Chapter Vm — OCS Development 



The Commission noted that the workshop should 

 be held no later than the end of February 1992 to 

 allow the results to be taken into consideration by 

 organizations requesting letters of authorization to take 

 marine mammals during the 1992 open-water season. 

 The Commission also noted that it would be desirable 

 to establish an independent group of scientists to 

 review and provide advice on the adequacy of moni- 

 toring plans accompanying such requests and the 

 results of the subsequent monitoring programs. 



On 21 November 1991, the Commission wrote 

 again to the National Marine Fisheries Service asking 

 what was being done to organize and hold the recom- 

 mended workshop. The Service responded by letter 

 of 6 December 1991. In its response, the Service 

 noted that it was planning to hold a workshop late in 

 February 1992 to review the results of the 1991 site- 

 specific monitoring programs and to determine what 

 changes should be made in the site-specific monitoring 

 guidelines developed at the 1991 workshop. The 

 Service questioned the Commission's interpretation of 

 the nature and scope of monitoring programs required 

 to give effect to section 101(a)(5) of the Marine 

 Mammal Protection Act. The Service also indicated 

 that it disagreed with the Commission's interpretation 

 of Congressional intent when it amended section 

 101(a)(5) of the Act in 1986 to authorize the take of 

 depleted, as well as non-depleted, marine mammals. 

 Specifically, the Service indicated that it believed "the 

 clear Congressional intent behind the 1986 amend- 

 ments... was to alter the standard for determining 

 negligible impact." 



On 24 December 1991, the Fish and Wildlife 

 Service responded to the Commission's 5 August 

 letter concerning the Service's final rule regarding the 

 incidental take of walrus and polar bears. The Fish 

 and Wildlife Service, like the National Marine Fisher- 

 ies Service, questioned the Commission's interpreta- 

 tions of the "small numbers" and "monitoring" 

 requirements of section 101(a)(5) of the Marine 

 Mammal Protection Act as amended. With regard to 

 the 1976 International Agreement on Polar Bears, the 

 Service indicated that the subject of implementing 

 legislation needed further review. It proposed that the 

 review be conducted by the polar bear management 

 team that it has established (see Chapter II). The 

 Service concurred with the Commission's recom- 



mendation that a workshop be held to define and 

 determine how monitoring requirements can best be 

 met, and indicated that it would work with the Nation- 

 al Marine Fisheries Service to organize the workshop. 



Petition To Amend the Small-Take Regulations 



In November 1990, nine oil and gas exploration 

 companies and the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commis- 

 sion jointly petitioned the National Marine Fisheries 

 Service to amend the Service's regulations governing 

 the taking of marine mammals incidental to oil and 

 gas exploration activities in Alaska. The proposed 

 amendments specified actions that the groups had 

 agreed should be taken to ensure that oil and gas 

 exploratory activities do not adversely affect the 

 availability of marine mammals for Native subsistence 

 uses. By letter of 28 June 1991, the Commission 

 advised die National Marine Fisheries Service that 

 most of the proposed amendments appeared to deal 

 with issues that would be addressed more appropriate- 

 ly in a memorandum of understanding among the 

 petitioners, radier than through amendment of the 

 regulations. The Conmiission also noted that several 

 of the proposed amendments might result in changes 

 in the traditional ways that Alaska Natives hunt 

 bowhead whales and, if so, could be contrary to the 

 provisions of section 101(b) of the Marine Mammal 

 Protection Act exempting Alaska Natives from the 

 Act's general prohibitions on taking marine mammals. 



In addition, the Commission noted that, while not 

 addressed by the petitioners, section 228.37 of the 

 applicable regulations (50 C.F.R. § 228.37) might 

 usefully be revised to describe the monitoring and 

 reporting requirements more clearly. The Commis- 

 sion pointed out that the need for revision was illus- 

 trated by the variability and deficiencies in the marine 

 mammal monitoring plans provided in requests for 

 letters of authorization submitted by the Amoco 

 Production Company, Arco Alaska, Inc., Chevron 

 U.S.A. Inc., and Shell Western E&P Inc. 



Requests for Letters of Authorization 



In 1991, the Commission, in consultation with its 

 Committee of Scientific Advisors, reviewed and 

 provided comments and recommendations to the 



173 



