Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Construction of the East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, 77617-77623 [2010-31214]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 238 / Monday, December 13, 2010 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Kara.Yeager@noaa.gov. E-mail
nominations are acceptable.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Notice Requesting Nominations for the
Marine Protected Areas Federal
Advisory Committee
National Marine Protected
Areas Center, Office of Ocean and
Coastal Resource Management, National
Ocean Service, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice requesting nominations
for the Marine Protected Areas Federal
Advisory Committee.
AGENCY:
The Department of Commerce
is seeking nominations for membership
on the Marine Protected Areas Federal
Advisory Committee (Advisory
Committee). The Advisory Committee
was established to advise the Secretary
of Commerce and the Secretary of the
Interior in implementing Section 4 of
Executive Order 13158, specifically on
strategies and priorities for developing
the national system of marine protected
areas (MPAs) and on practical
approaches to further enhance and
expand protection of new and existing
MPAs.
Nominations are sought for highly
qualified non-Federal scientists,
resource managers, and people
representing other interests or
organizations involved with or affected
by marine conservation including in the
Great Lakes. Six members of the
Committee have terms that expire
October 31, 2011, and nominations are
sought to fill these vacancies.
Individuals seeking membership on
the Advisory Committee should possess
demonstrable expertise in a related field
or represent a stakeholder interest
affected by MPAs. Nominees also will
be evaluated based on the following
factors: marine policy experience,
leadership and organization skills,
region of country represented, and
diversity characteristics. The
membership reflects the Department’s
commitment to attaining balance and
diversity. The full text of the Advisory
Committee Charter and its current
membership can be viewed at the
Agency’s Web page at https://mpa.gov.
DATES: Nominations must be
postmarked on or before February 15,
2011.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
SUMMARY:
Nominations should be sent
to: Kara Yeager, National Marine
Protected Areas Center, NOAA, 1305
East West Highway, Rm 9136, Silver
Spring, MD 20910. E-mail:
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Dec 10, 2010
Jkt 223001
Kara
Yeager, National Marine Protected Areas
Center, 1305 East-West Highway,
Building 4, Station 9136, 301–713 3100
ext. 162. Kara.Yeager@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
Executive Order 13158, the Department
of Commerce and the Department of the
Interior were directed to seek the expert
advice and recommendations of nonFederal scientists, resource managers,
and other interested people and
organizations through a Marine
Protected Areas Federal Advisory
Committee. The Advisory Committee
was established in June 2003 and
currently includes 30 members.
Effective October 31, 2011, the
Committee size will be decreased to 20
members.
The Committee meets at least once
annually. Committee members serve for
one, four-year nonrenewable term.
Members of the Committee will not be
compensated, but may, upon request, be
allowed travel and per diem expenses.
Each nomination submission should
include the proposed member’s name
and organizational affiliation, a cover
letter describing the nominee’s
qualifications and interest in serving on
the Advisory Committee, a curriculum
vitae or resume of the nominee, and no
more than three supporting letters
describing the nominee’s qualifications
and interest in serving on the
Committee. Self-nominations are
acceptable. The following contact
information should accompany each
submission: the nominee’s name,
address, phone number, fax number,
and e-mail address if available.
Dated: December 3, 2010.
Donna Wieting,
Director, Office of Ocean and Coastal
Resource Management.
[FR Doc. 2010–31187 Filed 12–10–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XZ83
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental
to Specified Activities; Construction of
the East Span of the San FranciscoOakland Bay Bridge
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77617
Notice; proposed incidental
harassment authorization; request for
comments.
ACTION:
NMFS has received a request
from the California Department of
Transportation (CALTRANS) for
renewal of an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to take small
numbers of California sea lions, Pacific
harbor seals, harbor porpoises, and gray
whales, by harassment, incidental to
construction of a replacement bridge for
the East Span of the San FranciscoOakland Bay Bridge (SF–OBB) in
California. Pursuant to the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS
is requesting comments on its proposal
to issue an IHA to CALTRANS to
incidentally harass, by Level B
Harassment only, four species of marine
mammals during the specified activity.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than January 12,
2011.
SUMMARY:
Comments on the
application should be addressed to
Michael Payne, Chief, Permits,
Conservation and Education Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910–3225. The mailbox address for
providing e-mail comments is
PR1.0648–XZ803@noaa.gov. NMFS is
not responsible for e-mail comments
sent to addresses other than the one
provided here. Comments sent via email, including all attachments, must
not exceed a 10-megabyte file size.
Instructions: All comments received
are a part of the public record and will
generally be posted to https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm without change. All
Personal Identifying Information (for
example, name, address, etc.)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publicly accessible. Do not
submit Confidential Business
Information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
A copy of the renewal request may be
obtained by writing to the address
specified above, telephoning the contact
listed below (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT), or visiting the
Internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
pr/permits/incidental.htm. Documents
cited in this notice may also be viewed,
by appointment, during regular business
hours, at the aforementioned address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 713–2289, ext
137.
ADDRESSES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\13DEN1.SGM
13DEN1
77618
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 238 / Monday, December 13, 2010 / Notices
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and either regulations are
issued or, the taking is limited to
harassment, notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public
for review.
Permission shall be granted if NMFS
finds that the taking will have a
negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) and will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
certain subsistence uses and if the
permissible methods of taking and
requirements pertaining to the
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting of
such taking are set forth. NMFS has
defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR
216.103 as ‘‘ * * * an impact resulting
from the specified activity that cannot
be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
established an expedited process by
which citizens of the United States can
apply for an authorization to
incidentally take small numbers of
marine mammals by harassment. Except
with respect to certain activities not
pertinent here, the MMPA defines
‘‘harassment’’ as:
Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance
which (i) has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
[Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential
to disturb a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns, including,
but not limited to, migration, breathing,
nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering
[Level B harassment].
Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45day time limit for NMFS review of an
application followed by a 30-day public
notice and comment period on any
proposed authorizations for the
incidental harassment of small numbers
of marine mammals. Within 45 days of
the close of the comment period, NMFS
must either issue or deny issuance of
the authorization.
Summary of Request
On July 8, 2010, CALTRANS
submitted a request to NOAA requesting
renewal of an IHA for the possible
harassment of small numbers of
California sea lions (Zalophus
californianus), Pacific harbor seals
(Phoca vitulina richardsii), harbor
porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), and
gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus)
incidental to construction of a
replacement bridge for the East Span of
the SF–OBB, in San Francisco Bay
(SFB), California. An IHA was
previously issued to CALTRANS for this
activity on August 14, 2009 and it
expired on August 13, 2010 (74 FR
41684, August 18, 2009). In its renewal
request, CALTRANS states that it has
not scheduled any in-water pile driving
for the 2010–2011 construction year.
However, CALTRANS states that due to
the possibility of unforeseen
construction changes, it is important for
CALTRANS to maintain a current IHA
during SF–OBB Project construction
operations. In addition, CALTRANS
stated that should construction schedule
changes necessitate the installation of
in-water piles, these would be small
diameter temporary piles like the ones
they conducted in the 2009–2010
season, ranging from 0.3 m (18 in) to 1.2
m (48 in). A detailed description of the
SF–OBB 2009–2010 construction work
was provided in the August 18, 2009 (74
FR 41684) Federal Register notice of
issuance of the IHA and is not repeated
here. The following is a brief summary
of CALTRANS 2009–2010 activities.
CALTRANS 2009–2010 pile driving
activities for 2009–2010 construction
included driving the 42–48 in (1.1–1.2
m) diameter temporary piles, as
opposed to the much larger 5.9–8.2 ft
(1.8–2.5 m) diameter permanent piles
they used to conduct in the past.
Therefore, the noises from pile driving
of these temporary piles are far less than
from previous pile driving activities.
However, CALTRANS indicates that
deployment of an air bubble curtain
would not be feasible for the driving of
these smaller temporary piles due to the
complexity of the driving frames. In
addition, in the 2009–2010 construction
season, certain piles were installed by
using both vibratory and impact
hammers, instead of only impact
hammers as in the past.
Empirical hydroacoustic
measurements of impact and vibratory
hammers during CALTRANS testing
pile driving in San Francisco Bay on
October 23, December 9, and December
11, 2008, are shown in Table 1.
Hydroacoustic monitors used data
collected on December 9 and December
11, 2008, determine the distance of the
120 dB isopleths. At 1,900 m from the
vibratory pile driving, sound levels are
in the low 120 dB root-mean-squared
(rms) range. At this distance pile driving
was audible but not measurable due to
ambient noise (CALTRANS, 2009).
If in-water pile driving is to be
conducted, prior collected
hydroacoustic data showed that the
vibration of the bottom segment of each
pile took approximately 3 minutes; the
vibration of the top segment of each pile
took approximately 8 minutes; and the
impact driving of the top segment of
each pile lasted an average of 15
minutes. On average, it took about 25
minutes of driving time to install each
temporary pile (CALTRANS, 2009).
TABLE 1—ROOT-MEAN-SQUARE ISOPLETHS BASED ON HYDROACOUSTIC MONITORING IN SAN FRANCISCO BAY BY
ILLINGWORTH & RODKIN, INC. (CALTRANS, 2009)
120 *
160 **
180 **
Radius for Vibratory Pile Driving ............
Radius for Impact Pile Driving ................
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Sound level (dB-rms re 1 μPa)
1,900 m ........................
NA ................................
250 m ...........................
1,000 m ........................
15 m .............................
235 m ...........................
190 **
does not exist.
95 m.
* Hydroacoustic measurements for received level at 120 dB (rms) re 1 μPa from vibratory pile driving were collected on December 9 and 11,
2008.
** Hydroacoustic measurements for received levels at 160, 180, and 190 dB (rms) re 1 μPa from vibratory pile driving were collected on October 23, 2008.
Since the proposed SF–OBB
construction project would be installing
smaller temporary piles with no air
bubble curtain, and since the pile
driving activities would be performed
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Dec 10, 2010
Jkt 223001
by using both impact and vibratory
hammers, NMFS conducted an
comparison of isopleths from
CALTRANS’ large foundation pile
driving activities using an air bubble
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
curtain system (Table 2) with the
current testing pile driving without an
air bubble curtain by both impact and
vibratory pile driving (Table 1). The
acoustic data used from the foundation
E:\FR\FM\13DEN1.SGM
13DEN1
77619
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 238 / Monday, December 13, 2010 / Notices
pile driving were provided by
CALTRANS (CALTRANS 2005). The
comparison shows that the radius for
the zone of influence (ZOI) for Level B
behavioral harassment, as defined by
marine mammals exposed to received
impulse sound pressure level (SPL) of
160 dB (rms) re 1 μPa, for the previous
larger pile driving activities using air
bubble curtain was about 2,000 m (see
further discussion on potential impacts
to marine mammals below). This
distance is approximately the same as
the radius for the proposed vibratory
pile driving for the smaller temporary
piles at received SPL of 120 dB (rms) re
1 μPa, a level thought may cause Level
B behavioral harassment to marine
mammals by vibratory pile driving.
Therefore, NMFS concludes that the
potential impacts to marine mammals
from the proposed SF–OBB construction
project involving installation of smaller
temporary piles using both impact and
vibratory hammers without deployment
of an air bubble curtain system are the
same as the previous construction
activities of installation larger
foundation piles using impact hammers
and air bubble curtain system as a
mitigation measure. Pile driving is
expected to occur during daylight hours
only, as in the previous IHAs.
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF HYDROACOUSTIC MEASUREMENTS REPORTED AS DB RE 1 μPA—PIER E3W MARINE MAMMAL
HYDROACOUSTIC CHARACTERIZATION, 10/13/2004 (ADOPTED FROM CALTRANS, 2005)
Position
Water Depth
South Pile Hammer: Menck
1,700
RMS impulse
50m West (made by Caltrans)* ...........................................
100m West* .........................................................................
100m North ..........................................................................
100m South** .......................................................................
500m West ...........................................................................
500m South ..........................................................................
1000m North ........................................................................
1000m South ........................................................................
2000m North ........................................................................
2000m South ........................................................................
4400m North ........................................................................
4400m South ........................................................................
—
∼12–14m
∼12m
∼12m
∼8m
∼10m
14m
∼10m
11m
∼10m
>12m
>12m
Peak
177
175
174
........................
174
167
........................
169
........................
<140
........................
<130
186
185
183
........................
182
177
........................
176
........................
<150
........................
<150
North Pile Hammer: Menck
1,700
RMS impulse
Peak
173
182
174
182
177
169
188
178
162
169
<130
<150
* Continuous measurement. All others are spot measurements of at least 5 minutes in duration.
** Many obstructions including Pier E3E.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
General information on the marine
mammal species found in California
waters can be found in Caretta et al.
(2010), which is available at the
following URL: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/
po2009.pdf. Refer to that document for
information on these species.
The marine mammals most likely to
be found in the SF–OBB area are the
California sea lion, Pacific harbor seal,
and harbor porpoise. From December
through May gray whales may also be
present in the SF–OBB area. Information
on California sea lion, harbor seal, and
gray whale was provided in the
November 14, 2003 (68 FR 64595),
Federal Register notice; information on
harbor porpoise was provided in the
January 26, 2006 (71 FR 4352), Federal
Register notice.
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals
and Their Habitat
CALTRANS and NMFS have
determined that open-water pile
driving, as outlined in the project
description, has the potential to result
in behavioral harassment of California
sea lions, Pacific harbor seals, harbor
porpoises, and gray whales that may be
swimming, foraging, or resting in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Dec 10, 2010
Jkt 223001
project vicinity while pile driving is
being conducted. Pile driving could
potentially harass those few pinnipeds
that are in the water close to the project
site, whether their heads are above or
below the surface.
Marine mammals exposed to high
intensity sound repeatedly or for
prolonged periods can experience
hearing threshold shift (TS), which is
the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain
frequency ranges (Kastak et al. 1999;
Schlundt et al. 2000; Finneran et al.
2002; 2005). TS can be permanent
(PTS), in which case the loss of hearing
sensitivity is unrecoverable, or
temporary (TTS), in which case the
animal’s hearing threshold will recover
over time (Southall et al. 2007). Since
marine mammals depend on acoustic
cues for vital biological functions, such
as orientation, communication, finding
prey, and avoiding predators, marine
mammals that suffer from PTS or TTS
will have reduced fitness in survival
and reproduction, either permanently or
temporarily. Repeated noise exposure
that leads to TTS could cause PTS.
Measured source levels from impact
pile driving can be as high as 214 dB re
1 μPa @ 1 m. Although no marine
mammals have been shown to
experience TTS or PTS as a result of
being exposed to pile driving activities,
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
experiments on a bottlenose dolphin
(Tursiops truncates) and beluga whale
(Delphinapterus leucas) showed that
exposure to a single watergun impulse
at a received level of 207 kPa (or 30 psi)
peak-to-peak (p-p), which is equivalent
to 228 dB (p-p) re 1 μPa, resulted in a
7 and 6 dB TTS in the beluga whale at
0.4 and 30 kHz, respectively.
Thresholds returned to within 2 dB of
the pre-exposure level within 4 minutes
of the exposure (Finneran et al. 2002).
No TTS was observed in the bottlenose
dolphin. Although the source level of
pile driving from one hammer strike is
expected to be much lower than the
single watergun impulse cited here,
animals being exposed for a prolonged
period to repeated hammer strikes could
receive more noise exposure in terms of
SEL than from the single watergun
impulse (estimated at 188 dB re 1 μPa2s) in the aforementioned experiment
(Finneran et al. 2002).
However, in order for marine
mammals to experience TTS or PTS, the
animals have to be close enough to be
exposed to high intensity noise levels
for prolonged period of time. Based on
the best scientific information available,
these sound levels are far below the
threshold that could cause TTS or the
onset of PTS.
E:\FR\FM\13DEN1.SGM
13DEN1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
77620
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 238 / Monday, December 13, 2010 / Notices
In addition, chronic exposure to
excessive, though not high-intensity,
noise could cause masking at particular
frequencies for marine mammals that
utilize sound for vital biological
functions. Masking can interfere with
detection of acoustic signals such as
communication calls, echolocation
sounds, and environmental sounds
important to marine mammals.
Therefore, under certain circumstances,
marine mammals whose acoustical
sensors or environment are being
severely masked could also be impaired
from maximizing their performance
fitness in survival and reproduction.
Masking occurs at the frequency band
which the animals utilize. Therefore,
since noise generated from in-water pile
driving during the SF–OBB construction
activities is mostly concentrated at low
frequency ranges, it may have less effect
on high frequency echolocation sounds
by harbor porpoises. However, lower
frequency man-made noises are more
likely to affect detection of
communication calls and other
potentially important natural sounds
such as surf and prey noise. It may also
affect communication signals when they
occur near the noise band and thus
reduce the communication space of
animals (e.g., Clark et al. 2009) and
cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote
et al. 2004; Holt et al. 2009).
Unlike TS, masking can potentially
impact the species at population,
community, or even ecosystem levels, as
well as individual levels. Masking
affects both senders and receivers of the
signals and could have long-term
chronic effects on marine mammal
species and populations. Recent science
suggests that low frequency ambient
sound levels have increased by as much
as 20 dB (more than 3 times in terms of
SPL) in the world’s ocean from preindustrial periods, and most of these
increases are from distant shipping
(Hildebrand 2009). All anthropogenic
noise sources, such as those from
vessels traffic, pile driving, and
dredging activities, contribute to the
elevated ambient noise levels, thus
intensify masking.
Nevertheless, the sum of noise from
the proposed SF–OBB construction
activities is confined in an area of
inland waters (San Francisco Bay) that
is bounded by landmass, therefore, the
noise generated is not expected to
contribute to increased ocean ambient
noise.
Finally, exposure of marine mammals
to certain sounds could lead to
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et
al. 1995), such as: changing durations of
surfacing and dives, number of blows
per surfacing, or moving direction and/
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Dec 10, 2010
Jkt 223001
or speed; reduced/increased vocal
activities, changing/cessation of certain
behavioral activities (such as socializing
or feeding); visible startle response or
aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke
slapping or jaw clapping), avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located,
and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds
flushing into water from haulouts or
rookeries).
The biological significance of many of
these behavioral disturbances is difficult
to predict, especially if the detected
disturbances appear minor. However,
the consequences of behavioral
modification could be expected to be
biologically significant if the change
affects growth, survival, and
reproduction. Some of these significant
behavioral modifications include:
• Drastic change in diving/surfacing
patterns (such as those thought to be
causing beaked whale stranding due to
exposure to military mid-frequency
tactical sonar);
• Habitat abandonment due to loss of
desirable acoustic environment; and
• Cease feeding or social interaction.
For example, at the Guerreo Negro
Lagoon in Baja California, Mexico,
which is one of the important breeding
grounds for Pacific gray whales,
shipping and dredging associated with a
salt works may have induced gray
whales to abandon the area through
most of the 1960s (Bryant et al. 1984).
After these activities stopped, the
lagoon was reoccupied, first by single
whales and later by cow-calf pairs.
The onset of behavioral disturbance
from anthropogenic noise depends on
both external factors (characteristics of
noise sources and their paths) and the
receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography) and is also
difficult to predict (Southall et al. 2007).
The proposed project area is not
believed to be a prime habitat for marine
mammals, nor is it considered an area
frequented by marine mammals.
Therefore, behavioral disturbances that
could result from anthropogenic noise
associated with SF–OBB construction
activities are expected to affect only a
small number of marine mammals on an
infrequent basis.
Currently NMFS uses 160 dB re 1 μPa
at received level for impulse noises
(such as impact pile driving) as the
onset of marine mammal behavioral
harassment, and 120 dB re 1 μPa for
continued noises (vibratory pile driving
and dredging).
As far as airborne noise is concerned,
based on airborne noise levels measured
and on-site monitoring conducted
during 2004 under a previous IHA,
noise levels from the East Span project
did not result in the harassment of
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
harbor seals hauled out on Yerba Buena
Island (YBI). Also, noise levels from the
East Span project are not expected to
result in harassment of the sea lions
hauled out at Pier 39 as airborne and
waterborne sound pressure levels (SPLs)
would attenuate to levels below where
harassment would be expected by the
time they reach that haul-out site, 5.7
km (3.5 miles) from the project site.
Therefore, no pinniped hauled out
would be affected as a result of the
proposed pile-driving. A detailed
description of the acoustic
measurements is provided in the 2004
CALTRANS marine mammal and
acoustic monitoring report for the same
activity (CALTRANS 2005).
Short-term impacts to habitat may
include minimal disturbance of the
sediment where individual bridge piers
are constructed. Long-term impacts to
marine mammal habitat will be limited
to the footprint of the piles and the
obstruction they will create following
installation. However, this impact is not
considered significant as the marine
mammals can easily swim around the
piles of the new bridge, as they
currently swim around the existing
bridge piers.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
For reasons provided in greater detail
in NMFS’ November 14, 2003 (68 FR
64595) Federal Register notice and in
CALTRANS’ annual monitoring reports
(CALTRANS 2007; 2010) and marine
mammal observation memoranda under
the previous IHAs, the proposed
construction would result in harassment
of only small numbers of marine
mammals and would not result in more
than a negligible impact on marine
mammal stocks and their habitat. This
was achieved by implementing a variety
of monitoring and mitigation measures
including marine mammal monitoring
before and during pile driving,
establishing safety zones, and ramping
up pile driving.
Marine mammal take estimates are
based on marine mammal monitoring
reports and marine mammal
observations made during pile driving
activities associated with the SF–OBB
construction work authorized under
prior IHAs. For pile driving activities
conducted in 2006, 5 harbor seals and
no other marine mammals were
detected within the isopleths of 160 dB
(rms) re 1 microPa during impact pile
driving where air bubble curtains were
deployed for mitigation measures
(radius of ZOI at 500 m) (CALTRANS
2007). For pile driving activities
conducted in the 2008 and 2009
seasons, CALTRANS monitored a much
E:\FR\FM\13DEN1.SGM
13DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 238 / Monday, December 13, 2010 / Notices
larger ZOI of 120 dB (rms) re 1 microPa
as a result of vibratory pile driving. A
total of 11 harbor seals and 1 California
sea lion were observed entering the 120
dB (rms) re 1 microPa ZOI
(CALTRANS). However, despite the ZOI
being monitored extended to 1,900 m
for the 120 dB isopleths, CALTRANS
did not specify which pile driving
activities conducted in 2008 and 2009
used impact hammer and which ones
used vibratory hammer. Therefore, at
least some of these animals were not
exposed to received level above 160 dB
(rms) re 1 microPa, thus should not be
considered as ‘‘taken’’ under the MMPA.
No harbor porpoise or gray whale were
observed during CALTRANS’ pile
driving activities since 2006
(CALTRANS 2007; 2010).
Based on these results, in addition to
CALTRANS’ expectation that very
limited pile driving activities would be
conducted in the next season, NMFS
proposes that at maximum 10 harbor
seals, 2 California sea lions, 5 harbor
porpoises, and 1 gray whale could be
exposed to noise levels above 120 dB by
vibratory pile driving.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Marine Mammal Monitoring Report
From Previous IHA
As mentioned above, marine mammal
monitoring during CALTRANS’ pile
driving activities and weekly marine
mammal observation memorandums
(CALTRANS 2007; 2010) indicate that
only a small number of harbor seals (a
total of 16 individuals since 2006) and
1 California sea lion (a total of 1
individual in 2009) were observed
within ZOIs that could result in
behavioral harassment. However, the
reports state that none of the animals
were observed to seen been startled by
the exposure, which could be an
indication that these animals were
habituated to human activities in San
Francisco Bay. In addition, no harbor
porpoise or gray whales were observed
during pile driving activities associated
to CALTRANS’ SF–OBB construction
work.
Proposed Mitigation Measures
NMFS proposes the following
mitigation measures for CALTRANS’
SF–OBB construction activities to
reduce adverse impacts to marine
mammals to the lowest extent
practicable if in-water pile driving
would be conducted.
Establishment of Safety/Buffer Zones
CALTRANS conducted underwater
acoustic measures during temporary
pile driving using impact hammers
conducted under the previous IHA
(CALTRANS 2010). The measurements
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Dec 10, 2010
Jkt 223001
showed that the distance to the 190 dB
(rms) re 1 μPa isopleths ranged from 50
m (164 ft) to 150 m (492 ft), and the
distance to the 180 dB (rms) re 1 μPa
isopleths ranged from 375 m (1,230 ft)
to 500 m (1,640 ft) at different locations.
NMFS proposes to use the most
conservative measurements for the
establishment of safety zones at 500 m
(1,640 ft) for pinnipeds and at 150 m
(492 ft) for cetaceans. These safety zones
shall be monitored at all times when
impact pile driving is underway.
No safety zone would be established
for vibratory pile driving since the
measured source levels will not exceed
the 180 and 190 dB re 1 μPa.
Observers on boats would survey the
safety zone to ensure that no marine
mammals are seen within the zones
before impact pile driving of a pile
segment begins. If marine mammals are
found within the safety zone, impact
pile driving of the segment would be
delayed until they move out of the area.
If a marine mammal is seen above water
and then dives below, the contractor
would wait 15 minutes and if no marine
mammals are seen by the observer in
that time it would be assumed that the
animal has moved beyond the safety
zone. This 15-minute criterion is based
on scientific evidence that harbor seals
in San Francisco Bay dive for a mean
time of 0.50 minutes to 3.33 minutes
(Harvey and Torok, 1994), and the mean
diving duration for harbor porpoises
ranges from 44 to 103 seconds (Westgate
et al., 1995).
Once the pile driving of a segment
begins it cannot be stopped until that
segment has reached its predetermined
depth due to the nature of the sediments
underlying the Bay. If pile driving stops
and then resumes, it would potentially
have to occur for a longer time and at
increased energy levels. In sum, this
would simply amplify impacts to
marine mammals, as they would endure
potentially higher SPLs for longer
periods of time. Pile segment lengths
and wall thickness have been specially
designed so that when work is stopped
between segments (but not during a
single segment), the pile tip is never
resting in highly resistant sediment
layers. Therefore, because of this
operational situation, if seals, sea lions,
or harbor porpoises enter the safety zone
after pile driving of a segment has
begun, pile driving will continue and
marine mammal observers will monitor
and record marine mammal numbers
and behavior. However, if pile driving
of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or
more and a marine mammal is sighted
within the designated safety zone prior
to commencement of pile driving, the
observer(s) must notify the Resident
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77621
Engineer (or other authorized
individual) immediately and follow the
mitigation requirements as outlined
previously in this document.
Soft Start
It should be recognized that although
marine mammals will be protected from
Level A harassment (i.e., injury) through
marine mammal observers monitoring a
190-dB safety zone for pinnipeds and
180-dB safety zone for cetaceans,
mitigation may not be 100 percent
effective at all times in locating marine
mammals. Therefore, in order to provide
additional protection to marine
mammals near the project area by
allowing marine mammals to vacate the
area prior to receiving a potential injury,
CALTRANS would also ‘‘soft start’’ the
hammer prior to operating at full
capacity. CALTRANS typically
implements a ‘‘soft start’’ with several
initial hammer strikes at less than full
capacity (i.e., approximately 40–60
percent energy levels) with no less than
a 1 minute interval between each strike.
Similar levels of noise reduction are
expected underwater. Therefore, the
contractor would initiate pile driving
hammers with this procedure in order to
allow pinnipeds or cetaceans in the area
to voluntarily move from the area. This
should expose fewer animals to loud
sounds both underwater and above
water noise. This would also ensure
that, although not expected, any
pinnipeds and cetaceans that are missed
during safety zone monitoring will not
be injured.
Compliance With Equipment Noise
Standards
To mitigate noise levels and,
therefore, impacts to California sea
lions, Pacific harbor seals, harbor
porpoises, and gray whales, all
construction equipment shall comply
with applicable equipment noise
standards of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, and all construction
equipment shall have noise control
devices no less effective than those
provided on the original equipment.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
The following monitoring measures
are proposed for CALTRANS’ SF–OBB
construction activities if in-water pile
driving would be conducted.
Safety zone monitoring would be
conducted during driving of all in-water
piles. Monitoring of the pinniped and
cetacean safety zones shall be
conducted by a minimum of three
qualified NMFS-approved observers for
each safety zone. One three-observer
team would be required for the safety
zones around each pile driving site, so
E:\FR\FM\13DEN1.SGM
13DEN1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
77622
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 238 / Monday, December 13, 2010 / Notices
that multiple teams would be required
if pile driving is occurring at multiple
locations at the same time. The
observers would begin monitoring at
least 30 minutes prior to startup of the
pile driving. Most likely observers
would conduct the monitoring from
small boats, as observations from a
higher vantage point (such as the SF–
OBB) are not practical. Pile driving
should not begin until the safety zones
are clear of marine mammals. However,
as described in the Mitigation section,
once pile driving of a segment begins,
operations would continue
uninterrupted until the segment has
reached its predetermined depth.
However, if pile driving of a segment
ceases for 30 minutes or more and a
marine mammal is sighted within the
designated safety zone prior to
commencement of pile driving, the
observer(s) must notify the Resident
Engineer (or other authorized
individual) immediately and follow the
mitigation requirements as outlined
previously (see Mitigation). Monitoring
should continue through the pile
driving period and would end
approximately 30 minutes after pile
driving has been completed. Biological
observations would be made using
binoculars during daylight hours.
In addition to monitoring from boats,
during in-water pile driving, monitoring
at one control site (i.e., harbor seal haulout sites and the waters surrounding
such sites not impacted by the East
Span Project’s pile driving activities,
e.g., Mowry Slough) would be
designated and monitored for
comparison. Monitoring would be
conducted twice a week at the control
site whenever in-water pile driving is
being conducted. Data on all
observations would be recorded and
should include items such as species,
numbers, behavior, details of any
observed disturbances, time of
observation, location, and weather. The
reactions of marine mammals would be
recorded based on the following
classifications that are consistent with
the Richmond Bridge Harbor Seal
survey methodology (for information on
the Richmond Bridge authorization, see
68 FR 66076, November 25, 2003): (1)
No response, (2) head alert (looks
toward the source of disturbance), (3)
approach water (but not leave), and (4)
flush (leaves haul-out site). The number
of marine mammals under each
disturbance reaction should be
recorded, as well as the time when seals
re-haul after a flush.
Proposed Reporting Measures
Under previous IHAs, CALTRANS
submitted weekly marine mammal
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Dec 10, 2010
Jkt 223001
monitoring reports for the time when inwater pile driving was commenced. In
June 2010, CALTRANS submitted the
Marine Mammal Monitoring for the
Self-anchored Suspension Span
Temporary Tower, which also includes
hydroacoustic measurements during
both impact and vibratory pile driving.
The report is available by contacting
NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
Under the proposed IHA,
coordination with NMFS would occur
on a weekly basis. During periods with
in-water pile driving activity, weekly
monitoring reports will be made
available to NMFS and the public at
https://biomitigation.org. These weekly
reports would include a summary of the
previous week’s monitoring activities
and an estimate of the number of seals
and sea lions that may have been
disturbed as a result of pile driving
activities.
In addition, CALTRANS would
provide NMFS with a draft final report
within 90 days after completion of the
westbound Skyway contract and 90
days after completion of the Suspension
Span foundations contract. This report
should detail the monitoring protocol,
summarize the data recorded during
monitoring, and estimate the number of
marine mammals that may have been
harassed due to pile driving. If no
comments are received from NMFS
within 30 days, the draft final report
would be considered the final report. If
comments are received, a final report
must be submitted within 30 days after
receipt of comments.
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers
Analysis and Determination
Pursuant to NMFS’ regulations
implementing the MMPA, an applicant
is required to estimate the number of
animals that will be ‘‘taken’’ by the
specified activities (i.e., takes by
harassment only, or takes by
harassment, injury, and/or death). This
estimate informs the analysis that NMFS
must perform to determine whether the
activity will have a ‘‘negligible impact’’
on the species or stock. Level B
(behavioral) harassment occurs at the
level of the individual(s) and does not
assume any resulting population-level
consequences, though there are known
avenues through which behavioral
disturbance of individuals can result in
population-level effects. A negligible
impact finding is based on the lack of
likely adverse effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of Level B harassment takes alone is not
enough information on which to base an
impact determination.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
In addition to considering estimates of
the number of marine mammals that
might be ‘‘taken’’ through behavioral
harassment, NMFS considers other
factors, such as the likely nature of any
responses (their intensity, duration,
etc.), the context of any responses
(critical reproductive time or location,
migration, etc.), as well as the number
and nature of estimated Level A takes,
the number of estimated mortalities, and
effects on habitat.
The CALTRANS’ specified activities
have been described based on best
estimates of the planned SF–OBB
construction project within the
proposed project area. Some of the
noises that would be generated as a
result of the proposed bridge
construction project, such as impact pile
driving, are high intensity. However, the
in-water pile driving for the test piles,
if conducted, would use small hammers
and/or vibratory pile driving methods,
therefore the resulting safety zones for
potential TS are expected to be small
and can be easily monitored to ensure
no marine mammals are within the
zones when pile driving starts. In
addition, the source levels from
vibratory pile driving are expected to be
below the TS onset threshold.
Therefore, NMFS does not expect that
any animals would receive Level A
(including injury) harassment or Level B
harassment in the form of TTS from
being exposed to in-water pile driving
associated with SF–OBB construction
project.
Based on marine mammal monitoring
reports under previous IHAs, only 16
harbor seals and 1 California sea lion
were observed within the 120 dB (in
2008 and 2009) or 160 dB (in 2006) ZOIs
during in-water pile driving since 2006.
NMFS proposes that up to 10 harbor
seals, 2 California sea lions, 5 harbor
propoises, and 1 gray whale could be
exposed to received levels above 120 dB
(rms) during vibratory pile driving or
160 dB (rms) during impact pile driving
for the next season of construction
activities if pile driving frequency
would be kept at 2008–2009 level.
These are small numbers, representing
0.03% of the California stock of harbor
seal population (estimated at 34,233;
Carretta et al. 2010), 0.00% of the U.S.
stock of California sea lion population
(estimated at 238,000; Carretta et al.
2010), 0.05% of the San FranciscoRussian River stock of harbor porpoise
population (estimated at 9,181; Carretta
et al. 2010), and 0.01% of the Eastern
North Pacific stock of gray whale
population; Allen and Angliss 2010).
Animals exposed to construction
noise associated with the SF–OBB
construction work would be limited to
E:\FR\FM\13DEN1.SGM
13DEN1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 238 / Monday, December 13, 2010 / Notices
Level B behavioral harassment only, i.e.,
the exposure of received levels for
impulse noise between 160 and 180 dB
(rms) re 1 μPa (from impact pile driving)
and for non-impulse noise between 120
and 180 dB (rms) re 1 μPa (from
vibratory pile driving). In addition, the
potential behavioral responses from
exposed animals are expected to be
localized and short in duration.
These low intensity, localized, and
short-term noise exposures (i.e., 160 dB
re 1 μPa (rms) from impulse sources and
120 dB re 1 μPa (rms) from non-impulse
sources), are expected to cause brief
startle reactions or short-term behavioral
modification by the animals. These brief
reactions and behavioral changes are
expected to disappear when the
exposures cease. Therefore, these levels
of received underwater construction
noise from the proposed SF–OBB
construction project are not expected to
affect marine mammal annual rates of
recruitment or survival. The average
measured 160 dB isopleths from impact
pile driving is 1,000 m from the pile,
and the estimated 120 dB isopleths from
vibratory pile driving is approximately
1,900 m from the pile.
For the reasons discussed in this
document, NMFS has preliminarily
determined that the impact of in-water
pile driving associated with
construction of the SF–OBB would
result, at worst, in the Level B
harassment of small numbers of
California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals,
harbor porpoises, and potentially gray
whales that inhabit or visit SFB in
general and the vicinity of the SF–OBB
in particular. While behavioral
modifications, including temporarily
vacating the area around the
construction site, may be made by these
species to avoid the resultant visual and
acoustic disturbance, the availability of
alternate areas within SFB and haul-out
sites (including pupping sites) and
feeding areas within the Bay has led
NMFS to preliminarily determine that
this action will have a negligible impact
on California sea lion, Pacific harbor
seal, harbor porpoise, and gray whale
populations along the California coast.
In addition, no take by Level A
harassment (injury) or death is
anticipated and harassment takes
should be at the lowest level practicable
due to incorporation of the mitigation
measures mentioned previously in this
document. The activity will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on
subsistence uses of marine mammals
described in MMPA section
101(a)(5)(D)(i)(II).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Dec 10, 2010
Jkt 223001
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by this
action.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
NMFS’ prepared an Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the take of marine
mammals incidental to construction of
the East Span of the SF–OBB and made
a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) on November 4, 2003. Due to
the modification of part of the
construction project and the mitigation
measures, NMFS reviewed additional
information from CALTRANS regarding
empirical measurements of pile driving
noises for the smaller temporary piles
without an air bubble curtain system
and the use of vibratory pile driving.
NMFS prepared a Supplemental
Environmental Assessment (SEA) and
analyzed the potential impacts to
marine mammals that would result from
the modification of the action. A
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) was signed on August 5, 2009.
A copy of the SEA and FONSI is
available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
On October 30, 2001, NMFS
completed consultation under section 7
of the ESA with the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) on the
CALTRANS’ construction of a
replacement bridge for the East Span of
the SF–OBB in California. Anadromous
salmonids are the only listed species
which may be affected by the project.
The finding contained in the Biological
Opinion was that the proposed action at
the East Span of the SF–OBB is not
likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of listed anadromous
salmonids, or result in the destruction
or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat for these species. Listed
marine mammals are not expected to be
in the area of the action and thus would
not be affected.
NMFS proposed issuance of an IHA to
CALTRANS constitutes an agency
action that authorizes an activity that
may affect ESA-listed species and,
therefore, is subject to section 7 of the
ESA. There is no ESA-listed marine
mammal species in the proposed action
area, therefore, NMFS has determined
that issuance of an IHA for this activity
will have no effect on any listed marine
mammal species.
Proposed Authorization
NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to
CALTRANS for the potential
harassment of small numbers of harbor
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
77623
seals, California sea lions, harbor
porpoises, and gray whales incidental to
construction of a replacement bridge for
the East Span of the San FrancisoOakland Bay Bridge in California,
provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated. NMFS
has preliminarily determined that the
proposed activity would result in the
harassment of only small numbers of
harbor seals, California sea lions, harbor
porpoises, and possibly gray whales and
will have no more than a negligible
impact on these marine mammal stocks.
Dated: December 7, 2010.
James H. Lecky,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–31214 Filed 12–10–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Meeting Notice
Wednesday, December
15, 2010, 10 a.m.–12 Noon.
PLACE: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda
Towers, 4330 East West Highway,
Bethesda, Maryland.
STATUS: Commission Meeting—Open to
the Public
TIME AND DATE:
Matter To Be Considered
Decisional Matter: Full-Sized and
Non-Full-Sized Cribs—Final Rules.
A live webcast of the Meeting can be
viewed at https://www.cpsc.gov/webcast.
For a recorded message containing the
latest agenda information, call (301)
504–7948.
CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission, 4330 East West
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301)
504–7923.
Dated: December 7, 2010.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–31350 Filed 12–9–10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6355–01–P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Meeting Notice
Wednesday, December
15, 2010; 2 p.m.—3 p.m.
PLACE: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda
Towers, 4330 East West Highway,
Bethesda, Maryland.
TIME AND DATE:
E:\FR\FM\13DEN1.SGM
13DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 238 (Monday, December 13, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77617-77623]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31214]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XZ83
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Construction of the East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request
for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the California Department of
Transportation (CALTRANS) for renewal of an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to take small numbers of California sea lions,
Pacific harbor seals, harbor porpoises, and gray whales, by harassment,
incidental to construction of a replacement bridge for the East Span of
the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SF-OBB) in California. Pursuant
to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments
on its proposal to issue an IHA to CALTRANS to incidentally harass, by
Level B Harassment only, four species of marine mammals during the
specified activity.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than January
12, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed to Michael
Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225. The mailbox address for
providing e-mail comments is PR1.0648-XZ803@noaa.gov. NMFS is not
responsible for e-mail comments sent to addresses other than the one
provided here. Comments sent via e-mail, including all attachments,
must not exceed a 10-megabyte file size.
Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted to https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm without change. All Personal Identifying Information
(for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the
commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential
Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
A copy of the renewal request may be obtained by writing to the
address specified above, telephoning the contact listed below (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or visiting the Internet at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. Documents cited in this
notice may also be viewed, by appointment, during regular business
hours, at the aforementioned address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 713-2289, ext 137.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 77618]]
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, the taking is
limited to harassment, notice of a proposed authorization is provided
to the public for review.
Permission shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have
a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or
stock(s) for certain subsistence uses and if the permissible methods of
taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting of such taking are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible
impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as `` * * * an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.''
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process
by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization
to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment.
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ``harassment'' as:
Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the
potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering
[Level B harassment].
Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS
review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and comment
period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of
small numbers of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the
comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny issuance of the
authorization.
Summary of Request
On July 8, 2010, CALTRANS submitted a request to NOAA requesting
renewal of an IHA for the possible harassment of small numbers of
California sea lions (Zalophus californianus), Pacific harbor seals
(Phoca vitulina richardsii), harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), and
gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) incidental to construction of a
replacement bridge for the East Span of the SF-OBB, in San Francisco
Bay (SFB), California. An IHA was previously issued to CALTRANS for
this activity on August 14, 2009 and it expired on August 13, 2010 (74
FR 41684, August 18, 2009). In its renewal request, CALTRANS states
that it has not scheduled any in-water pile driving for the 2010-2011
construction year. However, CALTRANS states that due to the possibility
of unforeseen construction changes, it is important for CALTRANS to
maintain a current IHA during SF-OBB Project construction operations.
In addition, CALTRANS stated that should construction schedule changes
necessitate the installation of in-water piles, these would be small
diameter temporary piles like the ones they conducted in the 2009-2010
season, ranging from 0.3 m (18 in) to 1.2 m (48 in). A detailed
description of the SF-OBB 2009-2010 construction work was provided in
the August 18, 2009 (74 FR 41684) Federal Register notice of issuance
of the IHA and is not repeated here. The following is a brief summary
of CALTRANS 2009-2010 activities.
CALTRANS 2009-2010 pile driving activities for 2009-2010
construction included driving the 42-48 in (1.1-1.2 m) diameter
temporary piles, as opposed to the much larger 5.9-8.2 ft (1.8-2.5 m)
diameter permanent piles they used to conduct in the past. Therefore,
the noises from pile driving of these temporary piles are far less than
from previous pile driving activities. However, CALTRANS indicates that
deployment of an air bubble curtain would not be feasible for the
driving of these smaller temporary piles due to the complexity of the
driving frames. In addition, in the 2009-2010 construction season,
certain piles were installed by using both vibratory and impact
hammers, instead of only impact hammers as in the past.
Empirical hydroacoustic measurements of impact and vibratory
hammers during CALTRANS testing pile driving in San Francisco Bay on
October 23, December 9, and December 11, 2008, are shown in Table 1.
Hydroacoustic monitors used data collected on December 9 and December
11, 2008, determine the distance of the 120 dB isopleths. At 1,900 m
from the vibratory pile driving, sound levels are in the low 120 dB
root-mean-squared (rms) range. At this distance pile driving was
audible but not measurable due to ambient noise (CALTRANS, 2009).
If in-water pile driving is to be conducted, prior collected
hydroacoustic data showed that the vibration of the bottom segment of
each pile took approximately 3 minutes; the vibration of the top
segment of each pile took approximately 8 minutes; and the impact
driving of the top segment of each pile lasted an average of 15
minutes. On average, it took about 25 minutes of driving time to
install each temporary pile (CALTRANS, 2009).
Table 1--Root-Mean-Square Isopleths Based on Hydroacoustic Monitoring in San Francisco Bay by Illingworth &
Rodkin, Inc. (CALTRANS, 2009)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sound level (dB-rms re 1 [mu]Pa) 120 * 160 ** 180 ** 190 **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radius for Vibratory Pile 1,900 m........... 250 m............. 15 m.............. does not exist.
Driving.
Radius for Impact Pile Driving.. NA................ 1,000 m........... 235 m............. 95 m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Hydroacoustic measurements for received level at 120 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa from vibratory pile driving were
collected on December 9 and 11, 2008.
** Hydroacoustic measurements for received levels at 160, 180, and 190 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa from vibratory pile
driving were collected on October 23, 2008.
Since the proposed SF-OBB construction project would be installing
smaller temporary piles with no air bubble curtain, and since the pile
driving activities would be performed by using both impact and
vibratory hammers, NMFS conducted an comparison of isopleths from
CALTRANS' large foundation pile driving activities using an air bubble
curtain system (Table 2) with the current testing pile driving without
an air bubble curtain by both impact and vibratory pile driving (Table
1). The acoustic data used from the foundation
[[Page 77619]]
pile driving were provided by CALTRANS (CALTRANS 2005). The comparison
shows that the radius for the zone of influence (ZOI) for Level B
behavioral harassment, as defined by marine mammals exposed to received
impulse sound pressure level (SPL) of 160 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa, for the
previous larger pile driving activities using air bubble curtain was
about 2,000 m (see further discussion on potential impacts to marine
mammals below). This distance is approximately the same as the radius
for the proposed vibratory pile driving for the smaller temporary piles
at received SPL of 120 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa, a level thought may cause
Level B behavioral harassment to marine mammals by vibratory pile
driving. Therefore, NMFS concludes that the potential impacts to marine
mammals from the proposed SF-OBB construction project involving
installation of smaller temporary piles using both impact and vibratory
hammers without deployment of an air bubble curtain system are the same
as the previous construction activities of installation larger
foundation piles using impact hammers and air bubble curtain system as
a mitigation measure. Pile driving is expected to occur during daylight
hours only, as in the previous IHAs.
Table 2--Summary of Hydroacoustic Measurements Reported as dB re 1 [mu]Pa--Pier E3W Marine Mammal Hydroacoustic
Characterization, 10/13/2004 (adopted from CALTRANS, 2005)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
South Pile Hammer: Menck 1,700 North Pile Hammer: Menck 1,700
Position Water Depth ---------------------------------------------------------------
RMS impulse Peak RMS impulse Peak
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50m West (made by Caltrans)*.... -- 177 186
100m West*...................... ~12-14m 175 185 173 182
100m North...................... ~12m 174 183
100m South**.................... ~12m .............. .............. 174 182
500m West....................... ~8m 174 182
500m South...................... ~10m 167 177 177 188
1000m North..................... 14m .............. .............. 169 178
1000m South..................... ~10m 169 176
2000m North..................... 11m .............. .............. 162 169
2000m South..................... ~10m <140 <150
4400m North..................... >12m .............. .............. <130 <150
4400m South..................... >12m <130 <150
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Continuous measurement. All others are spot measurements of at least 5 minutes in duration.
** Many obstructions including Pier E3E.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
General information on the marine mammal species found in
California waters can be found in Caretta et al. (2010), which is
available at the following URL: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/po2009.pdf. Refer to that document for information on these species.
The marine mammals most likely to be found in the SF-OBB area are
the California sea lion, Pacific harbor seal, and harbor porpoise. From
December through May gray whales may also be present in the SF-OBB
area. Information on California sea lion, harbor seal, and gray whale
was provided in the November 14, 2003 (68 FR 64595), Federal Register
notice; information on harbor porpoise was provided in the January 26,
2006 (71 FR 4352), Federal Register notice.
Potential Effects on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
CALTRANS and NMFS have determined that open-water pile driving, as
outlined in the project description, has the potential to result in
behavioral harassment of California sea lions, Pacific harbor seals,
harbor porpoises, and gray whales that may be swimming, foraging, or
resting in the project vicinity while pile driving is being conducted.
Pile driving could potentially harass those few pinnipeds that are in
the water close to the project site, whether their heads are above or
below the surface.
Marine mammals exposed to high intensity sound repeatedly or for
prolonged periods can experience hearing threshold shift (TS), which is
the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain frequency ranges (Kastak et
al. 1999; Schlundt et al. 2000; Finneran et al. 2002; 2005). TS can be
permanent (PTS), in which case the loss of hearing sensitivity is
unrecoverable, or temporary (TTS), in which case the animal's hearing
threshold will recover over time (Southall et al. 2007). Since marine
mammals depend on acoustic cues for vital biological functions, such as
orientation, communication, finding prey, and avoiding predators,
marine mammals that suffer from PTS or TTS will have reduced fitness in
survival and reproduction, either permanently or temporarily. Repeated
noise exposure that leads to TTS could cause PTS.
Measured source levels from impact pile driving can be as high as
214 dB re 1 [mu]Pa @ 1 m. Although no marine mammals have been shown to
experience TTS or PTS as a result of being exposed to pile driving
activities, experiments on a bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncates)
and beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) showed that exposure to a
single watergun impulse at a received level of 207 kPa (or 30 psi)
peak-to-peak (p-p), which is equivalent to 228 dB (p-p) re 1 [mu]Pa,
resulted in a 7 and 6 dB TTS in the beluga whale at 0.4 and 30 kHz,
respectively. Thresholds returned to within 2 dB of the pre-exposure
level within 4 minutes of the exposure (Finneran et al. 2002). No TTS
was observed in the bottlenose dolphin. Although the source level of
pile driving from one hammer strike is expected to be much lower than
the single watergun impulse cited here, animals being exposed for a
prolonged period to repeated hammer strikes could receive more noise
exposure in terms of SEL than from the single watergun impulse
(estimated at 188 dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-s) in the aforementioned experiment
(Finneran et al. 2002).
However, in order for marine mammals to experience TTS or PTS, the
animals have to be close enough to be exposed to high intensity noise
levels for prolonged period of time. Based on the best scientific
information available, these sound levels are far below the threshold
that could cause TTS or the onset of PTS.
[[Page 77620]]
In addition, chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-
intensity, noise could cause masking at particular frequencies for
marine mammals that utilize sound for vital biological functions.
Masking can interfere with detection of acoustic signals such as
communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental sounds
important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain circumstances,
marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment are being
severely masked could also be impaired from maximizing their
performance fitness in survival and reproduction.
Masking occurs at the frequency band which the animals utilize.
Therefore, since noise generated from in-water pile driving during the
SF-OBB construction activities is mostly concentrated at low frequency
ranges, it may have less effect on high frequency echolocation sounds
by harbor porpoises. However, lower frequency man-made noises are more
likely to affect detection of communication calls and other potentially
important natural sounds such as surf and prey noise. It may also
affect communication signals when they occur near the noise band and
thus reduce the communication space of animals (e.g., Clark et al.
2009) and cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote et al. 2004; Holt
et al. 2009).
Unlike TS, masking can potentially impact the species at
population, community, or even ecosystem levels, as well as individual
levels. Masking affects both senders and receivers of the signals and
could have long-term chronic effects on marine mammal species and
populations. Recent science suggests that low frequency ambient sound
levels have increased by as much as 20 dB (more than 3 times in terms
of SPL) in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of
these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand 2009). All
anthropogenic noise sources, such as those from vessels traffic, pile
driving, and dredging activities, contribute to the elevated ambient
noise levels, thus intensify masking.
Nevertheless, the sum of noise from the proposed SF-OBB
construction activities is confined in an area of inland waters (San
Francisco Bay) that is bounded by landmass, therefore, the noise
generated is not expected to contribute to increased ocean ambient
noise.
Finally, exposure of marine mammals to certain sounds could lead to
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al. 1995), such as: changing
durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or
moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities,
changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as
socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive
behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping), avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located, and/or flight responses (e.g.,
pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).
The biological significance of many of these behavioral
disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected
disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral
modification could be expected to be biologically significant if the
change affects growth, survival, and reproduction. Some of these
significant behavioral modifications include:
Drastic change in diving/surfacing patterns (such as those
thought to be causing beaked whale stranding due to exposure to
military mid-frequency tactical sonar);
Habitat abandonment due to loss of desirable acoustic
environment; and
Cease feeding or social interaction.
For example, at the Guerreo Negro Lagoon in Baja California,
Mexico, which is one of the important breeding grounds for Pacific gray
whales, shipping and dredging associated with a salt works may have
induced gray whales to abandon the area through most of the 1960s
(Bryant et al. 1984). After these activities stopped, the lagoon was
reoccupied, first by single whales and later by cow-calf pairs.
The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise
depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and
their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et
al. 2007).
The proposed project area is not believed to be a prime habitat for
marine mammals, nor is it considered an area frequented by marine
mammals. Therefore, behavioral disturbances that could result from
anthropogenic noise associated with SF-OBB construction activities are
expected to affect only a small number of marine mammals on an
infrequent basis.
Currently NMFS uses 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa at received level for
impulse noises (such as impact pile driving) as the onset of marine
mammal behavioral harassment, and 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa for continued
noises (vibratory pile driving and dredging).
As far as airborne noise is concerned, based on airborne noise
levels measured and on-site monitoring conducted during 2004 under a
previous IHA, noise levels from the East Span project did not result in
the harassment of harbor seals hauled out on Yerba Buena Island (YBI).
Also, noise levels from the East Span project are not expected to
result in harassment of the sea lions hauled out at Pier 39 as airborne
and waterborne sound pressure levels (SPLs) would attenuate to levels
below where harassment would be expected by the time they reach that
haul-out site, 5.7 km (3.5 miles) from the project site. Therefore, no
pinniped hauled out would be affected as a result of the proposed pile-
driving. A detailed description of the acoustic measurements is
provided in the 2004 CALTRANS marine mammal and acoustic monitoring
report for the same activity (CALTRANS 2005).
Short-term impacts to habitat may include minimal disturbance of
the sediment where individual bridge piers are constructed. Long-term
impacts to marine mammal habitat will be limited to the footprint of
the piles and the obstruction they will create following installation.
However, this impact is not considered significant as the marine
mammals can easily swim around the piles of the new bridge, as they
currently swim around the existing bridge piers.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
For reasons provided in greater detail in NMFS' November 14, 2003
(68 FR 64595) Federal Register notice and in CALTRANS' annual
monitoring reports (CALTRANS 2007; 2010) and marine mammal observation
memoranda under the previous IHAs, the proposed construction would
result in harassment of only small numbers of marine mammals and would
not result in more than a negligible impact on marine mammal stocks and
their habitat. This was achieved by implementing a variety of
monitoring and mitigation measures including marine mammal monitoring
before and during pile driving, establishing safety zones, and ramping
up pile driving.
Marine mammal take estimates are based on marine mammal monitoring
reports and marine mammal observations made during pile driving
activities associated with the SF-OBB construction work authorized
under prior IHAs. For pile driving activities conducted in 2006, 5
harbor seals and no other marine mammals were detected within the
isopleths of 160 dB (rms) re 1 microPa during impact pile driving where
air bubble curtains were deployed for mitigation measures (radius of
ZOI at 500 m) (CALTRANS 2007). For pile driving activities conducted in
the 2008 and 2009 seasons, CALTRANS monitored a much
[[Page 77621]]
larger ZOI of 120 dB (rms) re 1 microPa as a result of vibratory pile
driving. A total of 11 harbor seals and 1 California sea lion were
observed entering the 120 dB (rms) re 1 microPa ZOI (CALTRANS).
However, despite the ZOI being monitored extended to 1,900 m for the
120 dB isopleths, CALTRANS did not specify which pile driving
activities conducted in 2008 and 2009 used impact hammer and which ones
used vibratory hammer. Therefore, at least some of these animals were
not exposed to received level above 160 dB (rms) re 1 microPa, thus
should not be considered as ``taken'' under the MMPA. No harbor
porpoise or gray whale were observed during CALTRANS' pile driving
activities since 2006 (CALTRANS 2007; 2010).
Based on these results, in addition to CALTRANS' expectation that
very limited pile driving activities would be conducted in the next
season, NMFS proposes that at maximum 10 harbor seals, 2 California sea
lions, 5 harbor porpoises, and 1 gray whale could be exposed to noise
levels above 120 dB by vibratory pile driving.
Marine Mammal Monitoring Report From Previous IHA
As mentioned above, marine mammal monitoring during CALTRANS' pile
driving activities and weekly marine mammal observation memorandums
(CALTRANS 2007; 2010) indicate that only a small number of harbor seals
(a total of 16 individuals since 2006) and 1 California sea lion (a
total of 1 individual in 2009) were observed within ZOIs that could
result in behavioral harassment. However, the reports state that none
of the animals were observed to seen been startled by the exposure,
which could be an indication that these animals were habituated to
human activities in San Francisco Bay. In addition, no harbor porpoise
or gray whales were observed during pile driving activities associated
to CALTRANS' SF-OBB construction work.
Proposed Mitigation Measures
NMFS proposes the following mitigation measures for CALTRANS' SF-
OBB construction activities to reduce adverse impacts to marine mammals
to the lowest extent practicable if in-water pile driving would be
conducted.
Establishment of Safety/Buffer Zones
CALTRANS conducted underwater acoustic measures during temporary
pile driving using impact hammers conducted under the previous IHA
(CALTRANS 2010). The measurements showed that the distance to the 190
dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa isopleths ranged from 50 m (164 ft) to 150 m (492
ft), and the distance to the 180 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa isopleths ranged
from 375 m (1,230 ft) to 500 m (1,640 ft) at different locations. NMFS
proposes to use the most conservative measurements for the
establishment of safety zones at 500 m (1,640 ft) for pinnipeds and at
150 m (492 ft) for cetaceans. These safety zones shall be monitored at
all times when impact pile driving is underway.
No safety zone would be established for vibratory pile driving
since the measured source levels will not exceed the 180 and 190 dB re
1 [mu]Pa.
Observers on boats would survey the safety zone to ensure that no
marine mammals are seen within the zones before impact pile driving of
a pile segment begins. If marine mammals are found within the safety
zone, impact pile driving of the segment would be delayed until they
move out of the area. If a marine mammal is seen above water and then
dives below, the contractor would wait 15 minutes and if no marine
mammals are seen by the observer in that time it would be assumed that
the animal has moved beyond the safety zone. This 15-minute criterion
is based on scientific evidence that harbor seals in San Francisco Bay
dive for a mean time of 0.50 minutes to 3.33 minutes (Harvey and Torok,
1994), and the mean diving duration for harbor porpoises ranges from 44
to 103 seconds (Westgate et al., 1995).
Once the pile driving of a segment begins it cannot be stopped
until that segment has reached its predetermined depth due to the
nature of the sediments underlying the Bay. If pile driving stops and
then resumes, it would potentially have to occur for a longer time and
at increased energy levels. In sum, this would simply amplify impacts
to marine mammals, as they would endure potentially higher SPLs for
longer periods of time. Pile segment lengths and wall thickness have
been specially designed so that when work is stopped between segments
(but not during a single segment), the pile tip is never resting in
highly resistant sediment layers. Therefore, because of this
operational situation, if seals, sea lions, or harbor porpoises enter
the safety zone after pile driving of a segment has begun, pile driving
will continue and marine mammal observers will monitor and record
marine mammal numbers and behavior. However, if pile driving of a
segment ceases for 30 minutes or more and a marine mammal is sighted
within the designated safety zone prior to commencement of pile
driving, the observer(s) must notify the Resident Engineer (or other
authorized individual) immediately and follow the mitigation
requirements as outlined previously in this document.
Soft Start
It should be recognized that although marine mammals will be
protected from Level A harassment (i.e., injury) through marine mammal
observers monitoring a 190-dB safety zone for pinnipeds and 180-dB
safety zone for cetaceans, mitigation may not be 100 percent effective
at all times in locating marine mammals. Therefore, in order to provide
additional protection to marine mammals near the project area by
allowing marine mammals to vacate the area prior to receiving a
potential injury, CALTRANS would also ``soft start'' the hammer prior
to operating at full capacity. CALTRANS typically implements a ``soft
start'' with several initial hammer strikes at less than full capacity
(i.e., approximately 40-60 percent energy levels) with no less than a 1
minute interval between each strike. Similar levels of noise reduction
are expected underwater. Therefore, the contractor would initiate pile
driving hammers with this procedure in order to allow pinnipeds or
cetaceans in the area to voluntarily move from the area. This should
expose fewer animals to loud sounds both underwater and above water
noise. This would also ensure that, although not expected, any
pinnipeds and cetaceans that are missed during safety zone monitoring
will not be injured.
Compliance With Equipment Noise Standards
To mitigate noise levels and, therefore, impacts to California sea
lions, Pacific harbor seals, harbor porpoises, and gray whales, all
construction equipment shall comply with applicable equipment noise
standards of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and all
construction equipment shall have noise control devices no less
effective than those provided on the original equipment.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
The following monitoring measures are proposed for CALTRANS' SF-OBB
construction activities if in-water pile driving would be conducted.
Safety zone monitoring would be conducted during driving of all in-
water piles. Monitoring of the pinniped and cetacean safety zones shall
be conducted by a minimum of three qualified NMFS-approved observers
for each safety zone. One three-observer team would be required for the
safety zones around each pile driving site, so
[[Page 77622]]
that multiple teams would be required if pile driving is occurring at
multiple locations at the same time. The observers would begin
monitoring at least 30 minutes prior to startup of the pile driving.
Most likely observers would conduct the monitoring from small boats, as
observations from a higher vantage point (such as the SF-OBB) are not
practical. Pile driving should not begin until the safety zones are
clear of marine mammals. However, as described in the Mitigation
section, once pile driving of a segment begins, operations would
continue uninterrupted until the segment has reached its predetermined
depth. However, if pile driving of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or
more and a marine mammal is sighted within the designated safety zone
prior to commencement of pile driving, the observer(s) must notify the
Resident Engineer (or other authorized individual) immediately and
follow the mitigation requirements as outlined previously (see
Mitigation). Monitoring should continue through the pile driving period
and would end approximately 30 minutes after pile driving has been
completed. Biological observations would be made using binoculars
during daylight hours.
In addition to monitoring from boats, during in-water pile driving,
monitoring at one control site (i.e., harbor seal haul-out sites and
the waters surrounding such sites not impacted by the East Span
Project's pile driving activities, e.g., Mowry Slough) would be
designated and monitored for comparison. Monitoring would be conducted
twice a week at the control site whenever in-water pile driving is
being conducted. Data on all observations would be recorded and should
include items such as species, numbers, behavior, details of any
observed disturbances, time of observation, location, and weather. The
reactions of marine mammals would be recorded based on the following
classifications that are consistent with the Richmond Bridge Harbor
Seal survey methodology (for information on the Richmond Bridge
authorization, see 68 FR 66076, November 25, 2003): (1) No response,
(2) head alert (looks toward the source of disturbance), (3) approach
water (but not leave), and (4) flush (leaves haul-out site). The number
of marine mammals under each disturbance reaction should be recorded,
as well as the time when seals re-haul after a flush.
Proposed Reporting Measures
Under previous IHAs, CALTRANS submitted weekly marine mammal
monitoring reports for the time when in-water pile driving was
commenced. In June 2010, CALTRANS submitted the Marine Mammal
Monitoring for the Self-anchored Suspension Span Temporary Tower, which
also includes hydroacoustic measurements during both impact and
vibratory pile driving. The report is available by contacting NMFS (see
ADDRESSES).
Under the proposed IHA, coordination with NMFS would occur on a
weekly basis. During periods with in-water pile driving activity,
weekly monitoring reports will be made available to NMFS and the public
at https://biomitigation.org. These weekly reports would include a
summary of the previous week's monitoring activities and an estimate of
the number of seals and sea lions that may have been disturbed as a
result of pile driving activities.
In addition, CALTRANS would provide NMFS with a draft final report
within 90 days after completion of the westbound Skyway contract and 90
days after completion of the Suspension Span foundations contract. This
report should detail the monitoring protocol, summarize the data
recorded during monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals
that may have been harassed due to pile driving. If no comments are
received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft final report would be
considered the final report. If comments are received, a final report
must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of comments.
Negligible Impact and Small Numbers Analysis and Determination
Pursuant to NMFS' regulations implementing the MMPA, an applicant
is required to estimate the number of animals that will be ``taken'' by
the specified activities (i.e., takes by harassment only, or takes by
harassment, injury, and/or death). This estimate informs the analysis
that NMFS must perform to determine whether the activity will have a
``negligible impact'' on the species or stock. Level B (behavioral)
harassment occurs at the level of the individual(s) and does not assume
any resulting population-level consequences, though there are known
avenues through which behavioral disturbance of individuals can result
in population-level effects. A negligible impact finding is based on
the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of
Level B harassment takes alone is not enough information on which to
base an impact determination.
In addition to considering estimates of the number of marine
mammals that might be ``taken'' through behavioral harassment, NMFS
considers other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses
(their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any responses
(critical reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), as well as
the number and nature of estimated Level A takes, the number of
estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat.
The CALTRANS' specified activities have been described based on
best estimates of the planned SF-OBB construction project within the
proposed project area. Some of the noises that would be generated as a
result of the proposed bridge construction project, such as impact pile
driving, are high intensity. However, the in-water pile driving for the
test piles, if conducted, would use small hammers and/or vibratory pile
driving methods, therefore the resulting safety zones for potential TS
are expected to be small and can be easily monitored to ensure no
marine mammals are within the zones when pile driving starts. In
addition, the source levels from vibratory pile driving are expected to
be below the TS onset threshold. Therefore, NMFS does not expect that
any animals would receive Level A (including injury) harassment or
Level B harassment in the form of TTS from being exposed to in-water
pile driving associated with SF-OBB construction project.
Based on marine mammal monitoring reports under previous IHAs, only
16 harbor seals and 1 California sea lion were observed within the 120
dB (in 2008 and 2009) or 160 dB (in 2006) ZOIs during in-water pile
driving since 2006. NMFS proposes that up to 10 harbor seals, 2
California sea lions, 5 harbor propoises, and 1 gray whale could be
exposed to received levels above 120 dB (rms) during vibratory pile
driving or 160 dB (rms) during impact pile driving for the next season
of construction activities if pile driving frequency would be kept at
2008-2009 level. These are small numbers, representing 0.03% of the
California stock of harbor seal population (estimated at 34,233;
Carretta et al. 2010), 0.00% of the U.S. stock of California sea lion
population (estimated at 238,000; Carretta et al. 2010), 0.05% of the
San Francisco-Russian River stock of harbor porpoise population
(estimated at 9,181; Carretta et al. 2010), and 0.01% of the Eastern
North Pacific stock of gray whale population; Allen and Angliss 2010).
Animals exposed to construction noise associated with the SF-OBB
construction work would be limited to
[[Page 77623]]
Level B behavioral harassment only, i.e., the exposure of received
levels for impulse noise between 160 and 180 dB (rms) re 1 [mu]Pa (from
impact pile driving) and for non-impulse noise between 120 and 180 dB
(rms) re 1 [mu]Pa (from vibratory pile driving). In addition, the
potential behavioral responses from exposed animals are expected to be
localized and short in duration.
These low intensity, localized, and short-term noise exposures
(i.e., 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) from impulse sources and 120 dB re 1
[mu]Pa (rms) from non-impulse sources), are expected to cause brief
startle reactions or short-term behavioral modification by the animals.
These brief reactions and behavioral changes are expected to disappear
when the exposures cease. Therefore, these levels of received
underwater construction noise from the proposed SF-OBB construction
project are not expected to affect marine mammal annual rates of
recruitment or survival. The average measured 160 dB isopleths from
impact pile driving is 1,000 m from the pile, and the estimated 120 dB
isopleths from vibratory pile driving is approximately 1,900 m from the
pile.
For the reasons discussed in this document, NMFS has preliminarily
determined that the impact of in-water pile driving associated with
construction of the SF-OBB would result, at worst, in the Level B
harassment of small numbers of California sea lions, Pacific harbor
seals, harbor porpoises, and potentially gray whales that inhabit or
visit SFB in general and the vicinity of the SF-OBB in particular.
While behavioral modifications, including temporarily vacating the area
around the construction site, may be made by these species to avoid the
resultant visual and acoustic disturbance, the availability of
alternate areas within SFB and haul-out sites (including pupping sites)
and feeding areas within the Bay has led NMFS to preliminarily
determine that this action will have a negligible impact on California
sea lion, Pacific harbor seal, harbor porpoise, and gray whale
populations along the California coast.
In addition, no take by Level A harassment (injury) or death is
anticipated and harassment takes should be at the lowest level
practicable due to incorporation of the mitigation measures mentioned
previously in this document. The activity will not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on subsistence uses of marine mammals described in MMPA
section 101(a)(5)(D)(i)(II).
Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence
Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
NMFS' prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the take of
marine mammals incidental to construction of the East Span of the SF-
OBB and made a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on November 4,
2003. Due to the modification of part of the construction project and
the mitigation measures, NMFS reviewed additional information from
CALTRANS regarding empirical measurements of pile driving noises for
the smaller temporary piles without an air bubble curtain system and
the use of vibratory pile driving. NMFS prepared a Supplemental
Environmental Assessment (SEA) and analyzed the potential impacts to
marine mammals that would result from the modification of the action. A
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was signed on August 5, 2009.
A copy of the SEA and FONSI is available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
On October 30, 2001, NMFS completed consultation under section 7 of
the ESA with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on the CALTRANS'
construction of a replacement bridge for the East Span of the SF-OBB in
California. Anadromous salmonids are the only listed species which may
be affected by the project. The finding contained in the Biological
Opinion was that the proposed action at the East Span of the SF-OBB is
not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed anadromous
salmonids, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of
designated critical habitat for these species. Listed marine mammals
are not expected to be in the area of the action and thus would not be
affected.
NMFS proposed issuance of an IHA to CALTRANS constitutes an agency
action that authorizes an activity that may affect ESA-listed species
and, therefore, is subject to section 7 of the ESA. There is no ESA-
listed marine mammal species in the proposed action area, therefore,
NMFS has determined that issuance of an IHA for this activity will have
no effect on any listed marine mammal species.
Proposed Authorization
NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to CALTRANS for the potential
harassment of small numbers of harbor seals, California sea lions,
harbor porpoises, and gray whales incidental to construction of a
replacement bridge for the East Span of the San Franciso-Oakland Bay
Bridge in California, provided the previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. NMFS has
preliminarily determined that the proposed activity would result in the
harassment of only small numbers of harbor seals, California sea lions,
harbor porpoises, and possibly gray whales and will have no more than a
negligible impact on these marine mammal stocks.
Dated: December 7, 2010.
James H. Lecky,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-31214 Filed 12-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P