0.03 410.1582 0 1079.3637 0.28 0Dall’s Porpoise 0.03 0.9244 0 0.1926 0 0False killer whale 0.03 0.0047 0 0.0047 0 0Killer Whale 0.03 0.1875 0 0.1875 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0.03 63.3597 0 13.1999 0.04 0Pacific White-SidedDolphin0.03 19.6585 0 19.6585 0.01 0Risso’s Dolphin 0.03 18.8765 0 18.8765 0.01 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0.03 0.0045 0 0.0045 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0.03 0.0047 0 0.0047 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0.03 0.0045 0 0.0045 0 0Striped dolphin 0.03 11.3051 0 18.5330 0.01 0PinnipedsCalifornia Sea Lion 0.01 190 0.03 60 0.04 0.04Northern Elephant Seal 0.01 10 0.01 50 0.00 0.01Pacific Harbor Seal 0 20 0.04 10 0 0.01* Represents ESA-listed species.February 2007 J-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix JTable J-3. Marine Mammal Exposures during JTFEX SMCM Operation Activity at NB Coronado(>12 psi)SpeciesCold Season %populationexposed to> 12 psiWarm Season %Cold SeasonpopulationDensity1000 km 2 exposed to >12 psiExposuresWarm Season1000 km 2 SeasonDensity ColdExposuresWarmSeasonLarge Deep Diving WhalesSperm whale* 0 0.4990 0 0.8181 0 0Large Shallow Diving WhalesBlue Whale* 0 0.5889 0 5.8894 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0.0279 0 0.0279 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0.4790 0 1.4515 0 0Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0.1345 0 0.2205 0 0Minke Whale 0 0.2849 0 0.2849 0 0North Pacific RightWhale*0 0.0055 0 0.0000 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0.0170 0 0.0279 0 0Small Medium Si ed Deep Diving WhalesBaird's beaked whale 0 0.0678 0 0.0678 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 1.8304 0 1.8304 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0.0034 0 0.0034 0 0Mesoplodon spp 0 0.0034 0 0.0034 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 10.9325 0 10.9325 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0.5839 0 0.5839 0 0Small Medium Shallow DivingBottlenose dolphin 0 6.6304 0 4.4203 0 0Common dolphin 0 410.1582 0 1079.3637 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0.9244 0 0.1926 0 0False killer whale 0 0.0047 0 0.0047 0 0Killer Whale 0 0.1875 0 0.1875 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 63.3597 0 13.1999 0 0Pacific White-SidedDolphin0 19.6585 0 19.6585 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 18.8765 0 18.8765 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0.0045 0 0.0045 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0.0047 0 0.0047 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0.0045 0 0.0045 0 0Striped dolphin 0 11.3051 0 18.5330 0 0PinnipedsCalifornia Sea Lion 0 190 0 60 0 0Northern Elephant Seal 0 10 0 50 0 0Pacific Harbor Seal 0 20 0 10 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.J-3 February 2007

Appendix J Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable J-4. Marine Mammal Exposures during JTFEX SMCM Operation Activity at NB Coronado(>23 psi)SpeciesCold Season %populationexposed to> 23 psiWarm Season %Cold SeasonpopulationDensity1000 km 2 exposed to> 23 psiExposuresWarm Season1000 km 2 SeasonDensity ColdExposuresWarmSeasonLarge Deep Diving WhalesSperm whale* 0 0.4990 0 0.8181 0 0Large Shallow Diving WhalesBlue Whale* 0 0.5889 0 5.8894 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0.0279 0 0.0279 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0.4790 0 1.4515 0 0Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0.1345 0 0.2205 0 0Minke Whale 0 0.2849 0 0.2849 0 0North Pacific RightWhale*0 0.0055 0 0.0000 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0.0170 0 0.0279 0 0Small Medium Si ed Deep Diving WhalesBaird's beaked whale 0 0.0678 0 0.0678 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 1.8304 0 1.8304 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0.0034 0 0.0034 0 0Mesoplodon spp 0 0.0034 0 0.0034 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 10.9325 0 10.9325 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0.5839 0 0.5839 0 0Small Medium Shallow DivingBottlenose dolphin 0 6.6304 0 4.4203 0 0Common dolphin 0 410.1582 0 1079.3637 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0.9244 0 0.1926 0 0False killer whale 0 0.0047 0 0.0047 0 0Killer Whale 0 0.1875 0 0.1875 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 63.3597 0 13.1999 0 0Pacific White-SidedDolphin0 19.6585 0 19.6585 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 18.8765 0 18.8765 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0.0045 0 0.0045 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0.0047 0 0.0047 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0.0045 0 0.0045 0 0Striped dolphin 0 11.3051 0 18.5330 0 0PinnipedsCalifornia Sea Lion 0 190 0 60 0 0Northern Elephant Seal 0 10 0 50 0 0Pacific Harbor Seal 0 20 0 10 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.February 2007 J-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix JTable J-5. Marine Mammal Exposures during JTFEX SMCM Operation Activity at NB Coronado(50% Tympanic membrane rupture; > 205 dB)SpeciesCold Season %populationexposed to>205 dBWarm Season %Cold SeasonpopulationDensityexposed to1000 km 2 >205 dBExposuresWarm Season1000 km 2 SeasonDensity ColdExposuresWarmSeasonLarge Deep Diving WhalesSperm whale* 0 0.4990 0 0.8181 0 0Large Shallow Diving WhalesBlue Whale* 0 0.5889 0 5.8894 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0.0279 0 0.0279 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0.4790 0 1.4515 0 0Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0.1345 0 0.2205 0 0Minke Whale 0 0.2849 0 0.2849 0 0North Pacific RightWhale*0 0.0055 0 0.0000 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0.0170 0 0.0279 0 0Small Medium Si ed Deep Diving WhalesBaird's beaked whale 0 0.0678 0 0.0678 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 1.8304 0 1.8304 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0.0034 0 0.0034 0 0Mesoplodon spp 0 0.0034 0 0.0034 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 10.9325 0 10.9325 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0.5839 0 0.5839 0 0Small Medium Shallow DivingBottlenose dolphin 0 6.6304 0 4.4203 0 0Common dolphin 0 410.1582 0 1079.3637 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0.9244 0 0.1926 0 0False killer whale 0 0.0047 0 0.0047 0 0Killer Whale 0 0.1875 0 0.1875 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphinPacific White-SidedDolphin0 63.3597 0 13.1999 0 00 19.6585 0 19.6585 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 18.8765 0 18.8765 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0.0045 0 0.0045 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0.0047 0 0.0047 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0.0045 0 0.0045 0 0Striped dolphin 0 11.3051 0 18.5330 0 0PinnipedsCalifornia Sea Lion 0 190 0 60 0 0Northern Elephant Seal 0 10 0 50 0 0Pacific Harbor Seal 0 20 0 10 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.J-5 February 2007

Appendix J Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable J-6. Marine Mammal Exposures during JTFEX SMCM Operation Activity at NB Coronado(Slight Lung Injury, Goertner S, [600 kg])SpeciesCold Season %populationexposed to>Goertner(600 kg)Warm Season %Cold Season populationDensity exposed to1000 km 2 >Goertner(600 kg)ExposuresWarm Season1000 km 2 SeasonDensity ColdExposuresWarmSeasonLarge Deep Diving WhalesSperm whale* 0 0.4990 0 0.8181 0 0Large Shallow Diving WhalesBlue Whale* 0 0.5889 0 5.8894 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0.0279 0 0.0279 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0.4790 0 1.4515 0 0Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0.1345 0 0.2205 0 0Minke Whale 0 0.2849 0 0.2849 0 0North Pacific RightWhale*0 0.0055 0 0.0000 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0.0170 0 0.0279 0 0PinnipedsCalifornia Sea Lion 0 190 0 60 0 0Northern Elephant Seal 0 10 0 50 0 0Pacific Harbor Seal 0 20 0 10 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.February 2007 J-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix JTable J-7. Marine Mammal Exposures during JTFEX SMCM Operation Activity at NB Coronado (Slight Lung Injury, Goertner S,[12.2 kg and 174 kg])SpeciesCold Season %populationexposed to>Goertner(12.2 kg)(Cold Season) % ofpopulationexposed to >Goertner(174 kg)Warm Season %populationCold Seasonexposed toDensity 1000 km 2 >Goertner(12.2 kg)(Warm Season) %of populationexposed to> Goertner (174 kg)ExposuresWarm SeasonColdDensity 1000 km 2 SeasonSmall Medium Si ed Deep Diving WhalesBaird's beaked whale 0 0 0.0678 0 0 0.0678 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 1.8304 0 0 1.8304 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0.0034 0 0 0.0034 0 0Mesoplodon spp 0 0 0.0034 0 0 0.0034 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 10.9325 0 0 10.9325 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0.5839 0 0 0.5839 0 0Small Medium Shallow DivingBottlenose dolphin 0 0 6.6304 0 0 4.4203 0 0Common dolphin 0 0 410.1582 0 0 1079.3637 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0.9244 0 0 0.1926 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0.0047 0 0 0.0047 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0.1875 0 0 0.1875 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphinPacific White-SidedDolphin0 0 63.3597 0 0 13.1999 0 00 0 19.6585 0 0 19.6585 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 18.8765 0 0 18.8765 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0.0045 0 0 0.0045 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0.0047 0 0 0.0047 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0.0045 0 0 0.0045 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 11.3051 0 0 18.5330 0 0PinnipedCalifornia Sea Lion 0 190 0 60 0 0Northern Elephant Seal 0 10 0 50 0 0Pacific Harbor Seal 0 20 0 10 0 0ExposuresWarmSeasonJ-7 February 2007

Appendix J Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 J-8

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix JTable J-8. Marine Mammal Exposures during JTFEX SMCM Operation Activity at NB Coronado(Extensive Lung Injury Goertner S, [600 kg])SpeciesCold Season %populationexposed to>Goertner(600 kg)Warm Season %Cold Season populationDensity exposed to1000 km 2 >Goertner(600 kg)ExposuresWarm Season1000 km 2 SeasonDensity ColdExposuresWarmSeasonLarge Deep Diving WhalesSperm whale* 0 0.4990 0 0.8181 0 0Large Shallow Diving WhalesBlue Whale* 0 0.5889 0 5.8894 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0.0279 0 0.0279 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0.4790 0 1.4515 0 0Gray Whale* 0 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0.1345 0 0.2205 0 0Minke Whale 0 0.2849 0 0.2849 0 0North Pacific RightWhale*0 0.0055 0 0.0000 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0.0170 0 0.0279 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.J-9 February 2007

Appendix J Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 J-10

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix JTable J-9. Marine Mammal Exposures during JTFEX SMCM Operation Activity at NB Coronado (Extensive Lung Injury, Goertner S,[12.2 kg and 174 kg])SpeciesCold Season %populationexposed to>Goertner(12.2 kg)(Cold Season) % ofpopulationexposed to>Goertner(174 kg)Warm Season %populationCold Seasonexposed toDensity 1000 km 2 >Goertner(12.2 kg)(Warm Season) %of populationexposed to> Goertner (174 kg)Warm Season Exposures1000 km 2 SeasonDensityColdSmall Medium Si ed Deep Diving WhalesBaird's beaked whale 0 0 0.0678 0 0.06 0.0678 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 1.8304 0 0.06 1.8304 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0.0034 0 0.06 0.0034 0 0Mesoplodon spp 0 0 0.0034 0 0.06 0.0034 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 10.9325 0 0.06 10.9325 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0.5839 0 0.06 0.5839 0 0Small Medium Shallow DivingBottlenose dolphin 0 0 6.6304 0 0.06 4.4203 0 0Common dolphin 0 0 410.1582 0 0 1079.3637 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0.9244 0 0 0.1926 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0.0047 0 0 0.0047 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0.1875 0 0 0.1875 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphinPacific White-SidedDolphin0 0 63.3597 0 0 13.1999 0 00 0 19.6585 0 0 19.6585 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 18.8765 0 0 18.8765 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0.0045 0 0 0.0045 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0.0047 0 0 0.0047 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0.0045 0 0 0.0045 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 11.3051 0 0 18.5330 0 0PinnipedCalifornia Sea Lion 0 190 0 60 0 0Northern Elephant Seal 0 10 0 50 0 0Pacific Harbor Seal 0 20 0 10 0 0ExposuresWarmSeasonJ-11 February 2007

Appendix J Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 J-12

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix KAPPENDIX KESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO MININGOPERATION ACTIVITYTable K-1. Average Marine Mammal Exposures during Mining Operation Activities*SpeciesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)OdontocetesBaird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 0.22 0.22 0.03 0.26 0.05Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphinPacific White-SidedDolphin0.01 0.01 0 0.01 00.01 0.01 0 0.01 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0.01 0.01 0 0.01 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0.01 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.** Pinniped densities in this OPAREA are zero.K-1 February 2007

Appendix K Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable K-2. Marine Mammal Exposures during CSG COMPTUEX Mining Operation ActivitiesOdontocetesSpeciesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphinPacific White-SidedDolphin0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.February 2007 K-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix MAPPENDIX LESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO DEMO ACTIVITYSpeciesTable L-1. Average Marine Mammal Exposures during DEMO Activities*TTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)OdontocetesBaird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0.01 0.01 0 0.01 0Common dolphin 1.15 0.79 0.06 1.38 0.12Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0.01 0.01 0 0.01 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0.03 0.02 0 0.05 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0.02 0.02 0 0.03 0Pygmy sperm whale 0.04 0.03 0 0.05 0.01Risso’s Dolphin 0.02 0.02 0 0.03 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0.02 .020 0 0.03 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0.01 0.01 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.** Pinniped densities in this OPAREA are zero.L-1 February 2007

Appendix L Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesTable L-2. Marine Mammal Exposures during CSG JTFEX DEMO ActivitiesSpeciesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 12 12 0 12 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.February 2007 L-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix MOdontocetesTable L-3. Marine Mammal Exposures during ESG JTFEX DEMO ActivitiesSpeciesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 9 9 0 9 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.L-3 February 2007

Appendix L Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesTable L-4. Marine Mammal Exposures during CSG COMPTUEX DEMO ActivitiesSpeciesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 12 12 0 12 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.February 2007 L-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix MOdontocetesTable L-5. Marine Mammal Exposures during ESG COMPTUEX DEMO ActivitiesSpeciesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 9 9 0 9 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.L-5 February 2007

Appendix L Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 L-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix MAPPENDIX MESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS EXPOSED TO ASM OPERATIONACTIVITYTable M-1. Average Marine Mammal Exposures during ASM Operation ActivitiesSpeciesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)OdontocetesBaird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0.02 0.01 0 0.02 0Common dolphin 1.30 0.69 0.08 1.32 0.23Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0.01 0 0 0.01 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0.01 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0.09 0.04 0.01 0.11 0.02Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0.04 0.02 0 0.05 0.01Pygmy sperm whale 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.01Risso’s Dolphin 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.06 0.01Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0.08 0.05 0.01 0.10 0.03Striped dolphin 0.11 0.07 0.02 0.14 0.04Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0.01 0.01 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale* 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.M-1 February 2007

Appendix M Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAOdontocetesTable M-2. Marine Mammal Exposures during CSG JTFEX ASM Operation ActivitiesSpeciesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.February 2007 M-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix MTable M-3. Marine Mammal Exposures during ESG JTFEX ASM Operation ActivitiesSpeciesOdontocetesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembrane RuptureOnset of slightlung injury (Animalmass 12.2. kg)Onset of extensivelung injury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphinPacific White-SidedDolphin0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific RightWhale*0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.M-3 February 2007

Appendix M Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable M-4. Marine Mammal Exposures during CSG COMPTUEX ASM Operation ActivitiesOdontocetesSpeciesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 8 8 0 8 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right WhaleDolphin0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0PinnipedsCalifornia Sea Lion 0 0 0 0 0Northern Elephant Seal 0 0 0 0 0Pacific Harbor 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.February 2007 M-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix MTable M-5. Marine Mammal Exposures during ESG COMPTUEX ASM Operation ActivitiesOdontocetesSpeciesTTS182 dB re 1 Pa 2 sTTS23 PSI50% TympanicMembraneRuptureOnset of slightlung injury(Animal mass12.2. kg)Onset ofextensive lunginjury (Animalmass 12.2 kg)Baird's beaked whale 0 0 0 0 0Bottlenose dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Common dolphin 3 3 0 3 0Cuvier’s Beaked Whale 0 0 0 0 0Dall’s Porpoise 0 0 0 0 0Dwarf sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0False killer whale 0 0 0 0 0Killer Whale 0 0 0 0 0Mesoplodon spp. 0 0 0 0 0Northern Right Whale Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pacific White-Sided Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Pygmy sperm whale 0 0 0 0 0Risso’s Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Rough-toothed dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Short-finned pilot whale 0 0 0 0 0Sperm whale* 0 0 0 0 0Spotted Dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Striped dolphin 0 0 0 0 0Ziphiid Whales 0 0 0 0 0MysticetesBlue Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Bryde’s Whale 0 0 0 0 0Fin Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Gray Whale 0 0 0 0 0Humpback Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Minke Whale 0 0 0 0 0North Pacific Right Whale* 0 0 0 0 0Sei Whale* 0 0 0 0 0PinnipedsCalifornia Sea Lion 0 0 0 0 0Northern Elephant Seal 0 0 0 0 0Pacific Harbor 0 0 0 0 0* Represents ESA-listed species.M-5 February 2007

Appendix M Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 M-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix NAPPENDIX NESTIMATED ZONES OF INFLUENCE (ZOI) FOR MARINE MAMMALS DURINGUNDERWATER DETONATIONSZONE OF INFLUENCE FOR THE MK83 DURING ASM OPERATION OPERATIONS IN SOARModel Inputs (Assumptions)Explosive type and weight: 445 lb (202 kg) of H6.Explosive depth: 5 ft (1.5m) under the water surface.Sound Velocity Profile: March and September SVPs were acquired from The Naval OceanographicOffice (NAVOCEANO) web site at location of 33º N, 119º W.SOAR Location: 33ºN, 119ºWSediment properties: The averaged ocean bottom at this site is approximately 5,108 ft (1,557 m) deep.The sediment at test site was described as silt. The sound speed ratio of 0.994 and density of 1.421 g/cm 3were used as inputs to the Hamilton equation for the model run.Model OutputsThe energy flux density in 1/3-octave bands, peak pressure, positive impulse pressure and total energywere obtained from REFMS model at the following receiver depths and ranges.Depth: 5, 15, 50, 100, 150, 200, 300, 450, 600 and 750 mRange: 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 1, 2 and 3 nmResultsREFMS results shown in the following were compared with various harassment thresholds for the marinemammals to determine the zone of influence (ZOI).1. TTS Harassment: >182 dB (energy flux density) or > 12 psi (peak pressure) or > 23psi (peakpressure)2. 50 % Tympanic Membrane (TM) rupture: 205 dB in total energy3. Onset of slight lung injury: > 13 psi-ms (positive impulse pressure), indexed at the surface(Goertner’s modified impulse pressure) for animal size of a calf dolphin4. Onset of extensive lung injury: > 30.5 psi-ms (positive impulse pressure), indexed at the surface(Goertner’s modified impulse pressure) for animal size of a calf dolphin.N-1 February 2007

Appendix N Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable N-1. Quick ZOI Summary from the Acoustic Results of MK83 ASM Operation SOAR(March)Type of Harassment Threshold Max Hori ontal ZOI (nm)TTS Harassment for Mysticetes (> 10 Hz)TTS Harassment for Odontocetes (> 100Hz)TTS HarassmentTTS Harassment50 % Tympanic Membrane (TM) ruptureOnset of slight lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)Onset of extensive lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band12 psi23 psi205 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin total spectrumDepth-dependentImpulse Pressure(13 psi-ms @ the surface)Depth-dependentImpulse Pressure(30.5 psi-ms @ the surface)0.850.850.890.460.170.420.23Table N-2. Quick ZOI Summary from the Acoustic Results of MK83 ASM Operation SOAR(September)Type of Harassment Threshold Max Hori ontal ZOI (nm)TTS Harassment for Mysticete (> 10 Hz)TTS Harassment for Odontocete (> 100Hz)TTS HarassmentTTS Harassment50 % Tympanic Membrane (TM) ruptureOnset of slight lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)Onset of extensive lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band12 psi23 psi205 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin total spectrumDepth-dependentImpulse Pressure(13 psi-ms @ the surface)Depth-dependentImpulse Pressure(30.5 psi-ms @ the surface)0.890.890.910.490.150.490.23February 2007 N-2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix NQUICK SUMMARY OF MINING OPERATION (JTFEX) AT NB CORONADO ZOI RESULTSModel Inputs (Assumptions)Explosive type and weight: 20 lb of C4.Explosive depth: 40 ft (Mid Source) and 150 ft (Deep Source) under the water surface.Sound Velocity Profile: March and September SVPs were acquired from The Naval OceanographicOffice (NAVOCEANO) web site at location of 32’ 38” N, 117’ 09” W (NB Coronado).NB Coronado Location: 32’ 38”N, 117’ 09”WSediment properties: The averaged ocean bottom at NB Coronado is approximately 935 m deep. Thesediment at test site was described as silt. The sound speed ratio of 0.994 and density of 1.421 g/cm^3were used as inputs to the Hamilton equation for the model run.Model OutputsThe energy flux density in 1/3-octave bands, peak pressure, positive impulse pressure and total energywere obtained from REFMS model at the following receiver depths and ranges.Depth: 5, 15, 50, 100, 150, 200, 300, 450, 600 and 750 mRange: 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 1, 2 and 3 nmResultsREFMS results shown in the following were compared with various harassment thresholds for the marinemammals to determine the zone of influence (ZOI).1. TTS Harassment: >182 dB (energy flux density) or > 12 psi (peak pressure) or > 23psi (peakpressure)2. 50 % Tympanic Membrane (TM) rupture: 205 dB in total energy3. Onset of slight lung injury: > 13 psi-ms (positive impulse pressure), indexed at the surface(Goertner’s modified impulse pressure) for animal size of a calf dolphin4. Onset of extensive lung injury: > 30.5 psi-ms (positive impulse pressure), indexed at the surface(Goertner’s modified impulse pressure) for animal size of a calf dolphinN-3 February 2007

Appendix N Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEATable N-3. Quick ZOI Summary from the Acoustic Results of Mining Operation (Mid Source) atNB Coronado (March)Type of Harassment Threshold Max Hori ontal ZOI (nm)TTS Harassment for Mysticete (> 10 Hz)TTS Harassment for Odontocete (> 100Hz)TTS HarassmentTTS Harassment50 % Tympanic Membrane (TM) ruptureOnset of slight lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)Onset of extensive lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band12 psi23 psi205 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin total spectrumDepth-dependentImpulse Pressure(13 psi-ms @ the surface)Depth-dependentImpulse Pressure(30.5 psi-ms @ the surface)0.180.160.260.16< 0.050.160.07Table N-4. Quick ZOI Summary from the Acoustic Results of Mining Operation (Mid Source) atNB Coronado (September)Type of Harassment Threshold Max Hori ontal ZOI (nm)TTS Harassment for Mysticete (> 10 Hz)TTS Harassment for Odontocete (> 100Hz)TTS HarassmentTTS Harassment50 % Tympanic Membrane (TM) ruptureOnset of slight lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)Onset of extensive lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band12 psi23 psi205 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin total spectrumDepth-dependentImpulse Pressure(13 psi-ms @ the surface)Depth-dependentImpulse Pressure(30.5 psi-ms @ the surface)0.190.170.280.17< 0.050.160.07February 2007 N-4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix NTable N-5. Quick ZOI Summary from the Acoustic Results of Mining Operation (Deep Source) atNB Coronado (March)Type of Harassment Threshold Max Hori ontal ZOI (nm)TTS Harassment for Mysticete (> 10 Hz) 182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd 0.19octave bandTTS Harassment for Odontocete (> 100Hz)TTS HarassmentTTS Harassment182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band12 psi23 psi50 % Tympanic Membrane (TM) rupture 205 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin total spectrumOnset of slight lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)Onset of extensive lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)Depth-dependentImpulse Pressure(13 psi-ms @ the surface)Depth-dependentImpulse Pressure(30.5 psi-ms @ the surface)0.170.260.170.070.200.08Table N-6. Quick ZOI Summary from the Acoustic Results of Mining Operation (Deep Source) atNB Coronado (September)Type of Harassment Threshold Max Hori ontal ZOI (nm)TTS Harassment for Mysticete (> 10 Hz)TTS Harassment for Odontocete (> 100Hz)TTS HarassmentTTS Harassment50 % Tympanic Membrane (TM) ruptureOnset of slight lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)Onset of extensive lung injury(Animal mass - 12.2 kg)182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band182 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin a 1/3 rd octave band12 psi23 psi205 dB re 1 μPa 2 -sin total spectrumDepth-dependentImpulse Pressure(13 psi-ms @ the surface)Depth-dependentImpulse Pressure(30.5 psi-ms @ the surface)0.190.160.260.170.070.190.08N-5 February 2007

Appendix N Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEAThis Page Intentionally Left BlankFebruary 2007 N-6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA Final Appendix OAPPENDIX OFEDERAL CONSISTENCY WITH COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT1- COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION (CCD) CD-086-06 – DATED 25 OCTOBER 20062-CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR ITEM F8C TO CD-086-06 – UNDATED3-CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ADDENDUM FOR ITEM F8D TO CD-086-06 – DATED 12 DECEMBER 20064-CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION 15-DAY EXTENSION LETTER TO CD-086-06 – DATED15 DECEMBER 20065- CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION ADOPTED STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR ITEM W10BTO CD-086-06 – UNDATED6-DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION AT 15 DECEMBER2006 CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION HEARING –DATED 8JANUARY 20077-CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ADDENDUM FOR ITEM W10B TO CD-086-06 – DATED 9JANUARY 20078-CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION ADOPTED STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR ITEM W10BTO CD-086-06 - UNDATED9-CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION LETTER TO CNRSW REPORTING ON COASTALCOMMISSION VOTE ON 10 JANUARY 1007 HEARING –DATED 11 JANUARY 2007O-1 February 2007

Appendix O Final COMPTUEX/JTFEX EA/OEA10 - DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY RESPONSE TO CONDITIONAL DETERMINATION ON CD-086-06–DATED 17 JANUARY 200711 - CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION RESPONSE TO NAVY LETTER ON CD-086-06 –DATED 24 JANUARY 200712 – DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY LETTER TO MR.LECKY AT NMFS – DATED 12 FEBRUARY200713 – NMFS LETTER FROM MR.LECKY TO ADMIRAL SYMONDS AT N45 – DATED 12 FEBRUARY200714 - DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NOTICE TO CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION ON CD-086-06 - DATED 12 FEBRUARY 2007February 2007 O-2

COMPOSITETRAINING UNIT EXERCISESANDJOINT TASK FORCE EXERCISES(COMPTUEX/JTFEX)COASTAL CONSISTENCYDETERMINATION25 OCTOBER 2006DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006This Page Intentionally Left BlankPAGE II

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Acronyms and AbbreviationsAAV Amphibious Assault Vehicle ESA Endangered Species ActAAMEX Air-to-Air Missile Exercise ESG Expeditionary Strike GroupAAWEX Anti-Aircraft Warfare Exercise EWEX Electronic Warfare Exerciseac acre FBP Final Battle ProblemADEX Air Defense Exercise FIAC Fast Inshore Assault CraftAIROPS Aircraft Operations FMP Fishery Management PlanAMPHIBEX Amphibious Exercise FRTP Fleet Readiness Training PlanASMEX Air-Surface Missile Exercise FSA Fire Support AreaASW Anti-Submarine Warfare ft feetASWEX Anti-Submarine Warfare Exercise GUNEX Gunnery ExerciseBDU Bomb Dummy Unit ha hectareCAS Close Air Support HA/DR Humanitarian Assistance / DisasterReliefCCA California Coastal Act HVBSS Helicopter Visit, Board, Search, andSeizureCCD Coastal Consistency Determination JECG Joint Exercise Control GroupCCMPCalifornia Coastal Management JTFEXJoint Fleet ExerciseProgramCCR California Code of Regulations lb poundCDFGCalifornia Department of Fish and LHDAmphibious Helicopter UnitGameCOMPTUEX Composite Training Unit Exercise kg kilogramCPAAA Camp Pendleton Amphibious Assault kmkilometerAreaCPF Commander, U. S. Pacific Fleet km 2 square kilometersCRRC Combat Rubber Raiding Craft LCAC Landing Craft, Air CushionCSAR Combat Search and Rescue LCU Landing Craft, UtilityCSG Carrier Strike Group LFX Live Fire ExerciseCSOF Counter Special Operations Force m MeterCVN Aircraft Carrier MCB Marine Corps BaseCVW Air Wing MCBCP Marine Corps Base Camp PendletonCZ Coastal Zone MCM Mine CountermeasuresCZMA Coastal Zone Management Act MEU Marine Expeditionary UnitDEMO Demolition mi mileDLQ Deck Launch Qualification mi 2 square milesDoD Department of Defense MINEX Mine ExerciseDON Department of the Navy MMPA Marine Mammal Protection ActEFEX Expeditionary Fires Exercise MPA Maritime Patrol AircraftEFH Essential Fish Habitat MSO/OPLAT Military Security Operations / OilPlatformEOD Explosive Ordnance Disposal NBC Naval Base CoronadoPAGE III

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006NCAGS Naval Cooperation and Guidance of SMCMEX Ship Mine Countermeasures ExerciseShippingNEO Non-Combatant Evacuation SOCAL Southern CaliforniaNEW net explosive weight SPECWAROPS Special Warfare Operationsnm nautical miles SSC Sea Surface ControlNMFS National Marine Fisheries Service SSMEX Surface-to-Surface Missile ExerciseNOAANational Oceanic and Atmospheric SSTCSilver Strand Training ComplexAdministrationNOTAM Notice to Airmen SUBOPS Submarine OperationsNOTMAR Notice to Mariners SURGEX Surge ExerciseNSFS Naval Surface Fire Support TRACKEX Tracking ExerciseNSG Naval Strike Group TRAP Tactical Recovery of Aircraft andPersonnelOPAREA Operating Area TSS Time-Sensitive StrikeOPFOR Opposing Forces UAV Unmanned Aerial VehiclePGM Precision-Guided Munition U.S. United StatesPSYOPS Psychological Operations U.S.C. United States CodeRHIB Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceROV Remotely Operated Vehicle UUV Unmanned Underwater VehicleSCI San Clemente Island VBSS Visit, Board, Search, and SeizureSCIRC San Clemente Island Range Complex WASEX War at Sea ExerciseSCORE Southern California Offshore Range W-291 Warning Area 291SHOBA Shore Bombardment Area YMCA Young Men's Christian AssociationSINKEX Sinking ExercisePAGE IV

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Table of ContentsCHAPTER 1 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................11.1 Exercise Description ...........................................................................................................11.2 Proposed Action ..................................................................................................................21.3 Purpose and Need ..............................................................................................................4CHAPTER 2 PROJECT AREAS AND ACTIVITIES SUBJECT TO CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION..72.1 Coastal Zone Definition ......................................................................................................72.2 Areas and Activities.............................................................................................................72.2.1 At-Sea Training Operations......................................................................................82.2.2 Air Operations ............................................................................................................9CHAPTER 3 DETERMINATION OF CONSISTENCY ...............................................................................103.1 Summary of Coastal Consistency Determination.........................................................103.2 Article 2 – Public Access..................................................................................................113.2.1 Section 30210 – Public Access, Recreational Opportunities............................113.3 Article 4 – Marine Environment .......................................................................................133.3.1 Section 30230 – Marine Resources......................................................................133.3.2 Section 30231 – Biological Productivity ...............................................................213.3.3 Section 30234.5 – Economic, Commercial, and Recreational .........................Importance of Fishing .............................................................................................223.4 Article 5 – Land Resources..............................................................................................233.4.1 Section 30244 – Archaeological or Paleontological Resources.......................23CHAPTER 4 CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................................25CHAPTER 5 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................26APPENDIX ..........................................................................................................................................28List of TablesTable 1-1. Training Locations Evaluated in the Coastal Consistency Determination.....................2Table 1-2. COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities Inside the Coastal Zone ..................................................5Table 1-3. COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities Outside the Coastal Zone ...............................................6Table 2-1. COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities..............................................................................................7Table 3-1. Applicability of California Coastal Act to Proposed Action.............................................10Table 3-2. Sea Turtle Status in SOCAL OPAREA.............................................................................16Table 3-3. Marine Mammal Species in Southern California Waters ...............................................19List of FiguresFigure 1-1. Military Ranges and Operating Areas Supporting COMPTUEX/JTFEX ......................3PAGE V

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006This Page Intentionally Left BlankPAGE VI

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006CHAPTER 1BACKGROUND1.1 EXERCISE DESCRIPTIONThe training mission of Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet (CPF) is to provide fully trained Navyand Marine forces to Combatant Commanders, as dictated by the National Command Authority.In furtherance of this mandate and in support of the Navy’s Fleet Readiness Training Plan(FRTP) the U.S. THIRD Fleet (headquartered at Naval Base Point Loma) regularly conductsComposite Training Unit Exercises (COMPTUEX) and Joint Task Force Exercises (JTFEX) atmilitary installations and operating areas in the southwestern United States and offshore ofSouthern California. These complex, deployment-preparation exercises require varied land,sea, and undersea training environments to properly demonstrate the full range of capabilitiesrequired of deploying naval forces.U. S. Navy ships are normally assigned to and deploy as a package or formation called a StrikeGroup. Strike Groups are further divided by function into a Carrier Strike Group (CSG) orExpeditionary Strike Group (ESG). A CSG is normally formed around an Aircraft Carrier (CV/N)with an embarked Air Wing (CVW). A CSG is frequently supported by three to five other typesof ships aimed at power projection, and gaining and maintaining sea control. An ESG is formedaround an Amphibious Helicopter Carrier (LHD) with an embarked Marine Expeditionary Unit(MEU). An ESG is also normally supported by three to five other types of ships. An ESG andCSG have certain similar capabilities. However, an ESG is unique in its ability to moveembarked MEU elements ashore via helicopter or amphibious-type craft. Thus an ESG willoften train to different, expanded warfare capabilities from the sea to land areas.The FRTP is a “stair step” training process that is divided into three, increasingly complexPhases: Basic, Integrated and Sustainment.COMPTUEX is in the Integrated Phase of the FRTP and may involve either a CSG or an ESG.A COMPTUEX is conducted as a series of scheduled training events that occur according to agiven time schedule against an opposition force. The COMPTUEX provides an opportunity forthe Strike Group to become proficient in the myriad of required warfare skill sets. Additionally, itstresses the integration or coordination of the different warfare areas and provides realistictraining on in-theater operations. The COMPTUEX is normally more structured than the JTFEX,so it is longer in duration.JTFEX is in the Sustainment or final Phase of the FRTP and may involve either a CSG or anESG. It is a scenario-driven, at-sea training exercise designed to evaluate the Strike Group’spreparedness for forward deployed contingency and combat operations. JTFEX also utilizes asimulated opposition force and serves as the venue for U.S. THIRD Fleet to assess thereadiness, interoperability, and proficiency of naval forces in realistic, free-play scenarios,ranging from military operations other-than-war to armed conflict. As the final certification eventof the FRTP, the Strike Group must demonstrate the ability to operate and integrate into a JointOperations Area under simulated austere, hostile conditions.PAGE 1

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 20061.2 PROPOSED ACTIONNominally, the U.S. Navy (Navy) conducts seven COMPTUEXs and seven JTFEXs per 2-yearperiod throughout existing major ranges and facilities in the southwestern United States andoffshore Southern California (Table 1-1 and Figure 1-1). Dependent on national tasking, anaverage of three ESG COMPTUEXs, four CSG COMPTUEXs, three ESG JTFEXs, and fourCSG JTFEXs, would be conducted over a 2-year period (fourteen total exercises). BeginningJanuary 2007, the Navy proposes to conduct some of these major range events concurrently.The overall number, type, frequency, and location of these major range events would notchange from current baseline operations. Southern California (SOCAL) land, sea and airranges have supported major Fleet training dating back before the 1920’s. San ClementeIsland (SCI) has served as a dedicated Fleet training asset since it was transferred over to theDepartment of the Navy (DON) in 1934. As early as 1935, naval gunfire and bombing, and U.S.Fleet Landing exercises have occurred in the SCI Shore Bombardment Area (SHOBA) andthroughout the island, respectively.Table 1-1. Training Locations Evaluated in the Coastal Consistency DeterminationTRAININGAREASouthernCaliforniaOperatingAreaSan ClementeIsland RangeComplexSilver StrandTrainingComplexMarine CorpsBase CampPendletonDESCRIPTION OF COASTAL AREAThe SOCAL Operating Area (OPAREA) is located in waters adjacent to SouthernCalifornia from Santa Barbara to Baja California. Warning Area's 289, 290 and 291 (W-289, W-290, W-291) are associated with the SOCAL OPAREA. It parallels the coast tothe south of Los Angeles for approximately 288 nautical miles (nm) (533 kilometers [km])and extends seaward for up to 800 nm (1,482 km). A small portion of the SOCALOPAREA lies within the coastal zone (CZ).San Clemente Island Range Complex (SCIRC) includes more than 80 range andoperational areas covering approximately 2,620 square miles (mi 2 ) (6,718 squarekilometers (km 2 ). Portions of the SCIRC from the mean high water to 3 nm (5.6 km) liewithin the CZ. SCI is Federal property. Access is controlled by the Navy. Some offshoreoperating areas around SCI are designated by Federal regulations as Security, Danger,Restricted, or Safety Zones. These designations have been in place for many years andwould not change under the Proposed Action.Silver Strand Training Complex (SSTC) is located on a narrow, sandy isthmus separatingSan Diego Bay from the Pacific Ocean in San Diego County. SSTC consists of landareas, which are part of Naval Base Coronado, adjacent ocean areas, and areas withinSan Diego Bay. Access to SSTC is controlled by DON, and is restricted to militarypersonnel and their family members, Department of Defense (DoD) civilians, andauthorized contractors. An amphibious assault-landing course extends two miles into thePacific Ocean. Other SSTC special-purpose ranges are located in San Diego Bay. TheNavy leases the ocean beaches along SSTC from the State of California.Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton (MCBCP), located along the coast about 38 mi (61km) north of San Diego, occupies more than 125,000 acres (ac) (49,213 hectares [ha]) ofland. The adjacent Camp Pendleton Amphibious Assault Area (CPAAA) occupies about294 mi 2 (754 km 2 ) of ocean. Less than 10 mi (16 km) of coastline is normally used fortraining. Portions of CPAAA lie within the CZ.PAGE 2

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Figure 1-1. Military Ranges and Operating Areas Supporting COMPTUEX/JTFEXPAGE 3

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006The Proposed Action would use existing land and sea ranges currently used by the Navy forCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities. The type of vessels and aircraft that would participate inCOMPTUEX/JTFEX are the same units that have been conducting major range events inSOCAL. The COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities are short-term and intermittent, and do not involveland acquisition, new construction, modification or acquisition of airspace, or any expansion orpermanent movement of military personnel. Training activities conducted duringCOMPTUEX/JTFEX would occur both inside and outside the coastal zone (CZ). Less than halfof the training events occur within the CZ (Table 1-2). Of these events, only a small portionhave the potential to affect coastal uses or resources within the CZ (marked with asterisk inTable 1-2). The remaining training events comprising a JTFEX/COMPTUEX occur outside theCZ and do not have an effect on coastal zone uses or resources (Table 1-3). This CoastalConsistency Determination (CCD) analyzes those activities that occur in the CZ or could have adirect or indirect effect on coastal uses or resources within the CZ. It also provides a briefdescription of those events that occur outside the CZ or do not have a direct or indirect effect oncoastal uses or resources within the CZ (Appendix).1.3 PURPOSE AND NEEDThe purpose of conducting COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs is to train, prepare and certify StrikeGroup readiness prior to deployment of forces to Combatant Commanders. The exercisesincorporate a multi-dimensional, multi-threat environment that stresses all aspects of jointmaritime operations.The need for major naval exercises such as COMPTUEXs or JTFEXs is derived from theCongressional mandate to organize, train, and equip the military services for prompt andsustained combat operations (10 United States Code [U.S.C.] Sections 5032 and 5062). TheCOMPTUEX and JTFEX are required both to train the units and to evaluate their combatreadiness. At the conclusion of the JTFEX, Commander, U.S. THIRD Fleet certifies to theCommander, Pacific Fleet that the CSG or ESG is ready to deploy, fulfilling the Navy’s Title 10responsibilities.PAGE 4

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Table 1-2. COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities Inside the Coastal ZoneEVENTAmphibious Exercise*Ship Mine CountermeasuresExercise*Demolition Operations*Visit, Board, Search, and SeizureNaval Cooperation and Guidancefor ShippingMaritime Security OperationsNaval Surface Fire Support*Straits Transit / Q RouteFast Inshore Assault CraftDynamic STRIKE/TSSClose Air SupportCounter Special Operations ForceMining Exercise*Surge ExerciseLive-Fire ExerciseSpecial Warfare OperationsHumanitarian Assistance / DisasterReliefNon-Combatant EvacuationEmbassy ReinforcementCombat Search and Rescue TrapRANGE/OPAREASCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSOCALSOCALSOCALSCIRC, SOCALSOCALSOCALSCIRCSCIRC, MCBCPSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCAL, SCIRC, MCBCPSCIRC, MCBCPMCBCPSCIRC, MCBCPSCIRC, MCBCPSCIRC, SOCAL, MCBCP*Activities have the potential to affect coastal uses or resources within the coastal zonePAGE 5

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Table 1-3. COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities Outside the Coastal ZoneEVENTAnti-Aircraft Warfare ExerciseSurface-to-Surface Missile ExerciseSink ExerciseGunnery ExerciseSubmarine OperationsTracking ExercisePsychological OperationsAircraft Operations SupportAir-to-Air Missile ExerciseAir-to-Surface Missile ExerciseHaystackUrban Close Air SupportLong Range STRIKEDeck Landing QualificationWar at Sea ExerciseGANGPLANKSea Surface ControlMaritime InterdictionMaritime Patrol AircraftAnti-Submarine Warfare ExerciseElectronic Warfare ExerciseCommand and ControlAir Defense ExerciseCounter TargetingFinal Battle ProblemRANGE/OPAREASCIRCSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSCIRC, SOCAL, MCBCPSOCALSOCALOver San DiegoNTC Ft Irwin BSTRCSCIRCSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCALPAGE 6

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006CHAPTER 2PROJECT AREAS AND ACTIVITIES SUBJECT TO CONSISTENCYDETERMINATION2.1 COASTAL ZONE DEFINITIONThe implementing regulations of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) and theenforceable policies of the California Coastal Management Program (CCMP), as defined inChapter 3 of the California Coastal Act (CCA), apply to land and waters within coastal zoneboundaries and to activities conducted within or outside the coastal zone that may affect uses orresources within the coastal zone. As defined in Section 307 of the CCA, the term "coastalzone" does not include "lands the use of which is by law subject solely to the discretion of orwhich is held in trust by the Federal Government." Lands that are wholly owned and operatedby the DON are excluded from the CZ. Activities occurring above the high tide line or beyond 3nm (5.6 km) offshore, and not affecting coastal uses or resources, are not required to beaddressed in a CCD. All offshore and onshore components of the Proposed Action have beenconsidered to evaluate those activities for which coastal effects are reasonably foreseeable.2.2 AREAS AND ACTIVITIESThe majority of training events occurring inside the CZ do not have the potential to affect coastaluses or resources within the CZ. These events involve coordinating Fleet personnel and assetsduring a variety of scenarios including: integrating surveillance and intelligence collection data;conducting safe passage for transiting ships; rendering evacuation assistance for humanitarianor embassy personnel in simulated hostile countries; transferring command control from Navyoffshore assets to Marine Corps ground troops; inserting Special Operations personnel duringmaritime interdiction operations; rescuing down pilots; and sustaining elevated operationaltempo for extended periods of time.Coastal effects are reasonably foreseeable as a result of five of the training activities includedas components of COMPTUEX and JTFEX (Table 2-1). Naval Surface Fire Support (NSFS)activities occurring in the Shore Bombardment Area (SHOBA) are included in the list of eventswith foreseeable effects on coastal uses or resources because the public is temporarilyrestricted from the nearshore waters off SHOBA (charted as a Danger Zone) during the firingexercise.Table 2-1. COMPTUEX/JTFEX ActivitiesEVENTAmphibious OperationsNaval Surface Fire SupportShip Mine CountermeasuresOperationsDemolition OperationsMining OperationsRANGE/OPAREASCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSHOBA*SCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSOCALPAGE 7

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 20062.2.1 At-Sea Training OperationsAmphibious OperationsAmphibious operations involve the movement of Marine Corps combat and support forces fromNavy ships at-sea to an objective or an operations area ashore. Amphibious operations mayinclude shore assault, boat raid, airfield seizure, humanitarian assistance, and forcereconnaissance. Amphibious operations are the principal type of training conducted by an ESGduring an Expeditionary Fires Exercise (EFEX) and may be part of a COMPTUEX/JTFEX. Theobjective of these operations is to provide a realistic training environment for conductingamphibious assaults, amphibious raids, reconnaissance, hydrographic surveys, and surfcondition assessments. Navy and Marine Corps fighter and attack aircraft from the CSG andthe ESG may provide Close Air Support (CAS) for the amphibious operation. Amphibiouslandings are launched from Navy ships positioned out to 50 mi (80 km) offshore.For an assault on a beach, units come ashore in Landing Craft, Air Cushion (LCAC) and inAmphibious Assault Vehicles (AAV). LCACs are high-speed vessels whose air cushioncapability allows them to travel across the beach to the desired location for discharging Marines,combat vehicles, and cargo. The AAVs are lightly armored tracked vehicles capable ofmaneuvering through the water and driving on land to ferry Marines from ship to shore.An amphibious exercise may last from 2 days up to 3 weeks, depending on the size andcomplexity of the exercise, and typically includes a Live-Fire Exercise. Amphibious operationsnormally take place at MCBCP and the SCIRC. Additionally, smaller amphibious exerciseshave occurred on the southern beaches of the SSTC. The participants and assets inamphibious operations typically include: 1,500 Marines; rotary wing, fixed wing, and tilt-wingaircraft; amphibious vehicles, vessels, and boats - Landing Craft, Utility (LCU), Combat RubberRaiding Raft (CRRC), Rigid Hull Inflatable Boat (RHIB); three amphibious ships; and othersurface ships.Naval Surface Fire Support (NSFS) OperationsNSFS operations involve naval surface ships with the MK-45 5-inch/54 or the MK-45 5-inch/62naval gun firing system, engaging land and surface targets. NSFS operations are an annualrequirement for all naval vessels outfitted with the 5-inch gun system. NSFS is conductedagainst land targets in the SHOBA on SCI. Because ships are firing from sea to land targetslocated in SHOBA, the public is restricted in the offshore portion of SHOBA, called Fire SupportArea (FSA), during the live-firing portion of the operations. However, the cumulative time thatships are actually firing weapons during these operations is extremely short. The participantsassociated with an NSFS operation include: four to six ships.Mine Countermeasures (MCM) OperationsMCM Operations train forces to locate and neutralize inert (non-explosive) mine shapes inshallow-water environments in support of the CSG and ESG. A typical exercise would involvebottom-laid explosive and mid-water column explosive training evolutions. The training wouldtake place offshore of the beaches at SSTC/MCBCP, and in the nearshore waters off thewestern side of SCI. The assets include two MCM ships, two to three airborne minecountermeasures helicopters, divers, unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV) and marinemammals (dolphins). Some or all of the following equipment would be used: underwaterPAGE 8

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006explosives (up to 20 pounds net explosives weight (NEW)), side-scan sonar, high-frequencysonar, laser line scans, magnetic sweep gear, and influence sweep gear.Demolition Operations (DEMO)DEMO provides training in the identification and neutralization or destruction of inert floating ormoored mines. This training includes hydrographic reconnaissance of approaches toprospective landing beaches; demolition of obstacles and clearing mines; locating, improving,and marking of useable channels; channel and harbor clearance; and acquisition of operationalintelligence during pre-assault operations. Explosives used in DEMO are less than 20 pounds.During a COMPTUEX or JTFEX there may be up to 20 demolition events. The DEMO exercisetakes place at locations routinely used for explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) and DEMOtraining at SCIRC, MCBCP, SSTC, and Naval Base Coronado (NBC). The participants andassets typically used in this event include: EOD divers, small boats, and helicopters.2.2.2 Air OperationsMining OperationsMining Operation consists of airborne mine-laying. The aircraft drop a series of (usually four),non-explosive inert training shapes (MK-76, bomb dummy unit [BDU] 45, or BDU 48) in thewater. The aircraft may make multiple passes on the same flight pattern, dropping one or moreshapes each pass. The shapes are scored for accuracy as they enter the water. The trainingshapes are inert and recovered at the end of the operation.PAGE 9

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006CHAPTER 3DETERMINATION OF CONSISTENCY3.1 SUMMARY OF COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATIONThe following CCD was prepared in compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act of1972, Section 307, which states that Federal actions must be consistent to the maximum extentpracticable with the enforceable policies of approved state coastal management programs.Sections of the California Coastal Act (CCA) of 1976 (14 California Code of Regulations[C.C.R.] § 13001 et seq.) applicable to the Proposed Action are listed in Table 3-1.In the following CCD, the applicable CCA policy is stated first, followed by a summary of thereasonably foreseeable coastal effects and a more-detailed discussion of the Proposed Actionin relation to the specific coastal policy.In accordance with the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended, the Navyhas determined that training activities conducted in SOCAL OPAREA during COMPTUEX andJTFEX are consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable policies of theCalifornia Coastal Management Program (CCMP), pursuant to the requirements of the CoastalZone Management Act of 1972, as amended, (CZMA).Table 3-1. Applicability of California Coastal Act to Proposed ActionArticle Section Description ApplicabilityArticle 2:PublicAccessArticle 3:RecreationArticle 4:MarineEnvironment30210 Access; recreational opportunities; posting Consistent30211 Development not to interfere with access NA30212 New development projects NA30212.5 Public facilities; distribution NA30213 Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities; encouragementand provision; overnight room rentalsNA30214 Implementation of public access policies; legislative intent NA30220 Protection of certain water-oriented activities NA30221 Oceanfront land; protection for recreational use andNAdevelopment30222 Private lands; priority of development purposes NA30222.5 Oceanfront lands; aquaculture facilities; priority NA30223 Upland areas NA30224 Recreational boating use; encouragement; facilities NA30230 Marine resources; maintenance Consistent30231 Biological productivity; wastewater Consistent30232 Oil and hazardous substance spills NA30233 Diking, filling and dredging NA30234 Commercial fishing and recreational boating facilities NA30234.5 Fishing; economic, commercial and recreational importance Consistent30235 Revetments, breakwaters, etc. NA30236 Water supply and flood control NAPAGE 10

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Article Section Description ApplicabilityArticle 5:LandResourcesArticle 6:DevelopmentArticle 7:IndustrialDevelopment30240(a) Environmentally sensitive habitat areas NA30240(b)Environmentally sensitive habitat areas; adjacentdevelopmentsNA30241 Prime agricultural land; maintenance in agricultural production NA30241.5 Agricultural lands; viability of uses NA30242 Lands suitable for agricultural use; conversion NA30243 Productivity of soils and timberlands; conversions NA30244 Archaeological or paleontological resources Consistent30250 Location, generally NA30251 Scenic and visual qualities NA30252 Maintenance and enhancement of public areas NA30253 Safety, stability, pollution, energy conservation, visitors NA30254 Public works facilities NA30254.5 Sewage treatment plants and conditions NA30255 Priority of coastal-dependent developments NA30260 Location or expansion NA30261 Use of tanker facilities NA30262 Oil and gas development NA30263 Refineries or petrochemical facilities NA30264 Thermal electric generating plants NA30265 Offshore oil transport and refining NA30265.5 Coordination of offshore oil transport and refining activities NA3.2 ARTICLE 2–PUBLIC ACCESS3.2.1 Section 30210 – Public Access, Recreational OpportunitiesCalifornia PolicyMaximum access, which shall be conspicuously posted, and recreational opportunities shall beprovided for all the people consistent with public safety needs and the need to protect publicrights, rights of private property owners, and natural resource areas from overuse.Coastal Zone EffectsThe Proposed Action is fully consistent with California CZ policy Section 30210 because itwould not alter current public access to recreational areas or recreational opportunities in theCZ. Public beaches and beach access routes are not affected, nor are National Park facilities.Notices to Mariners (NOTMARs) and Notices-to-Airmen (NOTAMs) are issued to allow marinersand commercial recreational services (e.g., dive charters) to select alternate destinationswithout substantially affecting their activities. The Proposed Action would not increase thenumber or type of training operations or change the training locations.Most COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities in the CZ are compatible with concurrent recreationalactivities. Some COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities (i.e., those involving the live firing of weapons)require access to be restricted for safety and military security concerns. COMPTUEX/JTFEXPAGE 11

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006activities in areas of joint use occasionally limit public access to portions of the shoreline ornearshore waters for short periods because the Navy implements strict safety procedures priorto each training activity. The locations, sizes, and durations of safety zones are carefullytailored to the needs of the military exercise so as to minimize the effects on public access andrecreation, and ensure public safety.DiscussionThe Navy has implemented procedures to efficiently inform the public about temporaryexclusions when such exclusions are necessary for public safety during NSFS, Mine Exercise(MINEX), DEMO, Ship Mine Countermeasures Exercise (SMCMEX), and Amphibious Exercise(AMPHIBEX). Potential effects of the Proposed Action on public access to beaches arenegligible because these activities take place on or in proximity to Federally-owned property forwhich the public is not permitted access.Elements of these activities that require exclusive use of an open-ocean area have the potentialto affect public access and recreational fishing operations during the actual operation. AroundSCI, these operations occur in Federally-designated danger and restricted zones. In the othernearshore operating areas offshore SSTC and MCBCP, non-authorized individuals are clearedfrom the area for the duration of the exercise. Short-term, intermittent effects on individualrecreational use of these areas may result from temporary closures of specific operating areas,but the areas are relatively small, and easily circumvented.Prior to commencement of these events, NOTMARs and NOTAMs are issued, providing thepublic, including commercial fishermen, with notice of upcoming location and time restrictions inspecific training areas. In addition, the Southern California Offshore Range (SCORE) maintainsa public website depicting upcoming restrictions in designated Danger Zones around SCI.These notices detail date, time, duration, and location of restricted access so that commercialand private fishermen and divers can plan their activities accordingly. The restricted times onlyextend through the duration of the training activity; thereby allowing the public to shift theiractivities to alternate areas during temporary closures. The Navy will continue to schedule itsactivities to minimize conflicts, and to provide adequate public notice. The Proposed Actionwould be consistent with Section 30210 to the maximum extent practicable.Nearshore and Beach AreasSan Clemente Island Range ComplexSCI is Navy-owned property where public access is strictly controlled for purposes of militarysecurity and public safety. The Navy considers all ocean areas around SCI to be co-use zonesthat are available for public access, except for the restricted anchorages in the Wilson CoveExclusive Zone. Access to some co-use zones may be restricted from time to time for publicsafety. When such restrictions are necessary, the Navy implements procedures to minimizeeffects on the public. Under the Proposed Action, COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities at SCI areconsistent with Section 30210. Recreational activities in the CZ include sport fishing, sailing,boating, whale-watching, and diving. Commercial uses include fishing, tourism, and marinetransportation. The area also is used by the public for scientific research and education.PAGE 12

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Silver Strand Training ComplexThe Navy leases ocean beaches along the SSTC from the California State Lands Commission.Boat lanes extend out 2 nm from these beaches in support of offshore amphibious training.Bayside training areas off the northern portion of SSTC are also used in support of amphibioustraining events. When not in use for military training, the nearshore bay and ocean waters offSSTC are used for commercial fishing and recreational boating. The Navy training areas onSan Diego Bay adjacent to the peninsula are within a designated restricted area. However,non-Navy vessels may transit through the area when the training lanes are not scheduled formilitary activities. Consistent with ongoing activities, public access and recreation co-exist withNavy training.The Navy contributes to the provision of public access on the Silver Strand peninsula. TheSilver Strand peninsula has several water-oriented public facilities, including marinas, parks,beaches, and resorts. Together, these facilities provide the public with substantial access to thelocal beaches and waters of San Diego Bay and offshore areas. YMCA Camp Surf operates on80 acres on SSTC-South at the southern end of the peninsula on Navy land, providing overnightbeachfront accommodations for local youth and instruction in water sports. A salt marshecological preserve and salt evaporator ponds located on about 27 acres (10.9 hectares) ofSSTC South property fronting San Diego Bay is leased by the Navy to San Diego CountyDepartment of Parks and Recreation, which has installed a parking lot and bicycle andpedestrian paths. The Proposed Action is consistent with California CZ Section 30210 toprovide maximum public access consistent with public safety.Marine Corps Base Camp PendletonSubstantial public access to beaches and nearshore waters is provided both to the north andsouth of Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton. San Onofre Beach, located at the northern endof MCBCP, is a public beach leased to the State by the Marine Corps. Both San Onofre StateBeach and the adjacent San Mateo State Preserve/Trestles Beach are directly accessible fromthe Interstate-5 freeway. Immediately south of Camp Pendleton lies the City of Oceanside, witha harbor and extensive beach areas. Public access is not affected by COMPTUEX/JTFEXtraining exercises because the Camp Pendleton shoreline is not accessible to the public. Underthe Proposed Action, the extent and accessibility of adjacent public areas would not change.The Proposed Action is consistent with Section 30210 to provide maximum public accessconsistent with public safety.3.3 ARTICLE 4–MARINE ENVIRONMENT3.3.1 Section 30230 – Marine ResourcesCalifornia PolicyMarine resources shall be maintained, enhanced, and where feasible, restored. Specialprotection shall be given to areas and species of special biological or economic significance.Uses of the marine environment shall be carried out in a manner that will sustain the biologicalproductivity of coastal waters and that will maintain healthy populations of all species of marineorganisms adequate for long-term commercial, recreational, scientific, and educationalpurposes.PAGE 13

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Coastal Zone EffectsThe Proposed Action would be consistent with Section 30230. Under the Proposed Action, theoverall number, type and location of training operations would not increase. Biologicalproductivity of coastal waters would be maintained and populations of fish and other marineorganisms would be sustained. Important marine resources would be avoided.DiscussionCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities within the SOCAL OPAREA with potential to affect marineresources include deployment of inert mine shapes on surface targets, sea-to-land weaponsfiring into designated land-based ranges, underwater detonation, and amphibious landings.Due to the generally dispersed, infrequent nature of Navy training exercises and the widedispersal of marine resources, biological productivity of coastal waters will be maintained.Marine resources of special biological or economic significance in the SOCAL OPAREA include:Marine flora, especially kelp forestsCommercial and recreational fish stocks and essential fish habitatSpecial-status species, including marine mammals, sea turtles, and white abaloneThese resources are considered, for this analysis, to be suitable indicators of general biologicalproductivity, and representative of the overall marine resources within the SOCAL OPAREA.Marine FloraThe giant kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera) beds located along the coast and around all of the offshoreislands are an important element of coastal fish habitat. The kelp bed off SCI extends aroundthe island from about 500 feet (ft) (150 meters [m]) to about 2,500 ft (760 m). At the Navy’sinvitation, researchers from the Channel Islands National Park Kelp Forest Monitoring Programcame out to SCI and conducted surveys in 2003 and again in 2004 (DON 2004). The researchrevealed: All monitoring sites had thick, healthy giant kelp canopies that covered 85-100percent of the survey transects, and all monitoring sites appeared to have changedlittle from 2003-2004Pink abalone (Haliotis corrugata) are more abundant than around the other ChannelIslands; the SCI population is one of the largest pink abalone populations along theCalifornia coastFish were abundant at the monitoring sites, with a diversity comparable to otherChannel islandsCommercial and Recreational Fish Stocks and Essential Fish HabitatThreats to offshore fish habitat generally include: navigation, dumping, offshore sand andmineral mining, oil and gas exploration, development, transportation, commercial and industrialactivities, and natural events. A total of 91 fish and invertebrate species with designatedessential fish habitat (EFH) occur in the SOCAL OPAREA. They are grouped into the coastalpelagic species, Pacific coast ground fish, and highly migratory species.PAGE 14

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Coastal pelagic species are small to medium-sized, schooling species that migrate in coastalwaters, often near the ocean surface. Coastal pelagic species collectively comprise one of thelargest marine fisheries in California with respect to biomass, landed volume, and revenue.“Boom or bust” population cycles of coastal pelagic stocks have been attributed to a number ofkey factors, including relatively short life-cycles, variable recruitment, and annual and longercyclevariation in optimal habitats for spawning, larval survival, recruitment, and feeding. Largenatural fluctuations in Coastal pelagic species abundance have been accentuated in the past byhuman influence (California Department of Fish and Game [CDFG] 2001).Ground fish species are bottom-dwelling fin fishes. More than 80 species of marine fish areincluded in the Pacific Coast Ground Fish Fishery Management Plan (FMP) that was adoptedby the Pacific Fishery Management Council in 1982. Fewer than 20 of these commercially andrecreationally important fish ever have been comprehensively assessed. The current status ofmany rockfish and lingcod off California is poor. Ground fish landings have declined sharply,and the general condition of West Coast ground fish stocks is poor.Highly migratory species include the tuna, billfish, pelagic sharks, and dolphin fish. This groupcontributes to valuable commercial fisheries, and is important to the sport fishery in SouthernCalifornia. The stocks of all highly migratory species are considered to be healthy (CDFG2001). These species are less likely to be affected by conditions within the CZ than coastalpelagic species or highly migratory species.Special-Status SpeciesWhite AbaloneThe white abalone, a marine gastropod with a lifespan of more than 30 years, is the onlyinvertebrate within the SOCAL OPAREA that is listed as Federally endangered. The whiteabalone is found at depths to 197 ft (60 m) on rocky substrate from Point Conception, California,to Punta Abreojos, Baja California, Mexico (Hobday and Tegner 2000; National MarineFisheries Service [NMFS] 2001). White abalones are not randomly distributed on rockysubstrate. They occupy crevices in open, low relief rock or boulder habitat surrounded by sand(Tutschulte 1976; Davis et al. 1996).Historically, white abalone densities in Southern California were greatest around the ChannelIslands. For example, up to 80 percent of commercial landings were taken off SCI (Hobday andTegner 2000; Rogers-Bennett et al. 2002). SCI also once supported a strong white abalonerecreational fishery (Hobday and Tegner 2000). The current distribution of the species isprimarily around islands along banks of the area (Davis et al. 1996; Davis et al. 1998; Hobdayand Tegner 2000; DON 2002).Densities of the white abalone are currently very low. The recent, documented 99 percentdecline in the white abalone population is due to over-fishing, not habitat degradation, so nocritical habitat has been designated (NMFS 2001) Density estimates ranged from 0 at SantaCruz Island and Osborn Bank to 3.9/ac (9.79/ha) at Tanner Bank (1.1/ac [2.7/ha] overall); 24individuals recorded at 98-213 ft (30-65 m) depths off west SCI gave a density estimate of0.38/ac (0.96/ha). NMFS conducted a submersible and multi-beam and side-scan SONARsurvey of Tanner Bank, about 128 mi (80 km) southwest of SCI, in 2002 for white abalone andabalone habitat. A total of 194 white abalone were recorded at 98-197 ft (30-60 m) depths,resulting in a density estimate of 7.1/ac (18/ha) (NMFS 2003). Another survey, a joint effortPAGE 15

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006between NMFS, Scripps, California State University Monterey Bay, and the Navy using aremotely operated vehicle (ROV) and divers to map white abalone habitat in waters 66-230 ft(20-70 m) deep on the western side of SCI, was completed in August 2004. During this survey,only 6 abalone were recorded at 120-160 ft (37-50 m) depths (DON 2005).DEMO and amphibious landings occurring in the waters just offshore SCI are conducted insandy bottom environments. SMCMEX are rarely conducted in SOCAL, and only occur inshallow, nearshore water off the western side of SCI. Because the white abalone is rare in theSOCAL OPAREA, occurs only at substantial depths, and inhabits only crevices of rockysubstrate, COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities would not affect the biological productivity of whiteabalone.Sea TurtlesFour species of sea turtles are likely to occur off the coast of Southern California: loggerhead(Caretta caretta); leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea); eastern Pacific green (Cheloniaagassizi); and olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea). The eastern Pacific green, also known asthe black sea turtle, is considered by some to be a subspecies of the green sea turtle (Cheloniamydas). None of the four species are known to nest on Southern California beaches. All of thefour species are currently listed as either Endangered or Threatened under the EndangeredSpecies Act (ESA) (Table 3-2). No data are available on actual numbers of turtles occurring inSouthern California waters, but their presence in the SOCAL OPAREA is considered very rare.Table 3-2. Sea Turtle Status in SOCAL OPAREACommon Name (Scientific Name) Status Occurrence in Project AreaLoggerhead (Caretta caretta) Threatened very unlikely; rarely sightedLeatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) Endangered very unlikely; rarely sightedGreen (Chelonia mydas) Threatened very unlikely; rarely sightedOlive Ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) Threatened very unlikely; rarely sightedSources: U.S. Navy 2005, U.S. Navy 2002, NMFS and USFWS 1998The distribution of sea turtles is strongly affected by seasonal changes in ocean temperature.Young loggerhead, green, and olive ridley sea turtles are believed to move offshore into openocean convergence zones where food is abundant (Carr 1987; NRC 1990; NMFS and USFWS1998a, 1998b, 1998c, 1998d). A survey of the eastern tropical Pacific found that sea turtleswere present during 15 percent of observations in habitats of floating debris and material ofbiological origin (flotsam) (Pitman 1990; Arenas and Hall 1992). In general, sightings increaseduring summer as warm water moves northward along the coast (Stinson 1984). Sightings mayalso be more numerous in warm years than in cold years.Stinson (1984) reported that over 60 percent of eastern Pacific green and olive ridley turtlesobserved in California waters were in waters less than 165 ft (50 m) in depth. Green turtleswere often observed along shore in areas of eelgrass. Loggerheads and leatherbacks wereobserved over a broader range of depths out to 3,300 ft (1,000 m). When sea turtles reach subadultsize, they move to the shallow, nearshore benthic feeding grounds of adults (Carr 1987;NRC 1990; NMFS and USFWS 1998a, 1998b, 1998c, 1998d). Aerial surveys off Californiahave shown that most leatherbacks occur in slope waters, and that few occur over thePAGE 16

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006continental shelf (Eckert 1993). Tracking studies found that migrating leatherback turtles oftentravel parallel to deepwater contours ranging in depth from 650 to 11,500 ft (200 to 3,500 m).Sea turtles are rarely sighted in the nearshore waters around SCI, SSTC and MCBCP, and donot use these beaches for nesting. In the rare event that a sea turtle is present during DEMO,SMCMEX, and MINEX, the training would be delayed or postponed until the sea turtle movedout of the area. While the energy from underwater detonations associated with DEMO andSMCMEX events will propagate through the water column, the detonations associated withthese events are limited to only a few per year, and occur in relatively shallow water; therebyfacilitating the sighting of sea turtles in the shallow waters. MINEX involves the dropping of inertbomb dummy shapes from an aircraft. Air crews are scored on their accuracy as the dummyshape enters the water near a target. The shapes are recovered once the event is completed.From an aerial platform, flight crews would visually search for sea turtles and delay the event ifa sea turtle was observed in the target area. Based on the low probability of encountering a seaturtle, the limited range of acoustic propagation of sound sources, and the commitment to postlookouts during exercises, the Proposed Action would not affect the productivity of sea turtles inthe SOCAL OPAREA.Marine MammalsCetaceansA total of 31 species of cetaceans could be encountered in the SOCAL OPAREA area, notincluding species considered to be extra-limital in the SOCAL OPAREA (Table 3-3). Theyinclude 23 species of toothed whales (odontocetes) and eight species of baleen whales(mysticetes). At least ten species can generally be found in the SOCAL OPAREA in moderateor high numbers, either year-round or during annual migrations into or through the area: graywhale (Eschrichtius robustus), pygmy sperm whale (Kogia breviceps), bottlenose dolphin(Tursiops truncatus), pantropical spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata), striped dolphin (Stenellacoeruleoalba), short-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus delphis), Pacific white-sided dolphin(Lagenorhynchus obliquidens), Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus), northern right whale dolphin(Lissodelphis borealis), and Dall’s porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli). Other species arerepresented by either small numbers, moderate numbers during part of the year, or occasionalsightings.Comparison of cetacean abundance in 1979/80 vs. 1991 indicated that numbers of mysticetesand odontocetes have increased in offshore California waters over the 12-year period. Thestatus of cetacean stocks and their abundance estimates for California are summarized in Table3-3 from marine mammal stock assessments prepared by Barlow et al. (1997), Forney et al.(2000), and Carretta et al. (2001 and 2004).Five species of endangered or threatened cetaceans occur in the SOCAL OPAREA. The bluewhale (Balaenoptera musculus), fin whale (B. physalus), humpback whale (Megapteranovaeangliae), sei whale (B. borealis), and sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) are listed asendangered species and are protected under the ESA. Gray whales were removed from theendangered list in 1994 because of an increase in population numbers (Carretta et al. 2005).Stocks of all species listed as endangered under the ESA are automatically considered‘depleted’ and ‘strategic’ under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). The specificdefinition of a strategic stock is complex, but in general it is a stock for which human activitiesPAGE 17

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006may be having a deleterious effect on the population and which may not be sustainable. Thestocks of blue, fin, humpback, sei, and sperm whales in the waters off California are consideredstrategic (Barlow et al. 1997). In addition, the California/Oregon/Washington Stocks of theshort-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus) and sperm whale (Physetermacrocephalus) have been designated as strategic.PinnipedsThree species of pinnipeds occur in the SOCAL OPAREA. Only one of the species, theCalifornia sea lion (Zalophus californianus), is abundant in the Southern California Bight. Asmall rookery is located on Santa Barbara Island. Guadalupe Island, just south of the OPAREA,is a major haul-out site (DON 2005). Large colonies of California sea lions are found on SanNicolas and San Miguel Islands. The Guadalupe fur seal also is found in the SOCAL OPAREA.This species is listed as threatened under the ESA, and is considered to be depleted andstrategic under the MMPA.Two other species, the harbor seal (Phoca vitulina) and the northern elephant seal (Miroungaangustirostris), haul out regularly in small numbers and occasionally pup on SCI. The harborseal (Phoca vitulina) occupies haul-out sites on mainland beaches and all of the ChannelIslands, including Santa Barbara, Santa Catalina, and San Nicolas Islands (DON 2005). Smallcolonies of northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) breed and haul out on SantaBarbara Island with large colonies on San Nicolas and San Miguel Islands (DON 2005). Allthree species are more abundant on the Channel Islands north of the SOCAL OPAREA.In San Diego Bay, two pinniped species occur: California sea lion and the Pacific harbor seal(Phoca vitulina). These species are occasionally observed on the beaches of the coastalproperties of NBC and SSTC. In general the SSTC area is not an active marine mammal area.There is little information on marine mammal abundance and distribution in the SSTC, but itappears there is little marine mammal activity in this area.The overall abundance of pinnipeds increased rapidly on the Channel Islands between the endof commercial exploitation in the 1920s and the mid-1980s. The growth rates of populations ofsome species appear to have declined after the mid-1980s, and some survey data suggestedthat local populations of some species were declining. The declines may have been a result ofeither inter-species competition or population numbers having exceeded the carrying capacity ofthe environment (Stewart and Delong 1993; Hanan 1996). More recently, most populations areincreasing (Carretta et al. 2004) and, in some cases, such as the seals, have recently occupiednew rookeries and haul-out areas.PAGE 18

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Table 3-3. Marine Mammal Species in Southern California WatersCommon NameSpecies NameBlue whaleBalaenoptera musculusBryde’s whaleBalaenoptera edeniFin whaleBalaenoptera physalusGray whaleEschrichtius robustusHumpback whaleMegaptera novaeangliaeMinke whaleBalaenoptera acutorostrataNorth Pacific right whaleEubalaena japonicaSei whaleBalaenoptera borealisBaird’s beaked whaleBerardius bairdiiBottlenose dolphin coastalTursiops truncatusBottlenose dolphin offshoreTursiops truncatusCuvier’s beaked whaleZiphius cavirostrisDall’s porpoisePhocoenoides dalliDwarf sperm whaleKogia simaFalse killer whalePseudorca crassidensKiller whale offshoreOrcinus orcaHarbor porpoisePhocoena phocoenaKiller whale southernresidentKiller whale transientOrcinus orcaLong-beaked commondolphinMesoplodont beaked whalesMesoplodon spp.Northern right whale dolphinLissodelphis borealisAbundance1,744(0.28)12(2.0)3,279(0.31)26,635(0.1006)1,034(0.11)1,015(0.73)Unknown56(0.61)228(0.51)206(012)5,065(0.66)1,884(0.68)99,517(0.33)UnknownUnknownRare1,340(0.31)7,579(0.38)83(?)346(?)43,360(0.72)1,247(0.92)20,362(0.26)Stock (SAR)Eastern NorthPacificESA &MMPAStatusE, D, SAnnualPopulationTrendMay beincreasingCalifornia Unknown RareCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonEastern NorthPacificCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonEastern NorthPacificEastern NorthPacificCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonCaliforniaCoastalCaliforniaOffshoreCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonEastern TropicalPacificEastern NorthPacificCentralCalifornia NorthBritish ColumbiaEastern NorthPacificCaliforniaCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonE, D, SE, D, SMay beincreasingIncreasing ~2.5%Increasing6-7%UnknownE, D, S Unknown RareE, D, SD,SMay beincreasingUnknownStableUnknownUnknownUnknownUnknownUnknownUnknownIncreasingbut notIncreased in2002 & 2003UnknownUnknown –seasonalUnknownNo TrendSouthernCaliforniaOperating AreaUncommonUncommonCommon duringmigrationUncommonUncommonRareRareRareCommonUncommonCommonPossible visitorRareUncommonVery rareUncommonUncommonUncommonRareCommonPAGE 19

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Common NameSpecies NamePantropical spotted dolphinStenella attenuatePygmy sperm whaleKogia brevicepsRisso’s DolphinGrampus griseusPacific white-sided dolphinLagenorhynchusobliguidensRough-toothed dolphinSteno bredanensisShort-beaked commondolphinDelphinus delphisShort-finned pilot whaleGlobicephalamacrorhynchusSperm whalePhyseter macrocephalusSpinner dolphinStenella longirostrisStriped dolphinStenella coeruleoalbaHarbor sealPhoca vitulinaNorthern elephant sealMirounga angustirostrisCalifornia sea lionZalophus californianusGuadalupe fur sealArctocephalus townsendiNorthern fur sealCallorhinus ursinusStellar sea lionEumetopias jubatusSouthern Sea OtterEnhydra lutrisAbundanceUnknown119(?)16,066(0.28)59,724(0.50)Unknown449,846(0.25)304(1.02)1,233(0.41)2,805(0.66)13,934(0.53)27,863(0.17)Stock (SAR)Eastern TropicalPacificCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonTropical andwarm temperateCalifornia,Oregon, WashCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonTropical andwarm temperateCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonESA &MMPAStatusAnnualPopulationTrendUnknownUnknownNo TrendNo TrendUnknownUnknown –seasonaldifferencesUnknownSouthernCaliforniaOperating AreaRareRareCommonCommonRareCommonSeasonallyabundantUncommon;common before1982E, D, S Unknown UncommonUnknownNo TrendRareOccasional visitorCalifornia Stable Common101,000 California Increasing Common237,000 U.S. Stock6,443 Mexico T, D, S7,7846,555San MiguelIslandCalifornia,Oregon,WashingtonIncreasing6.1%Increasing13.7%Increasing8.3%Abundant insummerRareCommonT, D Decreasing Rare2,359 California T, D Increasing RareStock or population abundance estimates and the associated correlation of variance (CV) from NMFS Stock Assessment Reports(SAR), their status under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), the population trend,and relative abundance in each range area. E=Endangered under the ESA; D = Depleted under the MMPA; and S=Strategic Stockunder the MMPA. Due to lack of information, several of the Mesoplodont beaked whales have been grouped together.Effects of the Proposed ActionOverviewJTFEX/COMPTUEX activities would have negligible effects on marine mammals. Minoracoustic effects to marine mammals could occur from underwater detonations and possiblyinclude: temporary changes in behavior, movement away from an area of activity, temporaryPAGE 20

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006reduction in hearing sensitivity, and no response. It is highly unlikely that a marine mammalwould experience any long-term effects because the proposed training is:IntermittentLocalized in discreet, shallow water areas in SOCALMitigated, such that marine mammals will not be in proximity to underwaterdetonations during training eventsUnderwater DetonationsMarine mammals may be exposed to acoustic energy from underwater detonations from DEMOand SMCMEX, and to physical injury from inert mine shapes dropped during MINEX. Smallcharges are used to neutralize inert mine shapes during DEMO and SMCMEX. Underwaterdetonations associated with DEMO are aimed at removing obstacles and clearing mines inareas to be used for approaches to landing beaches. Underwater detonations conducted duringSMCMEX involve one bottom-laid detonation and one mid-water column detonation. Whilewater depth is slightly greater than DEMO activities, SMCMEX activities are conducted to locateand neutralize inert mine shapes in shallow water environments. Because underwaterdetonations conducted during DEMO and SMCMEX occur in shallow or very shallow water, asignificant portion of the energy is dissipated as surface blowout pressure and/or into the oceansubstrate. In addition, bottom substrate characteristics have an affect on the amount of energypropagating through the water column.Characteristic of the west coast of North America, Southern California has mixed semidiurnaltides. This results in four daily tidal heights, including a low low tide, high low tide, low high tide,and high high tide. During these tides, sand and gravel from submerged portions of intertidalbeaches are washed into the water column. This frequent tidal flow, combined with closeproximity to erosion of sand and particulate matter from coastal dunes and hills results in arelatively deep sandy substrate in nearshore waters. Consequently, propagation of acousticenergy from these shallow water, and shallow water bottom-laid mine shapes is significantlyreduced in the water column.Operating procedures for detecting marine mammals would be implemented in conjunction withunderwater detonations training. Prior to an underwater detonation (DEMO, SMCMEX) or minelaying activity (MINEX), ship-based or aerial observers would visually scan the area for marinemammals. As with sea turtles, underwater detonations or mine laying would be delayed,postponed or cancelled if a marine mammal approached the operating area; thereby, avoidinginjury to marine mammals.While marine mammals may detect the underwater detonations or sound of an inert mine shapedropping into the water from a distance, these exercises would be intermittent, and of very shortduration. Underwater detonations and mine-laying would not affect the biological productivity ofmarine mammal populations in the CZ. The Proposed Action is consistent to the maximumextent practicable with Section 30230 for marine resources.3.3.2 Section 30231 – Biological ProductivityCalifornia PolicyThe biological productivity and the quality of coastal waters, streams, wetlands, estuaries, andlakes appropriate to maintain optimum populations of marine organisms and for the protection ofPAGE 21

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006human health shall be maintained and, where feasible, restored through, among other means,minimizing adverse effects of waste water discharges and entrainment, controlling runoff,preventing depletion of ground water supplies and substantial interference with surface waterflow, encouraging waste water reclamation, maintaining natural vegetation buffer areas thatprotect riparian habitats, and minimizing alteration of natural streams.Coastal Zone EffectsCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities within the SOCAL OPAREA with the potential to affect biologicalproductivity include underwater detonations from DEMO and SMCMEX. Mine shapes used inconjunction with these activities are either floating or moored mines. Small charges are used toneutralize inert mine shapes. Underwater detonations associated with DEMO are aimed atremoving obstacles and clearing mines in areas to be used for approaches to landing beaches.Because these underwater detonations occur in very shallow water, a significant portion of theenergy is dissipated as surface blowout pressure; thereby, reducing affects to water quality andplankton communities in the water column. Underwater detonations conducted during DEMOand SMCMEX would not be conducted in kelp forests surrounding SCI.Due to the generally dispersed, infrequent nature of underwater detonations, small chargesused, significant tidal flow (particularly around SCI), discreet effects associated with underwaterdetonations, and the wide dispersal of marine resources, biological productivity of coastalwaters will be maintained. The Proposed Action is consistent to the maximum extentpracticable with Section 30231.3.3.3 Section 30234.5 – Economic, Commercial, and Recreational Importance of FishingCalifornia PolicyThe economic, commercial, and recreational importance of fishing activities shall be recognizedand protected.Coastal Zone EffectsCommercial fishing activities occur at various locations off the coast of Southern California.Commercial fishing in the Southern California area accounts for a substantial proportion of thefish and invertebrate catches in California, with an annual value of approximately $145 million(CDFG 2001). Sport fishing and tourism are important economic activities, supporting largenumbers of charter operators and boaters in the Southern California area. Commercial fishspecies found in the CZ are described in Section 3.3.1.Commercial fishing takes place in nearshore waters from La Jolla to the Silver Strand; the targetresources include both hard-bottom (urchins and crustaceans) and pelagic (mackerel and tuna)species. The extensive kelp bed and rocky substrate offshore of Point Loma likely supportsmost of the hard-bottom fishing, which includes diving (urchins and top snail) and traps (lobsterand crab). Purse seining occurs throughout this area. This area results in an annual harvest ofabout 656,000 pounds (lb) (298,000 kilograms [kg]) of fish and about 339,000 lb (154,000 kg) ofinvertebrates annually. Commonly targeted species include barracuda, halibut, croaker, whitesea bass, and surf perch (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS} 1984).Salt-water sport fishing is concentrated around the Channel Islands and in the shallower watersover the Cortez and Tanner Banks. Diving occurs year-round, although the number of trips toPAGE 22

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006SCI and the Banks appears to peak during lobster season (October-March). Most boat tripsoriginate from marinas and harbors along the Southern California coast.Recreational spear fishing also is popular off of Point Loma. The International Artificial Reef,located in approximately 165 ft (50 m) of water to the southwest of the Imperial Beach Pier, is apopular destination. The proximity of rocky and sedimentary habitats to the major recreationalfishing centers in San Diego Bay makes this area particularly popular with sport fishers. Kelpbass, sheephead, sculpin, and rockfish are popular recreational speciesPotential effects of the Proposed Action on economic, commercial, and recreational fishing havebeen evaluated by the Navy. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities do not have the potential to result inpermanent modifications of the marine environment within the CZ. Elements of the ProposedAction that require exclusive use of an ocean area (e.g., those operations in which weapons arefired) have the potential to affect commercial and recreational fishing operations during theactual operation. Short-term adverse effects on individual commercial fishermen may resultfrom temporary closures of specific ocean areas, but the economic importance of the regionalcommercial fishing industry would be unchanged.Prior to these events, NOTMARs and NOTAMs are issued, providing the public and commercialfishermen with notice of upcoming location and timing restrictions in specific training areas. Inaddition, the Southern California Offshore Range (SCORE) maintains a public website depictingupcoming restrictions in designated Danger Zones around SCI. These notices detail date, timeduration, and location of restricted access, so that commercial and private fishermen and diverscan plan their activities accordingly. The restricted times only extend through the duration of thetraining activity; thereby allowing the public to shift their activities to alternate areas duringtemporary closures. Thus, the Proposed Action would be consistent with Section 30234.5 to themaximum extent practicable.3.4 ARTICLE 5–LAND RESOURCES3.4.1 Section 30244 – Archaeological or Paleontological ResourcesCalifornia PolicyWhere development would adversely impact archaeological or paleontological resources asidentified by the State Historic Preservation Officer, reasonable mitigation measures shall berequired.Coastal Zone EffectsPaleontological resources of significance have not been identified in the CZ portions of theSOCAL OPAREA. Archaeological resources in the CZ consist primarily of historic shipwrecks.Shipwrecks are found throughout the SOCAL OPAREA along the coast, around the ChannelIslands, and around the offshore banks. Over 1,400 shipwrecks are known to be within theSOCAL OPAREA (Veridian Corporation 2001, and National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration [NOAA] 2005).Shipwrecks are documented from the period of Spanish exploration in the fifteenth centurythrough the modern period (twentieth century), although only shipwrecks older than 50 yearsare considered to be historic. The locations of many earlier shipwrecks are unknown due to theimprecise documentation. The best-known historic shipwrecks are those from the 1800's to the1900's. Submerged cultural resources such as shipwrecks are affected primarily byPAGE 23

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006environmental conditions (e.g., currents and tidal surge, sedimentation, colonization by marineorganisms) and secondarily by disturbance from scientific and recreational activities.Navy training activities in the CZ have had no discernable effect on submerged culturalresources. Vessel traffic has no potential to affect historic resources on the ocean floor. Debrisfrom expended training materials may settle on the ocean bottom, but the surface area ofcultural sites is a very small fraction of the OPAREA, and little or no debris is expected to settleon these sites. Amphibious exercises are conducted on beaches that are regularly used fortraining, and local cultural sites are known and avoided. Underwater demolition training isconducted at locations selected for their lack of sensitive resources. Under the ProposedAction, these conditions would not change. Therefore, the Proposed Action would be fullyconsistent with Section 30244.PAGE 24

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006CHAPTER 4CONCLUSIONThe Navy’s proposed activity will be undertaken in a manner consistent to the maximum extentpracticable with the enforceable policies of California Coastal Management Program.PAGE 25

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006CHAPTER 5REFERENCESArenas, P. and M. Hall. 1992. The association of sea turtles and other pelagic fauna with floating objectsin the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean.Barlow, J., K.A. Forney, P.S. Hill, R.L. Brownell Jr., J.V. Carretta, D.P. DeMaster, F. Julian, M.S. Lowry,T. Ragen, and R.R. Reeves, 1997. U.S. Pacific marine mammal stock assessments: 1996. NOAATechnical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-248. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National MarineFisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Barlow, J., P.S. Hill, K.A. Forney, and D.P. DeMaster, 1998. U.S. Pacific marine mammal stockassessments: 1998. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-258. Southwest FisheriesScience Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.California Department of Fish and Game. 2001. Coastal pelagic species: Overview. in W.S. Leet, C.M.Dewees, R. Klingbell, and E.J. Lawson, eds. California's Living Marine Resources: A Status Report.Carr, A.F. 1987. New Perspectives on the pelagic stage of sea turtle development. Cons. Biol. 1(2): 103-121.Carretta, J.V., K.A. Forney, and J. Barlow, 1995. Report of 1993–1994 marine mammal aerial surveysconducted within the U.S. Navy Outer Sea Test Range off southern California. NOAA TechnicalMemorandum NMFS-SWFSC-217. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine FisheriesService, La Jolla, CA.Carretta, J.V., J. Barlow, K.A. Forney, M.M. Muto, and J. Baker, 2001. U.S. Pacific marine mammal stockassessments: 2001. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-317. Southwest FisheriesScience Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Carretta, J.V., K.A. Forney, M.M. Muto, J. Barlow, J. Baker, B. Hanson, and M.S. Lowry, 2004. U.S.Pacific marine mammal stock assessments: 2003. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-375. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.Carretta, J.V., K.A. Forney, M.M. Muto, J. Barlow, J. Baker, B. Hanson, and M.S. Lowry, 2005. U.S.Pacific marine mammal stock assessments: 2004. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-375. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA. 316 pp.Carretta, J.V., K.A. Forney, M.M. Muto, J. Barlow, J. Baker, B. Hanson, and M.S. Lowry, 2006. U.S.Pacific marine mammal stock assessments: 2005. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-388. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA. 317 pp.Davis, G.E., P.L. Haaker, and D.V. Richards. 1996. Status and trends of white abalone at the CaliforniaChannel Islands. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 125:42-48.Davis, G.E., P.L. Haaker, and D.V. Richards. 1998. The perilous condition of white abalone, Haliotissorensoi. Journal of Shellfish Research 17:871-875.Department of the Navy. 2002. San Clemente Island Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan.Department of the Navy. 2004. San Clemente Island Kelp Forest Monitoring, Naval Auxiliary LandingField, 2004 Annual Report and Final Report.Department of the Navy. 2005. Marine Resources Assessment for the Southern California OperatingArea. Final Report. September.Department of the Navy. 2006. Draft COMPTUEX/JTFEX Environmental Assessment/OverseasEnvironmental Assessment. July.Eckert, K.L. 1993. The biology and population status of marine turtles in the north Pacific Ocean. NOAATechnical Memorandum.PAGE 26

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006Forney, K.A., J. Barlow, M.M. Muto, M. Lowry, J. Baker, G. Cameron, J. Mobley, C. Stinchcomb, and J.V.Carretta, 2000. U.S. Pacific marine mammal stock assessments: 2000. NOAA TechnicalMemorandum NMFS-SWFSC-300. Southwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine FisheriesService, La Jolla, CA.Hanan, D.A. 1996. Dynamics of abundance and distribution for Pacific harbor seal, Phoca vitulinarichardsi, on the coast of California. Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.Hobday, A.J. and M.J. Tegner. 2000. Status review of white abalone (Haliotus sorenseni) throughout itsrange in California and Mexico. NOAA Technical Memorandum, National Marine Fisheries Service.May.Lowry, M.S. and J.V. Carretta, 2003. Pacific harbor seal, Phoca vitulina richardii, census in Californiaduring May–July 2002. NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SWFSC-353. Southwest FisheriesScience Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla, CA.National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998a. Recovery plan for U.S.Pacific populations of the east Pacific green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas)._______. 1998b. Recovery plan for U.S. Pacific populations of the olive ridley turtle (Lepodochelysolivacea)._______. 1998c. Recovery plan for U.S. Pacific populations of the loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta)._______. 1998d. Recovery plan for U.S. Pacific populations of the leatherback turtle (Dermochelyscoriacea).National Marine Fisheries Service. 2001. Endangered and threatened species: Endangered Status forWhite Abalone. Federal Register 66:29046-29055.National Marine Fisheries Service. 2003. Taking of threatened or endangered species incidental tocommercial fishing operations. Federal Register 68(241): 69, 962-969, 967.National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 2005. Shipwreck Database (online)National Research Council. 1990. Decline of the sea turtle: causes and prevention.Pitman, R.L. 1990. Pelagic distribution and biology of sea turtles in the eastern tropical Pacific.Rogers-Bennett, L. P.C. Haaker, T.O. Huff, and P.K. Dayton. 2002. Estimating baseline abundances ofabalone in California for restoration.Stewart, B.S. and R.L. DeLong. 1993. Seasonal dispersion and habitat use of foraging northern elephantseals. Pages 179-194 in I.L. Boyd (ed), Marine mammals: Advances in behavioral and populationbiology. Symposium of the Zoological Society of London 66, Oxford, U.K.Stinson, M.L. 1984. Biology of sea turtles in San Diego Bay, California and in the northeastern PacificOcean.Tutschulte, T.C. 1976. The comparative ecology of three sympatric abalone. Ph.D. dissertation. Universityof California, San Diego.U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1984. Recovery Plan for Endangered and Threatened Speciesof the California Channel Islands. USFWS, Portland, OR. 165 pp.Veridian Corporation. 2001. The Global Maritime Wrecks Database.PAGE 27

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006APPENDIXCOMPTUEX/JTFEX TRAINING ACTIVITIES OUTSIDE THE COASTAL ZONEAnti-Submarine Warfare Exercise (ASWEX)ASWEX provides crews of submarines, ships, aircraft, and helicopters with experience inlocating, tracking, and attacking submarines or submarine-like mobile underwater targets.Anti-Aircraft Warfare Exercise (AAWEX)The AAWEX provides realistic training and evaluation of ships and their crews in defendingagainst enemy aircraft and missiles.Surface-to-Surface Missile Exercise (SSMEX)SSMEX provides basic training for Fleet units in firing surface-to-surface HARPOON missiles.Sinking Exercise (SINKEX)In a SINKEX, a specially-prepared, deactivated vessel is deliberately sunk using multipleweapons systems.Gunnery Exercise (GUNEX)Surface ship gunnery exercises take place in the open ocean and involve a variety of stationaryand moving surface and aerial targets to provide gunnery practice for ship crews in an offensiveor defensive posture.Submarine Operations (SUBOPS)SUBOPS train submarine crews in using sonar systems to search for and track surface shipsand submarines, responding to simulated attacks using evasive maneuvering andcountermeasures in deep and shallow waters, and avoiding detection by anti-submarine warfare(ASW) systems.Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure (VBSS) or Maritime Intercept Operations (MIO) orHelicopter Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure (HVBSS)VBSS missions are the principal type of Maritime Intercept Operations. Highly trained teams ofpersonnel are deployed by small Zodiac boats or helicopters to board and inspect ships andvessels suspected of carrying contraband.Naval Cooperation and Guidance for Shipping (NCAGS)NCAGS assists the operational Commander in managing risk by providing situationalawareness, a real-time operational picture, and the coordinated and safe passage of friendlymerchant shipping carrying military supplies into seaports for off-load during a crisis orcontingency.Maritime Security Operation/Oil Platform (MSO/OPLAT) DefenseMSO/OPLAT Defense operations train ship crews to defend stationary high value infrastructuresat-sea from possible attack.PAGE 28

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006STRAITS Transit/Q-RouteSTRAITS Transit/Q-Route operations involve ships transiting along a predetermined routethrough the water in a simulated confined maneuvering area under potentially hostile conditions.Fast Inshore Assault Craft (FIAC)FIAC operations test a ship’s ability to defend itself against Opposing Forces (OPFOR) smallboats with hostile or unknown intentions.Tracking Exercise (TRACKEX)A TRACKEX tests the Naval Strike Group’s (NSG) ability to locate and track an unknown orhostile submarine over a predetermined period.Psychological Operations (PSYOPS)PSYOPS are an aspect of Information Warfare, during which ships broadcast genericinformation to a particular area in order to facilitate the desired end state.Aircraft Operations Support (AIROPS)AIROPS encompasses operational and logistics support for NSGs by Navy, Marine Corps, AirForce, and contract OPFOR aircraft, to include unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), during aCOMPTUEX/JTFEX.Air-to-Air Missile Exercise (AAMEX)AAMEXs are operations in which air-to-air missiles (less than half with live warheads, the restwith telemetry) are fired from aircraft against aerial targets to provide aircrews with experienceusing aircraft missile firing systems and training on air-to-air combat tactics.Air-to-Surface Missile/Bomb Exercise (ASMEX)An ASMEX provides training for Navy and Marine tactical aircrews in air-to-surface missilefiring; conventional ordnance delivery (including bombing, gunnery, and rocketry); andprecision-guided munitions (PGM) firing. Dynamic Strike or Time Sensitive Strike (TSS) for aCOMPTUEX.Time Sensitive Strike (TSS) or Dynamic StrikeThe purpose of Time-Sensitive Strike (TSS) or Dynamic Strike operations is to test the NSG inthe prosecution of time-sensitive targets by testing intelligence-gathering and dissemination,command and control procedures, and strike aircraft execution.Close Air Support (CAS)CAS is the use of air-to-ground weapons in proximity to friendly forces. It differs from LongRange Strikes in that it must be integrated with the fire and maneuver of ground forces.GANGPLANKA GANGPLANK is a combination WASEX and TSS/Dynamic Strike Operation. The overallobjective of a GANGPLANK is the prosecution of a sea-borne target.Counter Special Operations Force (CSOF)CSOF operations are similar in nature to GANGPLANK operations. The overall objective of aGANGPLANK is the prosecution of a sea-borne target. They are a reactionary attackPAGE 29

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006prosecuted by an airborne platform, except that the target is a seaborne unit of specialoperations landing forces.HaystackThe purpose of a Haystack operation is a part-task training event, designed to challenge andrefine fundamental target acquisition skills in an urban environment using available onboardsensors and simulated weapons delivery for aircrew.Urban Close Air Support (Urban CAS)Urban CAS is identical to CAS with the exception that it occurs in a fabricated urbanenvironment where collateral damage is a concern.Deck Launch Qualifications (DLQs)Perhaps the most demanding mission of any naval aviator is landing an aircraft aboard a ship.The mission is further compounded when these operations are required at night.War at Sea Exercise (WASEX)A WASEX is the planned prosecution of sea-borne targets using airborne assets.Sea Surface Control (SSC)SSC operations involve aircraft, typically FA-18 hornets, performing reconnaissance of thesurrounding battlespace.Maritime InterdictionMaritime Interdiction is a coordinated pre-planned pre-emptive attack against multiple surfaceand air contacts with the objective of delivering a decisive blow to enemy forces.Maritime Patrol Aircraft (MPA)MPA operations use P-3C Orion aircraft to conduct general search, localization, identificationand tracking operations throughout W-291.Surge Exercise (SURGEX)A SURGEX is designed to test the Air wing’s ability to generate and sustain a high tempo offixed wing flight operations over an extended period.Electronic Warfare Exercise (EWEX)EWEX operations are electronic counter-warfare exercises that primarily focus on allowingshipboard EW modules to track and correlate radar and electronic signals.Live-Fire Exercise (LFX)A Live-Fire Exercise (LFX) is a ground exercise conducted by Marines from the ESG andsupported by Navy ships and aircraft. A LFX occurs as a part of an Expeditionary FiresExercise, following an amphibious assault or helicopter movement of Marines from Navy shipsto positions ashore (see discussion of AMPHIBEX above).Special Warfare Operations (SPECWAROPS)SPECWAROPS train Naval Special Warfare Sea, Air, and Land (SEAL) platoons in missionssupporting the CSG and ESG including reconnaissance, surveillance, land interdiction andPAGE 30

COMPTUEX/JTFEX COASTAL CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION 25 OCTOBER 2006maritime interdiction operations, direct action missions, insertion and extraction missions, andCSAR.Humanitarian Assistance/Disaster Relief (HA/DR) (PEACEOPS)PEACEOPS provide training for Navy and Marine Corps forces in responding to a request foremergency support in a foreign country in response to a natural disaster, famine, or collapse ofa government or regime. The purpose is to train Strike Group forces in providing assistanceand relief to a civilian population.Non-Combatant Evacuation Operation (NEO)NEO training practices the evacuation of American citizens or designated personnel from acountry or region in which their safety cannot be assured such as during a revolution or coup.Embassy ReinforcementEmbassy reinforcement entails the reinforcement or evacuation of American citizens anddesignated personnel from an embassy located in a foreign country during an uprising orrevolution.Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR) or Tactical Recovery of Aircraft and Personnel(TRAP)CSAR/TRAP operations are primarily concerned with the recovery of friendly forces behindenemy lines or at-sea.Command and Control (ASHORE)A COMPTUEX/JTFEX is a complex and lengthy exercise requiring support from personnel andstaffs operating ashore. Two such support functions are the Joint Exercise Control Group(JECG) and OPFOR Command and Control.Air Defense Exercise (ADEX)The purpose of an ADEX is to exercise the command and control of strike fighter aircraft bysurface and air control platforms in a defensive posture.Counter TargetingA Counter Targeting operation is a coordinated, defensive operation using surface and airassets, that attempts to use jamming and chaff to show a false force presentation to inboundsurface-to-surface platforms.Final Battle Problem (FBP)The Final Battle Problem is an operation that is unique to the COMPTUEX. It is designed to testall warfare areas of the NSG in a simulated war.PAGE 31

STATE OF CALIFORNIA -- THE RESOURCES AGENCYCALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION45 FREMONT STREET, SUITE 2000SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105-2219VOICE AND TDD (415) 904-5200ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, GOVERNORF 8cSTAFF RECOMMENDATIONON CONSISTENCY DETERMINATIONConsistency Determination No. CD-086-06Staff:MPD-SFFile Date: 10/30/0660th Day: 12/29/0675th Day: 1/13/07Commission Meeting: 12/15/06FEDERAL AGENCY:PROJECTLOCATION:PROJECTDESCRIPTION:U.S. NavyFour Navy operating areas: Southern California operating area(Exhibits 1-2), San Clemente Island Range Complex, MarineCorps Base Camp Pendleton, and Silver Strand TrainingComplex (Exhibits 1-3)Onshore and offshore U.S. Pacific Fleet military training exercisesSUBSTANTIVEFILE DOCUMENTS: See page 20.EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe U.S. Navy (Navy) has submitted a consistency determination for the U.S. Pacific Fleet’soffshore and onshore military training exercises in southern California. The four training areasare: the southern California operating area (Exhibit 1), San Clemente Island Range Complex,Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, and Silver Strand Training Complex (Exhibit 2). Theexercises involve a wide range and combinations of ships, support craft, submarines,helicopters, airplanes, and amphibious vehicles, and other equipment used to train Navy andMarine forces with “complex, deployment-preparation exercises.”Many of the exercises would take place outside the coastal zone (up to 80 miles offshore).Activities within the coastal zone include Amphibious Operations, Naval Surface FireSupport, Ship Mine Countermeasures Operations, Demolition Operations, and Mining(airborne, non-explosive, mine-laying) Operations.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 2Potential marine environment and use issues raised by the projects are impacts to marinemammals, sea turtles, kelp beds, white abalone, commercial and recreational fishing, andrecreational diving in the marine environment. Potential land habitat issues raised are impactsto sensitive bird breeding areas (e.g., snowy plovers and loggerhead shrikes) in several areasand the island night lizard on San Clemente Island. The exercises are similar to activities theNavy has been regularly undertaking for many years and do not represent an intensification inuse of the affected areas compared to past years’ activities. Activities with the potential todisturb marine mammals include ship movement, inert mine drops, underwater detonations,and, outside the coastal zone, mid-frequency sonar, missile launches, and amphibious landings.Use of explosives within the coastal zone would be limited to small (mostly 1-5 lb.) charges.Mid-frequency sonar would only occur outside the coastal zone, and, for the most part, beyond80 nautical miles from shore (off San Clemente Island).The Navy’s initial consistency determination focused on activities physically within the coastalzone; nevertheless, in response to Commission staff questions the Navy has providedadditional information detailing the protection measures in place from activities outside butpotentially affecting the coastal zone. Marine mammal and sea turtle protection measuresinclude: Marine Species Awareness Training material, shipboard surveillance for marinemammals and sea turtles, aerial surveillance where planes or helicopters are part of the activity,passive acoustic monitoring, implementing a buffer zone (700 yard arc-radius arounddetonation sites for small explosives (mostly 1-5 pounds, with none exceeding 20 pounds)),reducing the likelihood of exposing marine mammals or sea turtles to sounds exceeding 173decibels (dB), avoiding of dropping any inert mines on marine mammals or sea turtles,removing from the marine environment inert mines dropped pre- and post-exercise surveys,and coordinating with NMFS in the event of any injury to a marine mammal or sea turtleobserved and submitting monitoring reports. The Navy has also agreed to coordinate withCommission staff on whether marine mammal incident reports for events occurring in theSouthern California Operating Area will be provided to Commission staff after discussion andreview with NOAA. These reports may be generated pursuant to future MMPA and/or ESAtake authorizations/consultations.For land-based species, because the activities are similar to past training exercises, the Navy isrelying on mitigation measures developed through its Endangered Species Act consultationswith the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and contained in several existing Biological Opinions.These agreements include measures to protect loggerhead shrikes and island night lizards onSan Clemente Island for Naval Surface Fire Support activities, and snowy plovers at CampPendleton and the Silver Strand peninsula for amphibious landing activities.Thus, through its consultation with other federal agencies, the Navy is applying a number ofhabitat protection measures to the proposed activities. When added to the measures included inthe Navy’s consistency determination, the only measure lacking to enable a finding ofconsistency with the marine resource policies is a Navy agreement to submit the marinemammal/turtle monitoring reports that it prepares for NMFS to the Commission staff.Submittal of these reports is necessary under the Coastal Act for several reasons. First, the

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 3Navy is using explosives within the coastal zone, which have the potential to affect marinemammals unless adequate preclusion areas are maintained. Second, review of the monitoringis necessary to assure the Commission that the Navy has complied with its commitments toprotect marine resources. Third, interim monitoring reports may lead to alterations in trainingpractices and protection measures included. Fourth, submittal of the monitoring reports is anideal way for the Navy to support its assertion that use of mid-frequency sonar in federalwaters would not affect the coastal zone. Fifth, the federal consistency regulations (Section930.45 – see page 9) specifically require continued monitoring and coordination with stateagencies). The Commission is therefore conditioning its concurrence on a requirement that theNavy provide its monitoring reports to the Commission staff. Only as conditioned would theproject include adequate measures to enable the Commission to find that the activities will beconducted in a manner protecting marine resources, and that the proposed activities would beconsistent with the applicable marine resource, water quality, and environmentally sensitivehabitat policies (Sections 30230, 30231, and 30240) of the Coastal Act.As provided in 15 CFR § 930.4(b), in the event the Navy does not agree with theCommission’s condition of concurrence, then all parties shall treat this conditional concurrenceas an objection.Measures to minimize impacts to boating, diving and fishing activities include publishingNotices to Mariners, limiting operations offshore of San Clemente Island to Federallydesignateddanger and restricted zones, temporary closures of other affected areas, avoidingoperations if boats or divers do not leave the area, and limiting amphibious landings torestricted military beaches already off-limits to the public. With these measures, the proposedexercises would be consistent with the commercial and recreational fishing and diving policiesand public access and recreation policies (Sections 30234, 30234.5, 30210, and 30212) of theCoastal Act.STAFF SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONI. STAFF SUMMARY:A. Project Description. The Navy has submitted a consistency determination for aseries of offshore and onshore military exercise used to train the U.S. Pacific Fleet in southernCalifornia both onshore and in offshore waters. The four training areas are: the southernCalifornia operating area, San Clemente Island Range Complex, Marine Corps Base CampPendleton, and Silver Strand Training Complex (Exhibits 1-2). The exercises, which have beenconducted in various forms since the 1920s, are used to train Navy and Marine forces with“complex, deployment-preparation exercises” involving “varied land, sea, and underseatraining environments to properly demonstrate the full range of capabilities required ofdeploying naval forces.”

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 4The exercises are separated into three, increasingly complex phases, which the Navy calls:“Basic, Integrated and Sustainment.” The Navy calls the latter two phases “COMPTUEX,”standing for Composite Training Unit Exercises, and “JTFEX,” standing for Joint Task ForceExercises.The exercises would involve troops from bases in three states (California, Arizona andNevada (Exhibit 1)), which would form “Strike Groups.” Strike Groups are either: (a) aCarrier Strike Group (CSG) (normally formed around an Aircraft Carrier (CV/N), with anembarked Air Wing (CVW)); or (b) an Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG) (formed around anAmphibious Helicopter Carrier (LHD), with an embarked Marine Expeditionary Unit(MEU)). Both types of groups would also involve a number of support ships. CSG exercisesare offshore; only ESGs would involve bring troops ashore (either by helicopter oramphibious vehicle).The Navy elaborates:A COMPTUEX is conducted as a series of scheduled training events that occuraccording to a given time schedule against an opposition force. The COMPTUEXprovides an opportunity for the Strike Group to become proficient in the myriad ofrequired warfare skill sets. Additionally, it stresses the integration or coordination ofthe different warfare areas and provides realistic training on in-theater operations.The COMPTUEX is normally more structured than the JTFEX, so it is longer induration.JTFEX is in the Sustainment or final Phase of the FRTP and may involve either aCSG or an ESG. It is a scenario-driven, at-sea training exercise designed to evaluatethe Strike Group’s preparedness for forward deployed contingency and combatoperations. JTFEX also utilizes a simulated opposition force and serves as the venuefor U.S. THIRD Fleet to assess the readiness, interoperability, and proficiency ofnaval forces in realistic, free-play scenarios, ranging from military operations otherthan-warto armed conflict. As the final certification event of the FRTP, the StrikeGroup must demonstrate the ability to operate and integrate into a Joint OperationsArea under simulated austere, hostile conditions.Most of the training would occur outside the coastal zone on federal land or in federal waters.The Navy’s consistency determined examined those exercises within or with the potential toaffect the coastal zone. Exercises outside the coastal zone are listed and briefly summarized inExhibit 3. (The asterisks (*) in the list below denote those activities the Navy believes has thepotential to affect the coastal zone. The acronyms stand for the four operating areas(OPAREAs): SOCAL, SCIRC, SSTC, MCBCP - southern California operating area, SanClemente Island Range Complex, Silver Strand Training Complex, and Marine Corps BaseCamp Pendleton, respectively).

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 5Table 1-2. COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities Inside the Coastal ZoneEVENTAmphibious Exercise*Ship Mine Countermeasures Exercise*Demolition Operations*Visit, Board, Search, and SeizureNaval Cooperation and Guidancefor ShippingMaritime Security OperationsNaval Surface Fire Support*Straits Transit/Q RouteFast Inshore Assault CraftDynamic STRIKE/TSSClose Air SupportCounter Special Operations ForceMining Exercise*Surge ExerciseLive-Fire ExerciseSpecial Warfare OperationsHumanitarian Assistance/Disaster ReliefNon-Combatant EvacuationEmbassy ReinforcementCombat Search and Rescue TrapRANGE/OPAREASCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSOCALSOCALSOCALSCIRC, SOCALSOCALSOCALSCIRCSCIRC, MCBCPSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCAL, SCIRC, MCBCPSCIRC, MCBCPMCBCPSCIRC, MCBCPSCIRC, MCBCPSCIRC, SOCAL, MCBCPThus, of these activities, the Navy believes only the following five types of events have thepotential to affect coastal resources: Amphibious Operations, Naval Surface Fire Support,Ship Mine Countermeasures Operations, Demolition Operations, and Mining Operations.Describing these, the Navy states:2.2.1 At-Sea Training OperationsAmphibious OperationsAmphibious operations may include shore assault, boat raid, airfield seizure,humanitarian assistance, and force reconnaissance. Amphibious landings arelaunched from Navy ships positioned out to 50 mi (80 km) offshore. For an assaulton a beach, units come ashore in Landing Craft, Air Cushion (LCAC) and inAmphibious Assault Vehicles (AAV)(lightly armored tracked vehicles). Anamphibious exercise may last from 2 days up to 3 weeks, depending on the size andcomplexity of the exercise, and typically includes a Live-Fire Exercise. Amphibiousoperations normally take place at MCBCP and the SCIRC. Additionally, smalleramphibious exercises have occurred on the southern beaches of the SSTC. Theparticipants and assets in amphibious operations typically include: 1,500 Marines;

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 6rotary wing, fixed wing, and tilt-wing aircraft; amphibious vehicles, vessels, andboats - Landing Craft, Utility (LCU), Combat Rubber Raiding Raft (CRRC), RigidHull Inflatable Boat (RHIB); three amphibious ships; and other surface ships.Naval Surface Fire Support (NSFS) OperationsNSFS operations involve naval surface ships with the MK-45 5-inch/54 or the MK-455-inch/62 naval gun firing system, engaging land and surface targets. NSFSoperations are an annual requirement for all naval vessels outfitted with the 5-inchgun system. NSFS is conducted against land targets in the SHOBA on SCI. Becauseships are firing from sea to land targets located in SHOBA, the public is restricted inthe offshore portion of SHOBA, called Fire Support Area (FSA), during the live-firingportion of the operations. However, the cumulative time that ships are actually firingweapons during these operations is extremely short. The participants associated withan NSFS operation include: four to six ships.Mine Countermeasures (MCM) OperationsMCM Operations train forces to locate and neutralize inert (non-explosive) mineshapes in shallow-water environments in support of the CSG and ESG. A typicalexercise would involve bottom-laid explosive and mid-water column explosivetraining evolutions. The training would take place offshore of the beaches atSSTC/MCBCP, and in the nearshore waters off the western side of SCI. The assetsinclude two MCM ships, two to three airborne mine countermeasures helicopters,divers, unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV) and marine mammals (dolphins). Someor all of the following equipment would be used: underwater explosives (up to 20pounds net explosives weight (NEW)), side-scan sonar, high-frequency sonar, laserline scans, magnetic sweep gear, and influence sweep gear.Demolition Operations (DEMO)DEMO provides training in the identification and neutralization or destruction ofinert floating or moored mines. This training includes hydrographic reconnaissanceof approaches to prospective landing beaches; demolition of obstacles and clearingmines; locating, improving, and marking of useable channels; channel and harborclearance; and acquisition of operational intelligence during pre-assault operations.Explosives used in DEMO are less than 20 pounds. During a COMPTUEX or JTFEXthere may be up to 20 demolition events. The DEMO exercise takes place at locationsroutinely used for explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) and DEMO training at SCIRC,MCBCP, SSTC, and Naval Base Coronado (NBC). The participants and assetstypically used in this event include: EOD divers, small boats, and helicopters.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 72.2.2 Air OperationsMining OperationsMining Operation consists of airborne mine-laying. The aircraft drop a series of(usually four), non-explosive inert training shapes (MK-76, bomb dummy unit [BDU]45, or BDU 48) in the water. The aircraft may make multiple passes on the sameflight pattern, dropping one or more shapes each pass. The shapes are scored foraccuracy as they enter the water. The training shapes are inert and recovered at theend of the operation.Describing the need for the training, the Navy also states:1.3 PURPOSE AND NEEDThe purpose of conducting COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs is to train, prepare and certifyStrike Group readiness prior to deployment of forces to Combatant Commanders. Theexercises incorporate a multi-dimensional, multi-threat environment that stresses allaspects of joint maritime operations.The need for major naval exercises such as COMPTUEXs or JTFEXs is derived fromthe Congressional mandate to organize, train, and equip the military services forprompt and sustained combat operations (10 United States Code [U.S.C.] Sections5032 and 5062). The COMPTUEX and JTFEX are required both to train the units andto evaluate their combat readiness. At the conclusion of the JTFEX, Commander, U.S.THIRD Fleet certifies to the Commander, Pacific Fleet that the CSG or ESG is ready todeploy, fulfilling the Navy’s Title 10 responsibilities.B. History. As noted above, the exercises are similar in duration, intensity, andlocation to long-standing Navy training in the operating areas. The Navy states:Nominally, the U.S. Navy (Navy) conducts seven COMPTUEXs and seven JTFEXsper 2-year period throughout existing major ranges and facilities in the southwesternUnited States and offshore Southern California (Table 1-1 and Figure 1-1 [Exhibit1]). Dependent on national tasking, an average of three ESG COMPTUEXs, fourCSG COMPTUEXs, three ESG JTFEXs, and four CSG JTFEXs, would be conductedover a 2-year period (fourteen total exercises). Beginning January 2007, the Navyproposes to conduct some of these major range events concurrently. The overallnumber, type, frequency, and location of these major range events would not changefrom current baseline operations. Southern California (SOCAL) land, sea and airranges have supported major Fleet training dating back before the 1920’s. SanClemente Island (SCI) has served as a dedicated Fleet training asset since it wastransferred over to the Department of the Navy (DON) in 1934. As early as 1935,naval gunfire and bombing, and U.S. Fleet Landing exercises have occurred in theSCI Shore Bombardment Area (SHOBA) and throughout the island, respectively.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 8C. Federal Agency's Consistency Determination. The Navy has determined theproject consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the California Coastal ManagementProgram.II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:The staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion:MOTION:I move that the Commission conditionally concur with consistencydetermination CD-086-06 and determine that, as conditioned, theproject described therein is fully consistent, and thus is consistent tothe maximum extent practicable, with the enforceable policies of theCalifornia Coastal Management Program (CCMP).STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Staff recommends a YES vote on the motion. Passage of this motion will result in anagreement with the determination and adoption of the following resolution and findings. Anaffirmative vote of a majority of the Commissioners present is required to pass the motion.RESOLUTION TO CONDITIONALLY CONCUR WITH CONSISTENCYDETERMINATION:The Commission hereby conditionally concurs with consistency determination CD-086-06 bythe Navy on the grounds that the project would be fully consistent, and thus consistent to themaximum extent practicable, with the enforceable policies of the CCMP, provided the Navyagrees to modify the project consistent with the condition specified below, as provided for in15 CFR §930.4.Condition:1. Submittal of Monitoring Plans. The Navy shall agree to submit all marinemammal monitoring reports prepared for the National Marine Fisheries Service to theCommission staff for its review.III. APPLICABLE LEGAL AUTHORITIES.The federal consistency regulations (15 CFR § 930.4) provide for conditionalconcurrences, as follows:(a) Federal agencies, … should cooperate with State agencies to develop conditionsthat, if agreed to during the State agency’s consistency review period and included in aFederal agency’s final decision under Subpart C … would allow the State agency toconcur with the federal action. If instead a State agency issues a conditionalconcurrence:

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 9(1) The State agency shall include in its concurrence letter the conditions which mustbe satisfied, an explanation of why the conditions are necessary to ensure consistencywith specific enforceable policies of the management program, and an identification ofthe specific enforceable policies. The State agency’s concurrence letter shall alsoinform the parties that if the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of thesection are not met, then all parties shall treat the State agency’s conditionalconcurrence letter as an objection pursuant to the applicable Subpart . . . ; and(2) The Federal agency (for Subpart C) … shall modify the applicable plan [or] projectproposal, … pursuant to the State agency’s conditions. The Federal agency … shallimmediately notify the State agency if the State agency’s conditions are not acceptable;and…(b) If the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section are not met, thenall parties shall treat the State agency’s conditional concurrence as an objectionpursuant to the applicable Subpart.The federal consistency regulations also provide for monitoring and coordination; 15 CFR §930.45(a) provides:(a) Federal and State agencies shall cooperate in their efforts to monitorfederally approved activities in order to make certain that such activities continue to beundertaken in a manner consistent to the maximum extent practicable with theenforceable policies of the management program.IV. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS:The Commission finds and declares as follows:A. Marine Resources/Coastal Waters/Environmentally Sensitive Habitat. TheCoastal Act provides:Section 30230: Marine resources shall be maintained, enhanced, and where feasible,restored. Special protection shall be given to areas and species of special biological oreconomic significance. Uses of the marine environment shall be carried out in amanner that will sustain the biological productivity of coastal waters and that willmaintain healthy populations of all species of marine organisms adequate for long-termcommercial, recreational, scientific, and educational purposes.Section 30231: The biological productivity and the quality of coastal waters, streams,wetlands, estuaries, and lakes appropriate to maintain optimum populations of marineorganisms and for the protection of human health shall be maintained and, wherefeasible, restored through, among other means, minimizing adverse effects of wastewater discharges and entrainment, controlling runoff, preventing depletion of ground

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 10water supplies and substantial interference with surface water flow, encouraging wastewater reclamation, maintaining natural vegetation buffer areas that protect riparianhabitats, and minimizing alteration of natural streams.Section 30240: (a) Environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be protected againstany significant disruption of habitat values, and only uses dependent on those resourcesshall be allowed within those areas.(b) Development in areas adjacent to environmentally sensitive habitatareas and parks and recreation areas shall be sited and designed to prevent impactswhich would significantly degrade those areas, and shall be compatible with thecontinuance of those habitat and recreation areas.Sensitive marine species in the project areas include marine mammals and sea turtles, kelpbeds, white abalone, and essential fish habitat. Potentially affected onshore species includesnowy plovers at Camp Pendleton and the Silver Strand peninsula, and loggerhead shrikes andthe island night lizard on San Clemente Island (Exhibits 5 & 6). The Navy’s consistencydetermination focuses on the five types of exercises occurring within the coastal zone andhaving the potential to affect coastal zone resources. The Navy states:Coastal Zone EffectsThe Proposed Action would be consistent with Section 30230. Under the ProposedAction, the overall number, type and location of training operations would notincrease. Biological productivity of coastal waters would be maintained andpopulations of fish and other marine organisms would be sustained. Important marineresources would be avoided.DiscussionCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities within the SOCAL OPAREA with potential to affectmarine resources include deployment of inert mine shapes on surface targets, sea-tolandweapons firing into designated land-based ranges, underwater detonation, andamphibious landings. Due to the generally dispersed, infrequent nature of Navytraining exercises and the wide dispersal of marine resources, biological productivityof coastal waters will be maintained.Marine resources of special biological or economic significance in the SOCALOPAREA include:• Marine flora, especially kelp forests• Commercial and recreational fish stocks and essential fish habitat• Special-status species, including marine mammals, sea turtles, and white abalone

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 11These resources are considered, for this analysis, to be suitable indicators of generalbiological productivity, and representative of the overall marine resources within theSOCAL OPAREA.Exhibit 4 contains the Navy’s estimates of marine mammal distributions and population trendsin the offshore operating areas. The Navy states:Effects of the Proposed ActionOverviewJTFEX/COMPTUEX activities would have negligible effects on marine mammals.Minor acoustic effects to marine mammals could occur from underwater detonationsand possibly include: temporary changes in behavior, movement away from an area ofactivity, temporary reduction in hearing sensitivity, and no response. It is highlyunlikely that a marine mammal would experience any long-term effects because theproposed training is:• Intermittent• Localized in discreet, shallow water areas in SOCAL• Mitigated, such that marine mammals will not be in proximity to underwaterdetonations during training eventsUnderwater DetonationsMarine mammals may be exposed to acoustic energy from underwater detonations fromDEMO and SMCMEX, and to physical injury from inert mine shapes dropped duringMINEX. Small charges are used to neutralize inert mine shapes during DEMO andSMCMEX. Underwater detonations associated with DEMO are aimed at removingobstacles and clearing mines in areas to be used for approaches to landing beaches.Underwater detonations conducted during SMCMEX involve one bottom-laiddetonation and one mid-water column detonation. While water depth is slightly greaterthan DEMO activities, SMCMEX activities are conducted to locate and neutralize inertmine shapes in shallow water environments. Because underwater detonationsconducted during DEMO and SMCMEX occur in shallow or very shallow water, asignificant portion of the energy is dissipated as surface blowout pressure and/or intothe ocean substrate. In addition, bottom substrate characteristics have an affect on theamount of energy propagating through the water column.Characteristic of the west coast of North America, Southern California has mixedsemidiurnal tides. This results in four daily tidal heights, including a low low tide, highlow tide, low high tide, and high high tide. During these tides, sand and gravel fromsubmerged portions of intertidal beaches are washed into the water column. Thisfrequent tidal flow, combined with close proximity to erosion of sand and particulatematter from coastal dunes and hills results in a relatively deep sandy substrate in

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 12nearshore waters. Consequently, propagation of acoustic energy from these shallowwater, and shallow water bottom-laid mine shapes is significantly reduced in the watercolumn.Operating procedures for detecting marine mammals would be implemented inconjunction with underwater detonations training. Prior to an underwater detonation(DEMO, SMCMEX) or mine laying activity (MINEX), ship-based or aerial observerswould visually scan the area for marine mammals. As with sea turtles, underwaterdetonations or mine laying would be delayed, postponed or cancelled if a marinemammal approached the operating area; thereby, avoiding injury to marine mammals.While marine mammals may detect the underwater detonations or sound of an inertmine shape dropping into the water from a distance, these exercises would beintermittent, and of very short duration. Underwater detonations and mine-layingwould not affect the biological productivity of marine mammal populations in the CZ.The Proposed Action is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with Section30230 for marine resources.Concerning water quality, the Navy states:Coastal Zone EffectsCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities within the SOCAL OPAREA with the potential to affectbiological productivity include underwater detonations from DEMO and SMCMEX.Mine shapes used in conjunction with these activities are either floating or mooredmines. Small charges are used to neutralize inert mine shapes. Underwater detonationsassociated with DEMO are aimed at removing obstacles and clearing mines in areas tobe used for approaches to landing beaches. Because these underwater detonationsoccur in very shallow water, a significant portion of the energy is dissipated as surfaceblowout pressure; thereby, reducing affects to water quality and plankton communitiesin the water column. Underwater detonations conducted during DEMO and SMCMEXwould not be conducted in kelp forests surrounding SCI.Due to the generally dispersed, infrequent nature of underwater detonations, smallcharges used, significant tidal flow (particularly around SCI), discreet effectsassociated with underwater detonations, and the wide dispersal of marine resources,biological productivity of coastal waters will be maintained. The Proposed Action isconsistent to the maximum extent practicable with Section 30231.The Commission notes that the proposed training exercises are similar to activities the Navyhas been regularly undertaking for many years and do not represent an intensification in use ofthe affected areas compared to past years’ activities. However the Commission takes a broaderview than the Navy as to which activities may affect the coastal zone. Many of the speciescovered potentially affected by the proposed training activities spend some portions of their lifecycles within coastal waters (e.g., birds that fly in and out of the coastal zone and marine

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 13species that swim in and out of the coastal zone). Without adequate avoidance and mitigationmeasures, a greater number of exercises than those listed by the Navy could adversely affectcoastal zone resources. The Commission believes that the numbers and types of activities withthe potential to disturb marine species and other sensitive habitat include ship movement, inertmine drops, underwater detonations, and, from activities outside the coastal zone, midfrequencysonar, missile launches (onto federally owned San Clemente Island), andamphibious landings (onto federally owned Navy and Marine Corps bases at Camp Pendletonand the Silver Strand). Accordingly, the Commission staff requested additional informationfrom the Navy about the activities outside the coastal zone, and in response, the Navy hasprovided additional information detailing more specifically the locations and intensities of thevarious training exercises, monitoring practices, and protection measures in place (Exhibit 2).The Commission will look to the broader regulatory scheme (under the Marine MammalProtection Act (MMPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA)) and Navy planning efforts(under the “Sikes” Act, which set up the Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan(INRMP) planning process for all military bases), in examining the adequacy of mechanisms inplace to protect the potentially affected species (in addition to those measures included in theNavy’s consistency determination). The Commission notes that measures are already in placethrough existing Biological Opinions issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and that theNavy is coordinating with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in implementingmeasures to minimize acoustic impacts from mid-frequency sonar (which are proposed, for themost part, beyond 80 nautical miles from shore off San Clemente Island).The acoustic protection measures now routinely used by the Navy during training activitieswere developed to minimize effects of active sonar and underwater detonations on marinemammals and sea turtles. The measures in place for the proposed exercises include:requiring all Navy lookouts to review the NMFS-approved Marine SpeciesAwareness Training material;shipboard surveillance for marine mammals and sea turtles;aerial surveillance where planes or helicopters are part of the activity;passive acoustic monitoring;implementation of a buffer zone (700 yard arc-radius around detonation sites forsmall explosives (mostly 1-5 pounds, with none exceeding 20 pounds)); reducing the likelihood of exposing marine mammals or sea turtles to sounds >173 dB (received level (RL), expressed in decibels (re 1 μPa 2 ·s @ 1m [onemicropascal squared second at one meter]));avoidance of dropping any inert mines on marine mammals or sea turtles;

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 14removal from the marine environment of inert mines dropped pre- and postexercisesurveys; andcoordination with NMFS in the event of any injury to a marine mammal or seaturtle observed and submitting monitoring reports.The Navy has also agreed to coordinate with Commission staff on whether marine mammalincident reports for events occurring in the Southern California Operating Area will beprovided to Commission staff after discussion and review with NOAA. These reports may begenerated pursuant to future MMPA and/or ESA take authorizations/consultations.The Commission further notes that the acoustic protection measures provide habitat protectionmeasures that, until recently, were not previously implemented for these types of exercises inCalifornia waters, and thus represent an improvement in marine mammal protection comparedto historic practices. (The Commission also notes, parenthetically, that the Navy will bepreparing a report on the effectiveness of these types of measures, when it submits its report tothe National Marine Fisheries Service on the “RIMPAC” 1 measures, expected within the nextfew months.)The Navy has also documented that the project would not adversely affect kelp beds, whiteabalone, or any marine mammal haulout areas or rookeries. The primary onshore sensitivespecies of concern are snowy plovers at the Silver Strand in Coronado, and island night lizardsand loggerhead shrikes on San Clemente Island (Exhibits 5-6), but again, measures and effortsare in place to protect these species, both through Biological Opinions covering Navy trainingexercises and through the Navy’s INRMPs for the affected bases. Of these species the only“listed” species potentially affected that lives completely outside the coastal zone is the islandnight lizard (on San Clemente Island). Although it is listed as a threatened species under theESA, based on extrapolation the Fish and Wildlife Service estimates a fairly robust populationof 2-20 million individuals throughout the island (and the Navy’s INRMP estimates “an excessof 20 million”). The Fish and Wildlife Service is currently undergoing an analysis to consider“de-listing” the species, at least for this island (compared to possibly genetically distinct andmuch smaller populations on San Nicolas and Santa Barbara Islands). Also, possibly arguablynot a coastal zone species (the biological important activities of which occur predominantly onthe federally owned island) is the San Clemente Island loggerhead shrike, which does notmigrate but is sometimes observed over water areas, and which has been described as“…possibly the most endangered animal population in the continental United States.” (Lynn etal. 1999) (Source, Navy May 2002 San Clemente Island Integrated Natural ResourcesManagement Plan (INRMP). Other populations of loggerhead shrikes may occur on the1 Small Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) AntisubmarineWarfare (ASW) Exercise Training Events Within the Hawaiian Islands Operating Area (OpArea), National Oceanicand Atmospheric Administration Federal Register Notice, Vol. 71, No. 78, Monday, April 24, 2006.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 15mainland and nearby Santa Catalina Island; however, the San Clemente Island population isgenetically and morphologically distinct from these populations (Ridgway 1903; Miller 1931;Mundy et al. 1996 in Lynn et al. 2000)(same source).Through the ESA and INRMP processes, the Navy is currently implementing aggressive,island-wide measures to manage, protect, and improve loggerhead shrike and island nightlizard habitat, including but not limited to, surveying, monitoring and research, predatormanagement and removal, fire controls (including during Naval Surface Fire Support from theproposed training activities), establishing restricted areas off limits to military and other humanactivities, captive breeding, and habitat enhancement. Firebreaks are coordinated with theNavy’s Natural Resources Office prior to installation, and fire suppression equipment is on siteduring live-firing events. The Navy has also established snowy plover avoidance measures thatmust be implemented for any training occurring during the snowy plover nesting season at theSilver Strand Peninsula. The Marine Corps implements conservation measures on landingbeaches off Camp Pendleton, including: fencing nesting areas, predator controls, restoringdunes within nesting areas, monitoring breeding activities, and studying long-term snowyplover and least tern population trends.Thus, through its consultation with other federal agencies, the Navy is applying a number ofhabitat protection measures to the proposed activities. When added to the measures included inthe Navy’s consistency determination, the only measure lacking to enable a finding ofconsistency with the marine resource policies is a Navy agreement to submit the marinemammal/turtle monitoring reports that it prepares for NMFS to the Commission staff. TheNavy has only agree to coordinate with Commission staff on whether marine mammal incidentreports will be provided to Commission staff, and only after discussion and review withNOAA. Submittal of marine mammal monitoring reports is necessary under the Coastal Actfor several reasons. First, the Navy is using explosives, albeit small, within the coastal zone,which have the potential to affect marine mammals unless adequate preclusion areas aremaintained. Second, review of the monitoring is necessary to assure the Commission that theNavy has complied with its commitments to protect marine resources. Third, interimmonitoring reports may lead to alterations in training practices and protection measuresincluded (as was the case for the Mobil Pier decommissioning project the Commissionreviewed in 1996, where acoustic monitoring of the explosives footprint led to greater areas ofpreclusion than originally proposed). Fourth, if the Navy’s concern is of a jurisdictional naturebased on use of mid-frequency sonar in only federal waters, there is no better way for the Navyto establish to the Commission’s satisfaction that coastal zone resource impacts are beingavoided than to provide the Commission the data that would support the Navy’s conclusions.Fifth, the federal consistency regulations (Section 930.45 – see page 9) specifically requirecontinued monitoring and coordination with state agencies). The Commission is thereforeconditioning its concurrence on a requirement that the Navy provide its monitoring reports tothe Commission staff. Only as conditioned would the project include adequate measures toenable the Commission to find that the activities will be conducted in a manner protectingmarine resources, and that the proposed activities would be consistent with the applicablemarine resource, water quality, and environmentally sensitive habitat policies (Sections 30230,30231, and 30240) of the Coastal Act.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 16As provided in 15 CFR § 930.4(b), in the event the Navy does not agree with theCommission’s condition of concurrence, then all parties shall treat this conditional concurrenceas an objection.B. Public Access/Fishing. Section 30210 of the Coastal Act provides:In carrying out the requirement of Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution,maximum access, which shall be conspicuously posted, and recreational opportunitiesshall be provided for all the people consistent with safety needs and the need to protectpublic rights, rights of private property public owners, and natural resource areas fromoveruse.Section 30212 provides in part:(a) Public access from the nearest public roadway to the shoreline and along the coastshall be provided in new development projects except where:Section 30220 provides:(1) it is inconsistent with public safety, military security needs, or the protectionof fragile coastal resources....Coastal areas suited for water-oriented recreational activities that cannot readily beprovided at inland water areas shall be protected for such uses.In addition, aside from the commercial fishing protection afforded under Section 30230,quoted above on page 9, Sections 30234 and 30234.5 underscore the need to protectcommercial and recreational fishing opportunities:30234. Facilities serving the commercial fishing and recreational boating industriesshall be protected and, where feasible, upgraded. Existing commercial fishing andrecreational boating harbor space shall not be reduced unless the demand for thosefacilities no longer exists or adequate substitute space has been provided. Proposedrecreational boating facilities shall, where feasible, be designed and located in such afashion as not to interfere with the needs of the commercial fishing industry.30234.5. The economic, commercial, and recreational importance of fishing activitiesshall be recognized and protected.The Navy maintains that the project is consistent with the public access and recreation, andrecreational fishing policies of the Coastal Act, stating that:The Proposed Action is fully consistent with California CZ policy Section 30210because it would not alter current public access to recreational areas or recreational

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 17opportunities in the CZ. Public beaches and beach access routes are not affected, norare National Park facilities. Notices to Mariners (NOTMARs) and Notices-to-Airmen(NOTAMs) are issued to allow mariners and commercial recreational services (e.g.,dive charters) to select alternate destinations without substantially affecting theiractivities. The Proposed Action would not increase the number or type of trainingoperations or change the training locations.Most COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities in the CZ are compatible with concurrentrecreational activities. Some COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities (i.e., those involving thelive firing of weapons) require access to be restricted for safety and military securityconcerns. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities in areas of joint use occasionally limit publicaccess to portions of the shoreline or nearshore waters for short periods because theNavy implements strict safety procedures prior to each training activity. The locations,sizes, and durations of safety zones are carefully tailored to the needs of the militaryexercise so as to minimize the effects on public access and recreation, and ensurepublic safety.DiscussionThe Navy has implemented procedures to efficiently inform the public about temporaryexclusions when such exclusions are necessary for public safety during NSFS, MineExercise (MINEX), DEMO, Ship Mine Countermeasures Exercise (SMCMEX), andAmphibious Exercise (AMPHIBEX). Potential effects of the Proposed Action on publicaccess to beaches are negligible because these activities take place on or in proximityto Federally-owned property for which the public is not permitted access.Elements of these activities that require exclusive use of an open-ocean area have thepotential to affect public access and recreational fishing operations during the actualoperation. Around SCI, these operations occur in Federally-designated danger andrestricted zones. In the other nearshore operating areas offshore SSTC and MCBCP,non-authorized individuals are cleared from the area for the duration of the exercise.Short-term, intermittent effects on individual recreational use of these areas may resultfrom temporary closures of specific operating areas, but the areas are relatively small,and easily circumvented.Prior to commencement of these events, NOTMARs and NOTAMs are issued, providingthe public, including commercial fishermen, with notice of upcoming location and timerestrictions in specific training areas. In addition, the Southern California OffshoreRange (SCORE) maintains a public website depicting upcoming restrictions indesignated Danger Zones around SCI. These notices detail date, time, duration, andlocation of restricted access so that commercial and private fishermen and divers canplan their activities accordingly. The restricted times only extend through the durationof the training activity; thereby allowing the public to shift their activities to alternateareas during temporary closures. The Navy will continue to schedule its activities to

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 18minimize conflicts, and to provide adequate public notice. The Proposed Action wouldbe consistent with Section 30210 to the maximum extent practicable.Nearshore and Beach AreasSan Clemente Island Range ComplexSCI is Navy-owned property where public access is strictly controlled for purposes ofmilitary security and public safety. The Navy considers all ocean areas around SCI tobe co-use zones that are available for public access, except for the restrictedanchorages in the Wilson Cove Exclusive Zone. Access to some co-use zones may berestricted from time to time for public safety. When such restrictions are necessary, theNavy implements procedures to minimize effects on the public. Under the ProposedAction, COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities at SCI are consistent with Section 30210.Recreational activities in the CZ include sport fishing, sailing, boating, whalewatching,and diving. Commercial uses include fishing, tourism, and marinetransportation. The area also is used by the public for scientific research andeducation.Silver Strand Training ComplexThe Navy leases ocean beaches along the SSTC from the California State LandsCommission. Boat lanes extend out 2 nm from these beaches in support of offshoreamphibious training. Bayside training areas off the northern portion of SSTC are alsoused in support of amphibious training events. When not in use for military training,the nearshore bay and ocean waters off SSTC are used for commercial fishing andrecreational boating. The Navy training areas on San Diego Bay adjacent to thepeninsula are within a designated restricted area. However, non-Navy vessels maytransit through the area when the training lanes are not scheduled for militaryactivities. Consistent with ongoing activities, public access and recreation co-exist withNavy training.The Navy contributes to the provision of public access on the Silver Strand peninsula.The Silver Strand peninsula has several water-oriented public facilities, includingmarinas, parks, beaches, and resorts. Together, these facilities provide the public withsubstantial access to the local beaches and waters of San Diego Bay and offshoreareas. YMCA Camp Surf operates on 80 acres on SSTC-South at the southern end ofthe peninsula on Navy land, providing overnight beachfront accommodations for localyouth and instruction in water sports. A salt marsh ecological preserve and saltevaporator ponds located on about 27 acres (10.9 hectares) of SSTC South propertyfronting San Diego Bay is leased by the Navy to San Diego County Department ofParks and Recreation, which has installed a parking lot and bicycle and pedestrianpaths. The Proposed Action is consistent with California CZ Section 30210 to providemaximum public access consistent with public safety.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 19Marine Corps Base Camp PendletonSubstantial public access to beaches and nearshore waters is provided both to the northand south of Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton. San Onofre Beach, located at thenorthern end of MCBCP, is a public beach leased to the State by the Marine Corps.Both San Onofre State Beach and the adjacent San Mateo State Preserve/TrestlesBeach are directly accessible from the Interstate-5 freeway. Immediately south of CampPendleton lies the City of Oceanside, with a harbor and extensive beach areas. Publicaccess is not affected by COMPTUEX/JTFEX training exercises because the CampPendleton shoreline is not accessible to the public. Under the Proposed Action, theextent and accessibility of adjacent public areas would not change. The ProposedAction is consistent with Section 30210 to provide maximum public access consistentwith public safety.Concerning commercial fishing, the Navy states:Potential effects of the Proposed Action on economic, commercial, and recreationalfishing have been evaluated by the Navy. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities do not havethe potential to result in permanent modifications of the marine environment within theCZ. Elements of the Proposed Action that require exclusive use of an ocean area (e.g.,those operations in which weapons are fired) have the potential to affect commercialand recreational fishing operations during the actual operation. Short-term adverseeffects on individual commercial fishermen may result from temporary closures ofspecific ocean areas, but the economic importance of the regional commercial fishingindustry would be unchanged.Prior to these events, NOTMARs and NOTAMs are issued, providing the public andcommercial fishermen with notice of upcoming location and timing restrictions inspecific training areas. In addition, the Southern California Offshore Range (SCORE)maintains a public website depicting upcoming restrictions in designated Danger Zonesaround SCI. These notices detail date, time duration, and location of restricted access,so that commercial and private fishermen and divers can plan their activitiesaccordingly. The restricted times only extend through the duration of the trainingactivity; thereby allowing the public to shift their activities to alternate areas duringtemporary closures. Thus, the Proposed Action would be consistent with Section30234.5 to the maximum extent practicable.The Navy’s proposal is consistent with the Coastal Act policies that provide for balancingmaximum public access in a manner consistent with public safety and military security needs.In past reviews, the Commission has found that absent a nexus such as intensifications ofpublic access closures, no new public access requirements are normally required. For theproposed exercises, the public area closures during the exercises, which are clearly necessaryfor both public safety and military needs, are similar to past closures from similar Navy testing.The proposal may even reduce closures, as one of the Navy’s goals is to schedule morefrequent simultaneously occurring exercises than previously scheduled. The Commission

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 20concludes that the existing military restrictions are necessary and consistent with Coastal Actpolicies, that the Navy is not proposing greater numbers or durations of closures, and that theproject is consistent with the public access, recreation, and fishing policies (Sections 30210,30212, 30234, and 30234.5) of the Coastal Act.V. SUBSTANTIVE FILE DOCUMENTS:1. Navy Consistency Determinations CD-20-95 (Navy San Clemente Island CableRepair), CD-109-98 (Navy Advanced Deployable System (ADS) Ocean Tests), CD-95-97 and CD-153-97 (Navy, Low-Frequency Active (LFA) Sonar Research, Phases I andII), CD-2-01 (Navy Point Mugu Sea Range testing and training activities), CD-045-89and CD-50-03 (Navy FOCUS Cable and Cable repairs, San Nicolas Island), and CD-37-06 (Navy Monterey Bay (MB) 06).2. Island Night Lizard, 5-Year Review, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.3. San Clemente Island Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP), Navy,May 2002.4. USGS Seismic Survey Consistency Determinations No. CD-14-02, CD-16-00 and CD-32-99.5. Mobil Oil Pier and Wharf Decommissioning (Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No.E-96-14).6. Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) (CDP No. E-05-007/ConsistencyCertification No. CC-076-05).7. Consistency Determination No. CD-102-99, National Marine Fisheries Service, smalltest of “pulsed power” acoustic harassment device to protect recreational fishing fromsea lions.8. Consistency Certification CC-110-94/Coastal Development Permit Application 3-95-40, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Acoustic Thermometry of Ocean Climate(ATOC) Project and Marine Mammal Research Program (MMRP).9. High Energy Seismic Survey Review Process and Interim Operational Guidelines forMarine Surveys Offshore Southern California, the High Energy Seismic Survey Team(HESS), for the California State Lands Commission and the U.S. MineralsManagement Service Pacific OCS Region, September 1996 – February 1999.10. Caltrans 10 Mile River Bridge Replacement, CDP No. 1-06-022/Public Works Plan 1-06-01/LCP Amendment A-1-MEN-98-017-A2.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA -- THE RESOURCES AGENCYCALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION45 FREMONT STREET, SUITE 2000SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105-2219VOICE AND TDD (415) 904-5200ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, GovernorPrepared December 12, 2006 (for December 15, 2006 hearing)To:From:Coastal Commissioners and Interested PersonsMark Delaplaine, Federal Consistency SupervisorSubject: STAFF REPORT ADDENDUM for Item F 8dConsistency Determination CD-086-06 (Navy, U.S. Pacific Fleet’s offshoreand onshore military training exercises in southern California)The staff has several modifications to the staff report to reflect the Navy’s agreementwith the recommended condition for submittal of monitoring reports contained in theoriginal staff report mailed for this agenda item, including: (1) a revised motion andresolution to concur; (2) additional language replacing the need for the condition with anexplanation that the project “as modified” is consistent with the applicable policies, asfollows; and (3) one copy of numerous emails received opposing the staffrecommendation:[Proposed new language is shown in underline text; language to be deleted is shown instrikeout text.]Revised Recommendation and Motion, page 8:IV. Staff Recommendation. The staff recommends that the Commission adopt the followingmotion:MOTION:I move that the Commission conditionally concur with consistencydetermination CD-086-06 and determine that, as conditioned, theproject described therein is fully consistent, and thus is consistent tothe maximum extent practicable, with the enforceable policies of theCalifornia Coastal Management Program (CCMP).STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Staff recommends a YES vote on the motion. Passage of this motion will result in anagreement with the determination and adoption of the following resolution and findings. Anaffirmative vote of a majority of the Commissioners present is required to pass the motion.RESOLUTION TO CONDITIONALLY CONCUR WITH CONSISTENCYDETERMINATION:

Page 2The Commission hereby conditionally concurs with consistency determination CD-086-06 bythe Navy on the grounds that the project would be is fully consistent, and thus consistent to themaximum extent practicable, with the enforceable policies of the CCMP., provided the AirForce agrees to modify the project consistent with the condition specified below, as providedfor in 15 CFR §930.4.The Commission staff proposes several minor wording changes to reflect the Navy’sagreement with the recommended condition language.Executive Summary, bottom of page 2/top of page 3:Thus, through its consultation with other federal agencies, the Navy is applying a number ofhabitat protection measures to the proposed activities. When added to the measures included inthe Navy’s consistency determination, the only measure lacking to enable a finding ofconsistency with the marine resource policies is a Navy agreement to submit the marinemammal/turtle monitoring reports that it prepares for NMFS to the Commission staff.Submittal of these reports is necessary under the Coastal Act for several reasons. First, theNavy is using explosives within the coastal zone, which have the potential to affect marinemammals unless adequate preclusion areas are maintained. Second, review of the monitoringis necessary to assure the Commission that the Navy has complied with its commitments toprotect marine resources. Third, interim monitoring reports may lead to alterations in trainingpractices and protection measures included. Fourth, submittal of the monitoring reports is anideal way for the Navy to support its assertion that use of mid-frequency sonar in federalwaters would not affect the coastal zone. Fifth, the federal consistency regulations (Section930.45 – see page 9) specifically require continued monitoring and coordination with stateagencies). The Commission staff initially recommended, and the Navy has now agreed, to istherefore conditioning its concurrence on a requirement that the Navy provide its monitoringreports to the Commission staff. As modified, Only as conditioned would the project wouldinclude adequate measures to enable the Commission to find that the activities will beconducted in a manner protecting marine resources, and that the proposed activities would beconsistent with the applicable marine resource, water quality, and environmentally sensitivehabitat policies (Sections 30230, 30231, and 30240) of the Coastal Act.As provided in 15 CFR § 930.4(b), in the event the Navy does not agree with theCommission’s condition of concurrence, then all parties shall treat this conditional concurrenceas an objection.Condition and Applicable Legal Authorities, page 8-9, delete the recommended conditionand the section on Applicable Legal Authorities.Marine Resources Findings, page 13, make the following changes:

Page 3Thus, through its consultation with other federal agencies, the Navy is applying a number ofhabitat protection measures to the proposed activities. When added to the measures included inthe Navy’s consistency determination, the only measure lacking to enable a finding ofconsistency with the marine resource policies is a Navy agreement to submit the marinemammal/turtle monitoring reports that it prepares for NMFS to the Commission staff. TheNavy has only now agreed to also provide the coordinate with Commission staff with all onwhether marine mammal incident and other monitoring reports that it will be provide toNMFSd to Commission staff, and only after discussion and review with NOAA. Submittal ofmarine mammal monitoring reports is necessary under the Coastal Act for several reasons.First, the Navy is using explosives, albeit small, within the coastal zone, which have thepotential to affect marine mammals unless adequate preclusion areas are maintained. Second,review of the monitoring is necessary to assure the Commission that the Navy has compliedwith its commitments to protect marine resources. Third, interim monitoring reports may leadto alterations in training practices and protection measures included (as was the case for theMobil Pier decommissioning project the Commission reviewed in 1996, where acousticmonitoring of the explosives footprint led to greater areas of preclusion than originallyproposed). Fourth, if the Navy’s concern is of a jurisdictional nature based on use of midfrequencysonar in only federal waters, there is no better way for the Navy to establish to theCommission’s satisfaction that coastal zone resource impacts are being avoided than to providethe Commission the data that would support the Navy’s conclusions. Fifth, the federalconsistency regulations (Section 930.45 – see page 9) specifically require continuedmonitoring and coordination with state agencies). Because the Navy has now agreed toprovide these The Commission is therefore conditioning its concurrence on a requirement thatthe Navy provide its monitoring reports to the Commission staff, . Only asmodified,conditioned would the project would include adequate measures to enable theCommission to find that the activities will be conducted in a manner protecting marineresources, and that the proposed activities would be consistent with the applicable marineresource, water quality, and environmentally sensitive habitat policies (Sections 30230, 30231,and 30240) of the Coastal Act.As provided in 15 CFR § 930.4(b), in the event the Navy does not agree with theCommission’s condition of concurrence, then all parties shall treat this conditional concurrenceas an objection.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA -- THE RESOURCES AGENCYCALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION45 FREMONT STREET, SUITE 2000SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105-2219VOICE AND TDD (415) 904-5200ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, GovernorW 10bREVISED STAFF RECOMMENDATIONON CONSISTENCY DETERMINATIONConsistency Determination No. CD-086-06Staff:MPD-SFFile Date: 10/30/0660th Day: 12/29/0675th Day: 1/13/07Commission Meeting: 1/10/07FEDERAL AGENCY:PROJECTLOCATION:PROJECTDESCRIPTION:U.S. NavyFour Navy operating areas: Southern California operating area(Exhibits 1-2), San Clemente Island Range Complex, MarineCorps Base Camp Pendleton, and Silver Strand TrainingComplex (Exhibits 1-3)Onshore and offshore U.S. Pacific Fleet military training exercisesSUBSTANTIVEFILE DOCUMENTS: See page 38.[Staff Note – This item was continued from the December Coastal Commission meeting inorder to consider additional mitigation measures primarily to address marine mammal and seaturtle monitoring, minimization, and mitigation measures related to mid-frequency sonar. Thisstaff report has been revised to include a list of recommended conditions, found on pages 10-13.]EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe U.S. Navy (Navy) has submitted a consistency determination for the U.S. Pacific Fleet’soffshore and onshore military training exercises in southern California. The four training areasare: the southern California operating area (Exhibit 1), San Clemente Island Range Complex,Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, and Silver Strand Training Complex (Exhibit 2). The

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 2exercises involve a wide range and combinations of ships, support craft, submarines,helicopters, airplanes, and amphibious vehicles, and other equipment used to train Navy andMarine forces with “complex, deployment-preparation exercises.”Many of the exercises would take place outside the coastal zone (up to 80 miles offshore).Activities within the coastal zone include Amphibious Operations, Naval Surface FireSupport, Ship Mine Countermeasures Operations, Demolition Operations, and Mining(airborne, non-explosive, mine-laying) Operations.Potential marine environment and use issues raised by the projects are impacts to marinemammals, sea turtles, kelp beds, white abalone, commercial and recreational fishing, andrecreational diving in the marine environment. Potential land habitat issues raised are impactsto sensitive bird breeding areas (e.g., snowy plovers and loggerhead shrikes) in several areasand the island night lizard on San Clemente Island. The exercises are similar to activities theNavy has been regularly undertaking for many years and do not represent an intensification inuse of the affected areas compared to past years’ activities. Activities with the potential todisturb marine mammals include ship movement, inert mine drops, underwater detonations,and, outside the coastal zone, mid-frequency sonar, missile launches, and amphibious landings.Use of explosives within the coastal zone would be limited to small (mostly 1-5 lb.) charges.Mid-frequency sonar would only occur outside the coastal zone, and, for the most part, beyond80 nautical miles from shore (off San Clemente Island).The Navy’s initial consistency determination focused on activities physically within the coastalzone; nevertheless, in response to Commission staff questions the Navy has providedadditional information detailing the protection measures in place from activities outside butpotentially affecting the coastal zone. Marine mammal and sea turtle protection measuresinclude: Marine Species Awareness Training material, shipboard surveillance for marinemammals and sea turtles, aerial surveillance where planes or helicopters are part of the activity,passive acoustic monitoring, implementing a buffer zone (700 yard arc-radius arounddetonation sites for small explosives (mostly 1-5 pounds, with none exceeding 20 pounds)),reducing the likelihood of exposing marine mammals or sea turtles to sounds exceeding 173decibels (dB), avoiding of dropping any inert mines on marine mammals or sea turtles,removing from the marine environment inert mines dropped pre- and post-exercise surveys,coordinating with NMFS in the event of any injury to a marine mammal or sea turtle observedand submitting monitoring reports, and providing the Commission with the monitoring reportsit provides to NMFS.However, the Navy has not provided the Commission with the level of detail needed for theCommission to fully review the proposed project and its marine resource impacts. TheCommission has traditionally required, as the Navy did provide for its most recent consistencydetermination involving active acoustics in Monterey Bay (CD-37-06 - Navy Monterey Bay(MB) 06), a detailed analysis of estimated “take” (numbers of animals affected), and for eachacoustic source, the frequency range, duty cycle, acoustic intensity, and distance to what the

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 3Navy had estimated as the threshold for effect (although, as noted below, both NMFS and theCommission determined lower thresholds were needed than what the Navy had originallyproposed). While the subject proposal is not a new activity in these waters, this is the firstopportunity the Commission has had to review issues related to mid-frequency sonar sinceconcerns were raised in the Bahamas, De Haro Straits, Hawaii, and other coastal areas in recentyears.In the subject case, NMFS has not yet completed its review; however NMFS most recentIncidental Harassment Authorization for Navy training in Hawaii involving mid-frequencysonar (RIMPAC) expressed an approach that would consider 190 dB as a TemporaryThreshold Shift “take” threshold, and 173 dB as a behavioral harassment “take” threshold.As it found during the review of CD-037-06, the Commission believes that a lower thresholdthan articulated by NMFS is warranted. NMFS appears to have taken a “middle ground”approach, noting that available evidence exists to support a lower threshold, but basing itsdetermination on the level at which 25% of mammals were behaviorally affected in a captivedolphin study (Finneran and Schlundt (2004)). As the Commission noted in CD-037-06, theNowacek study (Exhibit 10), which NMFS cited but did not base its threshold on, supportsreliance on a lower threshold, given that it addresses animals not in captivity (and not trained toexpect rewards). Also, the Natural Research Council has expressed concerns (see pages 29-32)over reliance solely on studies of captive animals. Given this information, combined with thepaucity of data concerning the effects of anthropogenic sound on marine species, and thedifficulty in detecting marine mammals and sea turtles, a compelling case exists that a lowerthreshold is warranted. Therefore, the Commission reiterates its finding from CD-037-06:“While the Commission agrees that the movement from a single to a dual criteria is a step inthe right direction, the Commission does not believe the Navy has established a basis for itsproposed [in that case]186 dB threshold. An equivalent if not better case can be made foradopting what Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution has suggested (i.e., a more precautionary154 dB threshold).” Consequently, the Commission believes the conditions on pages 10-13,which include implementation of a lower threshold, as well as other measures to protect marinemammals and sea turtles, are needed to bring the project into consistency with the marineresource policy of the Coastal Act (Section 30230). These conditions would require the Navyto:implement safety zones out to the 154 dB (received level (RL), expressed in decibels(re 1 μPa2 ·s @ 1m [one micropascal squared second at one meter]);include two dedicated NOAA-trained observers at all times during use of midfrequencysonar;provide adequate, NMFS approved training for the monitors;include Passive Acoustic Monitoring and use it to enforce the safety zones;

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 4perform aerial monitoring;avoid, where possible, effect on gray whales, the Channel Islands National MarineSanctuary, and areas with known high concentrations of marine mammals, and complex, steepseabed topography (except on the Navy’s instrumented range off San Clemente Island);additional measures for night and low visibility conditions, during Surface DuctingConditions, and for Choke-point exercises;to the degree possible, retrieval of inert mine shapes dropped; andas agreed to previously, submit all monitoring results provided to NMFS (unlessclassified) to the Commission staff.Only as conditioned, would the proposed training exercises be consistent with the applicablemarine resource, water quality, and fill of open coastal waters policies (Sections 30230, 20331,and 30233) of the Coastal Act.For land-based species, because the activities are similar to past training exercises, the Navy isrelying on mitigation measures developed through its Endangered Species Act consultationswith the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and contained in several existing Biological Opinions.These agreements include measures to protect loggerhead shrikes and island night lizards onSan Clemente Island for Naval Surface Fire Support activities, and snowy plovers at CampPendleton and the Silver Strand peninsula for amphibious landing activities. These measuresare adequate to find the project consistent with the environmentally sensitive habitat policy(Section 30240) of the Coastal Act.Measures to minimize impacts to boating, diving and fishing activities include publishingNotices to Mariners, limiting operations offshore of San Clemente Island to Federallydesignateddanger and restricted zones, temporary closures of other affected areas, avoidingoperations if boats or divers do not leave the area, and limiting amphibious landings torestricted military beaches already off-limits to the public. With these measures, the proposedexercises would be consistent with the commercial and recreational fishing and diving policiesand public access and recreation policies (Sections 30234, 30234.5, 30210, and 30212) of theCoastal Act.As provided in 15 CFR § 930.4(b), in the event the Navy does not agree with theCommission’s conditions of concurrence, then all parties shall treat this conditionalconcurrence as an objection.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 5STAFF SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONI. STAFF SUMMARY:A. Project Description. The Navy has submitted a consistency determination for aseries of offshore and onshore military exercise used to train the U.S. Pacific Fleet in southernCalifornia both onshore and in offshore waters. The four training areas are: the southernCalifornia operating area, San Clemente Island Range Complex, Marine Corps Base CampPendleton, and Silver Strand Training Complex (Exhibits 1-2). The exercises, which have beenconducted in various forms since the 1920s, are used to train Navy and Marine forces with“complex, deployment-preparation exercises” involving “varied land, sea, and underseatraining environments to properly demonstrate the full range of capabilities required ofdeploying naval forces.”The exercises are separated into three, increasingly complex phases, which the Navy calls:“Basic, Integrated and Sustainment.” The Navy calls the latter two phases “COMPTUEX,”standing for Composite Training Unit Exercises, and “JTFEX,” standing for Joint Task ForceExercises.The exercises would involve troops from bases in three states (California, Arizona andNevada (Exhibit 1)), which would form “Strike Groups.” Strike Groups are either: (a) aCarrier Strike Group (CSG) (normally formed around an Aircraft Carrier (CV/N), with anembarked Air Wing (CVW)); or (b) an Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG) (formed around anAmphibious Helicopter Carrier (LHD), with an embarked Marine Expeditionary Unit(MEU)). Both types of groups would also involve a number of support ships. CSG exercisesare offshore; only ESGs would involve bring troops ashore (either by helicopter oramphibious vehicle).The Navy elaborates:A COMPTUEX is conducted as a series of scheduled training events that occuraccording to a given time schedule against an opposition force. The COMPTUEXprovides an opportunity for the Strike Group to become proficient in the myriad ofrequired warfare skill sets. Additionally, it stresses the integration or coordination ofthe different warfare areas and provides realistic training on in-theater operations.The COMPTUEX is normally more structured than the JTFEX, so it is longer induration.JTFEX is in the Sustainment or final Phase of the FRTP and may involve either aCSG or an ESG. It is a scenario-driven, at-sea training exercise designed to evaluatethe Strike Group’s preparedness for forward deployed contingency and combatoperations. JTFEX also utilizes a simulated opposition force and serves as the venuefor U.S. THIRD Fleet to assess the readiness, interoperability, and proficiency of

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 6naval forces in realistic, free-play scenarios, ranging from military operations otherthan-warto armed conflict. As the final certification event of the FRTP, the StrikeGroup must demonstrate the ability to operate and integrate into a Joint OperationsArea under simulated austere, hostile conditions.Most of the training would occur outside the coastal zone on federal land or in federal waters.The Navy’s consistency determined examined those exercises within or with the potential toaffect the coastal zone. Exercises outside the coastal zone are listed and briefly summarized inExhibit 3. (The asterisks (*) in the list below denote those activities the Navy believes has thepotential to affect the coastal zone. The acronyms stand for the four operating areas(OPAREAs): SOCAL, SCIRC, SSTC, MCBCP - southern California operating area, SanClemente Island Range Complex, Silver Strand Training Complex, and Marine Corps BaseCamp Pendleton, respectively).Table 1-2. COMPTUEX/JTFEX Activities Inside the Coastal ZoneEVENTAmphibious Exercise*Ship Mine Countermeasures Exercise*Demolition Operations*Visit, Board, Search, and SeizureNaval Cooperation and Guidancefor ShippingMaritime Security OperationsNaval Surface Fire Support*Straits Transit/Q RouteFast Inshore Assault CraftDynamic STRIKE/TSSClose Air SupportCounter Special Operations ForceMining Exercise*Surge ExerciseLive-Fire ExerciseSpecial Warfare OperationsHumanitarian Assistance/Disaster ReliefNon-Combatant EvacuationEmbassy ReinforcementCombat Search and Rescue TrapRANGE/OPAREASCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSCIRC, SSTC, MCBCPSOCALSOCALSOCALSCIRC, SOCALSOCALSOCALSCIRCSCIRC, MCBCPSOCALSOCALSOCALSOCAL, SCIRC, MCBCPSCIRC, MCBCPMCBCPSCIRC, MCBCPSCIRC, MCBCPSCIRC, SOCAL, MCBCP

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 7Thus, of these activities, the Navy believes only the following five types of events have thepotential to affect coastal resources: Amphibious Operations, Naval Surface Fire Support,Ship Mine Countermeasures Operations, Demolition Operations, and Mining Operations.Describing these, the Navy states:2.2.1 At-Sea Training OperationsAmphibious OperationsAmphibious operations may include shore assault, boat raid, airfield seizure,humanitarian assistance, and force reconnaissance. Amphibious landings arelaunched from Navy ships positioned out to 50 mi (80 km) offshore. For an assaulton a beach, units come ashore in Landing Craft, Air Cushion (LCAC) and inAmphibious Assault Vehicles (AAV)(lightly armored tracked vehicles). Anamphibious exercise may last from 2 days up to 3 weeks, depending on the size andcomplexity of the exercise, and typically includes a Live-Fire Exercise. Amphibiousoperations normally take place at MCBCP and the SCIRC. Additionally, smalleramphibious exercises have occurred on the southern beaches of the SSTC. Theparticipants and assets in amphibious operations typically include: 1,500 Marines;rotary wing, fixed wing, and tilt-wing aircraft; amphibious vehicles, vessels, andboats - Landing Craft, Utility (LCU), Combat Rubber Raiding Raft (CRRC), RigidHull Inflatable Boat (RHIB); three amphibious ships; and other surface ships.Naval Surface Fire Support (NSFS) OperationsNSFS operations involve naval surface ships with the MK-45 5-inch/54 or the MK-455-inch/62 naval gun firing system, engaging land and surface targets. NSFSoperations are an annual requirement for all naval vessels outfitted with the 5-inchgun system. NSFS is conducted against land targets in the SHOBA on SCI. Becauseships are firing from sea to land targets located in SHOBA, the public is restricted inthe offshore portion of SHOBA, called Fire Support Area (FSA), during the live-firingportion of the operations. However, the cumulative time that ships are actually firingweapons during these operations is extremely short. The participants associated withan NSFS operation include: four to six ships.Mine Countermeasures (MCM) OperationsMCM Operations train forces to locate and neutralize inert (non-explosive) mineshapes in shallow-water environments in support of the CSG and ESG. A typicalexercise would involve bottom-laid explosive and mid-water column explosivetraining evolutions. The training would take place offshore of the beaches atSSTC/MCBCP, and in the nearshore waters off the western side of SCI. The assetsinclude two MCM ships, two to three airborne mine countermeasures helicopters,

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 8divers, unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV) and marine mammals (dolphins). Someor all of the following equipment would be used: underwater explosives (up to 20pounds net explosives weight (NEW)), side-scan sonar, high-frequency sonar, laserline scans, magnetic sweep gear, and influence sweep gear.Demolition Operations (DEMO)DEMO provides training in the identification and neutralization or destruction ofinert floating or moored mines. This training includes hydrographic reconnaissanceof approaches to prospective landing beaches; demolition of obstacles and clearingmines; locating, improving, and marking of useable channels; channel and harborclearance; and acquisition of operational intelligence during pre-assault operations.Explosives used in DEMO are less than 20 pounds. During a COMPTUEX or JTFEXthere may be up to 20 demolition events. The DEMO exercise takes place at locationsroutinely used for explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) and DEMO training at SCIRC,MCBCP, SSTC, and Naval Base Coronado (NBC). The participants and assetstypically used in this event include: EOD divers, small boats, and helicopters.2.2.2 Air OperationsMining OperationsMining Operation consists of airborne mine-laying. The aircraft drop a series of(usually four), non-explosive inert training shapes (MK-76, bomb dummy unit [BDU]45, or BDU 48) in the water. The aircraft may make multiple passes on the sameflight pattern, dropping one or more shapes each pass. The shapes are scored foraccuracy as they enter the water. The training shapes are inert and recovered at theend of the operation.Describing the need for the training, the Navy also states:1.3 PURPOSE AND NEEDThe purpose of conducting COMPTUEXs and JTFEXs is to train, prepare and certifyStrike Group readiness prior to deployment of forces to Combatant Commanders. Theexercises incorporate a multi-dimensional, multi-threat environment that stresses allaspects of joint maritime operations.The need for major naval exercises such as COMPTUEXs or JTFEXs is derived fromthe Congressional mandate to organize, train, and equip the military services forprompt and sustained combat operations (10 United States Code [U.S.C.] Sections5032 and 5062). The COMPTUEX and JTFEX are required both to train the units andto evaluate their combat readiness. At the conclusion of the JTFEX, Commander, U.S.THIRD Fleet certifies to the Commander, Pacific Fleet that the CSG or ESG is ready todeploy, fulfilling the Navy’s Title 10 responsibilities.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 9B. History. As noted above, the exercises are similar in duration, intensity, andlocation to long-standing Navy training in the operating areas. The Navy states:Nominally, the U.S. Navy (Navy) conducts seven COMPTUEXs and seven JTFEXsper 2-year period throughout existing major ranges and facilities in the southwesternUnited States and offshore Southern California (Table 1-1 and Figure 1-1 [Exhibit1]). Dependent on national tasking, an average of three ESG COMPTUEXs, fourCSG COMPTUEXs, three ESG JTFEXs, and four CSG JTFEXs, would be conductedover a 2-year period (fourteen total exercises). Beginning January 2007, the Navyproposes to conduct some of these major range events concurrently. The overallnumber, type, frequency, and location of these major range events would not changefrom current baseline operations. Southern California (SOCAL) land, sea and airranges have supported major Fleet training dating back before the 1920’s. SanClemente Island (SCI) has served as a dedicated Fleet training asset since it wastransferred over to the Department of the Navy (DON) in 1934. As early as 1935,naval gunfire and bombing, and U.S. Fleet Landing exercises have occurred in theSCI Shore Bombardment Area (SHOBA) and throughout the island, respectively.C. Federal Agency's Consistency Determination. The Navy has determined theproject consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the California Coastal ManagementProgram.II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:The staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following motion:MOTION:I move that the Commission conditionally concur with consistencydetermination CD-086-06 and determine that, as conditioned, theproject described therein is fully consistent, and thus is consistent tothe maximum extent practicable, with the enforceable policies of theCalifornia Coastal Management Program (CCMP).STAFF RECOMMENDATION:Staff recommends a YES vote on the motion. Passage of this motion will result in anagreement with the determination and adoption of the following resolution and findings. Anaffirmative vote of a majority of the Commissioners present is required to pass the motion.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 10RESOLUTION TO CONDITIONALLY CONCUR WITH CONSISTENCYDETERMINATION:The Commission hereby conditionally concurs with consistency determination CD-086-06 bythe Navy on the grounds that the project would be fully consistent, and thus consistent to themaximum extent practicable, with the enforceable policies of the CCMP, provided the Navyagrees to modify the project consistent with the conditions specified below, as provided for in15 CFR §930.4.Conditions:1. Safety Zones. The Navy shall adopt safety zones (i.e., marine mammal preclusionzones) out to the distance at which the sonar has attenuated to 154 dB (received level (RL),expressed in decibels (re 1 μPa 2 ·s @ 1m [one micropascal squared second at one meter]).The Navy will monitor the area and lower sonar levels (or delay transmissions until an animalhas left the safety zone) such that marine mammals and sea turtles will not be exposed toreceived levels greater than 154 dB. If the 154 dB level cannot be feasibly achieved, the Navyshall either cease sonar transmissions should a marine mammal be detected within 2 km of thesonar dome, as the Navy has currently agreed to for its SURTASS LFA sonar operations, orthe Navy shall provide the Commission with sufficient information about the sonar intensitiesand attenuation rates, and the maximum capabilities of its monitoring, to enable theCommission to determine that the Navy will protect a safety zone as close as is feasible to the154 dB zone.2. Surveillance. Surveillance shall include two dedicated NOAA-trained observers atall times during use of mid-frequency sonar.3. Training. The Navy shall employ the RIMPAC-derived measures, which state:NMFS-Approved Training• Navy shipboard lookouts shall be qualified watchstanders who have completedmarine species awareness training.- Navy watchstanders will participate in marine mammal observer trainingapproved by NMFS.4. Passive Acoustic Monitoring. To the maximum extent feasible, passive acousticmonitoring will be used to enforce safety zones. All personnel engaged in passive acousticsonar operations during an exercise employing mid-frequency sonar shall monitor for marinemammals and report the detection of any marine mammal to the appropriate watch station fordissemination and appropriate action.5. Aerial Monitoring. The Navy shall ensure that aircraft operating in the Navy’sinstrumented range off San Clemente will monitor the area for marine mammals during

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 11their assigned missions and will monitor the area throughout any mid-frequency sonarexercises on the instrumented range. All other aircraft flying low enough to reasonablyspot a marine mammal will watch for marine mammals. The Navy shall require that allaerial sightings of marine mammals be reported to the appropriate watch stations forappropriate action. Appropriate action means taking mitigation measures anddisseminating the information to other units and watchstanders for increased situationalawareness.6. Gray Whale Migration Season. To the maximum extent feasible, the Navy shalllocate and schedule training outside the gray whale migration season, where the sonar is nearenough to known or observed gray whale migration paths to expose gray whales to sonar levelsabove 154 dB. If conducting exercises during the migration season the Navy shall avoidknown gray whale migration corridors.7. Areas of High Marine Mammal Populations. To the maximum extent feasible, theNavy shall avoid training in areas with known high concentrations of marine mammals,including but not limited to:avoiding active sonar transmissions within the National Marine Sanctuaries offCalifornia’s coast (e.g., the Channel Islands NMS); andavoiding seamounts and coastal areas with complex, steep seabed topography,except on the Navy’s instrumented range off San Clemente Island.8. Night and low visibility conditions. The Navy shall employ the RIMPAC-derivedmeasures, which state:Low visibility conditions (i.e., whenever the entire safety zone cannot beeffectively monitored due to nighttime, high sea state, fog or other factors)– The Navy will use additional detection measures, such as infrared (IR) orenhanced passive acoustic detection. If detection of marine mammals is notpossible out to the prescribed safety zone, the Navy will power down sonar by 6dB as if marine mammals were present in the zones it cannot see.9. Stranding Response and Reporting. The Navy shall employ the RIMPACderivedmeasures, which state:• The Navy will coordinate with the NMFS Stranding Coordinator for any unusualmarine mammal behavior, including stranding, beached live or dead cetacean(s),floating marine mammals, or out-of-habitat/milling live cetaceans that may occur atany time during or shortly after major exercises.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 12• The Navy will provide a report to NMFS after the completion of a major exercise thatincludes:- An assessment of the effectiveness of these mitigation and monitoringmeasures with recommendations of how to improve them.- Results of the marine species monitoring during the major exercise. As muchunclassified information as the Navy can provide including, but not limited to, whereand when sonar was used (including sources not considered in take estimates, such assubmarine and aircraft sonars) in relation to any measured received levels, sourcelevels, numbers of sources, and frequencies, so it can be coordinated with observedcetacean behaviors. If necessary, classified information may be provided to NMFSpersonnel with an appropriate security clearance and need to know.10. Surface Ducting Conditions. During significant surface ducting conditions,as defined by NMFS (2006), the Navy shall power down the sonar source by 6 dB. TheNavy shall assess whether surface ducting conditions are present at least once hourlyduring periods as specified by NMFS (and as discussed on page 3 of the NMFS IHA forRIMPAC (Exhibit 13)).11. Choke-point exercises. - Prior to approving a proposed choke-pointexercise, Navy commands shall consult with OPNAV N45.- The Navy will provide NMFS (Stranding Coordinator and Protected Resources,Headquarters) with information regarding the time and place for the choke-pointexercises in advance of any proposed choke-point exercise.- The Navy and NMFS will mutually agree upon whether non-Navy observers arerequired.- The Navy will coordinate a focused monitoring effort around the choke-pointexercises, to include pre-exercise monitoring (2 hours), during-exercise monitoring,and post-exercise monitoring (1-2 days). This monitoring effort will include at leastone dedicated aircraft or one dedicated vessel for realtime monitoring from the pre- throughpost-monitoring time period, except at night, with the vessel or airplanemaintaining regular communication with a Tactical Officer with the authority to shutdown,power-down, or delay the start-up of sonar operations. These monitors willcommunicate with the Navy command to ensure the safety zones are clear prior tosonar start-up, to recommend power-down and shut-down during the exercise, and toextensively search for potentially injured or stranding animals in the area and downcurrent ofthe area post-exercise.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 1312. Mine Shape Retrieval. To the maximum extent feasible, the Navy shall retrieveinert mine shapes dropped.13. Monitoring Reports. In addition to the above, as agreed to previously, allmonitoring results provided to NMFS (unless classified) shall be submitted to the Commissionstaff.III. APPLICABLE LEGAL AUTHORITIES.A. Conditional Concurrences. The federal consistency regulations (15 CFR §930.4) provide for conditional concurrences, as follows:(a) Federal agencies, … should cooperate with State agencies to develop conditionsthat, if agreed to during the State agency’s consistency review period and included in aFederal agency’s final decision under Subpart C … would allow the State agency toconcur with the federal action. If instead a State agency issues a conditionalconcurrence:(1) The State agency shall include in its concurrence letter the conditions which mustbe satisfied, an explanation of why the conditions are necessary to ensure consistencywith specific enforceable policies of the management program, and an identification ofthe specific enforceable policies. The State agency’s concurrence letter shall alsoinform the parties that if the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of thesection are not met, then all parties shall treat the State agency’s conditionalconcurrence letter as an objection pursuant to the applicable Subpart . . . ; and(2) The Federal agency (for Subpart C) … shall modify the applicable plan [or] projectproposal, … pursuant to the State agency’s conditions. The Federal agency … shallimmediately notify the State agency if the State agency’s conditions are not acceptable;and…(b) If the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section are not met, thenall parties shall treat the State agency’s conditional concurrence as an objectionpursuant to the applicable Subpart.B. Practicability. The federal consistency regulations also provide:15 CFR § 930.32: Consistent to the maximum extent practicable.(a)(1) The term ‘‘consistent to the maximum extent practicable’’ means fully consistentwith the enforceable policies of management programs unless full consistency isprohibited by existing law applicable to the Federal agency.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 14Since the Navy has raised no issue of practicability, as so defined, the standard before theCommission is full consistency with the policies of the California Coastal ManagementProgram (CPRC §§ 30200-30265.5).IV. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS:The Commission finds and declares as follows:A. Marine Resources/Coastal Waters/Environmentally Sensitive Habitat. TheCoastal Act provides:Section 30230: Marine resources shall be maintained, enhanced, and where feasible,restored. Special protection shall be given to areas and species of special biological oreconomic significance. Uses of the marine environment shall be carried out in amanner that will sustain the biological productivity of coastal waters and that willmaintain healthy populations of all species of marine organisms adequate for long-termcommercial, recreational, scientific, and educational purposes.Section 30231: The biological productivity and the quality of coastal waters, streams,wetlands, estuaries, and lakes appropriate to maintain optimum populations of marineorganisms and for the protection of human health shall be maintained and, wherefeasible, restored through, among other means, minimizing adverse effects of wastewater discharges and entrainment, controlling runoff, preventing depletion of groundwater supplies and substantial interference with surface water flow, encouraging wastewater reclamation, maintaining natural vegetation buffer areas that protect riparianhabitats, and minimizing alteration of natural streams.Section 30240: (a) Environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall be protected againstany significant disruption of habitat values, and only uses dependent on those resourcesshall be allowed within those areas.(b) Development in areas adjacent to environmentally sensitive habitatareas and parks and recreation areas shall be sited and designed to prevent impactswhich would significantly degrade those areas, and shall be compatible with thecontinuance of those habitat and recreation areas.Sensitive marine species in the project areas include marine mammals and sea turtles, kelpbeds, white abalone, and essential fish habitat. Potentially affected onshore species includesnowy plovers at Camp Pendleton and the Silver Strand peninsula, and loggerhead shrikes andthe island night lizard on San Clemente Island (Exhibits 5 & 6). The Navy’s consistencydetermination focuses on the five types of exercises occurring within the coastal zone andhaving the potential to affect coastal zone resources. The Navy states:

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 15Coastal Zone EffectsThe Proposed Action would be consistent with Section 30230. Under the ProposedAction, the overall number, type and location of training operations would notincrease. Biological productivity of coastal waters would be maintained andpopulations of fish and other marine organisms would be sustained. Important marineresources would be avoided.DiscussionCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities within the SOCAL OPAREA with potential to affectmarine resources include deployment of inert mine shapes on surface targets, sea-tolandweapons firing into designated land-based ranges, underwater detonation, andamphibious landings. Due to the generally dispersed, infrequent nature of Navytraining exercises and the wide dispersal of marine resources, biological productivityof coastal waters will be maintained.Marine resources of special biological or economic significance in the SOCALOPAREA include:• Marine flora, especially kelp forests• Commercial and recreational fish stocks and essential fish habitat• Special-status species, including marine mammals, sea turtles, and white abaloneThese resources are considered, for this analysis, to be suitable indicators of generalbiological productivity, and representative of the overall marine resources within theSOCAL OPAREA.Exhibit 4 contains the Navy’s estimates of marine mammal distributions and population trendsin the offshore operating areas. The Navy states:Effects of the Proposed ActionOverviewJTFEX/COMPTUEX activities would have negligible effects on marine mammals.Minor acoustic effects to marine mammals could occur from underwater detonationsand possibly include: temporary changes in behavior, movement away from an area ofactivity, temporary reduction in hearing sensitivity, and no response. It is highlyunlikely that a marine mammal would experience any long-term effects because theproposed training is:• Intermittent

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 16• Localized in discreet, shallow water areas in SOCAL• Mitigated, such that marine mammals will not be in proximity to underwaterdetonations during training eventsUnderwater DetonationsMarine mammals may be exposed to acoustic energy from underwater detonations fromDEMO and SMCMEX, and to physical injury from inert mine shapes dropped duringMINEX. Small charges are used to neutralize inert mine shapes during DEMO andSMCMEX. Underwater detonations associated with DEMO are aimed at removingobstacles and clearing mines in areas to be used for approaches to landing beaches.Underwater detonations conducted during SMCMEX involve one bottom-laiddetonation and one mid-water column detonation. While water depth is slightly greaterthan DEMO activities, SMCMEX activities are conducted to locate and neutralize inertmine shapes in shallow water environments. Because underwater detonationsconducted during DEMO and SMCMEX occur in shallow or very shallow water, asignificant portion of the energy is dissipated as surface blowout pressure and/or intothe ocean substrate. In addition, bottom substrate characteristics have an affect on theamount of energy propagating through the water column.Characteristic of the west coast of North America, Southern California has mixedsemidiurnal tides. This results in four daily tidal heights, including a low low tide, highlow tide, low high tide, and high high tide. During these tides, sand and gravel fromsubmerged portions of intertidal beaches are washed into the water column. Thisfrequent tidal flow, combined with close proximity to erosion of sand and particulatematter from coastal dunes and hills results in a relatively deep sandy substrate innearshore waters. Consequently, propagation of acoustic energy from these shallowwater, and shallow water bottom-laid mine shapes is significantly reduced in the watercolumn.Operating procedures for detecting marine mammals would be implemented inconjunction with underwater detonations training. Prior to an underwater detonation(DEMO, SMCMEX) or mine laying activity (MINEX), ship-based or aerial observerswould visually scan the area for marine mammals. As with sea turtles, underwaterdetonations or mine laying would be delayed, postponed or cancelled if a marinemammal approached the operating area; thereby, avoiding injury to marine mammals.While marine mammals may detect the underwater detonations or sound of an inertmine shape dropping into the water from a distance, these exercises would beintermittent, and of very short duration. Underwater detonations and mine-layingwould not affect the biological productivity of marine mammal populations in the CZ.The Proposed Action is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with Section30230 for marine resources.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 17Concerning water quality, the Navy states:Coastal Zone EffectsCOMPTUEX/JTFEX activities within the SOCAL OPAREA with the potential to affectbiological productivity include underwater detonations from DEMO and SMCMEX.Mine shapes used in conjunction with these activities are either floating or mooredmines. Small charges are used to neutralize inert mine shapes. Underwater detonationsassociated with DEMO are aimed at removing obstacles and clearing mines in areas tobe used for approaches to landing beaches. Because these underwater detonationsoccur in very shallow water, a significant portion of the energy is dissipated as surfaceblowout pressure; thereby, reducing affects to water quality and plankton communitiesin the water column. Underwater detonations conducted during DEMO and SMCMEXwould not be conducted in kelp forests surrounding SCI.Due to the generally dispersed, infrequent nature of underwater detonations, smallcharges used, significant tidal flow (particularly around SCI), discreet effectsassociated with underwater detonations, and the wide dispersal of marine resources,biological productivity of coastal waters will be maintained. The Proposed Action isconsistent to the maximum extent practicable with Section 30231.The Commission notes that the proposed training exercises are similar to activities the Navyhas been regularly undertaking for many years and do not represent an intensification in use ofthe affected areas compared to past years’ activities. However the Commission takes a broaderview than the Navy as to which activities may affect the coastal zone. Many of the speciescovered potentially affected by the proposed training activities spend some portions of their lifecycles within coastal waters (e.g., birds that fly in and out of the coastal zone and marinespecies that swim in and out of the coastal zone)(see Exhibit 7, NOAA letter to CCC, March10, 1995). Without adequate avoidance and mitigation measures, a greater number ofexercises than those listed by the Navy could adversely affect coastal zone resources. TheCommission believes that the numbers and types of activities with the potential to disturbmarine species and other sensitive habitat include ship movement, inert mine drops,underwater detonations, and, from activities outside the coastal zone, mid-frequency sonar,missile launches (onto federally owned San Clemente Island), and amphibious landings (ontofederally owned Navy and Marine Corps bases at Camp Pendleton and the Silver Strand).Accordingly, the Commission staff requested additional information from the Navy about theactivities outside the coastal zone, and in response, the Navy has provided some additionalinformation and a list and summary of monitoring and mitigation measures it intends to adoptfor the proposed training exercises (Exhibit 2), as well as an explanation that it will becoordinating with the federal regulatory agencies under the Marine Mammal Protection Act(MMPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA)).

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 18The list of acoustic protection measures to minimize effects of active sonar and underwaterdetonations on marine mammals and sea turtles includes:requiring all Navy lookouts to review the NMFS-approved Marine SpeciesAwareness Training material;shipboard surveillance for marine mammals and sea turtles;aerial surveillance where planes or helicopters are part of the activity;passive acoustic monitoring;implementation of a buffer zone (700 yard arc-radius around detonation sites forsmall explosives (mostly 1-5 pounds, with none exceeding 20 pounds)); reducing the likelihood of exposing marine mammals or sea turtles to sounds >173 dB (received level (RL), expressed in decibels (re 1 μPa 2 ·s @ 1m [onemicropascal squared second at one meter]));avoidance of dropping any inert mines on marine mammals or sea turtles;removal from the marine environment of inert mines dropped pre- and postexercisesurveys; andcoordination with NMFS in the event of any injury to a marine mammal or seaturtle observed and submitting monitoring reports.The Navy has also agreed to submit its monitoring reports to the Commission staff.(The Commission also notes, parenthetically, that the Navy will be preparing a report on theeffectiveness of these types of measures, when it submits its report to the National MarineFisheries Service on the “RIMPAC” 1 measures, expected within the next few months.)However, the Navy has not provided the Commission with the level of detail needed for theCommission to fully review the proposed project and its marine resource impacts. TheCommission has traditionally required, as the Navy did provide for its most recent consistencydetermination involving active acoustics in Monterey Bay (CD-37-06 - Navy Monterey Bay(MB) 06), a detailed analysis of estimated “take” (numbers of animals affected), and for eachacoustic source, the frequency range, duty cycle, acoustic intensity, and distance to what theNavy had estimated as the threshold for effect (although, as noted below, both NMFS and the1 Small Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) AntisubmarineWarfare (ASW) Exercise Training Events Within the Hawaiian Islands Operating Area (OpArea), National Oceanicand Atmospheric Administration Federal Register Notice, Vol. 71, No. 78, Monday, April 24, 2006.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 19Commission determined lower thresholds were needed). The following table shows a sampleof that information provided:CD-037-06 Navy Monterey Bay 2006, or MB 06, acoustic sourcesSource type Frequency Source level Pulse length Radius to 186 dBShipboard ADCPs 50-150 kHz 223.6 dB 12-24 ms 2-76 meters(Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers)Fixed or Mobile ADCPs 140-170 kHz 192 dB 6 ms 2 metersLagrangian Floats 8-16 kHz 192 dB 5 ms 2 metersSide Scan Sonar 50 kHz 200 dB 30 ms 5 metersSub-bottom profiler 3.5/12 kHz 221 dB 5 ms 56 metersFloat tracking device 8-16 kHz 192 dB 5 ms 2 metersBubble scan device 0.75-1 MHz 210 dB 200 ms 16 metersDuring its review of that consistency determination for “MB06,” the Commission found:[Staff Note – Dual Criteria/Sound Exposure Levels: Regulators and acousticexperts have recently been moving towards “dual” criteria for acousticthresholds, a combined “SPL” (sound pressure level) and “SEL” (soundexposure level). The first measures instantaneous peak pressures, and the secondis a more cumulative measure of energy received over time. SPL is aninstantaneous measurement and can be expressed as the peak, the peak-peak, orthe root mean square (rms). Root mean square, which is the square root of thearithmetic average of the squared instantaneous pressure values, is typically usedin discussions of the effects of sounds on vertebrates. The commonly usedreference pressure level in underwater acoustics is 1 μPa (micropascal,sometimes written as “mPa”) and the units for SPLs are dB re: 1 μPa. SPL (indB) = 20 log (pressure/reference pressure). SPL does not take the duration of asound into account.SEL is an energy metric that integrates the squared instantaneous sound pressureover a stated time interval. The units for SEL are dB re: 1 μPa 2 –s. SEL = SPL +10 log (duration). If an animal is exposed to multiple pings, the SEL in eachindividual ping is summed to calculate the total SEL. The total SEL depends onthe SPL, duration, and number of pings received. The acoustic effects on hearingthat result in temporary threshold shift (TTS) and permanent threshold shift (PTS)do not imply any specific SPL, duration, or number of pings. The SPL andduration of each received ping are used to calculate the total SEL and determinewhether the received SEL meets or exceeds the effect thresholds.]The Navy’s uses the following acoustic criteria for sound exposure level (SEL) fromintermittent sounds:

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 20… Level A threshold – onset permanent threshold shift (PTS), or injury: 215 dBre: 1 μPa 2 -s; Level B threshold – onset temporary threshold shift (TTS), or harassment:195 dB re: 1 μPa 2 -s; and Level B threshold – behavioral disruption: 186 dB re: 1 μPa 2 -s.In the context of quite different activities, more potentially disruptive military sonarproposals (proposed in other areas of the country), the scientific debate over applicablethresholds for military mid-frequency sonar remains unresolved. For Navy midfrequencysonar proposed off North Carolina and Hawaii, the Navy initially proposed a190 dB threshold, NOAA Fisheries (NMFS) selected 173 dB, 2 and several institutionsand environmental organizations have suggested 154 dB may be the most appropriatethreshold. Not much focus has occurred over thresholds that may be applicable to thefairly common types of research-related and shipping sounds at the frequencies,intensities and durations similar to those proposed here, and unlike strandingsassociated with military sonar, no documentation exists to date that these types ofsources pose threats to marine mammals. Nor does NMFS believe a “take” permit iseven needed for the proposed research.In the separate, mid-frequency sonar dialogue, the Navy selected 190 dB asrepresenting 50% of mammals behaviorally affected in a controlled study (Finneranand Schlundt (2004)). NMFS selected 173 dB from the same study (combined with twoothers) 3 but representing the level where 25% of the mammals showed an effect.Placing more emphasis on the right whale studies in the wild (Nowacek et al. 2003),comments on the same Navy mid-frequency sonar proposals included letters from the2 NMFS recently requested that the Navy use 173 dB as an SEL threshold for behavioral impacts, in both: (1)NMFS’ January 30, 2006, comments on the Navy’s Draft Overseas EIS/EIR for the Dept. of the Navy’s UnderseaWarfare Training Range (proposed off North Carolina); and (2) NMFS’ comments in its Federal Register Noticeof April 24, 2006, on the Navy’s NMFS Permit application for Small Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental toSpecified Activities; Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) Antisubmarine Warfare (ASW) Exercise Training EventsWithin the Hawaiian Islands Operating Area (OpArea).3 NMFS believes that “ … in the absence of controlled exposure experiments, the following investigations andreports … constitute the best available scientific information for establishing an appropriate acoustic threshold forsub- TTS behavioral disruption: (1) Finneran and Schlundt (2004), in which behavioral observations from TTSstudies of captive bottlenose dolphins and beluga whales are analyzed as a function of known noise exposure; (2)Nowachek [sic] et al. (2004), in which controlled exposure experiments were conducted on North Atlantic rightwhales using ship noise, social sounds of con-specifics, and an alerting stimulus; and (3) NMFS (2005), in whichthe behavioral reactions of killer whales in the presence of tactical midfrequency sonar were observed, andanalyzed after the fact. Based on these three studies, NMFS has set the sub-TTS behavioral disruption threshold at173 dB re 1 μPa –s (SEL).” (Fed. Reg. Notice, April 24, 2006, Navy’s NMFS Permit application for “RIMPAC”)

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 21Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Woods Hole OceanographicInstitution (WHOI, which is also conducting some of the proposed research) urged alowering of the behavioral threshold to 154 dB. Based on the Nowacek study WHOInoted “…significant behavioral responses (cessation of foraging and re-location) werereported at ELs (energy levels, or received levels) of about 154 dB …. 4 NRDC echoedsimilar concerns in its May 24, 2006, comments on “RIMPAC.”Having been extensively involved in the Marine Mammal Commission’s AdvisoryCommittee on Acoustic Impacts on Marine Mammals, the Commission is well aware ofthe difficulty in achieving consensus on regulatory thresholds for marine mammalimpacts. At the same time, unlike the above-discussed Hawaii and North Carolinaactivities (Navy mid-range sonar, 1 to 10 kHz), for which a NMFS take permit wasrequired, 5 and for which documentation does exist that similar past comparableactivities have been associated with, and likely caused in some cases, 6 marine mammalstrandings and thus that the sound levels in those activities warrant serious concern,NMFS does not believe the proposed research activities in Monterey Bay even triggerthe need for a take permit.Thus, while the case can be made that commonly occurring, predominantly highfrequencymarine research activities should not be treated the same as mid-frequencymilitary sonar, the issue of marine mammal threshold criteria continues to be debated.While the Commission agrees that the movement from a single to a dual criteria is astep in the right direction, the Commission does not believe the Navy has established abasis for its proposed 186 dB threshold. An equivalent if not better case can be madefor adopting what Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution has suggested (i.e., a moreprecautionary 154 dB threshold.Prior to the hearing, the Navy agreed (in a telephone communication with theCommission staff) that the 100 yd. marine mammal preclusion zone included theunderstanding that if a marine mammal were to enter the agreed-upon 100 yd.preclusion zone, active acoustic devices would be turned off. During the publichearing, noting a difference of opinion about the marine mammal thresholds, theCommission indicated its preference for a 154 decibel (dB) Sound Energy Level (SEL)threshold, rather than the 186 dB threshold that the Navy had relied on in itsconsistency determination. Consequently, the Commission requested, and the Navyrepresentative agreed, that the Navy would provide an additional calculation of thelateral (horizontal) distance to 154 dB, and if that meant a larger preclusion radius4 Letter dated 27 January, 2006, from Dr. Mark P. Johnson, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, to KeithJenkins, U.S. Navy.5 NMFS estimated a “Level B” take of up to 30,000+ marine mammals for the Navy’s “RIMPAC” exercise.6 For example, the March 2000 Bahamas beaked whale stranding.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 22than the previously-agreed-to 100 yd. preclusion zone, then any such larger preclusionzone would become the preclusion zone for the proposed research. Thus, thiscommitment was incorporated into the project as part of the Navy’s submittal.NMFS defended its rationale for its use of a 173 dB SEL threshold during its review of theNavy’s RIMPAC training is contained in its Federal Register Notice of July 7, 2006, 7 whichincluded:Harassment ThresholdsFor the purposes of this IHA, NMFS recognizes three levels of take;Level A Harassment (Injury), Level B Harassment (BehavioralDisruption), and mortality (or serious injury that may lead tomortality) (Table 2). Mortality, or serious injury leading tomortality, may not be authorized with an IHA.NMFS has determined that for acoustic effects, acoustic thresholdsare the most effective way to consistently both apply measures to avoidor minimize the impacts of an action and to quantitatively estimate theeffects of an action. Thresholds are commonly used in two ways: (1) Toestablish a shut-down or power down zone, i.e., if an animal enters anarea calculated to be ensonified above the level of an establishedthreshold, a sound source is powered down or shut down; and (2) tocalculate take, for example, if the Level A Harassment threshold is 215dB, a model may be used to calculate the area around the sound sourcethat will be ensonified to that level or above, then, based on theestimated density of animals and the distance that the sound sourcemoves, NMFS can estimate the number of marine mammals exposed to 215dB. The rationale behind the acoustic thresholds proposed for thisauthorization are discussed below.(1) Finneran and Schlundt (2004) analyzed behavioral observationsfrom related TTS studies (Schlundt et al., 2000; Finneran et al., 2001;2003) to calculate cetacean behavioral reactions as a function of knownnoise exposure. During the TTS experiments, four dolphins and two whitewhales were exposed during a total of 224 sessions to 1-s pulsesbetween 160 and 204 dB re 1 mPa (root-mean-square sound pressure level(SPL)), at 0.4, 3, 10, 20, and 75 kHz. Finneran and Schlundt (2004)evaluated the behavioral observations in each session and determinedwhether a ``behavioral alteration'' (ranging from modifications ofresponse behavior during hearing sessions to attacking the experimental7 http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-6050.htm

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 23equipment) occurred. For each frequency, the percentage of sessions inwhich behavioral alterations occurred was calculated as a function ofreceived noise SPL. By pooling data across individuals and testfrequencies, respective SPL levels coincident with responses by 25, 50,and 75 percent behavioral alteration were documented. 190 dB re 1 mPa(SPL) is the point at which 50 percent of the animals exposed to 3, 10,and 20 kHz tones were deemed to respond with some behavioralalteration, and the threshold that the Navy originally proposed forsub-TTS behavioral disturbance.(2) Nowacek et al. (2004) conducted controlled exposure experimentson North Atlantic right whales using ship noise, social sounds of conspecifics,and an alerting stimulus (frequency modulated tonal signalsbetween 500 Hz and 4.5 kHz). Animals were tagged with acoustic sensors(D-tags) that simultaneously measured movement in three dimensions.Whales reacted strongly to alert signals at received levels of 133-148dB SPL, mildly to conspecific signals, and not at all to ship sounds oractual vessels. The alert stimulus caused whales to immediately ceaseforaging behavior and swim rapidly to the surface. Although SEL valueswere not directly reported, based on received exposure durations,approximate received values were on the order of 160 dB re: 1 mPa\2\-s.(3) NMFS (2005) evaluated the acoustic exposures and coincidentbehavioral reactions of killer whales in the presence of tactical midfrequencysonar. In this case, none of the animals were directly fittedwith acoustic dosimeters. However, based on a Naval Research Laboratory(NRL) analysis that took advantage of the fact that calibratedmeasurements of the sonar signals were made in situ and using advancedmodeling to bound likely received exposures, estimates of receivedsonar signals by the killer whales were possible. Received SPL valuesranged from 121 to 175 dB re: 1 mPa. The most probable SEL values were169.1 to 187.4 dB re: 1 mPa\2\-s; worst-case estimates ranged from177.7 to 195.8 dB re: 1 mPa\2\-s. Researchers observing the animalsduring the course of sonar exposure reported unusual alterations inswimming, breathing, and diving behavior.For more detailed information regarding how marine mammals mayrespond to sound, see the Navy's IHA application, the Navy's associatedEA, Richardson's Marine Mammals and Noise (1995), or the referencescited on NMFS' Ocean Acoustic Program website (see ADDRESSES)

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 24Sub-TTS Behavioral DisruptionNMFS believes that behavioral disruption of marine mammals mayresult from received levels of mid-frequency sonar lower than thosebelieved necessary to induce TTS, and further, that the lower limit ofLevel B Harassment may be defined by the received sound levelsassociated with these sub-TTS behavioral disruptions. As of yet, nocontrolled exposure experiments have been conducted wherein wildcetaceans are deliberately exposed to tactical mid-frequency sonar andtheir reactions carefully observed. However, NMFS believes that in theabsence of controlled exposure experiments, the followinginvestigations and reports (described previously in the BehavioralEffects section) constitute the best available scientific informationfor establishing an appropriate acoustic threshold for sub-TTSbehavioral disruption: (1) Finneran and Schlundt (2004), in whichbehavioral observations from TTS studies of captive bottlenose dolphinsand beluga whales are analyzed as a function of known noise exposure;(2) Nowachek et al. (2004), in which controlled exposure experimentswere conducted on North Atlantic right whales using ship noise, socialsounds of con-specifics, and an alerting stimulus; and (3) NMFS (2005),in which the behavioral reactions of killer whales in the presence oftactical mid-frequency sonar were observed, and analyzed after thefact. Based on these three studies, NMFS has set the sub-TTS behavioraldisruption threshold at 173 dB re 1 mPa\2\-s (SEL).The Finneran and Schlundt (2004) analysis is an important piece inthe development of an appropriate acoustic threshold for sub-TTSbehavioral disruption because: (1) researchers had superior controlover and ability to quantify noise exposure conditions; (2) behavioralpatterns of exposed marine mammals were readily observable anddefinable; and, (3) fatiguing noise consisted of tonal noise exposureswith frequencies contained in the tactical mid-frequency sonarbandwidth. In Finneran and Schlundt (2004) 190 dB re 1 mPa (SPL) is thepoint at which 50 percent of the animals exposed to 3, 10, and 20 kHztones were deemed to respond with some behavioral alteration. This 50percent behavior alteration level (190 dB SPL) may be converted to anSEL criterion of 190 dB re 1 mPa\2\-s (the numerical values areidentical because exposure durations were 1-s), which providesconsistency with the Level A (PTS) effects threshold, which are alsoexpressed in SEL. The Navy proposed 190 dB (SEL) as the acousticthreshold for sub-TTS behavioral disruption in the first IHAapplication they submitted to NMFS.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 25NMFS acknowledges the advantages arising from the use of behavioralobservations in controlled laboratory conditions; however, there isconsiderable uncertainty regarding the validity of applying data collectedfrom trained captives conditioned to not respond to noise exposure in establishingthresholds for behavioral reactions of naive wild individuals to a sound sourcethat apparently evokes strong reactions in some marine mammals. Althoughwide-ranging in terms of sound sources, context, and type/extent ofobservations reported, the large and growing body of literatureregarding behavioral reactions of wild, naive marine mammals toanthropogenic exposure generally suggests that wild animals arebehaviorally affected at significantly lower levels than thosedetermined for captive animals by Finneran and Schlundt (2004). Forinstance, some cetaceans exposed to human noise sound sources, such asseismic airgun sounds and low frequency sonar signals, have been shownto exhibit avoidance behavior when the animals are exposed to noiselevels of 140-160 dB re: 1 mPa under certain conditions (Malme et al.,1983; 1984; 1988; Ljungblad et al., 1988; Tyack and Clark, 1998).Richardson et al. (1995) reviewed the behavioral response data for manymarine mammal species and a wide range of human sound sources.Two specific situations for which exposure conditions andbehavioral reactions of free-ranging marine mammals exposed to soundsvery similar to those proposed for use in RIMPAC are considered byNowacek et al. (2004) and NMFS (2005) (described previously inBehavioral Effects subsection). In the Nowacek et al. (2004) study,North Atlantic right whales reacted strongly to alert signals atreceived levels of 133-148 dB SPL, which, based on received exposuredurations, is approximately equivalent to 160 dB re: 1 mPa\2\-s (SEL).In the NMFS (2005) report, unusual alterations in swimming, breathing,and diving behaviors of killer whales observed by researchers in HaroStrait were correlated, after the fact, with the presence of estimatedreceived sound levels between 169.1 and 187.4 dB re: 1 mPa\2\-s (SEL).While acknowledging the limitations of all three of these studiesand noting that they may not necessarily be predictive of how wildcetaceans might react to mid-frequency sonar signals in the OpArea,NMFS believes that these three studies are the best available scienceto support the selection of an acoustic sub-TTS behavioral disturbancethreshold at this time. Taking into account all three studies, NMFS hasestablished 173 dB re: 1 mPa\2\ (SEL) as the threshold for sub-TTSbehavioral disturbance.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 26In its “RIMPAC” review (same Federal Register notice 8 ), NMFS commented as follows on arequest to use a lower than 173 dB threshold:Comment 44: The 173-dB behavioral threshold is not supportable, assignificant behavioral changes have been demonstrated in a controlledexposure experiment (Nowacek et al., 2004) at 154 dB SEL. It is notappropriate to use the 25th percentile results of the Finneran study(173 dB), as the captive animals in that study cannot adequatelyrepresent the responses of wild animals. Alternatively, NMFS receivedone comment in support of the issuance of the IHA, but that commenterbelieved that the 190-dB behavioral threshold was supported, not the190-dB threshold.Response: As discussed in the text, NMFS used the three examples(Finneran and Schlundt, 2004, Nowacek et al., 2004; and NMFS HaroStrait analysis) of cetacean responses to high intensity sound that webelieve are the most predictive for marine mammal responses to tacticalsonar to develop the threshold. Generally, NMFS interprets the receivedSELs in these studies as approximately 50 percent disturbance = 190 dBSEL (Finneran), approximately maximum SEL:160 dB (Nowacek), andapproximately 165-175 dB SEL (Haro Strait). Where using a singlethreshold, instead of the likely more appropriate but currently unknowndose-response sigmoidal relationship, NMFS acknowledges that someanimals exposed above the threshold may not be harassed by the soundand, conversely, some animals exposed to a sound below the thresholdmay be harassed. Therefore, NMFS believes that an appropriate thresholdis a number somewhere between the lowest and highest mid-frequencysignal exposure levels to which animals have demonstrated profoundbehavioral disturbance, which is why we chose 173 dB SEL for thisauthorization.NMFS also considers disruption of the behavior of marine mammalsthat can result from sound levels lower than those considered necessaryfor TTS to occur (often referred to as sub-TTS behavioral disruption).Though few studies have specifically documented the effects of tacticalmid-frequency sonar on the behavior of marine mammals in the wild, manystudies have reported the effects of a wide range of intenseanthropogenic acoustic stimuli on specific facets of marine mammalbehavior, including migration (Malme et al., 1984; Ljungblad et al.,1988; Richardson et al., 1999), feeding (Malme et al., 1988), andsurfacing (Nowachek et al., 2004). Below, NMFS summarizes the results8 http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-6050.htm

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 27of two studies and one after-the-fact investigation wherein the naturalbehavior patterns of marine mammals exposed to levels of tactical midfrequencysonar, or sounds similar to mid-frequency sonar, lower thanthose thought to induce TTS were disrupted to the point where it wasabandoned or significantly altered:(1) Finneran and Schlundt (2004) analyzed behavioral observationsfrom related TTS studies (Schlundt et al., 2000; Finneran et al., 2001;2003) to calculate cetacean behavioral reactions as a function of knownnoise exposure. During the TTS experiments, four dolphins and two whitewhales were exposed during a total of 224 sessions to 1-s pulsesbetween 160 and 204 dB re 1 mPa (root-mean-square sound pressure level(SPL)), at 0.4, 3, 10, 20, and 75 kHz. Finneran and Schlundt (2004)evaluated the behavioral observations in each session and determinedwhether a ``behavioral alteration'' (ranging from modifications ofresponse behavior during hearing sessions to attacking the experimentalequipment) occurred. For each frequency, the percentage of sessions inwhich behavioral alterations occurred was calculated as a function ofreceived noise SPL. By pooling data across individuals and testfrequencies, respective SPL levels coincident with responses by 25, 50,and 75 percent behavioral alteration were documented. 190 dB re 1 mPa(SPL) is the point at which 50 percent of the animals exposed to 3, 10,and 20 kHz tones were deemed to respond with some behavioralalteration, and the threshold that the Navy originally proposed forsub-TTS behavioral disturbance.(2) Nowacek et al. (2004) conducted controlled exposure experimentson North Atlantic right whales using ship noise, social sounds of conspecifics,and an alerting stimulus (frequency modulated tonal signalsbetween 500 Hz and 4.5 kHz). Animals were tagged with acoustic sensors(D-tags) that simultaneously measured movement in three dimensions.Whales reacted strongly to alert signals at received levels of 133-148dB SPL, mildly to conspecific signals, and not at all to ship sounds oractual vessels. The alert stimulus caused whales to immediately ceaseforaging behavior and swim rapidly to the surface. Although SEL valueswere not directly reported, based on received exposure durations,approximate received values were on the order of 160 dB re: 1 mPa\2\-s.(3) NMFS (2005) evaluated the acoustic exposures and coincidentbehavioral reactions of killer whales in the presence of tactical midfrequencysonar. In this case, none of the animals were directly fittedwith acoustic dosimeters. However, based on a Naval Research Laboratory(NRL) analysis that took advantage of the fact that calibrated

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 28measurements of the sonar signals were made in situ and using advancedmodeling to bound likely received exposures, estimates of receivedsonar signals by the killer whales were possible. Received SPL valuesranged from 121 to 175 dB re: 1 mPa. The most probable SEL values were169.1 to 187.4 dB re: 1 mPa\2\-s; worst-case estimates ranged from177.7 to 195.8 dB re: 1 mPa\2\-s. Researchers observing the animalsduring the course of sonar exposure reported unusual alterations inswimming, breathing, and diving behavior.[Note: the Finneran and Schlundt (2004) and Nowacek et al. (2004) studies referenced aboveare attached as Exhibits 10 and 11.]As it found during the review of CD-037-06, the Commission believes that a lower thresholdthan articulated by NMFS is warranted. NMFS appears to have taken a “middle ground”approach, noting that available evidence exists to support a lower threshold, but basing itsdetermination on the level at which 25% of mammals were behaviorally affected in a captivedolphin study (Finneran and Schlundt (2004)). As the Commission noted in CD-037-06, theNowacek study (Exhibit 10) (and supported by the January 27, 2006, letter from Woods Holeto the Navy (Exhibit 9)) represents a more reliable indicator, given that it addresses animals notin captivity (and not trained to expect rewards). Given the results of this study, combined withthe paucity of data concerning the effects of anthropogenic sound on marine species, and thedifficulty in detecting marine mammals and sea turtles, a compelling case exists that a lowerthreshold is warranted. Therefore, the Commission reiterates its finding from CD-037-06:“While the Commission agrees that the movement from a single to a dual criteria is a step inthe right direction, the Commission does not believe the Navy has established a basis for itsproposed 186 dB threshold. An equivalent if not better case can be made for adopting whatWoods Hole Oceanographic Institution has suggested (i.e., a more precautionary 154 dBthreshold).” Consequently, the Commission believes the conditions on pages 10-13 are neededto, among other measures, implement a 154 dB (received level (RL)).The Commission notes that further support for a lower threshold exists in the Woods HoleOceanographic Institution letter of January, 27, 2006 to the Navy (Exhibit 9), NMFS’ IHA fora recent Scripps seismic survey, and the National Research Council’s 2005 report “MarineMammal Populations and Ocean Noise: Determining When Noise Causes BiologicallySignificant Effects.”In its IHA for Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO) (Incidental Harassment Authorization(IHA) to take small numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to conducting anoceanographic survey in the South Pacific Ocean (SPO), 9 NMFS set forth a 160 dB threshold,stating:9 http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/E6-21611.htm andhttp://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-8353.htm

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 29The Level B harassment estimates are based on a consideration ofthe number of marine mammals that might be exposed to sound levels ator higher than 160 dB, the criterion for the onset of Level Bharassment, by operations with the 2 GI-gun array planned to be usedfor this project.The National Research Council’s 2005 report “Marine Mammal Populations and Ocean Noise:Determining When Noise Causes Biologically Significant Effects” highlighted theuncertainties in relying on studies from captive animals and noted:The behavioral responses of marine mammals to acoustic stimuli vary widely,depending on the species, the context, the properties of the stimuli, and prior exposureof the animals (Wartzok et al., 2004). Species variation in auditory processing is soimportant that a distinction should certainly be made between taxonomic groups thathave widely different hearing and sensitivity frequencies. For example, pinnipeds havelower maximal frequency of hearing and maximal sensitivity of hearing thanodontocetes (toothed whales). They typically have a high-frequency cutoff in theirunderwater hearing between 30 and 60 kHz, and maximal sensitivity of about 60 dB re1 Pa, and odontocetes have best frequency of hearing between 80 and 150 kHz andmaximum sensitivity between 40-50 dB. Therefore, odontocetes can hear over a widerfrequency range and have keener hearing than pinnipeds, so they could potentially beaffected by a wider variety of sounds. Little is known about the frequency range ofhearing and sensitivity of some marine mammal taxa, such as baleen whales, butseveral attempts have been made to divide marine mammals into functional categorieson the basis of hearing (e.g., Ketten, 1994).As mentioned above, some of the variation in responses between species or individualsmay stem from differences in audition. Not only do different species have differenthearing capabilities but there is considerable variation in hearing among conspecifics.One of the most predictable patterns in mammals involves age-related hearing loss,which particularly affects high frequencies and is more common in males than females(Willott et al., 2001).

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 30Auditory processing is less likely than behavior to differ between captive and wildanimals, and captive data on behavioral reactions closely linked to audition may berelevant to other settings. For example, Schlundt et al. (2000) noted disturbancereactions of captive bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and beluga whales duringTTS experiments. The behavioral reactions involved avoidance of the source, refusal ofparticipation in the test, aggressive threats, or attacks on the equipment. Finneran andSchlundt (2004) showed that the probability of those reactions increased withincreasing received level from 160 to 200 dB rms re 1 Pa at 1m except for lowfrequency(400-Hz) stimuli near the low-frequency boundary of auditory sensitivity.The kinds of reactions observed and how they scale with intense exposures near thelevel that provoked TTS suggest that the signals were perceived as annoyingly loud.Some of the variation in responses to sound may stem from experience. There areseveral well-known mechanisms by which an animal modifies its responses to a soundstimulus, depending upon reinforcement correlated with exposure. The response ofanimals to an innocuous stimulus often wanes after repeated exposure—a processcalled habituation. The National Research Council (NRC, 1993) recommended studieson habituation of marine mammals to repeated human-made sounds. In one of fewexperimental studies of habituation in marine mammals, Cox et al. (2001) showed thatporpoises tended to avoid at a distance of 208 m upon initial exposure to a 10-kHzpinger with a source level of 132 dB peak to peak re 1 Pa at 1m. This avoidancedistance dropped by 50% within 4 days, and sightings within 125 m equaled controlvalues within 10-11 days. The pingers are used on nets to prevent porpoises frombecoming entangled in them, so evaluations of their effectiveness must take habituationinto account.Kastelein et al. (1997) report that a captive harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena)avoided exposure to high-frequency pingers with source levels of 103-117 dB rms re 1Pa at 1m and received levels of 78-90 dB rms re 1 Pa. When exposed to a sourcewith a level of 158 dB rms re 1 Pa at 1m, the porpoise swam as far away as possiblein the enclosure and made shallow rapid dives. Those results combine with the resultsof Cox et al. (2001) to suggest that porpoises react to sound at much lower levels thanthe captive delphinids studied by Finneran and Schlundt (2004). However, the contextof the captive studies was quite different: the dolphins and belugas studied by Finneranand Schlundt were being rewarded for submitting to exposure to intense sounds,whereas the porpoise was not being rewarded for remaining in the sound field.If an animal in captivity or the wild is conditioned to associate a sound with a foodreward, it may become more tolerant of the sound and may become sensitized and usethe sound as a cue for foraging. Several large-scale studies have shown that thedistribution of feeding baleen whales correlates with prey but not with loud sonar orindustrial activities (Croll et al., 2001); but the studies were unable to test for

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 31potentially more subtle effects on feeding, such as reduced prey capture per unit effortand reduced time engaged in feeding.Some of the strongest reactions of marine mammals to human-generated noise mayoccur when the sound happens to match their general template for predator sounds.The risk-benefit relationship is very different for predator defense and foraging. Ananimal may lose a meal if it fails to recognize a foraging opportunity, but it may die if itfails to detect predators. Animals do not have the luxury of learning to detect predatorsthrough experience with them. Deecke et al. (2002) showed that harbor sealsresponded strongly to playbacks of the calls of mammal-eating killer whales andunfamiliar fish-eating killer whales but not to familiar calls of local fish-eating killerwhales. That suggests that, like birds studied with visual models of predators (Schleidt,1961a; 1961b), these animals inherit diffuse templates for predators. They initiallyrespond to any stimulus similar to the predator template but learn through habituationto cease responding to harmless variants of the general predator image.It would make sense for animals to show strong reactions to novel sounds that fit withinthe predator template, whatever the received level. Indeed, the behavioral reactions ofbelugas to ice breaker noise match the local Inuit description of their responses tokiller whales, a dangerous predator. Some of those strong reactions to novel sounds,such as the responses of diving right whales to an artificial alarm stimulus as reportedby Nowacek et al. (2003), might be expected to habituate if the stimuli aredistinguishable from real predators and are not associated with aversive effects. Infact, the only right whale subject not to respond was the last of six whales tested, and itmay have heard the stimulus up to five times before. Beluga whales that fled icebreakernoise at received levels of 94-105 dB rms re 1 Pa returned in 1-2 days to the areawhere received icebreaker noise was 120 dB rms re 1 Pa (Finley et al., 1990). Incontrast, Kastak and Schusterman (1996) reported that a captive elephant seal not onlydid not habituate but was sensitized to a broadband pulsed stimulus somewhat similarto killer whale echolocation clicks even though nothing dangerous or aversive wasassociated with the noise.The low sound levels that stimulate intense responses of Arctic beluga whales (Frost etal., 1984; LGL and Greeneridge, 1986; Cosens and Dueck, 1988) contrast sharply withthe high levels required to evoke responses in captive beluga whales (Finneran andSchlundt, 2004). This difference highlights that there are likely to be several kinds ofresponse, depending on whether the animal is captive and whether the noise resemblesthat of a known predator. Annoyance responses may require levels of sound well abovelevels that may stimulate strong antipredator responses. If animals in the wild hear asound that matches their auditory template for a predator, they may avoid exposures tosound levels much lower than those required to elicit the disturbance responsesobserved by Finneran and Schlundt (2004). If learning can modify the predatortemplate, as suggested by Deecke et al. (2002), it is essential to conduct studies of

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 32behavioral responses of animals to human-made stimuli in habitats resembling thoseencountered by wild populations.An important property of most anthropogenic sound is that high-intensity levels aretypically confined to the immediate location of the sound source (an exception is highintensity,low-frequency sound), so any effects caused by exposure to high levels arereduced as animals move away from the source. However, high-intensity low-frequencysound travels well enough underwater that animals can detect signals at ranges of tensto hundreds of kilometers from the source. If, as in the case of Arctic belugas hearingicebreaker noise, exposure to low received levels can still trigger an intense response, afew sources may affect a large fraction of a population.Even in the absence of a strong response, low received levels of sound can affect alarge fraction of a population if the sound results in a masking of normal stimuli.Marine mammals show exquisite adaptations to overcome masking, but they may not beeffective in the presence of pervasive anthropogenic sounds (reviewed in NRC, 2003b;Wartzok et al., 2004).Concerning other issues raised by this proposal, the Navy has documented that the projectwould not adversely affect kelp beds, white abalone, or any marine mammal haulout areas orrookeries. The primary onshore sensitive species of concern are snowy plovers at the SilverStrand in Coronado, and island night lizards and loggerhead shrikes on San Clemente Island(Exhibits 5-6), but again, measures and efforts are in place to protect these species, boththrough Biological Opinions covering Navy training exercises and through the Navy’sINRMPs for the affected bases. Of these species the only “listed” species potentially affectedthat lives completely outside the coastal zone is the island night lizard (on San ClementeIsland). Although it is listed as a threatened species under the ESA, based on extrapolation theFish and Wildlife Service estimates a fairly robust population of 2-20 million individualsthroughout the island (and the Navy’s INRMP estimates “an excess of 20 million”). The Fishand Wildlife Service is currently undergoing an analysis to consider “de-listing” the species, atleast for this island (compared to possibly genetically distinct and much smaller populations onSan Nicolas and Santa Barbara Islands). Also, possibly arguably not a coastal zone species(the biological important activities of which occur predominantly on the federally ownedisland) is the San Clemente Island loggerhead shrike, which does not migrate but is sometimesobserved over water areas, and which has been described as “…possibly the most endangeredanimal population in the continental United States.” (Lynn et al. 1999) (Source, Navy May2002 San Clemente Island Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP). Otherpopulations of loggerhead shrikes may occur on the mainland and nearby Santa CatalinaIsland; however, the San Clemente Island population is genetically and morphologicallydistinct from these populations (Ridgway 1903; Miller 1931; Mundy et al. 1996 in Lynn et al.2000)(same source).

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 33Through the ESA and Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan (INRMP) processes, theNavy is currently implementing aggressive, island-wide measures to manage, protect, andimprove loggerhead shrike and island night lizard habitat, including but not limited to,surveying, monitoring and research, predator management and removal, fire controls(including during Naval Surface Fire Support from the proposed training activities),establishing restricted areas off limits to military and other human activities, captive breeding,and habitat enhancement. Firebreaks are coordinated with the Navy’s Natural Resources Officeprior to installation, and fire suppression equipment is on site during live-firing events. TheNavy has also established snowy plover avoidance measures that must be implemented for anytraining occurring during the snowy plover nesting season at the Silver Strand Peninsula. TheMarine Corps implements conservation measures on landing beaches off Camp Pendleton,including: fencing nesting areas, predator controls, restoring dunes within nesting areas,monitoring breeding activities, and studying long-term snowy plover and least tern populationtrends.In conclusion, for the reasons discussed on pages 18-32 above, based on the project’s marineresource concerns, the Commission is conditioning its concurrence on requirements that theNavy incorporate the following monitoring and mitigation measures (see p. 10-13 for conditionlanguage):implement safety zones out to the 154 dB (received level (RL), expressed in decibels(re 1 μPa2 ·s @ 1m [one micropascal squared second at one meter]);include two dedicated NOAA-trained observers at all times during use of midfrequencysonar;provide adequate, NMFS approved training for the monitors;include Passive Acoustic Monitoring and use it to enforce the safety zones;perform aerial monitoring;avoid, where possible, effect on gray whales, the Channel Islands National MarineSanctuary, and areas with known high concentrations of marine mammals, and complex, steepseabed topography (except on the Navy’s instrumented range off San Clemente Island);additional measures for night and low visibility conditions, during Surface DuctingConditions, and for Choke-point exercises;to the degree possible, retrieval of inert mine shapes dropped; andas agreed to previously, submit all monitoring results provided to NMFS (unlessclassified) to the Commission staff.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 34While the proposed training is not a new activity in these waters, this is the first opportunitythe Commission has had to review issues related to mid-frequency sonar since concerns wereraised in the Bahamas, De Haro Straits, Hawaii, and other coastal areas in recent years.The Commission concludes that, only as conditioned, would the proposed training exercises beconsistent with the applicable marine resource, water quality, and fill of open coastal waterspolicies (Sections 30230, 20331, and 30233) of the Coastal Act. The Commission alsoconcludes that, for the other habitat issues raised, the project would be consistent with theenvironmentally sensitive habitat policy (Section 30240) of the Coastal Act.As provided in 15 CFR § 930.4(b), in the event the Navy does not agree with theCommission’s conditions of concurrence, then all parties shall treat this conditionalconcurrence as an objection.B. Public Access/Fishing. Section 30210 of the Coastal Act provides:In carrying out the requirement of Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution,maximum access, which shall be conspicuously posted, and recreational opportunitiesshall be provided for all the people consistent with safety needs and the need to protectpublic rights, rights of private property public owners, and natural resource areas fromoveruse.Section 30212 provides in part:(a) Public access from the nearest public roadway to the shoreline and along the coastshall be provided in new development projects except where:Section 30220 provides:(1) it is inconsistent with public safety, military security needs, or the protectionof fragile coastal resources....Coastal areas suited for water-oriented recreational activities that cannot readily beprovided at inland water areas shall be protected for such uses.In addition, aside from the commercial fishing protection afforded under Section 30230,quoted above on page 14, Sections 30234 and 30234.5 underscore the need to protectcommercial and recreational fishing opportunities:30234. Facilities serving the commercial fishing and recreational boating industriesshall be protected and, where feasible, upgraded. Existing commercial fishing andrecreational boating harbor space shall not be reduced unless the demand for thosefacilities no longer exists or adequate substitute space has been provided. Proposed

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 35recreational boating facilities shall, where feasible, be designed and located in such afashion as not to interfere with the needs of the commercial fishing industry.30234.5. The economic, commercial, and recreational importance of fishing activitiesshall be recognized and protected.The Navy maintains that the project is consistent with the public access and recreation, andrecreational fishing policies of the Coastal Act, stating that:The Proposed Action is fully consistent with California CZ policy Section 30210because it would not alter current public access to recreational areas or recreationalopportunities in the CZ. Public beaches and beach access routes are not affected, norare National Park facilities. Notices to Mariners (NOTMARs) and Notices-to-Airmen(NOTAMs) are issued to allow mariners and commercial recreational services (e.g.,dive charters) to select alternate destinations without substantially affecting theiractivities. The Proposed Action would not increase the number or type of trainingoperations or change the training locations.Most COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities in the CZ are compatible with concurrentrecreational activities. Some COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities (i.e., those involving thelive firing of weapons) require access to be restricted for safety and military securityconcerns. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities in areas of joint use occasionally limit publicaccess to portions of the shoreline or nearshore waters for short periods because theNavy implements strict safety procedures prior to each training activity. The locations,sizes, and durations of safety zones are carefully tailored to the needs of the militaryexercise so as to minimize the effects on public access and recreation, and ensurepublic safety.DiscussionThe Navy has implemented procedures to efficiently inform the public about temporaryexclusions when such exclusions are necessary for public safety during NSFS, MineExercise (MINEX), DEMO, Ship Mine Countermeasures Exercise (SMCMEX), andAmphibious Exercise (AMPHIBEX). Potential effects of the Proposed Action on publicaccess to beaches are negligible because these activities take place on or in proximityto Federally-owned property for which the public is not permitted access.Elements of these activities that require exclusive use of an open-ocean area have thepotential to affect public access and recreational fishing operations during the actualoperation. Around SCI, these operations occur in Federally-designated danger andrestricted zones. In the other nearshore operating areas offshore SSTC and MCBCP,non-authorized individuals are cleared from the area for the duration of the exercise.Short-term, intermittent effects on individual recreational use of these areas may result

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 36from temporary closures of specific operating areas, but the areas are relatively small,and easily circumvented.Prior to commencement of these events, NOTMARs and NOTAMs are issued, providingthe public, including commercial fishermen, with notice of upcoming location and timerestrictions in specific training areas. In addition, the Southern California OffshoreRange (SCORE) maintains a public website depicting upcoming restrictions indesignated Danger Zones around SCI. These notices detail date, time, duration, andlocation of restricted access so that commercial and private fishermen and divers canplan their activities accordingly. The restricted times only extend through the durationof the training activity; thereby allowing the public to shift their activities to alternateareas during temporary closures. The Navy will continue to schedule its activities tominimize conflicts, and to provide adequate public notice. The Proposed Action wouldbe consistent with Section 30210 to the maximum extent practicable.Nearshore and Beach AreasSan Clemente Island Range ComplexSCI is Navy-owned property where public access is strictly controlled for purposes ofmilitary security and public safety. The Navy considers all ocean areas around SCI tobe co-use zones that are available for public access, except for the restrictedanchorages in the Wilson Cove Exclusive Zone. Access to some co-use zones may berestricted from time to time for public safety. When such restrictions are necessary, theNavy implements procedures to minimize effects on the public. Under the ProposedAction, COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities at SCI are consistent with Section 30210.Recreational activities in the CZ include sport fishing, sailing, boating, whalewatching,and diving. Commercial uses include fishing, tourism, and marinetransportation. The area also is used by the public for scientific research andeducation.Silver Strand Training ComplexThe Navy leases ocean beaches along the SSTC from the California State LandsCommission. Boat lanes extend out 2 nm from these beaches in support of offshoreamphibious training. Bayside training areas off the northern portion of SSTC are alsoused in support of amphibious training events. When not in use for military training,the nearshore bay and ocean waters off SSTC are used for commercial fishing andrecreational boating. The Navy training areas on San Diego Bay adjacent to thepeninsula are within a designated restricted area. However, non-Navy vessels maytransit through the area when the training lanes are not scheduled for militaryactivities. Consistent with ongoing activities, public access and recreation co-exist withNavy training.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 37The Navy contributes to the provision of public access on the Silver Strand peninsula.The Silver Strand peninsula has several water-oriented public facilities, includingmarinas, parks, beaches, and resorts. Together, these facilities provide the public withsubstantial access to the local beaches and waters of San Diego Bay and offshoreareas. YMCA Camp Surf operates on 80 acres on SSTC-South at the southern end ofthe peninsula on Navy land, providing overnight beachfront accommodations for localyouth and instruction in water sports. A salt marsh ecological preserve and saltevaporator ponds located on about 27 acres (10.9 hectares) of SSTC South propertyfronting San Diego Bay is leased by the Navy to San Diego County Department ofParks and Recreation, which has installed a parking lot and bicycle and pedestrianpaths. The Proposed Action is consistent with California CZ Section 30210 to providemaximum public access consistent with public safety.Marine Corps Base Camp PendletonSubstantial public access to beaches and nearshore waters is provided both to the northand south of Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton. San Onofre Beach, located at thenorthern end of MCBCP, is a public beach leased to the State by the Marine Corps.Both San Onofre State Beach and the adjacent San Mateo State Preserve/TrestlesBeach are directly accessible from the Interstate-5 freeway. Immediately south of CampPendleton lies the City of Oceanside, with a harbor and extensive beach areas. Publicaccess is not affected by COMPTUEX/JTFEX training exercises because the CampPendleton shoreline is not accessible to the public. Under the Proposed Action, theextent and accessibility of adjacent public areas would not change. The ProposedAction is consistent with Section 30210 to provide maximum public access consistentwith public safety.Concerning commercial fishing, the Navy states:Potential effects of the Proposed Action on economic, commercial, and recreationalfishing have been evaluated by the Navy. COMPTUEX/JTFEX activities do not havethe potential to result in permanent modifications of the marine environment within theCZ. Elements of the Proposed Action that require exclusive use of an ocean area (e.g.,those operations in which weapons are fired) have the potential to affect commercialand recreational fishing operations during the actual operation. Short-term adverseeffects on individual commercial fishermen may result from temporary closures ofspecific ocean areas, but the economic importance of the regional commercial fishingindustry would be unchanged.Prior to these events, NOTMARs and NOTAMs are issued, providing the public andcommercial fishermen with notice of upcoming location and timing restrictions inspecific training areas. In addition, the Southern California Offshore Range (SCORE)

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 38maintains a public website depicting upcoming restrictions in designated Danger Zonesaround SCI. These notices detail date, time duration, and location of restricted access,so that commercial and private fishermen and divers can plan their activitiesaccordingly. The restricted times only extend through the duration of the trainingactivity; thereby allowing the public to shift their activities to alternate areas duringtemporary closures. Thus, the Proposed Action would be consistent with Section30234.5 to the maximum extent practicable.The Navy’s proposal is consistent with the Coastal Act policies that provide for balancingmaximum public access in a manner consistent with public safety and military security needs.In past reviews, the Commission has found that absent a nexus such as intensifications ofpublic access closures, no new public access requirements are normally required. For theproposed exercises, the public area closures during the exercises, which are clearly necessaryfor both public safety and military needs, are similar to past closures from similar Navy testing.The proposal may even reduce closures, as one of the Navy’s goals is to schedule morefrequent simultaneously occurring exercises than previously scheduled. The Commissionconcludes that the existing military restrictions are necessary and consistent with Coastal Actpolicies, that the Navy is not proposing greater numbers or durations of closures, and that theproject is consistent with the public access, recreation, and fishing policies (Sections 30210,30212, 30234, and 30234.5) of the Coastal Act.V. SUBSTANTIVE FILE DOCUMENTS:1. Navy Consistency Determinations CD-20-95 (Navy San Clemente Island CableRepair), CD-109-98 (Navy Advanced Deployable System (ADS) Ocean Tests), CD-95-97 and CD-153-97 (Navy, Low-Frequency Active (LFA) Sonar Research, Phases I andII), CD-2-01 (Navy Point Mugu Sea Range testing and training activities), CD-045-89and CD-50-03 (Navy FOCUS Cable and Cable repairs, San Nicolas Island), and CD-37-06 (Navy Monterey Bay (MB) 06).2. Island Night Lizard, 5-Year Review, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.3. San Clemente Island Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP), Navy,May 2002.4. USGS Seismic Survey Consistency Determinations No. CD-14-02, CD-16-00 and CD-32-99.5. Mobil Oil Pier and Wharf Decommissioning (Coastal Development Permit (CDP) No.E-96-14).6. Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI) (CDP No. E-05-007/ConsistencyCertification No. CC-076-05).7. Consistency Determination No. CD-102-99, National Marine Fisheries Service, smalltest of “pulsed power” acoustic harassment device to protect recreational fishing fromsea lions.

CD-086-06, Navy Training ExercisesSouthern CaliforniaPage 398. Consistency Certification CC-110-94/Coastal Development Permit Application 3-95-40, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Acoustic Thermometry of Ocean Climate(ATOC) Project and Marine Mammal Research Program (MMRP).9. High Energy Seismic Survey Review Process and Interim Operational Guidelines forMarine Surveys Offshore Southern California, the High Energy Seismic Survey Team(HESS), for the California State Lands Commission and the U.S. MineralsManagement Service Pacific OCS Region, September 1996 – February 1999.10. Caltrans 10 Mile River Bridge Replacement, CDP No. 1-06-022/Public Works Plan 1-06-01/LCP Amendment A-1-MEN-98-017-A2.11. Marine Mammal Populations and Ocean Noise: Determining When Noise CausesBiologically Significant Effects, National Research Council, Committee onCharacterizing Biologically Significant Marine Mammal Behavior, Ocean StudiesBoard, 2005.12. Finneran and Schlundt (2004)), Effects of Intense Pure Tones on the Behavior ofTrained Odontocetes, Authors: J. J. Finneran; C. E. Schlundt; Space And NavalWarfare Systems Center, San Diego Ca, February 2004, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107(6),3496-3508.13. Nowacek et al. (2004), Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena glacialis) ignore ships butrespond to alerting stimuli.14. Letter dated 27 January, 2006, from Dr. Mark P. Johnson, Woods Hole OceanographicInstitution, to Keith Jenkins, U.S. Navy.15. Federal Register Notice July 7, 2006, (NOAA, Navy RIMPAC):http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-6050.htm16. Federal Register Notice March 24, 2006 and September 28, 2006 (Scripps):http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/E6-21611.htmhttp://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-8353.htm

STATE OF CALIFORNIA -- THE RESOURCES AGENCYCALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION45 FREMONT STREET, SUITE 2000SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105-2219VOICE AND TDD (415) 904-5200ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, GovernorW 10bPrepared January 9, 2007(for January 10, 2007 Hearing)To:From:Coastal Commissioners and Interested PersonsMark Delaplaine, Federal Consistency SupervisorSubject: STAFF REPORT ADDENDUM for Item W 10bI. CorrespondenceConsistency Determination CD-086-06 (Navy, U.S. Pacific Fleet’s offshoreand onshore military training exercises in southern California)The staff received the attached correspondence, which includes:1. A January 8, 2007, letter from the Navy containing a list of mitigationmeasures the Navy has agreed to incorporate, which the Navy has also submitted to theNational Marine Fisheries Service (with which it is still in consultation). The Navybelieves that with the measures, coastal zone resources would not be affected. The Navyhas also included a report on the effectiveness of measures incorporated during Hawaii“RIMPAC” exercises, which the staff report had noted was in preparation but notavailable at the time of the December Commission hearing on this item. The Navy statesthat many of the staff recommended measures are “similar” to those measures the Navyadopted for the RIMPAC exercises (and many of which are being carried forward for theproposed training exercises in California).2. Letters from the Natural Resources Defense Council and Linda Weilgart,Dalhousie University Department of Biology, and David Bain, providing additionalscientific studies and discussion that support the staff’s recommendation that 154 dB isan appropriate threshold for marine mammal impacts.3. Additional correspondence.

Page 2In addition, the staff has received over 16,000 email communications in support of thestaff’s recommendation. One copy indicating the nature of these communications isattached.II. Modifications to Staff RecommendationFor the reasons discussed in the staff recommendation, the staff does not agree with theNavy that the mitigation measures proposed are adequate to protect marine resources orthat the exercises are consistent with Section 30230 of the Coastal Act. However, thestaff is proposing several modifications to the staff report, as follows:Conditions.Condition 1. Make the following change to the last sentence of condition 1, page 10:If the 154 dB level cannot be feasibly achieved, the Navy shall either cease sonartransmissions should a marine mammal be detected within 2 km of the sonar dome, as theNavy has currently agreed to for its SURTASS LFA sonar operations, or the Navy shallprovide the Commission with sufficient information about the sonar intensities andattenuation rates, and the maximum capabilities of its monitoring, to enable the Commissionto determine that the Navy will protect a safety zone as close as is feasible possible to the 154dB zone.Add an additional sentence to the end of condition 1, page 10:The Navy shall provide this information to the Commission staff for review and approvalby the Executive Director prior to the first exercise involving mid-frequency sonar.Condition 2. Add “marine mammal” to “trained observers,” as follows:2. Surveillance. Surveillance shall include two dedicated NOAA-trained marinemammal observers at all times during use of mid-frequency sonarCondition 4. Since the Navy has agreed to passive acoustic monitoring, delete “To themaximum extent feasible” from the beginning of the condition.Condition 8. Add a footnote, at the end of Condition 8, stating:In fact, the U.S. Marine Mammal Commission has specifically recommended that, “given the limitations ofnight vision devices (based on [NMFS’] assessment in its previous Federal Register notices) and passiveacoustic monitoring,” the Navy observe a mandatory power-down in low-visibility conditions, assuming itcannot simply avoid them (MMC 2006). (Comments from Tim Ragen, Acting Executive Director, MarineMammal Commission, to P. Michael Payne, Chief of the Permits Division, NMFS, on the Navy’s 2006Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) Exercise.)

Page 3Findings.Marine Resources Findings and Executive Summary. On page 13, after the chart atthe top of the page, and in the Executive Summary, page 2, after the last full sentence onthe page, add:Although the Commission has not required an analysis of possible impacts, a detailedanalysis of estimated “take” down to 154 dB and for each acoustic source, the frequencyrange, duty cycle, acoustic intensity and distance to what the Navy had estimated as thethreshold for effect, this should not be taken as a statement that it is not necessary to doso. Due to time constraints and the fact that the Commission is conditionally approvingthis activity with what it believes are adequate mitigation measures, the Commission hasnot insisted on receiving this information.Clarification, Executive Summary and Marine Resources Findings. On page 3 andpage 34, change “De Haro Straits” to “Haro Strait.”