Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Construction of the Block Island Transmission System, 15573-15586 [2014-06140]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
2013). The peer review process is also
deemed to satisfy the requirements of
the Information Quality Act, including
the OMB Peer Review Bulletin
guidelines.
The Agenda is subject to change, and
the latest version will be posted at
https://www.npfmc.org. Background
documents, reports, and analyses for
review are posted on the Council Web
site in advance of the meeting. The
names and organizational affiliations of
SSC members are also posted on the
Web site.
Although non-emergency issues not
contained in this agenda may come
before this group for discussion, in
accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those
issues may not be the subject of formal
action during these meetings. Actions
will be restricted to those issues
specifically identified in this notice and
any issues arising after publication of
this notice that require emergency
action under Section 305(c) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the
public has been notified of the Council’s
intent to take final action to address the
emergency.
Special Accommodations
These meetings are physically
accessible to people with disabilities.
Requests for sign language
interpretation or other auxiliary aids
should be directed to Gail Bendixen at
(907) 271–2809 at least 7 working days
prior to the meeting date.
Dated: March 17, 2014.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2014–06133 Filed 3–19–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XD131
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Construction of
the Block Island Transmission System
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
harassment authorization; request for
comments.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
NMFS has received an
application from Deepwater Wind Block
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
Island Transmission, LLC (DWBIT) for
an Incidental Harassment Authorization
(IHA) to take marine mammals, by
harassment, incidental to construction
of the Block Island Transmission
System. Pursuant to the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS
is requesting comments on its proposal
to issue an IHA to DWBIT to
incidentally take, by Level B harassment
only, marine mammals during the
specified activity.
Comments and information must
be received no later than April 21, 2014.
DATES:
Comments on the
application should be addressed to Jolie
Harrison, Supervisor, Incidental Take
Program, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315
East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910. The mailbox address for
providing email comments is
itp.magliocca@noaa.gov. Comments
sent via email, including all
attachments, must not exceed a 25megabyte file size. NMFS is not
responsible for comments sent to
addresses other than those provided
here.
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.
An electronic copy of the application
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.
NMFS is also preparing an
Environmental Assessment (EA) in
accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
will consider comments submitted in
response to this notice as part of that
process. The EA will be posted at the
Web site listed above once it is
finalized.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michelle Magliocca, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15573
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and either regulations are
issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, a notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public
for review.
An authorization for incidental
takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible
impact on the species or stock(s), will
not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of the species or
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible
methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of such takings are set
forth. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as ‘‘an
impact resulting from the specified
activity that cannot be reasonably
expected to, and is not reasonably likely
to, adversely affect the species or stock
through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.’’
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has
the potential to disturb a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild by causing disruption of behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering [Level B
harassment].
Summary of Request
On March 11, 2013, NMFS received
an application from DWBIT for the
taking of marine mammals incidental to
construction of the Block Island
Transmission System. The application
went through a series of revisions and
the final version was submitted on
November 26, 2013. NMFS determined
that the application was adequate and
complete on December 2, 2013.
DWBIT proposes to develop the Block
Island Transmission System (BITS), a
bi-directional submarine transmission
cable, over a 1-year period. The
proposed activity could begin in late
2014 and last through late 2015;
however, portions of the project would
only occur for short, sporadic periods of
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
15574
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
times over the 1-year period. The
following specific aspects of the
proposed activities are likely to result in
the take of marine mammals: vibratory
pile driving and the use of dynamically
positioned (DP) vessel thrusters. Take,
by Level B Harassment only, of
individuals of nine species is
anticipated to result from the specified
activity.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
DWBIT proposes to construct a bidirectional submarine transmission
cable that will run from Block Island to
the Rhode Island mainland.
Construction of the marine portion of
the BITS will involve three activities:
Cable landfall construction on Block
Island using a short-distance horizontal
directional drill (HDD) from a temporary
excavated trench box on Crescent
Beach; cable landfall construction on
Scarborough State Beach in
Narragansett, Rhode Island using a longdistance HDD from a temporary offshore
cofferdam; and installation of the
submarine BITS cable. Cable landfall
construction may require the
installation and removal of a temporary
offshore cofferdam, which would
involve vibratory pile driving. The
generation of underwater noise from
vibratory pile driving and the DP vessel
thruster may result in the incidental
take of marine mammals.
The BITS will interconnect Block
Island to the existing Narragansett
Electric Company National Grid
distribution system on the Rhode Island
mainland. In connection with the BITS,
Deepwater Wind Block Island, LLC (a
different applicant) proposes to develop
the Block Island Wind Farm, a 30megawatt offshore wind farm. Incidental
take of marine mammals resulting from
construction of the Block Island Wind
Farm project will be assessed separately.
Dates and Duration
Construction activities could begin in
late 2014 and are scheduled to be
complete by August 2015. The
anticipated project work windows are
provided in Table 1.
TABLE 1—ANTICIPATED PROJECT WORK WINDOWS
Activity
Anticipated work window
Contracting, mobilization, and verification .............................................................................................................
Onshore short-distance HDD installation ..............................................................................................................
Onshore/offshore long-distance HDD installation .................................................................................................
Onshore cable installation .....................................................................................................................................
Substation construction .........................................................................................................................................
Offshore cable installation .....................................................................................................................................
Landfall demobilization and remediation ...............................................................................................................
NMFS is proposing to issue an
authorization effective December 2014
through December 2015, based on the
anticipated work windows for in-water
construction that could result in the
incidental take of marine mammals.
While project activities may occur for 1
year, in-water vibratory pile driving is
only expected to occur for up to of 4
days (2 days each for construction of the
cofferdam and 2 days each for removal
of the cofferdam). Use of the DP vessel
thruster during cable installation
activities is expected to occur for 4 to
6 weeks (42 days maximum). Vibratory
pile driving would occur during
daylight hours only, starting
approximately 30 minutes after dawn
and ending 30 minutes prior to dusk.
Cable installation (and subsequent use
of the DP vessel thruster) would be
conducted 24 hours per day.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Specified Geographic Region
The BITS cable would originate from
a manhole on Block Island and traverse
federal and state submerged lands in
Rhode Island Sound from Block Island
to Narragansett for a total distance of
19.8 miles with water depths reaching
up to 39 meters (m). Figure 1.2–1 of
DWBIT’s application shows the project
location in detail (see ADDRESSES).
Vibratory pile driving for temporary
offshore cofferdam would occur at a site
located off of Scarborough State Beach.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
The temporary offshore cofferdam
would be located between 685.8 m and
1,112.5 m from shore. Terrestrial cables
and other terrestrial facilities associated
with the BITS will be located in the
towns of New Shoreham (Block Island)
and Narragansett in Washington County,
Rhode Island. Construction staging and
laydown for offshore components of the
project will occur at the Quonset Point
port facility in North Kingstown, also in
Washington County, Rhode Island.
Detailed Description of Activities
The following sections provide
additional details associated with each
portion of the BITS marine construction
activities.
1. Landfall Construction
On Block Island, DWBIT plans to
bring the BITS cable ashore via a shortdistance HDD. DWBIT would use the
short-distance HDD to install either a
steel or high density polyethylene
conduit for the cable from the parking
lot under Crescent Beach to a temporary
excavated trench beginning at about
mean high water. The excavated trench
on Crescent Beach would be
approximately 2 to 3 m wide, 4 m deep,
and 11 m long. Spoils from the trench
excavation would be stored on the
respective beach and returned to the
trench after cable installation. To
support the short-distance HDD on
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
January 2014–December 2014.
December 2014–June 2015.
January 2015–June 2015.
October 2014–May 2015.
October 2014–May 2015.
April 2015–August 2015.
May 2015–June 2015.
Crescent Beach, DWBIT would install
steel sheet piling to stabilize the
excavated trench, possibly using a
vibratory pile driver. The HDD would
enter through the shore side of the
excavated trench and the cable conduit
would be installed between the trench
and the manhole. The BITS cable would
then be pulled from the excavated
trench into the respective manhole
through the newly installed conduit.
Sheet piling installations would occur at
low tide.
The coupling of land-based vibrations
and nearshore sounds into the
underwater acoustic field is not well
understood and cannot be accurately
predicted using current models.
However, because the excavation for the
cable trench and the HDD installation
on the beach would occur onshore and
because sand is generally a very poor
conductor of vibrations, NMFS
considers it unlikely that the
underwater noise generated from either
of these installations would result in
harassment of marine mammals.
DWBIT is proposing to conduct the
cable landfall on Scarborough State
Beach using a long-distance HDD from
the manhole located within the RIDEM
parking lot to a temporary offshore
cofferdam located between 685.8 m and
1,112.5 m from shore. From this
location, a jet plow, supported by a DP
cable installation barge, would be used
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
15575
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
to install the BITS cable below the
seabed. Construction of the temporary
cofferdam would consist of the
installation of steel sheet piles to create
an enclosed area approximately 15.2 by
6.1 m. The steel sheet piles would be
installed and later removed using a
vibratory hammer supported by a spud
barge. DWBIT expects the cofferdam to
be in place between January and the end
of May.
Vibratory pile driving would be
required to install the temporary
cofferdam off of Scarborough State
Beach. DWBIT assumes a 1,800 kilo
Newton vibratory force for estimating
source levels and frequency spectra.
DWBIT modeled vibratory hammering
at a source level of 194 decibels (dB) re
1 micro Pascal, using adjusted 1⁄3-octave
band source levels from measurements
of a similar offshore construction, and
adjusted to account for the estimated
force necessary for driving of the BITS
cofferdam sheet piles. Detailed
information on the acoustic modeling
for this source is provided in Appendix
A of DWBIT’s application (see
ADDRESSES).
2. Offshore Cable Installation
DWBIT would use a jet plow,
supported by a DP cable installation
barge, to install the BITS cable below
the seabed. The jet plow would be
positioned over the trench and pulled
from shore by the cable installation
vessel. The jet plow would likely be a
rubber-tired or skid-mounted plow with
a maximum width of about 4.6 m, and
pulled along the seafloor behind the
cable-laying barge with assistance of a
non-DP material barge. High-pressure
water from vessel-mounted pumps
would be injected into the sediments
through nozzles situated along the plow,
causing the sediments to temporarily
fluidize and create a liquefied trench.
DWBIT anticipates a temporary trench
width of up to 1.5 m. As the plow is
pulled along the route behind the barge,
the cable would be laid into the
temporary, liquefied trench through the
back of the plow. The trench would be
backfilled by the water current and the
natural settlement of the suspended
material. Umbilical cords would
connect the submerged jet plow to
control equipment on the vessel to
allow the operators to monitor and
control the installation process and
make adjustments to the speed and
alignment as the installation proceeds
across the water.
The BITS cable would be buried to a
target depth of 1.8 m beneath the
seafloor. The actual burial depth
depends on substrate encountered along
the route and could vary from 1.2 to 2.4
m. Where the BITS crosses two existing
submarine cables on the outer
continental shelf, the cable would be
installed directly on the seafloor and
protected from external aggression using
a combination of sand bags and concrete
mattresses. Anchored vessels would be
used to install both the BITS and the
associated cable armoring at these
locations.
DP systems maintain their precise
coordinates in waters through the use of
automatic controls. These control
systems use variable levels of power to
counter forces from current and wind.
During cable-lay activities, DWBIT
expects that a reduced 50 percent power
level will be used by DP vessels. DWBIT
modeled scenarios using a source level
of 180 dB re 1 micro Pascal for the DP
vessel thruster, assuming water depths
of 7, 10, 20, and 40 m, and thruster
power of 50 percent. Detailed
information on the acoustic modeling
for this source is provided in Appendix
A of DWBIT’s application (see
ADDRESSES).
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
There are 34 marine mammal species
with possible or confirmed occurrence
in the proposed area of the specified
activity (Table 2).
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES WITH POSSIBLE OR CONFIRMED OCCURRENCE IN THE PROPOSED PROJECT AREA
Common name
Scientific name
Status
Occurrence
Seasonality
Range
Toothed whales
(Odontocetes):
Atlantic whitesided dolphin.
Atlantic spotted
dolphin.
Bottlenose dolphin.
Lagenorhynchus
acutus.
Stenella frontalis ........
...........................
Confirmed .........
Year-round .......
23,390.
...........................
...........................
...........................
North Carolina to
Canada.
...............................
...........................
...........................
...............................
9,604.
Common ...........
Year-round .......
North Carolina to
Canada.
120,743.
89,054.
50,978.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Short-beaked
common dolphin.
Harbor porpoise
Delphinus delphis ......
Strategic (northern coastal
stock).
...........................
Phocoena phocoena
Strategic ...........
Common ...........
Year-round .......
Killer whale ........
False killer whale
Long-finned pilot
whale.
Short-finned pilot
whale.
Risso’s dolphin ..
Striped dolphin ..
White-beaked
dolphin.
Sperm whale .....
Orcinus orca ..............
Pseudorca crassidens
Globicephala malaena
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
North Carolina to
Greenland.
...............................
...............................
...............................
Globicephala
macrohynchus.
Grampus griseus .......
Stenella coeruleoalba
Lagenorhynchus
albirostris.
Physeter
macrocephalus.
Kogia breviceps .........
...........................
...........................
...........................
...............................
24,674.
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...............................
...............................
...............................
20,479.
94,462.
2,003.
Endangered ......
...........................
...........................
...............................
4,804.
Strategic ...........
...........................
...........................
...............................
395.
Kogia sima ................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...............................
395.
Ziphius cavirostris ......
Strategic ...........
...........................
...........................
...............................
3,513.
Pygmy sperm
whale.
Dwarf sperm
whale.
Cuvier’s beaked
whale.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Tursiops truncatus .....
Abundance
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
Unknown.
Unknown.
12,619.
15576
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES WITH POSSIBLE OR CONFIRMED OCCURRENCE IN THE PROPOSED PROJECT AREA—
Continued
Common name
Scientific name
Status
Occurrence
Seasonality
Range
Blainville’s
beaked whale.
Gervais’ beaked
whale.
True’s beaked
whale.
Bryde’s whale ....
Northern
bottlenose
whale.
Baleen whales
(Mysticetes):
Minke whale ......
Mesoplodon
densirostris.
Mesoplodon
europaeus.
Mesoplodon mirus .....
...........................
...........................
...........................
...............................
3,513.
Strategic ...........
...........................
...........................
...............................
3,513.
Strategic ...........
...........................
...........................
...............................
3,513.
Balaenoptera edeni ...
Hyperoodon
ampullatus.
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...........................
...............................
...............................
Balaenoptera
acutorostrata.
Balaenoptera
musculus.
Balaenoptera
physalus.
Megaptera
novaeangliae.
Eubalaena glacialis ...
...........................
Spring, summer,
fall.
...........................
Caribbean to
Greenland.
...............................
8,987.
Endangered ......
Common (spring
and summer).
...........................
Endangered ......
Common ...........
Year-round .......
3,985.
Endangered ......
Confirmed .........
Year-round .......
Endangered ......
Confirmed .........
Year-round .......
Balaenoptera borealis
Endangered ......
...........................
...........................
Caribbean to
Greenland.
Caribbean to
Greenland.
Southeastern U.S.
to Candada.
...............................
Halichoerus grypus ....
...........................
Confirmed .........
Year-round .......
348,900.
Harbor seals ......
Phoca vitulina ............
...........................
Common ...........
99,340.
Hooded seals ....
Harp seal ...........
West Indian
manatee.
Cystophora cristata ...
Phoca groenlandica ..
Trichechus manatus ..
...........................
...........................
Endangered ......
...........................
...........................
...........................
Spring, summer,
winter.
...........................
...........................
...........................
New England to
Canada.
Florida to Canada
...............................
...............................
...............................
Unknown.
Unknown.
3,802.
Blue whale .........
Fin whale ...........
Humpback whale
North Atlantic
right whale.
Sei whale ...........
Pinnipeds:
Gray seals .........
The highlighted species in Table 2 are
pelagic and/or northern species, or are
so rarely sighted that their presence in
the proposed project area, and therefore
take, is unlikely. These species are not
considered further in this proposed IHA
notice. The West Indian manatee is
managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and is also not considered
further in this proposed IHA notice.
Further information on the biology and
local distribution of these species can be
found in section 4 of DWBIT’s
application (see ADDRESSES), and the
NMFS Marine Mammal Stock
Assessment Reports, which are available
online at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
species/.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals
This section includes a summary and
discussion of the ways that the types of
stressors associated with the specified
activity (i.e., vibratory pile driving and
use of the DP vessel thruster) have been
observed to impact marine mammals.
This discussion may also include
reactions that we consider to rise to the
level of a take and those that we do not
consider to rise to the level of a take (for
example, with acoustics, we may
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
include a discussion of studies that
showed animals not reacting at all to
sound or exhibiting barely measurable
avoidance). This section is intended as
a background of potential effects and
does not consider either the specific
manner in which this activity will be
carried out or the mitigation that will be
implemented, and how either of those
will shape the anticipated impacts from
this specific activity. The ‘‘Estimated
Take by Incidental Harassment’’ section
later in this document will include a
quantitative analysis of the number of
individuals that are expected to be taken
by this activity. The ‘‘Negligible Impact
Analysis’’ section will include the
analysis of how this specific activity
will impact marine mammals and will
consider the content of this ‘‘Potential
Effects of the Specified Activity on
Marine Mammals’’ section, the
‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment’’ section, the ‘‘Proposed
Mitigation’’ section, and the
‘‘Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal
Habitat’’ section to draw conclusions
regarding the likely impacts of this
activity on the reproductive success or
survivorship of individuals, and from
that on the affected marine mammal
populations or stocks.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Abundance
Unknown.
11,570.
444.
Unknown.
Background on Sound
Sound is a physical phenomenon
consisting of minute vibrations that
travel through a medium, such as air or
water, and is generally characterized by
several variables. Frequency describes
the sound’s pitch and is measured in
hertz (Hz) or kilohertz (kHz), while
sound level describes the sound’s
intensity and is measured in decibels
(dB). Sound level increases or decreases
exponentially with each dB of change.
The logarithmic nature of the scale
means that each 10-dB increase is a 10fold increase in acoustic power (and a
20-dB increase is then a 100-fold
increase in power). A 10-fold increase in
acoustic power does not mean that the
sound is perceived as being 10 times
louder, however. Sound levels are
compared to a reference sound pressure
(micro-Pascal) to identify the medium.
For air and water, these reference
pressures are ‘‘re: 20 mPa’’ and ‘‘re: 1
mPa,’’ respectively. Root mean square
(RMS) is the quadratic mean sound
pressure over the duration of an
impulse. RMS is calculated by squaring
all of the sound amplitudes, averaging
the squares, and then taking the square
root of the average (Urick, 1975). RMS
accounts for both positive and negative
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
values; squaring the pressures makes all
values positive so that they may be
accounted for in the summation of
pressure levels (Hastings and Popper,
2005). This measurement is often used
in the context of discussing behavioral
effects, in part because behavioral
effects, which often result from auditory
cues, may be better expressed through
averaged units rather than by peak
pressures.
Acoustic Impacts
Vibratory pile driving and use of the
DP vessel thruster during the BITS
project may temporarily impact marine
mammals in the area due to elevated inwater sound levels. Marine mammals
are continually exposed to many
sources of sound. Naturally occurring
sounds such as lightning, rain, sub-sea
earthquakes, and biological sounds (e.g.,
snapping shrimp, whale songs) are
widespread throughout the world’s
oceans. Marine mammals produce
sounds in various contexts and use
sound for various biological functions
including, but not limited to: (1) Social
interactions; (2) foraging; (3) orientation;
and (4) predator detection. Interference
with producing or receiving these
sounds may result in adverse impacts.
Audible distance, or received levels of
sound depend on the nature of the
sound source, ambient noise conditions,
and the sensitivity of the receptor to the
sound (Richardson et al., 1995). Type
and significance of marine mammal
reactions to sound are likely dependent
on a variety of factors including, but not
limited to, (1) the behavioral state of the
animal (e.g., feeding, traveling, etc.); (2)
frequency of the sound; (3) distance
between the animal and the source; and
(4) the level of the sound relative to
ambient conditions (Southall et al.,
2007).
When considering the influence of
various kinds of sound on the marine
environment, it is necessary to
understand that different kinds of
marine life are sensitive to different
frequencies of sound. Based on available
behavioral data, audiograms have been
derived using auditory evoked
potentials, anatomical modeling, and
other data, Southall et al. (2007)
designate ‘‘functional hearing groups’’
for marine mammals and estimate the
lower and upper frequencies of
functional hearing of the groups. The
functional groups and the associated
frequencies are indicated below (though
animals are less sensitive to sounds at
the outer edge of their functional range
and most sensitive to sounds of
frequencies within a smaller range
somewhere in the middle of their
functional hearing range):
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
• Low frequency cetaceans (13
species of mysticetes): functional
hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 7 Hz and 22 kHz
(however, a study by Au et al. (2006) of
humpback whale songs indicate that the
range may extend to at least 24 kHz);
• Mid-frequency cetaceans (32
species of dolphins, six species of larger
toothed whales, and 19 species of
beaked and bottlenose whales):
functional hearing is estimated to occur
between approximately 150 Hz and 160
kHz;
• High frequency cetaceans (eight
species of true porpoises, six species of
river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana,
and four species of cephalorhynchids):
functional hearing is estimated to occur
between approximately 200 Hz and 180
kHz; and
• Pinnipeds in Water: functional
hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 75 Hz and 75 kHz, with
the greatest sensitivity between
approximately 700 Hz and 20 kHz.
As mentioned previously in this
document, nine marine mammal species
(seven cetaceans and two pinnipeds) are
likely to occur in the proposed project
area. Of the seven cetacean species
likely to occur in DWBIT’s proposed
project area, four are classified as lowfrequency cetaceans (i.e., minke whale,
fin whale, humpback whale, and North
Atlantic right whale), two are classified
as mid-frequency cetaceans (i.e.,
Atlantic white-sided dolphin and shortbeaked common dolphin), and one is
classified as a high-frequency cetacean
(i.e., harbor porpoise) (Southall et al.,
2007). A species’ functional hearing
group is a consideration when we
analyze the effects of exposure to sound
on marine mammals.
1. Hearing Impairment
Marine mammals may experience
temporary or permanent hearing
impairment when exposed to loud
sounds. Hearing impairment is
classified by temporary threshold shift
(TTS) and permanent threshold shift
(PTS). There are no empirical data for
onset of PTS in any marine mammal;
therefore, PTS-onset must be estimated
from TTS-onset measurements and from
the rate of TTS growth with increasing
exposure levels above the level eliciting
TTS-onset. PTS is presumed to be likely
if the hearing threshold is reduced by
≥40 dB (that is, 40 dB of TTS). PTS is
considered auditory injury (Southall et
al., 2007) and occurs in a specific
frequency range and amount. Irreparable
damage to the inner or outer cochlear
hair cells may cause PTS; however,
other mechanisms are also involved,
such as exceeding the elastic limits of
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15577
certain tissues and membranes in the
middle and inner ears and resultant
changes in the chemical composition of
the inner ear fluids (Southall et al.,
2007).
2. Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS)
TTS is the mildest form of hearing
impairment that can occur during
exposure to a loud sound (Kryter, 1985).
While experiencing TTS, the hearing
threshold rises and a sound must be
stronger in order to be heard. At least in
terrestrial mammals, TTS can last from
minutes or hours to (in cases of strong
TTS) days, can be limited to a particular
frequency range, and can occur to
varying degrees (i.e., a loss of a certain
number of dBs of sensitivity). For sound
exposures at or somewhat above the
TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity in
both terrestrial and marine mammals
recovers rapidly after exposure to the
noise ends.
Marine mammal hearing plays a
critical role in communication with
conspecifics and in interpretation of
environmental cues for purposes such
as predator avoidance and prey capture.
Depending on the degree (elevation of
threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery
time), and frequency range of TTS and
the context in which it is experienced,
TTS can have effects on marine
mammals ranging from discountable to
serious. For example, a marine mammal
may be able to readily compensate for
a brief, relatively small amount of TTS
in a non-critical frequency range that
takes place during a time when the
animals is traveling through the open
ocean, where ambient noise is lower
and there are not as many competing
sounds present. Alternatively, a larger
amount and longer duration of TTS
sustained during a time when
communication is critical for successful
mother/calf interactions could have
more serious impacts if it were in the
same frequency band as the necessary
vocalizations and of a severity that it
impeded communication. The fact that
animals exposed to levels and durations
of sound that would be expected to
result in this physiological response
would also be expected to have
behavioral responses of a comparatively
more severe or sustained nature is also
notable and potentially of more
importance than the simple existence of
a TTS.
Scientific literature highlights the
inherent complexity of predicting TTS
onset in marine mammals, as well as the
importance of considering exposure
duration when assessing potential
impacts (Mooney et al., 2009a, 2009b;
Kastak et al., 2007). Generally, with
sound exposures of equal energy,
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
15578
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
quieter sounds (lower SPL) of longer
duration were found to induce TTS
onset more than louder sounds (higher
SPL) of shorter duration (more similar to
subbottom profilers). For intermittent
sounds, less threshold shift will occur
than from a continuous exposure with
the same energy (some recovery will
occur between intermittent exposures)
(Kryter et al., 1966; Ward, 1997). For
sound exposures at or somewhat above
the TTS-onset threshold, hearing
sensitivity recovers rapidly after
exposure to the sound ends. Southall et
al. (2007) considers a 6 dB TTS (that is,
baseline thresholds are elevated by 6
dB) to be a sufficient definition of TTSonset. NMFS considers TTS as Level B
harassment that is mediated by
physiological effects on the auditory
system; however, NMFS does not
consider TTS-onset to be the lowest
level at which Level B harassment may
occur. The potential for TTS is
considered within NMFS’ analysis of
potential impacts from Level B
harassment.
3. Tolerance
Numerous studies have shown that
underwater sounds from industrial
activities are often readily detectable by
marine mammals in the water at
distances of many kilometers. However,
other studies have shown that marine
mammals at distances more than a few
kilometers away often show no apparent
response to industrial activities of
various types (Miller et al., 2005). This
is often true even in cases when the
sounds must be readily audible to the
animals based on measured received
levels and the hearing sensitivity of that
mammal group. Although various
baleen whales, toothed whales, and (less
frequently) pinnipeds have been shown
to react behaviorally to underwater
sound from sources such as airgun
pulses or vessels under some
conditions, at other times, mammals of
all three types have shown no overt
reactions (e.g., Malme et al., 1986;
Richardson et al., 1995; Madsen and
Mohl, 2000; Croll et al., 2001; Jacobs
and Terhune, 2002; Madsen et al., 2002;
Miller et al., 2005). In general,
pinnipeds seem to be more tolerant of
exposure to some types of underwater
sound than are baleen whales.
Richardson et al. (1995) found that
vessel sound does not seem to strongly
affect pinnipeds that are already in the
water. Richardson et al. (1995) went on
to explain that seals on haul-outs
sometimes respond strongly to the
presence of vessels and at other times
appear to show considerable tolerance
of vessels, and Brueggeman et al. (1992)
observed ringed seals (Pusa hispida)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
hauled out on ice pans displaying shortterm escape reactions when a ship
approached within 0.16–0.31 mi (0.25–
0.5 km).
4. Masking
Masking is the obscuring of sounds of
interest to an animal by other sounds,
typically at similar frequencies. Marine
mammals are highly dependent on
sound, and their ability to recognize
sound signals amid other sound is
important in communication and
detection of both predators and prey.
Background ambient sound may
interfere with or mask the ability of an
animal to detect a sound signal even
when that signal is above its absolute
hearing threshold. Even in the absence
of anthropogenic sound, the marine
environment is often loud. Natural
ambient sound includes contributions
from wind, waves, precipitation, other
animals, and (at frequencies above 30
kHz) thermal sound resulting from
molecular agitation (Richardson et al.,
1995).
Background sound may also include
anthropogenic sound, and masking of
natural sounds can result when human
activities produce high levels of
background sound. Conversely, if the
background level of underwater sound
is high (e.g., on a day with strong wind
and high waves), an anthropogenic
sound source would not be detectable as
far away as would be possible under
quieter conditions and would itself be
masked. Ambient sound is highly
variable on continental shelves
(Thompson, 1965; Myrberg, 1978;
Chapman et al., 1998; Desharnais et al.,
1999). This results in a high degree of
variability in the range at which marine
mammals can detect anthropogenic
sounds.
Although masking is a phenomenon
which may occur naturally, the
introduction of loud anthropogenic
sounds into the marine environment at
frequencies important to marine
mammals increases the severity and
frequency of occurrence of masking. For
example, if a baleen whale is exposed to
continuous low-frequency sound from
an industrial source, this would reduce
the size of the area around that whale
within which it can hear the calls of
another whale. The components of
background noise that are similar in
frequency to the signal in question
primarily determine the degree of
masking of that signal. In general, little
is known about the degree to which
marine mammals rely upon detection of
sounds from conspecifics, predators,
prey, or other natural sources. In the
absence of specific information about
the importance of detecting these
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
natural sounds, it is not possible to
predict the impact of masking on marine
mammals (Richardson et al., 1995). In
general, masking effects are expected to
be less severe when sounds are transient
than when they are continuous.
Masking is typically of greater concern
for those marine mammals that utilize
low-frequency communications, such as
baleen whales, because of how far lowfrequency sounds propagate.
5. Behavioral Disturbance
Behavioral responses to sound are
highly variable and context-specific. An
animal’s perception of and response to
(in both nature and magnitude) an
acoustic event can be influenced by
prior experience, perceived proximity,
bearing of the sound, familiarity of the
sound, etc. (Southall et al., 2007). If a
marine mammal does react briefly to an
underwater sound by changing its
behavior or moving a small distance, the
impacts of the change are unlikely to be
significant to the individual, let alone
the stock or population. However, if a
sound source displaces marine
mammals from an important feeding or
breeding area for a prolonged period,
impacts on individuals and populations
could be significant (e.g., Lusseau and
Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007).
The studies that address responses of
low-frequency cetaceans to non-pulse
sounds (such as vibratory pile driving or
the sound emitted from a DP vessel
thruster) include data gathered in the
field and related to several types of
sound sources (of varying similarity to
chirps), including: Vessel noise, drilling
and machinery playback, low-frequency
M-sequences (sine wave with multiple
phase reversals) playback, tactical lowfrequency active sonar playback, drill
ships, and non-pulse playbacks. These
studies generally indicate no (or very
limited) responses to received levels in
the 90 to 120 dB re: 1mPa range and an
increasing likelihood of avoidance and
other behavioral effects in the 120 to
160 dB range. As mentioned earlier,
though, contextual variables play a very
important role in the reported responses
and the severity of effects are not linear
when compared to received level. Also,
few of the laboratory or field datasets
had common conditions, behavioral
contexts, or sound sources, so it is not
surprising that responses differ.
The studies that address responses of
mid-frequency cetaceans to non-pulse
sounds include data gathered both in
the field and the laboratory and related
to several different sound sources (of
varying similarity to chirps) including:
Pingers, drilling playbacks, ship and
ice-breaking noise, vessel noise,
Acoustic harassment devices (AHDs),
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
Acoustic Deterrent Devices (ADDs),
mid-frequency active sonar, and nonpulse bands and tones. Southall et al.
(2007) were unable to come to a clear
conclusion regarding the results of these
studies. In some cases animals in the
field showed significant responses to
received levels between 90 and 120 dB,
while in other cases these responses
were not seen in the 120 to 150 dB
range. The disparity in results was
likely due to contextual variation and
the differences between the results in
the field and laboratory data (animals
typically responded at lower levels in
the field).
The studies that address responses of
high-frequency cetaceans to non-pulse
sounds include data gathered both in
the field and the laboratory and related
to several different sound sources (of
varying similarity to chirps), including:
Pingers, AHDs, and various laboratory
non-pulse sounds. All of these data
were collected from harbor porpoises.
Southall et al. (2007) concluded that the
existing data indicate that harbor
porpoises are likely sensitive to a wide
range of anthropogenic sounds at low
received levels (around 90 to 120 dB),
at least for initial exposures. All
recorded exposures above 140 dB
induced profound and sustained
avoidance behavior in wild harbor
porpoises (Southall et al., 2007). Rapid
habituation was noted in some but not
all studies.
The studies that address the responses
of pinnipeds in water to non-pulse
sounds include data gathered both in
the field and the laboratory and related
to several different sound sources (of
varying similarity to chirps), including:
AHDs, various non-pulse sounds used
in underwater data communication,
underwater drilling, and construction
noise. Few studies exist with enough
information to include them in the
analysis. The limited data suggest that
exposures to non-pulse sounds between
90 and 140 dB generally do not result
in strong behavioral responses of
pinnipeds in water, but no data exist at
higher received levels (Southall et al.,
2007).
Given the many uncertainties in
predicting the quantity and types of
impacts of noise on marine mammals, it
is common practice to estimate how
many mammals would be present
within a particular distance of activities
and/or exposed to a particular level of
sound. In most cases, this approach
likely overestimates the numbers of
marine mammals that would be affected
in some biologically-important manner.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
6. Vessel Strike
Vessels and in-water structures have
the potential to cause physical
disturbance to marine mammals.
Various types of vessels already use the
water surrounding Rhode Island and
Block Island in particular. Tug boats
and barges, both of which would be
required during the BITS construction
are slow moving and follow a
predictable course. Marine mammals
would be able to easily avoid these
vessels and are likely already habituated
to the presence of numerous vessels.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal
Habitat
There are no feeding areas, rookeries,
or mating grounds known to be
biologically important to marine
mammals within the proposed project
area. There is also no designated critical
habitat for any ESA-listed marine
mammals. Harbor seals haul out on
Block Island and points along
Narragansett Bay, the most important
haul-out being on the edge of New
Harbor, about 2.4 km from the proposed
BITS landfall on Block Island. The only
consistent haul-out locations for gray
seals within the vicinity of Rhode Island
are around Monomoy National Wildlife
Refuge and Nantucket Sound in
Massachusetts (more than 80 nautical
miles from the proposed project area).
NMFS’ regulations at 50 CFR 224
designated the nearshore waters of the
Mid-Atlantic Bight as the Mid-Atlantic
U.S. Seasonal Management Area (SMA)
for right whales in 2008. Mandatory
vessel speed restrictions are in place in
that SMA from November 1 through
April 30 to reduce the threat of
collisions between ships and right
whales around their migratory route and
calving grounds.
The BITS involves activities that
would disturb the seafloor and
potentially affect benthic and finfish
communities. Installation of the BITS
cable and the temporary offshore
cofferdam would result in the temporary
disturbance of no more than 45.3 acres
of seafloor. These installation activities
would also result in temporary and
localized increases in turbidity around
the proposed project area. DWBIT is
required to install additional protective
armoring over the BITS where it would
cross two existing marine cables in
federal waters. At the cable crossing
locations, the installation of additional
protective armoring would result in the
permanent conversion of about 1.7 acre
of soft substrate to hard substrate. The
BITS cable may also require additional
protective armoring in areas where the
burial depth achieved is less than 1.2 m.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15579
DWBIT expects that additional
protection would be required at a
maximum of 1 percent of the entire
BITS cable, resulting in a conversion of
up to 1 acre of soft substrate to hard
substrate along the cable route. During
the installation of additional protective
armoring at the cable crossings and as
necessary along the cable route, anchors
and anchor chains would temporarily
impact about 1.8 acres of bottom
substrate during each anchoring event.
Jet-plowing and cofferdam installation
would cause either the displacement or
loss of benthic and finfish resources in
the immediate areas of disturbance. This
may result in a temporary loss of forage
items and a temporary reduction in the
amount of benthic habitat available for
foraging marine mammals in the
immediate proposed project area.
However, the amount of habitat affected
represents a very small percentage of the
available foraging habitat in the
proposed project area. Increased
underwater sound levels from cofferdam
installation and use of the DP vessel
thruster may temporarily result in
marine mammals avoiding or
abandoning the area.
Because of the temporary nature of
the disturbance, the availability of
similar habitat and resources in the
surrounding area, and the lack of
important or unique marine mammal
habitat, the impacts to marine mammals
and the food sources that they utilize
are not expected to cause significant or
long-term consequences for individual
marine mammals or their populations.
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization (ITA) under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must
set forth the permissible methods of
taking pursuant to such activity, and
other means of effecting the least
practicable impact on such species or
stock and its habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds,
and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock
for taking for certain subsistence uses
(where relevant).
Proposed Mitigation Measures
With NMFS’ input during the
application process, DWBIT is
proposing the following mitigation
measures during vibratory pile driving
and use of the DP vessel thruster:
1. Marine Mammal Exclusion Zone
Protected species observers would
visually monitor a 200-m radius during
all in-water vibratory pile driving. This
distance is estimated to be the 160 dB
isopleth based on DWBIT’s sound
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
15580
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
exposure model. A minimum of two
observers would be stationed aboard
each noise-producing construction
support vessel. Each observer would
visually monitor a 360-degree field of
vision from the vessel. Observers would
begin monitoring at least 30 minutes
prior to vibratory pile driving, continue
monitoring during vibratory pile
driving, and stop monitoring 30 minutes
after vibratory pile driving has ended. If
a marine mammal is seen approaching
or entering the 200-m zone during
vibratory pile driving, DWBIT would
stop vibratory pile driving as a
precautionary measure to minimize
noise impacts on the animal.
2. Soft-Start Procedures
DWBIT would use a soft-start (or
ramp-up) procedure at the beginning of
vibratory pile driving. This procedure
would require an initial set of three
strikes from the vibratory hammer at 40
percent energy with a 1-minute waiting
period between subsequent 3-strike sets.
DWBIT would repeat the procedure two
additional times. DWBIT would initiate
a soft-start at the beginning of each day
of pile driving and if pile driving stops
for more than 30 minutes. DWBIT
would not initiate a soft-start if the
monitoring zone is obscured by fog,
inclement weather, poor lighting
conditions, etc.
3. Delay and Shut-Down Procedures
DWBIT would delay vibratory pile
driving and reduce DP vessel thruster
use if a marine mammal is observed
within the exclusion zone and until the
exclusion zone is clear of marine
mammals. DWBIT proposes to stop
vibratory pile driving if a marine
mammal is seen within a 200-m radius
from the sound source at the
Scarborough State Beach cofferdam and
would not be reinitiated until the 200m radius is clear of marine mammals for
at least 30 minutes.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
4. DP Thruster Power Reduction
A constant tension must be
maintained during cable installation
and any significant stoppage in vessel
maneuverability during jet plow
activities would result in damage to the
cable. Therefore, during DP vessel
operations, DWBIT proposes to reduce
DP thruster power to the maximum
extent possible if a marine mammal
approaches or enters a 5-m radius from
the vessel (estimated to be the 160-dB
isopleth from the vessel). This reduction
would not be implemented at the risk of
compromising safety and/or the
integrity of the BITS. DWBIT would not
increase power until the 5-m zone is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
clear of marine mammals for 30
minutes.
5. Time of Day and Weather Restrictions
DWBIT would conduct vibratory pile
driving off of Scarborough State Beach
during daylight hours only, starting
approximately 30 minutes after dawn
and ending 30 minutes before dusk. If
a soft-start is initiated before the onset
of inclement weather, DWBIT would
complete that segment of vibratory pile
driving. DWBIT would not initiate new
vibratory pile driving activities until the
entire monitoring zone is visible.
Mitigation Conclusions
NMFS has carefully evaluated the
applicant’s proposed mitigation
measures and considered a range of
other measures in the context of
ensuring that NMFS prescribes the
means of effecting the least practicable
impact on the affected marine mammal
species and stocks and their habitat. Our
evaluation of potential measures
included consideration of the following
factors in relation to one another:
• The manner in which, and the
degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure is
expected to minimize adverse impacts
to marine mammals;
• The proven or likely efficacy of the
specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned; and
• The practicability of the measure
for applicant implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed
by NMFS should be able to accomplish,
have a reasonable likelihood of
accomplishing (based on current
science), or contribute to the
accomplishment of one or more of the
general goals listed below:
1. Avoidance or minimization of
injury or death of marine mammals
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may
contribute to this goal).
2. A reduction in the numbers of
marine mammals (total number or
number at biologically important time
or location) exposed to received levels
of continuous noise, or other activities
expected to result in the take of marine
mammals (this goal may contribute to 1,
above, or to reducing harassment takes
only).
3. A reduction in the number of times
(total number or number at biologically
important time or location) individuals
would be exposed to received levels of
continuous noise, or other activities
expected to result in the take of marine
mammals (this goal may contribute to 1,
above, or to reducing harassment takes
only).
4. A reduction in the intensity of
exposures (either total number or
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
number at biologically important time
or location) to received levels of
continuous noise, or other activities
expected to result in the take of marine
mammals (this goal may contribute to a,
above, or to reducing the severity of
harassment takes only).
5. Avoidance or minimization of
adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying special attention to the
food base, activities that block or limit
passage to or from biologically
important areas, permanent destruction
of habitat, or temporary destruction/
disturbance of habitat during a
biologically important time.
6. For monitoring directly related to
mitigation—an increase in the
probability of detecting marine
mammals, thus allowing for more
effective implementation of the
mitigation.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s proposed measures, as well
as other measures considered by NMFS,
NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the proposed mitigation measures
provide the means of effecting the least
practicable impact on marine mammals
species or stocks and their habitat,
paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an
activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth,
‘‘requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such
taking.’’ The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13)
indicate that requests for ITAs must
include the suggested means of
accomplishing the necessary monitoring
and reporting that will result in
increased knowledge of the species and
of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are
expected to be present in the proposed
action area. Monitoring measures
prescribed by NMFS should accomplish
one or more of the following general
goals:
1. An increase in the probability of
detecting marine mammals, both within
the mitigation zone (thus allowing for
more effective implementation of the
mitigation) and in general to generate
more data to contribute to the analyses
mentioned below;
2. An increase in our understanding
of how many marine mammals are
likely to be exposed to levels of
continuous noise from vibratory pile
driving and use of a DP vessel thruster
that we associate with specific adverse
effects, such as behavioral harassment,
TTS, or PTS;
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
3. An increase in our understanding
of how marine mammals respond to
stimuli expected to result in take and
how anticipated adverse effects on
individuals (in different ways and to
varying degrees) may impact the
population, species, or stock
(specifically through effects on annual
rates of recruitment or survival) through
any of the following methods:
• Behavioral observations in the
presence of stimuli compared to
observations in the absence of stimuli
(need to be able to accurately predict
received level, distance from source,
and other pertinent information);
• Physiological measurements in the
presence of stimuli compared to
observations in the absence of stimuli
(need to be able to accurately predict
received level, distance from source,
and other pertinent information);
• Distribution and/or abundance
comparisons in times or areas with
concentrated stimuli versus times or
areas without stimuli;
4. An increased knowledge of the
affected species; and
5. An increase in our understanding
of the effectiveness of certain mitigation
and monitoring measures.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
DWBIT submitted a marine mammal
monitoring plan as part of the IHA
application. It can be found in section
12 of their application. The plan may be
modified or supplemented based on
comments or new information received
from the public during the public
comment period.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
1. Visual Monitoring
DWBIT would use protected species
observers to visually monitor the
surrounding area during all in-water
vibratory pile driving and use of DP
vessel thrusters. These observers would
monitor beyond the estimated 160-dB
isopleths, in addition to conducting
mitigation monitoring within these
zones. Observers would estimate
distances to marine mammals visually,
using laser range finders, or by using
reticle binoculars during daylight hours.
During night operations (DP vessel
thruster use only), observers would use
night-vision binoculars. Observers
would record their position using handheld or vessel global positioning system
units for each sighting, vessel position
change, and any environmental change.
Each observer would scan the
surrounding area for visual indication of
marine mammal presence. Observers
would be located from the highest
available vantage point on the
associated operational platform (e.g.,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
support vessel, barge or tug), estimated
to be at least 6 m above the waterline.
Prior to initiation of construction
work, all crew members on barges, tugs,
and support vessels would undergo
environmental training, a component of
which would focus on the procedures
for sighting and protection of marine
mammals. DWBIT would also conduct a
briefing with the construction
supervisors and crews and observers to
define chains of command, discuss
communication procedures, provide an
overview of the monitoring purposes,
and review operational procedures. The
DWBIT Construction Compliance
Manager (or other authorized
individual) would have the authority to
stop or delay vibratory pile driving
activities if deemed necessary.
2. Acoustic Field Verification
DWBIT would conduct field
verification of the estimated 160-dB
isopleths during vibratory pile driving
and use of the DP vessel thruster to
determine whether the proposed
distances are adequate to minimize
impacts to marine mammals.
DWBIT would conduct field
verification of the 200-m radius marine
mammal exclusion zone at the
Scarborough State Beach cofferdam.
DWBIT would take acoustic
measurements during vibratory pile
driving of the last half (deepest sheet
pile segment) for any given open-water
pile and would also measure from two
reference locations at two water depths
(a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m
above the seafloor). If the field
measurements determine that the 160dB isopleth is less than or beyond the
proposed 200-m distance, a new zone
may be established accordingly. DWBIT
would notify NMFS and the USACE
within 24 hours if a new marine
mammal exclusion zone is established
that extends beyond 200 m.
Implementation of a smaller zone would
be contingent on NMFS’ review and
would not be used until NMFS approves
the change.
DWBIT would also perform field
verification of the 160-dB isopleth
associated with DP vessel thruster use
during cable installation. DWBIT would
take acoustic measurements from two
reference locations at two water depths
(a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m
above the seafloor). Similar to field
verification during vibratory pile
driving, the DP thruster power
reduction zone may be modified as
necessary.
Proposed Reporting Measures
Observers would record dates and
locations of construction operations;
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15581
times of observations; location and
weather; details of marine mammal
sightings (e.g., species, age, numbers,
behavior); and details of any observed
take.
DWBIT proposes to provide the
following notifications and reports
during construction activities:
• Notification to NMFS and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
within 24-hours of beginning
construction activities and again within
24-hours of completion;
• Detailed report of field-verification
measurements within 7 days of
completion (including: sound levels,
durations, spectral characteristics, DP
thruster use, etc.) and notification to
NMFS and the USACE within 24-hours
if a new zone is established;
• Notification to NMFS and USACE
within 24-hours if field verification
measurements suggest a larger marine
mammal exclusion zone;
• Final technical report to NMFS and
the USACE within 120 days of
completion of the specified activity
documenting methods and monitoring
protocols, mitigation implementation,
marine mammal observations, other
results, and discussion of mitigation
effectiveness.
In the unanticipated event that the
specified activity clearly causes the take
of a marine mammal in a manner not
permitted by the authorization (if
issued), such as an injury, serious
injury, or mortality (e.g., ship-strike,
gear interaction, and/or entanglement),
DWBIT shall immediately cease the
specified activities and immediately
report the incident to the Incidental
Take Program Supervisor, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301–
427–8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov and the
Northeast Regional Stranding
Coordinator at 978–281–9300
(Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov). The report
must include the following information:
• Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the incident;
• Name and type of vessel involved;
• Vessel’s speed during and leading
up to the incident;
• Description of the incident;
• Status of all sound source use in the
24 hours preceding the incident;
• Water depth;
• Environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea
state, cloud cover, and visibility);
• Description of all marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
• Species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
15582
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
• Fate of the animal(s); and
• Photographs or video footage of the
animal(s) (if equipment is available).
DWBIT shall not resume its activities
until we are able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take.
We will work with DWBIT to determine
what is necessary to minimize the
likelihood of further prohibited take and
ensure MMPA compliance. DWBIT may
not resume their activities until notified
by us via letter, email, or telephone.
In the event that DWBIT discovers an
injured or dead marine mammal, and
the lead visual observer determines that
the cause of the injury or death is
unknown and the death is relatively
recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state
of decomposition), DWBIT shall
immediately report the incident to the
Incidental Take Program Supervisor,
Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, at 301–
427–8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov and the
Northeast Regional Stranding
Coordinator at 978–281–9300
(Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov). The report
must include the same information
identified in the paragraph above this
section. Activities may continue while
we review the circumstances of the
incident. We would work with DWBIT
to determine whether modifications in
the activities are appropriate.
In the event that DWBIT discovers an
injured or dead marine mammal, and
the lead visual observer determines that
the injury or death is not associated
with or related to the authorized
activities (e.g., previously wounded
animal, carcass with moderate to
advanced decomposition, or scavenger
damage), DWBIT would report the
incident to the Incidental Take Program
Supervisor, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
at 301–427–8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov and the
Northeast Regional Stranding
Coordinator at 978–281–9300
(Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov), within 24
hours of the discovery. DWBIT would
provide photographs or video footage (if
available) or other documentation of the
stranded animal sighting to us.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, the MMPA
defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i)
has the potential to injure a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has
the potential to disturb a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild by causing disruption of behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering [Level B
harassment].
Project activities that have the
potential to harass marine mammals, as
defined by the MMPA, include noise
associated with vibratory pile driving of
the temporary cofferdam, and noise
associated with the use of DP vessel
thrusters during cable installation.
Harassment could take the form of
masking, temporary threshold shift,
avoidance, or other changes in marine
mammal behavior. NMFS anticipates
that impacts to marine mammals would
be in the form of behavioral harassment
and no take by injury, serious injury, or
mortality is proposed. NMFS does not
anticipate take resulting from the
movement of vessels associated with
construction because there will be a
limited number of vessels moving at
slow speeds over a relatively shallow,
nearshore area.
NMFS’ current acoustic exposure
criteria are shown in Table 3 below.
Sound levels from vibratory pile driving
or use of the DP vessel thruster would
not reach the Level A harassment
threshold of 180/190 dB (cetaceans/
pinnipeds) during the proposed BITS
project. DWBIT modeled distances to
these acoustic exposure criteria are
shown in Table 4. Details on the model
characteristics and results are provided
in the Underwater Acoustic Report at
the end of DWBIT’s application (see
ADDRESSES). DWBIT and NMFS believe
that this estimate represents the worstcase scenario and that the actual
distance to the Level B harassment
threshold may be shorter.
TABLE 3—NMFS’ CURRENT ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA
[Non-explosive sound]
Criterion
Criterion definition
Threshold
Level A Harassment (Injury) ...............................
Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS) (Any level
above that which is known to cause TTS).
Level B Harassment ...........................................
Level B Harassment ...........................................
Behavioral Disruption (for impulse noises) ......
Behavioral Disruption (for continuous, noise) ..
180 dB re 1 microPa-m (cetaceans)/190 dB re
1 microPa-m (pinnipeds) root mean square
(rms).
160 dB re 1 microPa-m (rms).
120 dB re 1 microPa-m (rms).
TABLE 4—DWBIT’S MODELED DISTANCES TO ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA
Distance to Level B
harassment (120 dB)
Activity
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Vibratory pile driving (for long-distance HDD) .............................................................
DP vessel thruster use ................................................................................................
DWBIT estimated species densities
within the proposed project area in
order to estimate the number of marine
mammal exposures to sound levels
above 120 dB. DWBIT used sightings
per unit effort (SPUE) from Kenney and
Vigness-Raposa (2009) for relative
cetacean abundance and the Northeast
Navy OPAREA Density Estimates (DoN,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
>40 km
4,750 m
2007) for seal abundance. Based on
multiple reports, harbor seal abundance
off the coast of Rhode Island is thought
to be about 20 percent of the total
abundance for southern New England.
Because the seasonality and habitat use
of gray seals off the coast of Rhode
Island roughly overlaps with harbor
seals, DWBIT applied this 20 percent
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Distance to Level A
harassment (180/190 dB)
N/A
N/A
estimate to both pinniped species.
While the density estimates relied upon
for this proposed authorization are from
2007 and 2009, they are the best
scientific data available. NMFS is not
aware of any efforts to collect more
recent density estimates than those
relied upon here.
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
15583
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
Estimated takes were calculated by
multiplying the average highest species
density (per 100 km2) by the zone of
influence (maximum ensonified area of
120 dB), multiplied by a correction
factor of 1.5 to account for marine
mammals underwater, multiplied by the
number of days of the specified activity.
A detailed description of the DWBIT’s
model used to calculate zones of
influence is provided in the Underwater
Acoustic Report at the end of their
application (see ADDRESSES).
DWBIT used a zone of influence of
4,352 km2 and a total construction
period of 4 days to estimate take from
vibratory pile driving. In contrast to
their application, DWBIT clarified that
the vibratory pile driving would likely
occur over a 2-day period during the
winter and a 2-day period during the
spring. Their take calculations were
revised after the application was
submitted. For each species, DWBIT
used the estimated seasonal density
(winter and spring) to calculate take for
a total of 4 days (2 days each season).
DWBIT’s requested take numbers are
provided in Table 5 and this is also the
number of takes NMFS is proposing to
authorize. DWBIT’s calculations do not
take into account whether a single
animal is harassed multiple times or
whether each exposure is a different
animal. Therefore, the numbers in Table
5 are the maximum number of animals
that may be harassed during vibratory
pile driving (i.e., DWBIT assumes that
each exposure event is a different
animal). These estimates do not account
for mitigation measures that DWBIT
would implement during vibratory pile
driving.
DWBIT used a zone of influence of
23.0 km2 and a maximum installation
period of 42 days to estimate take from
use of the DP vessel thruster during
cable installation. The zone of influence
represents the average ensonified area
across the three representative water
depths along the cable route (7 m, 10 m,
20 m, and 40 m). DWBIT expects cable
installation to occur between April and
August; to be conservative, DWBIT used
the highest seasonal species density to
calculate take. Again, DWBIT’s
calculations do not take into account
whether a single animal is harassed
multiple times or whether each
exposure is a different animal.
Therefore, the numbers in Table 5 are
the maximum number of animals that
may be harassed during cable
installation. These estimates do not
account for mitigation measures that
DWBIT would implement during the
cable installation.
DWBIT did not request, and NMFS is
not proposing, take from vessel strike.
We do not anticipate marine mammals
to be impacted by vessel movement
because a limited number of vessels
would be involved in construction
activities and they would mostly move
at slow speeds throughout construction.
TABLE 5—DWBIT’S ESTIMATED TAKE FOR THE BITS PROJECT
Vibratory pile driving
DP Vessel thruster
Estimated
winter density
(per 100 km2)
Common species name
Estimated
spring density
(per 100 km2)
Estimated take
by Level B
harassment
Maximum
seasonal
density
(per 100 km2)
Estimated take
by Level B
harassment
2.12
2.04
0.00
0.19
0.30
0.00
0.00
14.16
9.74
1.23
2.59
0.74
0.12
0.62
0.11
0.06
14.16
9.74
438
604
97
40
121
15
7
739
509
2.12
2.59
0.74
0.19
2.15
0.11
0.06
14.16
9.74
18
38
11
3
32
2
1
41
29
Atlantic white-sided dolphin .....................
Short-beaked common dolphin ................
Harbor porpoise .......................................
Minke whale .............................................
Fin whale ..................................................
Humpback whale .....................................
North Atlantic right whale .........................
Gray seal ..................................................
Harbor seal ..............................................
Total
estimated
take
456
644
108
43
153
17
8
780
538
TABLE 6—SPECIES INFORMATION AND TAKE PROPOSED FOR AUTHORIZATION BY NMFS
Take proposed
for
authorization
Common species name
Abundance of
stock
Percentage of
stock potentially affected
456
644
108
43
153
17
8
784
540
23,390
120,743
89,054
8,987
3,985
11,570
444
348,900
99,340
1.95
0.53
0.12
0.48
3.84
0.15
1.80
0.22
0.54
Atlantic white-sided dolphin ................................................................................
Short-beaked common dolphin ..........................................................................
Harbor porpoise .................................................................................................
Minke whale .......................................................................................................
Fin whale ............................................................................................................
Humpback whale ................................................................................................
North Atlantic right whale ...................................................................................
Gray seal ............................................................................................................
Harbor seal .........................................................................................................
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Analysis and Preliminary
Determinations
Negligible Impact
Negligible impact is ‘‘an impact
resulting from the specified activity that
cannot be reasonably expected to, and is
not reasonably likely to, adversely affect
the species or stock through effects on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
annual rates of recruitment or survival’’
(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact
finding is based on the lack of likely
adverse effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of Level B harassment takes, alone, is
not enough information on which to
base an impact determination. In
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Population
trend
N/A.
N/A.
N/A.
N/A.
N/A.
Increasing.
Increasing.
Increasing.
N/A.
addition to considering estimates of the
number of marine mammals that might
be ‘‘taken’’ through behavioral
harassment, NMFS must consider other
factors, such as the likely nature of any
responses (their intensity, duration,
etc.), the context of any responses
(critical reproductive time or location,
migration, etc.), as well as the number
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
15584
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
and nature of estimated Level A
harassment takes, the number of
estimated mortalities, and effects on
habitat.
DWBIT did not request, and NMFS is
not proposing, take of marine mammals
by injury, serious injury, or mortality.
NMFS expects that take would be in the
form of behavioral harassment.
Exposure to sound levels above 120 dB
during vibratory pile driving would not
last for more than 12 hours per day for
4 non-consecutive days. Exposure to
sound levels above 120 dB during use
of the DP vessel thruster may last for 24
hours per day for 42 days. While use of
the DP thruster may last for consecutive
days, the vessel would be moving and
therefore not focused on one specific
area for the entire duration. Given the
duration and intensity of the activity,
and the fact that shipping contributes to
the ambient sound levels around Rhode
Island, NMFS does not anticipate the
proposed take estimates to impact
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
Animals may temporarily avoid the
immediate area, but are not expected to
permanently abandon the area. Marine
mammal habitat may be impacted by
elevated sound levels and sediment
disturbance, but these impacts would be
temporary. Furthermore, there are no
feeding areas, rookeries, or mating
grounds known to be biologically
important to marine mammals within
the proposed project area. There is also
no designated critical habitat for any
ESA-listed marine mammals. The
proposed mitigation measures are
expected to reduce the number and/or
severity of takes by (1) giving animals
the opportunity to move away from the
sound source before the pile driver
reaches full energy; (2) reducing the
intensity of exposure within a certain
distance by reducing the DP vessel
thruster power; and (3) preventing
animals from being exposed to
increased sound levels within 200 m of
vibratory pile driving.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
proposed monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS preliminarily finds
that the total marine mammal take from
DWBIT’s BITS project will have a
negligible impact on the affected marine
mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
The number of individual animals
that may be exposed to sound levels
above 120 dB is small relative to the
species or stock size (Table 6). The
proposed take numbers are the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
maximum numbers of animals that are
expected to be harassed during the BITS
project; it is possible that some of these
exposures may occur to the same
individual. NMFS preliminarily finds
that small numbers of marine mammals
will be taken relative to the populations
of the affected species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of marine mammals implicated by this
action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of
affected species or stocks would not
have an unmitigable adverse impact on
the availability of such species or stocks
for taking for subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There are three marine mammal
species that are listed as endangered
under the ESA: Fin whale, humpback
whale, and North Atlantic right whale.
Under section 7 of the ESA, the USACE
(the federal permitting agency for the
actual construction) consulted with
NMFS on the proposed BITS project.
NMFS Northeast Region issued a
Biological Opinion on January 30, 2014,
concluding that the Block Island Wind
Farm project (which includes the BITS)
may adversely affect but is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
fin whale, humpback whale, or North
Atlantic right whale. NMFS is also
consulting internally on the issuance of
an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA for this activity. The Biological
Opinion may be amended to include an
incidental take exemption for these
marine mammal species.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
The USACE is preparing an
Environmental Assessment on the
construction and operation of the BITS.
The USACE’s EA is not expected to be
finalized prior to NMFS making a
determination on the issuance of an
IHA. Therefore, NMFS is currently
conducting an analysis, pursuant to the
NEPA, to determine whether or not
DWBIT’s proposed activity may have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This analysis will be
completed prior to the issuance or
denial of this proposed IHA.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary
determinations, NMFS proposes to issue
an IHA to DWBIT for conducting
vibratory pile driving and use of a DP
vessel thruster during construction of
the BITS from late 2014 to late 2015,
provided the previously mentioned
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated. The
proposed IHA language is provided
next.
This section contains a draft of the
IHA itself. The wording contained in
this section is proposed for inclusion in
the IHA (if issued).
Deepwater Wind Block Island
Transmission, LLC (DWBIT) (56
Exchange Terrace, Suite 101,
Providence, RI 02903–1772) is hereby
authorized under section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16
U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) and 50 CFR
216.107, to harass marine mammals
incidental to vibratory pile driving and
DP vessel thruster use during
construction of the Block Island
Transmission System (BITS).
1. This Authorization is valid from
December 1, 2014 through November
31, 2015.
2. This Authorization is valid for
construction of the BITS off Block
Island, Rhode Island, as described in the
Incidental Harassment Authorization
(IHA) application.
3. The holder of this authorization
(Holder) is hereby authorized to take, by
Level B harassment only, 456 Atlantic
white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus
acutus), 644 short-beaked common
dolphins (Delphinus delphis), 108
harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena),
43 minke whales (Balaenoptera
acutorostrata), 153 fin whales
(Balaenoptera physalus), 17 humpback
whales (Megaptera novaeangliae), 8
North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena
glacialis), 780 gray seals (Halichoerus
grypus), and 538 harbor seals (Phoca
vitulina) incidental to vibratory pile
driving DP vessel thruster use
associated with construction of the
BITS.
4. The taking of any marine mammal
in a manner prohibited under this IHA
must be reported immediately to NMFS’
Northeast Region, 55 Great Republic
Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930–2276;
phone 978–281–9328, and NMFS’ Office
of Protected Resources, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910;
phone 301–427–8401; fax 301–713–
0376.
5. The Holder or designees must
notify NMFS’ Northeast Region and
Headquarters at least 24 hours prior to
the seasonal commencement of the
specified activity (see contact
information in 4 above).
6. Mitigation Requirements
The Holder is required to abide by the
following mitigation conditions listed in
6(a)–(e). Failure to comply with these
conditions may result in the
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
modification, suspension, or revocation
of this IHA.
(a) Marine Mammal Exclusion Zone:
Protected species observers shall
visually monitor an estimated 160-dB
isopleth during all vibratory pile driving
activity to ensure that no marine
mammals enter this zone. A minimum
of two observers shall be stationed
aboard the noise-producing support
vessel and shall monitor a 360-degree
field of vision. Observers shall begin
monitoring at least 30 minutes prior to
vibratory pile driving, continue
monitoring during vibratory pile
driving, and stop monitoring 30 minutes
after vibratory pile driving has ended.
(b) Soft-start Procedures: Soft-start
procedures shall be implemented at the
beginning of each day and if pile driving
has stopped for more than 30 minutes.
Contractors shall initiate a set of three
strikes form the vibratory hammer at 40
percent energy with a 1-minute waiting
period between subsequent three-strike
sets. This procedure shall be repeated
two additional times before full energy
is reached.
(c) Delay and Shutdown Procedures:
The Holder shall delay vibratory pile
driving if a marine mammal is observed
within the estimated 160-dB isopleth
marine mammal exclusion zone and
until the exclusion zone is clear of
marine mammals. The Holder shall stop
vibratory pile driving if a marine
mammal is seen within the estimated
160-dB isopleth from the sound source
at the Scarborough State Beach
cofferdam and would not reinitiate
vibratory pile driving until the
exclusion zone is clear of marine
mammals for at least 30 minutes.
(d) DP Thruster Power Reduction: The
Holder shall reduce DP thruster power
to the maximum extent possible if a
marine mammal approaches or enters
the estimated 160-dB isopleth from the
vessel. The Holder shall not increase
power until the zone is clear of marine
mammals for 30 minutes.
(e) Time of Day and Weather
Restrictions: The Holder shall conduct
vibratory pile driving during daylight
hours only, starting approximately 30
minutes after dawn and ending 30
minutes before dusk. The Holder shall
not initiate vibratory pile driving until
the entire marine mammal exclusion
zone is visible.
7. Monitoring Requirements
The Holder is required to abide by the
following monitoring conditions listed
in 7(a)–(b). Failure to comply with these
conditions may result in the
modification, suspension, or revocation
of this IHA.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
(a) General: If the Level B harassment
area is obscured by fog or poor lighting
conditions, the start of vibratory pile
driving shall be delayed until the area
is visible.
(b) Visual Monitoring: Protected
species observers shall survey beyond
the estimated 160-dB isopleths 30
minutes before, during, and 30 minutes
after all in-water vibratory pile driving
and use of DP vessel thrusters. The
observers shall be stationed on the
highest available vantage point on the
associated operating platform. Observers
shall estimate distances to marine
mammals visually, using laser range
finders, or by using reticle binoculars
during daylight hours. During night
operations (DP vessel thruster use only),
observers shall use night-vision
binoculars. Information recorded during
each observation shall be used to
estimate numbers of animals potentially
taken and shall include the following:
• Numbers of individuals observed;
• Frequency of observation;
• Location (i.e., distance from the
sound source);
• Vibratory pile driving status (i.e.,
soft-start, active, post pile driving, etc.);
• DP vessel thruster status (i.e.,
energy level); and
• Reaction of the animal(s) to relevant
sound source (if any) and observed
behavior, including bearing and
direction of travel.
(c) Acoustic Field Verification: The
Holder shall conduct field verification
of the estimated 160-dB isopleths during
vibratory pile driving and use of the DP
vessel thruster. Acoustic measurements
shall be taken during vibratory pile
driving of the last half (deepest sheet
pile segment) for any given open-water
pile and from two reference locations at
two water depths (a depth at mid-water
and at about 1 m above the seafloor). If
the field measurements show that the
160-dB isopleth is less than or beyond
the initially proposed 200-m distance, a
new zone may be established
accordingly. The Holder shall notify
NMFS within 24 hours if a new marine
mammal exclusion zone is established
that extends beyond 200 m.
Implementation of a smaller zone shall
be contingent on NMFS’ review and
shall not be used until NMFS approves
the change.
The Holder shall also perform field
verification of the 160-dB isopleth
associated with DP vessel thruster use
during cable installation. Acoustic
measurements shall be taken from two
reference locations at two water depths
(a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m
above the seafloor). Similar to field
verification during vibratory pile
driving, the DP thruster power
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15585
reduction zone may be modified as
necessary.
8. Reporting Requirements
The Holder shall provide the
following notifications during
construction activities:
• Notification to NMFS within 24hours of beginning construction and
again within 24-hours of completion;
• Detailed report of field-verification
measurements within 7 days of
completion and notification to NMFS
within 24-hours if a new zone is
established; and
• Notification to NMFS within 24hours if field verification measurements
suggest a larger marine mammal
exclusion zone.
The Holder shall submit a technical
report to the Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, within 120 days of
the conclusion of monitoring.
(a) The report shall contain the
following information:
• A summary of the activity and
monitoring plan (i.e., dates, times,
locations);
• A summary of mitigation
implementation;
• Monitoring results and a summary
that addresses the goals of the
monitoring plan, including the
following:
Æ Environmental conditions when
observations were made:
Æ Water conditions (i.e., Beaufort seastate, tidal state)
Æ Weather conditions (i.e., percent
cloud cover, visibility, percent glare)
Æ Date and time survey initiated and
terminated
Æ Date, time, number, species, and
any other relevant data regarding marine
mammals observed (for pre-activity,
during activity, and post-activity
surveys)
Æ Description of the observed
behaviors (in both the presence and
absence of activities):
D If possible, the correlation to
underwater sound level occurring at the
time of any observable behavior
• Estimated exposure/take numbers
during activities; and
• An assessment of the
implementation and effectiveness of
prescribed mitigation and monitoring
measures.
(b) In the unanticipated event that the
specified activity clearly causes the take
of a marine mammal in a manner not
permitted by the authorization (if
issued), such as an injury, serious
injury, or mortality (e.g., ship-strike,
gear interaction, and/or entanglement),
the Holder shall immediately cease the
specified activities and immediately
report the incident to the Incidental
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
15586
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 54 / Thursday, March 20, 2014 / Notices
Take Program Supervisor, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301–
427–8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov. The
report must include the following
information:
• Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the incident;
• Name and type of vessel involved;
• Vessel’s speed during and leading
up to the incident;
• Description of the incident;
• Status of all sound source use in the
24 hours preceding the incident;
• Water depth;
• Environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea
state, cloud cover, and visibility);
• Description of all marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
• Species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
• Fate of the animal(s); and
• Photographs or video footage of the
animal(s) (if equipment is available).
The Holder shall not resume its
activities until we are able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take.
NMFS will work with the Holder to
determine what is necessary to
minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA
compliance. The Holder may not
resume activities until notified by us via
letter, email, or telephone.
(c) In the event that the Holder
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead visual observer
determines that the cause of the injury
or death is unknown and the death is
relatively recent (i.e., in less than a
moderate state of decomposition as we
describe in the next paragraph), the
Holder shall immediately report the
incident to the Incidental Take Program
Supervisor, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
at 301–427–8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov,
Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov, and
Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov. The report
must include the same information
identified in the paragraph above this
section. Activities may continue while
we review the circumstances of the
incident. NMFS will work with the
Holder to determine whether
modifications in the activities are
appropriate.
(d) In the event that the Holder
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead visual observer
determines that the injury or death is
not associated with or related to the
authorized activities (e.g., previously
wounded animal, carcass with moderate
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:48 Mar 19, 2014
Jkt 232001
to advanced decomposition, or
scavenger damage), the Holder shall
report the incident to the Incidental
Take Program Supervisor, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, at 301–427–8401
and/or by email to Jolie.Harrison@
noaa.gov, Michelle.Magliocca@
noaa.gov, and Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov
within 24 hours of the discovery. The
Holder shall provide photographs or
video footage (if available) or other
documentation of the stranded animal
sighting to us.
9. A copy of this IHA must be in the
possession of the lead contractor on site
and protected species observers
operating under the authority of this
authorization.
10. This IHA may be modified,
suspended, or withdrawn if the Holder
fails to abide by the conditions
prescribed herein or if the authorized
taking is having more than a negligible
impact on the species or stock of
affected marine mammals.
Request for Public Comments
NMFS requests comment on our
analysis, the draft authorization, and
any other aspect of the Notice of
Proposed IHA for DWBIT’s construction
of the BITS. Please include with your
comments any supporting data or
literature citations to help inform our
final decision on DWBIT’s request for an
MMPA authorization.
Dated: March 14, 2014.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2014–06140 Filed 3–19–14; 8:45 am]
Regulations (18 CFR § 385.211 and
§ 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern
time on the specified comment date.
Protests may be considered, but
intervention is necessary to become a
party to the proceeding.
Filings in Existing Proceedings
Docket Numbers: RP14–373–001.
Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
Description: Market Lateral Service—
Compliance Filing to be effective 3/1/
2014.
Filed Date: 3/12/14.
Accession Number: 20140312–5125.
Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/24/14.
Any person desiring to protest in any
of the above proceedings must file in
accordance with Rule 211 of the
Commission’s Regulations (18 CFR
§ 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern
time on the specified comment date.
The filings are accessible in the
Commission’s eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the
docket number.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed
information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests,
service, and qualifying facilities filings
can be found at: https://www.ferc.gov/
docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For
other information, call (866) 208–3676
(toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659.
Dated March 13, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–06089 Filed 3–19–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Combined Notice of Filings
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
Take notice that the Commission has
received the following Part 284 Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate filings:
Combined Notice of Filings
Take notice that the Commission has
received the following Natural Gas
Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
Filings Instituting Proceedings
Docket Numbers: RP14–618–000.
Applicants: Saltville Gas Storage
Company L.L.C.
Description: Compliance Filing for
RP14–251–000 to be effective 4/1/2014.
Filed Date: 3/12/14.
Accession Number: 20140312–5196.
Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/24/14.
Any person desiring to intervene or
protest in any of the above proceedings
must file in accordance with Rules 211
and 214 of the Commission’s
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Filings Instituting Proceedings
Docket Numbers: PR14–23–000.
Applicants: Kansas Gas Service, A
Division of ONE Gas, Inc.
Description: Tariff filing per
284.123(b), (e): Amendment to Pending
Revision of Statement of Operating
Conditions to be effective 2/19/2014;
TOFC: 1270.
Filed Date: 3/7/14.
Accession Number: 20140307–5220.
Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/21/14.
284.123(g) Protests Due: 5 p.m. ET
4/21/14.
Docket Numbers: PR14–32–000.
Applicants: American Midstream
(Louisiana Intrastate), LLC.
E:\FR\FM\20MRN1.SGM
20MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 54 (Thursday, March 20, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15573-15586]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06140]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XD131
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Construction of the Block Island
Transmission System
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 an application from Deepwater Wind Block
Island Transmission, LLC (DWBIT) for an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to take marine mammals, by harassment, incidental
to construction of the Block Island Transmission System. Pursuant to
the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on
its proposal to issue an IHA to DWBIT to incidentally take, by Level B
harassment only, marine mammals during the specified activity.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than April
21, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed to Jolie
Harrison, Supervisor, Incidental Take Program, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox
address for providing email comments is itp.magliocca@noaa.gov.
Comments sent via email, including all attachments, must not exceed a
25-megabyte file size. NMFS is not responsible for comments sent to
addresses other than those provided here.
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.
An electronic copy of the application 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.
NMFS is also preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and will
consider comments submitted in response to this notice as part of that
process. The EA will be posted at the Web site listed above once it is
finalized.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Magliocca, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking
is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is
provided to the public for review.
An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings
are set forth. NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103
as ``an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.''
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering [Level B harassment].
Summary of Request
On March 11, 2013, NMFS received an application from DWBIT for the
taking of marine mammals incidental to construction of the Block Island
Transmission System. The application went through a series of revisions
and the final version was submitted on November 26, 2013. NMFS
determined that the application was adequate and complete on December
2, 2013.
DWBIT proposes to develop the Block Island Transmission System
(BITS), a bi-directional submarine transmission cable, over a 1-year
period. The proposed activity could begin in late 2014 and last through
late 2015; however, portions of the project would only occur for short,
sporadic periods of
[[Page 15574]]
times over the 1-year period. The following specific aspects of the
proposed activities are likely to result in the take of marine mammals:
vibratory pile driving and the use of dynamically positioned (DP)
vessel thrusters. Take, by Level B Harassment only, of individuals of
nine species is anticipated to result from the specified activity.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
DWBIT proposes to construct a bi-directional submarine transmission
cable that will run from Block Island to the Rhode Island mainland.
Construction of the marine portion of the BITS will involve three
activities: Cable landfall construction on Block Island using a short-
distance horizontal directional drill (HDD) from a temporary excavated
trench box on Crescent Beach; cable landfall construction on
Scarborough State Beach in Narragansett, Rhode Island using a long-
distance HDD from a temporary offshore cofferdam; and installation of
the submarine BITS cable. Cable landfall construction may require the
installation and removal of a temporary offshore cofferdam, which would
involve vibratory pile driving. The generation of underwater noise from
vibratory pile driving and the DP vessel thruster may result in the
incidental take of marine mammals.
The BITS will interconnect Block Island to the existing
Narragansett Electric Company National Grid distribution system on the
Rhode Island mainland. In connection with the BITS, Deepwater Wind
Block Island, LLC (a different applicant) proposes to develop the Block
Island Wind Farm, a 30-megawatt offshore wind farm. Incidental take of
marine mammals resulting from construction of the Block Island Wind
Farm project will be assessed separately.
Dates and Duration
Construction activities could begin in late 2014 and are scheduled
to be complete by August 2015. The anticipated project work windows are
provided in Table 1.
Table 1--Anticipated Project Work Windows
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Anticipated work window
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contracting, mobilization, January 2014-December 2014.
and verification.
Onshore short-distance HDD December 2014-June 2015.
installation.
Onshore/offshore long- January 2015-June 2015.
distance HDD installation.
Onshore cable installation... October 2014-May 2015.
Substation construction...... October 2014-May 2015.
Offshore cable installation.. April 2015-August 2015.
Landfall demobilization and May 2015-June 2015.
remediation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMFS is proposing to issue an authorization effective December 2014
through December 2015, based on the anticipated work windows for in-
water construction that could result in the incidental take of marine
mammals. While project activities may occur for 1 year, in-water
vibratory pile driving is only expected to occur for up to of 4 days (2
days each for construction of the cofferdam and 2 days each for removal
of the cofferdam). Use of the DP vessel thruster during cable
installation activities is expected to occur for 4 to 6 weeks (42 days
maximum). Vibratory pile driving would occur during daylight hours
only, starting approximately 30 minutes after dawn and ending 30
minutes prior to dusk. Cable installation (and subsequent use of the DP
vessel thruster) would be conducted 24 hours per day.
Specified Geographic Region
The BITS cable would originate from a manhole on Block Island and
traverse federal and state submerged lands in Rhode Island Sound from
Block Island to Narragansett for a total distance of 19.8 miles with
water depths reaching up to 39 meters (m). Figure 1.2-1 of DWBIT's
application shows the project location in detail (see ADDRESSES).
Vibratory pile driving for temporary offshore cofferdam would occur at
a site located off of Scarborough State Beach. The temporary offshore
cofferdam would be located between 685.8 m and 1,112.5 m from shore.
Terrestrial cables and other terrestrial facilities associated with the
BITS will be located in the towns of New Shoreham (Block Island) and
Narragansett in Washington County, Rhode Island. Construction staging
and laydown for offshore components of the project will occur at the
Quonset Point port facility in North Kingstown, also in Washington
County, Rhode Island.
Detailed Description of Activities
The following sections provide additional details associated with
each portion of the BITS marine construction activities.
1. Landfall Construction
On Block Island, DWBIT plans to bring the BITS cable ashore via a
short-distance HDD. DWBIT would use the short-distance HDD to install
either a steel or high density polyethylene conduit for the cable from
the parking lot under Crescent Beach to a temporary excavated trench
beginning at about mean high water. The excavated trench on Crescent
Beach would be approximately 2 to 3 m wide, 4 m deep, and 11 m long.
Spoils from the trench excavation would be stored on the respective
beach and returned to the trench after cable installation. To support
the short-distance HDD on Crescent Beach, DWBIT would install steel
sheet piling to stabilize the excavated trench, possibly using a
vibratory pile driver. The HDD would enter through the shore side of
the excavated trench and the cable conduit would be installed between
the trench and the manhole. The BITS cable would then be pulled from
the excavated trench into the respective manhole through the newly
installed conduit. Sheet piling installations would occur at low tide.
The coupling of land-based vibrations and nearshore sounds into the
underwater acoustic field is not well understood and cannot be
accurately predicted using current models. However, because the
excavation for the cable trench and the HDD installation on the beach
would occur onshore and because sand is generally a very poor conductor
of vibrations, NMFS considers it unlikely that the underwater noise
generated from either of these installations would result in harassment
of marine mammals.
DWBIT is proposing to conduct the cable landfall on Scarborough
State Beach using a long-distance HDD from the manhole located within
the RIDEM parking lot to a temporary offshore cofferdam located between
685.8 m and 1,112.5 m from shore. From this location, a jet plow,
supported by a DP cable installation barge, would be used
[[Page 15575]]
to install the BITS cable below the seabed. Construction of the
temporary cofferdam would consist of the installation of steel sheet
piles to create an enclosed area approximately 15.2 by 6.1 m. The steel
sheet piles would be installed and later removed using a vibratory
hammer supported by a spud barge. DWBIT expects the cofferdam to be in
place between January and the end of May.
Vibratory pile driving would be required to install the temporary
cofferdam off of Scarborough State Beach. DWBIT assumes a 1,800 kilo
Newton vibratory force for estimating source levels and frequency
spectra. DWBIT modeled vibratory hammering at a source level of 194
decibels (dB) re 1 micro Pascal, using adjusted \1/3\-octave band
source levels from measurements of a similar offshore construction, and
adjusted to account for the estimated force necessary for driving of
the BITS cofferdam sheet piles. Detailed information on the acoustic
modeling for this source is provided in Appendix A of DWBIT's
application (see ADDRESSES).
2. Offshore Cable Installation
DWBIT would use a jet plow, supported by a DP cable installation
barge, to install the BITS cable below the seabed. The jet plow would
be positioned over the trench and pulled from shore by the cable
installation vessel. The jet plow would likely be a rubber-tired or
skid-mounted plow with a maximum width of about 4.6 m, and pulled along
the seafloor behind the cable-laying barge with assistance of a non-DP
material barge. High-pressure water from vessel-mounted pumps would be
injected into the sediments through nozzles situated along the plow,
causing the sediments to temporarily fluidize and create a liquefied
trench. DWBIT anticipates a temporary trench width of up to 1.5 m. As
the plow is pulled along the route behind the barge, the cable would be
laid into the temporary, liquefied trench through the back of the plow.
The trench would be backfilled by the water current and the natural
settlement of the suspended material. Umbilical cords would connect the
submerged jet plow to control equipment on the vessel to allow the
operators to monitor and control the installation process and make
adjustments to the speed and alignment as the installation proceeds
across the water.
The BITS cable would be buried to a target depth of 1.8 m beneath
the seafloor. The actual burial depth depends on substrate encountered
along the route and could vary from 1.2 to 2.4 m. Where the BITS
crosses two existing submarine cables on the outer continental shelf,
the cable would be installed directly on the seafloor and protected
from external aggression using a combination of sand bags and concrete
mattresses. Anchored vessels would be used to install both the BITS and
the associated cable armoring at these locations.
DP systems maintain their precise coordinates in waters through the
use of automatic controls. These control systems use variable levels of
power to counter forces from current and wind. During cable-lay
activities, DWBIT expects that a reduced 50 percent power level will be
used by DP vessels. DWBIT modeled scenarios using a source level of 180
dB re 1 micro Pascal for the DP vessel thruster, assuming water depths
of 7, 10, 20, and 40 m, and thruster power of 50 percent. Detailed
information on the acoustic modeling for this source is provided in
Appendix A of DWBIT's application (see ADDRESSES).
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
There are 34 marine mammal species with possible or confirmed
occurrence in the proposed area of the specified activity (Table 2).
Table 2--Marine Mammal Species With Possible or Confirmed Occurrence in the Proposed Project Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Common name Scientific name Status Occurrence Seasonality Range Abundance
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toothed whales (Odontocetes):
Atlantic white-sided dolphin Lagenorhynchus acutus......... ....................... Confirmed.............. Year-round............. North Carolina to Canada.. 23,390.
Atlantic spotted dolphin.... Stenella frontalis............ ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... 50,978.
Bottlenose dolphin.......... Tursiops truncatus............ Strategic (northern ....................... ....................... .......................... 9,604.
coastal stock).
Short-beaked common dolphin. Delphinus delphis............. ....................... Common................. Year-round............. North Carolina to Canada.. 120,743.
Harbor porpoise............. Phocoena phocoena............. Strategic.............. Common................. Year-round............. North Carolina to 89,054.
Greenland.
Killer whale................ Orcinus orca.................. ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... Unknown.
False killer whale.......... Pseudorca crassidens.......... ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... Unknown.
Long-finned pilot whale..... Globicephala malaena.......... ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... 12,619.
Short-finned pilot whale.... Globicephala macrohynchus..... ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... 24,674.
Risso's dolphin............. Grampus griseus............... ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... 20,479.
Striped dolphin............. Stenella coeruleoalba......... ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... 94,462.
White-beaked dolphin........ Lagenorhynchus albirostris.... ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... 2,003.
Sperm whale................. Physeter macrocephalus........ Endangered............. ....................... ....................... .......................... 4,804.
Pygmy sperm whale........... Kogia breviceps............... Strategic.............. ....................... ....................... .......................... 395.
Dwarf sperm whale........... Kogia sima.................... ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... 395.
Cuvier's beaked whale....... Ziphius cavirostris........... Strategic.............. ....................... ....................... .......................... 3,513.
[[Page 15576]]
Blainville's beaked whale... Mesoplodon densirostris....... ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... 3,513.
Gervais' beaked whale....... Mesoplodon europaeus.......... Strategic.............. ....................... ....................... .......................... 3,513.
True's beaked whale......... Mesoplodon mirus.............. Strategic.............. ....................... ....................... .......................... 3,513.
Bryde's whale............... Balaenoptera edeni............ ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... .......................
Northern bottlenose whale... Hyperoodon ampullatus......... ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... .......................
Baleen whales (Mysticetes):
Minke whale................. Balaenoptera acutorostrata.... ....................... Common (spring and Spring, summer, fall... Caribbean to Greenland.... 8,987.
summer).
Blue whale.................. Balaenoptera musculus......... Endangered............. ....................... ....................... .......................... Unknown.
Fin whale................... Balaenoptera physalus......... Endangered............. Common................. Year-round............. Caribbean to Greenland.... 3,985.
Humpback whale.............. Megaptera novaeangliae........ Endangered............. Confirmed.............. Year-round............. Caribbean to Greenland.... 11,570.
North Atlantic right whale.. Eubalaena glacialis........... Endangered............. Confirmed.............. Year-round............. Southeastern U.S. to 444.
Candada.
Sei whale................... Balaenoptera borealis......... Endangered............. ....................... ....................... .......................... Unknown.
Pinnipeds:
Gray seals.................. Halichoerus grypus............ ....................... Confirmed.............. Year-round............. New England to Canada..... 348,900.
Harbor seals................ Phoca vitulina................ ....................... Common................. Spring, summer, winter. Florida to Canada......... 99,340.
Hooded seals................ Cystophora cristata........... ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... Unknown.
Harp seal................... Phoca groenlandica............ ....................... ....................... ....................... .......................... Unknown.
West Indian manatee......... Trichechus manatus............ Endangered............. ....................... ....................... .......................... 3,802.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The highlighted species in Table 2 are pelagic and/or northern
species, or are so rarely sighted that their presence in the proposed
project area, and therefore take, is unlikely. These species are not
considered further in this proposed IHA notice. The West Indian manatee
is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and is also not
considered further in this proposed IHA notice. Further information on
the biology and local distribution of these species can be found in
section 4 of DWBIT's application (see ADDRESSES), and the NMFS Marine
Mammal Stock Assessment Reports, which are available online at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/.
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals
This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that the
types of stressors associated with the specified activity (i.e.,
vibratory pile driving and use of the DP vessel thruster) have been
observed to impact marine mammals. This discussion may also include
reactions that we consider to rise to the level of a take and those
that we do not consider to rise to the level of a take (for example,
with acoustics, we may include a discussion of studies that showed
animals not reacting at all to sound or exhibiting barely measurable
avoidance). This section is intended as a background of potential
effects and does not consider either the specific manner in which this
activity will be carried out or the mitigation that will be
implemented, and how either of those will shape the anticipated impacts
from this specific activity. The ``Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment'' section later in this document will include a quantitative
analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by
this activity. The ``Negligible Impact Analysis'' section will include
the analysis of how this specific activity will impact marine mammals
and will consider the content of this ``Potential Effects of the
Specified Activity on Marine Mammals'' section, the ``Estimated Take by
Incidental Harassment'' section, the ``Proposed Mitigation'' section,
and the ``Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat'' section to
draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of this activity on the
reproductive success or survivorship of individuals, and from that on
the affected marine mammal populations or stocks.
Background on Sound
Sound is a physical phenomenon consisting of minute vibrations that
travel through a medium, such as air or water, and is generally
characterized by several variables. Frequency describes the sound's
pitch and is measured in hertz (Hz) or kilohertz (kHz), while sound
level describes the sound's intensity and is measured in decibels (dB).
Sound level increases or decreases exponentially with each dB of
change. The logarithmic nature of the scale means that each 10-dB
increase is a 10-fold increase in acoustic power (and a 20-dB increase
is then a 100-fold increase in power). A 10-fold increase in acoustic
power does not mean that the sound is perceived as being 10 times
louder, however. Sound levels are compared to a reference sound
pressure (micro-Pascal) to identify the medium. For air and water,
these reference pressures are ``re: 20 [micro]Pa'' and ``re: 1
[micro]Pa,'' respectively. Root mean square (RMS) is the quadratic mean
sound pressure over the duration of an impulse. RMS is calculated by
squaring all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then
taking the square root of the average (Urick, 1975). RMS accounts for
both positive and negative
[[Page 15577]]
values; squaring the pressures makes all values positive so that they
may be accounted for in the summation of pressure levels (Hastings and
Popper, 2005). This measurement is often used in the context of
discussing behavioral effects, in part because behavioral effects,
which often result from auditory cues, may be better expressed through
averaged units rather than by peak pressures.
Acoustic Impacts
Vibratory pile driving and use of the DP vessel thruster during the
BITS project may temporarily impact marine mammals in the area due to
elevated in-water sound levels. Marine mammals are continually exposed
to many sources of sound. Naturally occurring sounds such as lightning,
rain, sub-sea earthquakes, and biological sounds (e.g., snapping
shrimp, whale songs) are widespread throughout the world's oceans.
Marine mammals produce sounds in various contexts and use sound for
various biological functions including, but not limited to: (1) Social
interactions; (2) foraging; (3) orientation; and (4) predator
detection. Interference with producing or receiving these sounds may
result in adverse impacts. Audible distance, or received levels of
sound depend on the nature of the sound source, ambient noise
conditions, and the sensitivity of the receptor to the sound
(Richardson et al., 1995). Type and significance of marine mammal
reactions to sound are likely dependent on a variety of factors
including, but not limited to, (1) the behavioral state of the animal
(e.g., feeding, traveling, etc.); (2) frequency of the sound; (3)
distance between the animal and the source; and (4) the level of the
sound relative to ambient conditions (Southall et al., 2007).
When considering the influence of various kinds of sound on the
marine environment, it is necessary to understand that different kinds
of marine life are sensitive to different frequencies of sound. Based
on available behavioral data, audiograms have been derived using
auditory evoked potentials, anatomical modeling, and other data,
Southall et al. (2007) designate ``functional hearing groups'' for
marine mammals and estimate the lower and upper frequencies of
functional hearing of the groups. The functional groups and the
associated frequencies are indicated below (though animals are less
sensitive to sounds at the outer edge of their functional range and
most sensitive to sounds of frequencies within a smaller range
somewhere in the middle of their functional hearing range):
Low frequency cetaceans (13 species of mysticetes):
functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 Hz and
22 kHz (however, a study by Au et al. (2006) of humpback whale songs
indicate that the range may extend to at least 24 kHz);
Mid-frequency cetaceans (32 species of dolphins, six
species of larger toothed whales, and 19 species of beaked and
bottlenose whales): functional hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;
High frequency cetaceans (eight species of true porpoises,
six species of river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana, and four species
of cephalorhynchids): functional hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 200 Hz and 180 kHz; and
Pinnipeds in Water: functional hearing is estimated to
occur between approximately 75 Hz and 75 kHz, with the greatest
sensitivity between approximately 700 Hz and 20 kHz.
As mentioned previously in this document, nine marine mammal
species (seven cetaceans and two pinnipeds) are likely to occur in the
proposed project area. Of the seven cetacean species likely to occur in
DWBIT's proposed project area, four are classified as low-frequency
cetaceans (i.e., minke whale, fin whale, humpback whale, and North
Atlantic right whale), two are classified as mid-frequency cetaceans
(i.e., Atlantic white-sided dolphin and short-beaked common dolphin),
and one is classified as a high-frequency cetacean (i.e., harbor
porpoise) (Southall et al., 2007). A species' functional hearing group
is a consideration when we analyze the effects of exposure to sound on
marine mammals.
1. Hearing Impairment
Marine mammals may experience temporary or permanent hearing
impairment when exposed to loud sounds. Hearing impairment is
classified by temporary threshold shift (TTS) and permanent threshold
shift (PTS). There are no empirical data for onset of PTS in any marine
mammal; therefore, PTS-onset must be estimated from TTS-onset
measurements and from the rate of TTS growth with increasing exposure
levels above the level eliciting TTS-onset. PTS is presumed to be
likely if the hearing threshold is reduced by >=40 dB (that is, 40 dB
of TTS). PTS is considered auditory injury (Southall et al., 2007) and
occurs in a specific frequency range and amount. Irreparable damage to
the inner or outer cochlear hair cells may cause PTS; however, other
mechanisms are also involved, such as exceeding the elastic limits of
certain tissues and membranes in the middle and inner ears and
resultant changes in the chemical composition of the inner ear fluids
(Southall et al., 2007).
2. Temporary Threshold Shift (TTS)
TTS is the mildest form of hearing impairment that can occur during
exposure to a loud sound (Kryter, 1985). While experiencing TTS, the
hearing threshold rises and a sound must be stronger in order to be
heard. At least in terrestrial mammals, TTS can last from minutes or
hours to (in cases of strong TTS) days, can be limited to a particular
frequency range, and can occur to varying degrees (i.e., a loss of a
certain number of dBs of sensitivity). For sound exposures at or
somewhat above the TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity in both
terrestrial and marine mammals recovers rapidly after exposure to the
noise ends.
Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with
conspecifics and in interpretation of environmental cues for purposes
such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree
(elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and
frequency range of TTS and the context in which it is experienced, TTS
can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to
serious. For example, a marine mammal may be able to readily compensate
for a brief, relatively small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency
range that takes place during a time when the animals is traveling
through the open ocean, where ambient noise is lower and there are not
as many competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and
longer duration of TTS sustained during a time when communication is
critical for successful mother/calf interactions could have more
serious impacts if it were in the same frequency band as the necessary
vocalizations and of a severity that it impeded communication. The fact
that animals exposed to levels and durations of sound that would be
expected to result in this physiological response would also be
expected to have behavioral responses of a comparatively more severe or
sustained nature is also notable and potentially of more importance
than the simple existence of a TTS.
Scientific literature highlights the inherent complexity of
predicting TTS onset in marine mammals, as well as the importance of
considering exposure duration when assessing potential impacts (Mooney
et al., 2009a, 2009b; Kastak et al., 2007). Generally, with sound
exposures of equal energy,
[[Page 15578]]
quieter sounds (lower SPL) of longer duration were found to induce TTS
onset more than louder sounds (higher SPL) of shorter duration (more
similar to subbottom profilers). For intermittent sounds, less
threshold shift will occur than from a continuous exposure with the
same energy (some recovery will occur between intermittent exposures)
(Kryter et al., 1966; Ward, 1997). For sound exposures at or somewhat
above the TTS-onset threshold, hearing sensitivity recovers rapidly
after exposure to the sound ends. Southall et al. (2007) considers a 6
dB TTS (that is, baseline thresholds are elevated by 6 dB) to be a
sufficient definition of TTS-onset. NMFS considers TTS as Level B
harassment that is mediated by physiological effects on the auditory
system; however, NMFS does not consider TTS-onset to be the lowest
level at which Level B harassment may occur. The potential for TTS is
considered within NMFS' analysis of potential impacts from Level B
harassment.
3. Tolerance
Numerous studies have shown that underwater sounds from industrial
activities are often readily detectable by marine mammals in the water
at distances of many kilometers. However, other studies have shown that
marine mammals at distances more than a few kilometers away often show
no apparent response to industrial activities of various types (Miller
et al., 2005). This is often true even in cases when the sounds must be
readily audible to the animals based on measured received levels and
the hearing sensitivity of that mammal group. Although various baleen
whales, toothed whales, and (less frequently) pinnipeds have been shown
to react behaviorally to underwater sound from sources such as airgun
pulses or vessels under some conditions, at other times, mammals of all
three types have shown no overt reactions (e.g., Malme et al., 1986;
Richardson et al., 1995; Madsen and Mohl, 2000; Croll et al., 2001;
Jacobs and Terhune, 2002; Madsen et al., 2002; Miller et al., 2005). In
general, pinnipeds seem to be more tolerant of exposure to some types
of underwater sound than are baleen whales. Richardson et al. (1995)
found that vessel sound does not seem to strongly affect pinnipeds that
are already in the water. Richardson et al. (1995) went on to explain
that seals on haul-outs sometimes respond strongly to the presence of
vessels and at other times appear to show considerable tolerance of
vessels, and Brueggeman et al. (1992) observed ringed seals (Pusa
hispida) hauled out on ice pans displaying short-term escape reactions
when a ship approached within 0.16-0.31 mi (0.25-0.5 km).
4. Masking
Masking is the obscuring of sounds of interest to an animal by
other sounds, typically at similar frequencies. Marine mammals are
highly dependent on sound, and their ability to recognize sound signals
amid other sound is important in communication and detection of both
predators and prey. Background ambient sound may interfere with or mask
the ability of an animal to detect a sound signal even when that signal
is above its absolute hearing threshold. Even in the absence of
anthropogenic sound, the marine environment is often loud. Natural
ambient sound includes contributions from wind, waves, precipitation,
other animals, and (at frequencies above 30 kHz) thermal sound
resulting from molecular agitation (Richardson et al., 1995).
Background sound may also include anthropogenic sound, and masking
of natural sounds can result when human activities produce high levels
of background sound. Conversely, if the background level of underwater
sound is high (e.g., on a day with strong wind and high waves), an
anthropogenic sound source would not be detectable as far away as would
be possible under quieter conditions and would itself be masked.
Ambient sound is highly variable on continental shelves (Thompson,
1965; Myrberg, 1978; Chapman et al., 1998; Desharnais et al., 1999).
This results in a high degree of variability in the range at which
marine mammals can detect anthropogenic sounds.
Although masking is a phenomenon which may occur naturally, the
introduction of loud anthropogenic sounds into the marine environment
at frequencies important to marine mammals increases the severity and
frequency of occurrence of masking. For example, if a baleen whale is
exposed to continuous low-frequency sound from an industrial source,
this would reduce the size of the area around that whale within which
it can hear the calls of another whale. The components of background
noise that are similar in frequency to the signal in question primarily
determine the degree of masking of that signal. In general, little is
known about the degree to which marine mammals rely upon detection of
sounds from conspecifics, predators, prey, or other natural sources. In
the absence of specific information about the importance of detecting
these natural sounds, it is not possible to predict the impact of
masking on marine mammals (Richardson et al., 1995). In general,
masking effects are expected to be less severe when sounds are
transient than when they are continuous. Masking is typically of
greater concern for those marine mammals that utilize low-frequency
communications, such as baleen whales, because of how far low-frequency
sounds propagate.
5. Behavioral Disturbance
Behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context-
specific. An animal's perception of and response to (in both nature and
magnitude) an acoustic event can be influenced by prior experience,
perceived proximity, bearing of the sound, familiarity of the sound,
etc. (Southall et al., 2007). If a marine mammal does react briefly to
an underwater sound by changing its behavior or moving a small
distance, the impacts of the change are unlikely to be significant to
the individual, let alone the stock or population. However, if a sound
source displaces marine mammals from an important feeding or breeding
area for a prolonged period, impacts on individuals and populations
could be significant (e.g., Lusseau and Bejder, 2007; Weilgart, 2007).
The studies that address responses of low-frequency cetaceans to
non-pulse sounds (such as vibratory pile driving or the sound emitted
from a DP vessel thruster) include data gathered in the field and
related to several types of sound sources (of varying similarity to
chirps), including: Vessel noise, drilling and machinery playback, low-
frequency M-sequences (sine wave with multiple phase reversals)
playback, tactical low-frequency active sonar playback, drill ships,
and non-pulse playbacks. These studies generally indicate no (or very
limited) responses to received levels in the 90 to 120 dB re: 1[mu]Pa
range and an increasing likelihood of avoidance and other behavioral
effects in the 120 to 160 dB range. As mentioned earlier, though,
contextual variables play a very important role in the reported
responses and the severity of effects are not linear when compared to
received level. Also, few of the laboratory or field datasets had
common conditions, behavioral contexts, or sound sources, so it is not
surprising that responses differ.
The studies that address responses of mid-frequency cetaceans to
non-pulse sounds include data gathered both in the field and the
laboratory and related to several different sound sources (of varying
similarity to chirps) including: Pingers, drilling playbacks, ship and
ice-breaking noise, vessel noise, Acoustic harassment devices (AHDs),
[[Page 15579]]
Acoustic Deterrent Devices (ADDs), mid-frequency active sonar, and non-
pulse bands and tones. Southall et al. (2007) were unable to come to a
clear conclusion regarding the results of these studies. In some cases
animals in the field showed significant responses to received levels
between 90 and 120 dB, while in other cases these responses were not
seen in the 120 to 150 dB range. The disparity in results was likely
due to contextual variation and the differences between the results in
the field and laboratory data (animals typically responded at lower
levels in the field).
The studies that address responses of high-frequency cetaceans to
non-pulse sounds include data gathered both in the field and the
laboratory and related to several different sound sources (of varying
similarity to chirps), including: Pingers, AHDs, and various laboratory
non-pulse sounds. All of these data were collected from harbor
porpoises. Southall et al. (2007) concluded that the existing data
indicate that harbor porpoises are likely sensitive to a wide range of
anthropogenic sounds at low received levels (around 90 to 120 dB), at
least for initial exposures. All recorded exposures above 140 dB
induced profound and sustained avoidance behavior in wild harbor
porpoises (Southall et al., 2007). Rapid habituation was noted in some
but not all studies.
The studies that address the responses of pinnipeds in water to
non-pulse sounds include data gathered both in the field and the
laboratory and related to several different sound sources (of varying
similarity to chirps), including: AHDs, various non-pulse sounds used
in underwater data communication, underwater drilling, and construction
noise. Few studies exist with enough information to include them in the
analysis. The limited data suggest that exposures to non-pulse sounds
between 90 and 140 dB generally do not result in strong behavioral
responses of pinnipeds in water, but no data exist at higher received
levels (Southall et al., 2007).
Given the many uncertainties in predicting the quantity and types
of impacts of noise on marine mammals, it is common practice to
estimate how many mammals would be present within a particular distance
of activities and/or exposed to a particular level of sound. In most
cases, this approach likely overestimates the numbers of marine mammals
that would be affected in some biologically-important manner.
6. Vessel Strike
Vessels and in-water structures have the potential to cause
physical disturbance to marine mammals. Various types of vessels
already use the water surrounding Rhode Island and Block Island in
particular. Tug boats and barges, both of which would be required
during the BITS construction are slow moving and follow a predictable
course. Marine mammals would be able to easily avoid these vessels and
are likely already habituated to the presence of numerous vessels.
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
There are no feeding areas, rookeries, or mating grounds known to
be biologically important to marine mammals within the proposed project
area. There is also no designated critical habitat for any ESA-listed
marine mammals. Harbor seals haul out on Block Island and points along
Narragansett Bay, the most important haul-out being on the edge of New
Harbor, about 2.4 km from the proposed BITS landfall on Block Island.
The only consistent haul-out locations for gray seals within the
vicinity of Rhode Island are around Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge
and Nantucket Sound in Massachusetts (more than 80 nautical miles from
the proposed project area). NMFS' regulations at 50 CFR 224 designated
the nearshore waters of the Mid-Atlantic Bight as the Mid-Atlantic U.S.
Seasonal Management Area (SMA) for right whales in 2008. Mandatory
vessel speed restrictions are in place in that SMA from November 1
through April 30 to reduce the threat of collisions between ships and
right whales around their migratory route and calving grounds.
The BITS involves activities that would disturb the seafloor and
potentially affect benthic and finfish communities. Installation of the
BITS cable and the temporary offshore cofferdam would result in the
temporary disturbance of no more than 45.3 acres of seafloor. These
installation activities would also result in temporary and localized
increases in turbidity around the proposed project area. DWBIT is
required to install additional protective armoring over the BITS where
it would cross two existing marine cables in federal waters. At the
cable crossing locations, the installation of additional protective
armoring would result in the permanent conversion of about 1.7 acre of
soft substrate to hard substrate. The BITS cable may also require
additional protective armoring in areas where the burial depth achieved
is less than 1.2 m. DWBIT expects that additional protection would be
required at a maximum of 1 percent of the entire BITS cable, resulting
in a conversion of up to 1 acre of soft substrate to hard substrate
along the cable route. During the installation of additional protective
armoring at the cable crossings and as necessary along the cable route,
anchors and anchor chains would temporarily impact about 1.8 acres of
bottom substrate during each anchoring event.
Jet-plowing and cofferdam installation would cause either the
displacement or loss of benthic and finfish resources in the immediate
areas of disturbance. This may result in a temporary loss of forage
items and a temporary reduction in the amount of benthic habitat
available for foraging marine mammals in the immediate proposed project
area. However, the amount of habitat affected represents a very small
percentage of the available foraging habitat in the proposed project
area. Increased underwater sound levels from cofferdam installation and
use of the DP vessel thruster may temporarily result in marine mammals
avoiding or abandoning the area.
Because of the temporary nature of the disturbance, the
availability of similar habitat and resources in the surrounding area,
and the lack of important or unique marine mammal habitat, the impacts
to marine mammals and the food sources that they utilize are not
expected to cause significant or long-term consequences for individual
marine mammals or their populations.
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization (ITA) under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible
methods of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of
effecting the least practicable impact on such species or stock and its
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and
areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species
or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (where relevant).
Proposed Mitigation Measures
With NMFS' input during the application process, DWBIT is proposing
the following mitigation measures during vibratory pile driving and use
of the DP vessel thruster:
1. Marine Mammal Exclusion Zone
Protected species observers would visually monitor a 200-m radius
during all in-water vibratory pile driving. This distance is estimated
to be the 160 dB isopleth based on DWBIT's sound
[[Page 15580]]
exposure model. A minimum of two observers would be stationed aboard
each noise-producing construction support vessel. Each observer would
visually monitor a 360-degree field of vision from the vessel.
Observers would begin monitoring at least 30 minutes prior to vibratory
pile driving, continue monitoring during vibratory pile driving, and
stop monitoring 30 minutes after vibratory pile driving has ended. If a
marine mammal is seen approaching or entering the 200-m zone during
vibratory pile driving, DWBIT would stop vibratory pile driving as a
precautionary measure to minimize noise impacts on the animal.
2. Soft-Start Procedures
DWBIT would use a soft-start (or ramp-up) procedure at the
beginning of vibratory pile driving. This procedure would require an
initial set of three strikes from the vibratory hammer at 40 percent
energy with a 1-minute waiting period between subsequent 3-strike sets.
DWBIT would repeat the procedure two additional times. DWBIT would
initiate a soft-start at the beginning of each day of pile driving and
if pile driving stops for more than 30 minutes. DWBIT would not
initiate a soft-start if the monitoring zone is obscured by fog,
inclement weather, poor lighting conditions, etc.
3. Delay and Shut-Down Procedures
DWBIT would delay vibratory pile driving and reduce DP vessel
thruster use if a marine mammal is observed within the exclusion zone
and until the exclusion zone is clear of marine mammals. DWBIT proposes
to stop vibratory pile driving if a marine mammal is seen within a 200-
m radius from the sound source at the Scarborough State Beach cofferdam
and would not be reinitiated until the 200-m radius is clear of marine
mammals for at least 30 minutes.
4. DP Thruster Power Reduction
A constant tension must be maintained during cable installation and
any significant stoppage in vessel maneuverability during jet plow
activities would result in damage to the cable. Therefore, during DP
vessel operations, DWBIT proposes to reduce DP thruster power to the
maximum extent possible if a marine mammal approaches or enters a 5-m
radius from the vessel (estimated to be the 160-dB isopleth from the
vessel). This reduction would not be implemented at the risk of
compromising safety and/or the integrity of the BITS. DWBIT would not
increase power until the 5-m zone is clear of marine mammals for 30
minutes.
5. Time of Day and Weather Restrictions
DWBIT would conduct vibratory pile driving off of Scarborough State
Beach during daylight hours only, starting approximately 30 minutes
after dawn and ending 30 minutes before dusk. If a soft-start is
initiated before the onset of inclement weather, DWBIT would complete
that segment of vibratory pile driving. DWBIT would not initiate new
vibratory pile driving activities until the entire monitoring zone is
visible.
Mitigation Conclusions
NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation
measures and considered a range of other measures in the context of
ensuring that NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least
practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and
their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included
consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:
The manner in which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize
adverse impacts to marine mammals;
The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to
minimize adverse impacts as planned; and
The practicability of the measure for applicant
implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS should be able to
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of
the general goals listed below:
1. Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).
2. A reduction in the numbers of marine mammals (total number or
number at biologically important time or location) exposed to received
levels of continuous noise, or other activities expected to result in
the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to
reducing harassment takes only).
3. A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at
biologically important time or location) individuals would be exposed
to received levels of continuous noise, or other activities expected to
result in the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1,
above, or to reducing harassment takes only).
4. A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number
or number at biologically important time or location) to received
levels of continuous noise, or other activities expected to result in
the take of marine mammals (this goal may contribute to a, above, or to
reducing the severity of harassment takes only).
5. Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that
block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas,
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/disturbance
of habitat during a biologically important time.
6. For monitoring directly related to mitigation--an increase in
the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more
effective implementation of the mitigation.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammals species or
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an ITA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, ``requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such taking.'' The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for ITAs
must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary
monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the
species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area.
Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should accomplish one or more of
the following general goals:
1. An increase in the probability of detecting marine mammals, both
within the mitigation zone (thus allowing for more effective
implementation of the mitigation) and in general to generate more data
to contribute to the analyses mentioned below;
2. An increase in our understanding of how many marine mammals are
likely to be exposed to levels of continuous noise from vibratory pile
driving and use of a DP vessel thruster that we associate with specific
adverse effects, such as behavioral harassment, TTS, or PTS;
[[Page 15581]]
3. An increase in our understanding of how marine mammals respond
to stimuli expected to result in take and how anticipated adverse
effects on individuals (in different ways and to varying degrees) may
impact the population, species, or stock (specifically through effects
on annual rates of recruitment or survival) through any of the
following methods:
Behavioral observations in the presence of stimuli
compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to
accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other
pertinent information);
Physiological measurements in the presence of stimuli
compared to observations in the absence of stimuli (need to be able to
accurately predict received level, distance from source, and other
pertinent information);
Distribution and/or abundance comparisons in times or
areas with concentrated stimuli versus times or areas without stimuli;
4. An increased knowledge of the affected species; and
5. An increase in our understanding of the effectiveness of certain
mitigation and monitoring measures.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
DWBIT submitted a marine mammal monitoring plan as part of the IHA
application. It can be found in section 12 of their application. The
plan may be modified or supplemented based on comments or new
information received from the public during the public comment period.
1. Visual Monitoring
DWBIT would use protected species observers to visually monitor the
surrounding area during all in-water vibratory pile driving and use of
DP vessel thrusters. These observers would monitor beyond the estimated
160-dB isopleths, in addition to conducting mitigation monitoring
within these zones. Observers would estimate distances to marine
mammals visually, using laser range finders, or by using reticle
binoculars during daylight hours. During night operations (DP vessel
thruster use only), observers would use night-vision binoculars.
Observers would record their position using hand-held or vessel global
positioning system units for each sighting, vessel position change, and
any environmental change. Each observer would scan the surrounding area
for visual indication of marine mammal presence. Observers would be
located from the highest available vantage point on the associated
operational platform (e.g., support vessel, barge or tug), estimated to
be at least 6 m above the waterline.
Prior to initiation of construction work, all crew members on
barges, tugs, and support vessels would undergo environmental training,
a component of which would focus on the procedures for sighting and
protection of marine mammals. DWBIT would also conduct a briefing with
the construction supervisors and crews and observers to define chains
of command, discuss communication procedures, provide an overview of
the monitoring purposes, and review operational procedures. The DWBIT
Construction Compliance Manager (or other authorized individual) would
have the authority to stop or delay vibratory pile driving activities
if deemed necessary.
2. Acoustic Field Verification
DWBIT would conduct field verification of the estimated 160-dB
isopleths during vibratory pile driving and use of the DP vessel
thruster to determine whether the proposed distances are adequate to
minimize impacts to marine mammals.
DWBIT would conduct field verification of the 200-m radius marine
mammal exclusion zone at the Scarborough State Beach cofferdam. DWBIT
would take acoustic measurements during vibratory pile driving of the
last half (deepest sheet pile segment) for any given open-water pile
and would also measure from two reference locations at two water depths
(a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m above the seafloor). If the
field measurements determine that the 160-dB isopleth is less than or
beyond the proposed 200-m distance, a new zone may be established
accordingly. DWBIT would notify NMFS and the USACE within 24 hours if a
new marine mammal exclusion zone is established that extends beyond 200
m. Implementation of a smaller zone would be contingent on NMFS' review
and would not be used until NMFS approves the change.
DWBIT would also perform field verification of the 160-dB isopleth
associated with DP vessel thruster use during cable installation. DWBIT
would take acoustic measurements from two reference locations at two
water depths (a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m above the
seafloor). Similar to field verification during vibratory pile driving,
the DP thruster power reduction zone may be modified as necessary.
Proposed Reporting Measures
Observers would record dates and locations of construction
operations; times of observations; location and weather; details of
marine mammal sightings (e.g., species, age, numbers, behavior); and
details of any observed take.
DWBIT proposes to provide the following notifications and reports
during construction activities:
Notification to NMFS and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) within 24-hours of beginning construction activities and again
within 24-hours of completion;
Detailed report of field-verification measurements within
7 days of completion (including: sound levels, durations, spectral
characteristics, DP thruster use, etc.) and notification to NMFS and
the USACE within 24-hours if a new zone is established;
Notification to NMFS and USACE within 24-hours if field
verification measurements suggest a larger marine mammal exclusion
zone;
Final technical report to NMFS and the USACE within 120
days of completion of the specified activity documenting methods and
monitoring protocols, mitigation implementation, marine mammal
observations, other results, and discussion of mitigation
effectiveness.
In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner not permitted by the
authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury, or
mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction, and/or entanglement),
DWBIT shall immediately cease the specified activities and immediately
report the incident to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits
and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-
427-8401 and/or by email to Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov and the Northeast Regional Stranding
Coordinator at 978-281-9300 (Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov). The report must
include the following information:
Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the
incident;
Name and type of vessel involved;
Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
Description of the incident;
Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
Water depth;
Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
[[Page 15582]]
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
DWBIT shall not resume its activities until we are able to review
the circumstances of the prohibited take. We will work with DWBIT to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. DWBIT may not resume their
activities until notified by us via letter, email, or telephone.
In the event that DWBIT discovers an injured or dead marine mammal,
and the lead visual observer determines that the cause of the injury or
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than
a moderate state of decomposition), DWBIT shall immediately report the
incident to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 301-427-8401
and/or by email to Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and
Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov and the Northeast Regional Stranding
Coordinator at 978-281-9300 (Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov). The report must
include the same information identified in the paragraph above this
section. Activities may continue while we review the circumstances of
the incident. We would work with DWBIT to determine whether
modifications in the activities are appropriate.
In the event that DWBIT discovers an injured or dead marine mammal,
and the lead visual observer determines that the injury or death is not
associated with or related to the authorized activities (e.g.,
previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), DWBIT would report the incident to
the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 301-427-8401 and/or by
email to Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov and
the Northeast Regional Stranding Coordinator at 978-281-9300
(Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov), within 24 hours of the discovery. DWBIT would
provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other
documentation of the stranded animal sighting to us.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering [Level B harassment].
Project activities that have the potential to harass marine
mammals, as defined by the MMPA, include noise associated with
vibratory pile driving of the temporary cofferdam, and noise associated
with the use of DP vessel thrusters during cable installation.
Harassment could take the form of masking, temporary threshold shift,
avoidance, or other changes in marine mammal behavior. NMFS anticipates
that impacts to marine mammals would be in the form of behavioral
harassment and no take by injury, serious injury, or mortality is
proposed. NMFS does not anticipate take resulting from the movement of
vessels associated with construction because there will be a limited
number of vessels moving at slow speeds over a relatively shallow,
nearshore area.
NMFS' current acoustic exposure criteria are shown in Table 3
below. Sound levels from vibratory pile driving or use of the DP vessel
thruster would not reach the Level A harassment threshold of 180/190 dB
(cetaceans/pinnipeds) during the proposed BITS project. DWBIT modeled
distances to these acoustic exposure criteria are shown in Table 4.
Details on the model characteristics and results are provided in the
Underwater Acoustic Report at the end of DWBIT's application (see
ADDRESSES). DWBIT and NMFS believe that this estimate represents the
worst-case scenario and that the actual distance to the Level B
harassment threshold may be shorter.
Table 3--NMFS' Current Acoustic Exposure Criteria
[Non-explosive sound]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Criterion Criterion definition Threshold
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A Harassment (Injury). Permanent Threshold 180 dB re 1 microPa-
Shift (PTS) (Any m (cetaceans)/190
level above that dB re 1 microPa-m
which is known to (pinnipeds) root
cause TTS). mean square (rms).
Level B Harassment.......... Behavioral 160 dB re 1 microPa-
Disruption (for m (rms).
impulse noises).
Level B Harassment.......... Behavioral 120 dB re 1 microPa-
Disruption (for m (rms).
continuous, noise).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4--DWBIT's Modeled Distances to Acoustic Exposure Criteria
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance to Level B Distance to Level A
Activity harassment (120 dB) harassment (180/190 dB)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory pile driving (for long-distance HDD).......... >40 km N/A
DP vessel thruster use.................................. 4,750 m N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DWBIT estimated species densities within the proposed project area
in order to estimate the number of marine mammal exposures to sound
levels above 120 dB. DWBIT used sightings per unit effort (SPUE) from
Kenney and Vigness-Raposa (2009) for relative cetacean abundance and
the Northeast Navy OPAREA Density Estimates (DoN, 2007) for seal
abundance. Based on multiple reports, harbor seal abundance off the
coast of Rhode Island is thought to be about 20 percent of the total
abundance for southern New England. Because the seasonality and habitat
use of gray seals off the coast of Rhode Island roughly overlaps with
harbor seals, DWBIT applied this 20 percent estimate to both pinniped
species. While the density estimates relied upon for this proposed
authorization are from 2007 and 2009, they are the best scientific data
available. NMFS is not aware of any efforts to collect more recent
density estimates than those relied upon here.
[[Page 15583]]
Estimated takes were calculated by multiplying the average highest
species density (per 100 km\2\) by the zone of influence (maximum
ensonified area of 120 dB), multiplied by a correction factor of 1.5 to
account for marine mammals underwater, multiplied by the number of days
of the specified activity. A detailed description of the DWBIT's model
used to calculate zones of influence is provided in the Underwater
Acoustic Report at the end of their application (see ADDRESSES).
DWBIT used a zone of influence of 4,352 km\2\ and a total
construction period of 4 days to estimate take from vibratory pile
driving. In contrast to their application, DWBIT clarified that the
vibratory pile driving would likely occur over a 2-day period during
the winter and a 2-day period during the spring. Their take
calculations were revised after the application was submitted. For each
species, DWBIT used the estimated seasonal density (winter and spring)
to calculate take for a total of 4 days (2 days each season). DWBIT's
requested take numbers are provided in Table 5 and this is also the
number of takes NMFS is proposing to authorize. DWBIT's calculations do
not take into account whether a single animal is harassed multiple
times or whether each exposure is a different animal. Therefore, the
numbers in Table 5 are the maximum number of animals that may be
harassed during vibratory pile driving (i.e., DWBIT assumes that each
exposure event is a different animal). These estimates do not account
for mitigation measures that DWBIT would implement during vibratory
pile driving.
DWBIT used a zone of influence of 23.0 km\2\ and a maximum
installation period of 42 days to estimate take from use of the DP
vessel thruster during cable installation. The zone of influence
represents the average ensonified area across the three representative
water depths along the cable route (7 m, 10 m, 20 m, and 40 m). DWBIT
expects cable installation to occur between April and August; to be
conservative, DWBIT used the highest seasonal species density to
calculate take. Again, DWBIT's calculations do not take into account
whether a single animal is harassed multiple times or whether each
exposure is a different animal. Therefore, the numbers in Table 5 are
the maximum number of animals that may be harassed during cable
installation. These estimates do not account for mitigation measures
that DWBIT would implement during the cable installation.
DWBIT did not request, and NMFS is not proposing, take from vessel
strike. We do not anticipate marine mammals to be impacted by vessel
movement because a limited number of vessels would be involved in
construction activities and they would mostly move at slow speeds
throughout construction.
Table 5--DWBIT's Estimated Take for the BITS Project
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory pile driving DP Vessel thruster
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated Maximum Total
Common species name winter density spring density Estimated take seasonal Estimated take estimated take
(per 100 (per 100 by Level B density (per by Level B
km\2\) km\2\) harassment 100 km\2\) harassment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic white-sided dolphin............................ 2.12 1.23 438 2.12 18 456
Short-beaked common dolphin............................. 2.04 2.59 604 2.59 38 644
Harbor porpoise......................................... 0.00 0.74 97 0.74 11 108
Minke whale............................................. 0.19 0.12 40 0.19 3 43
Fin whale............................................... 0.30 0.62 121 2.15 32 153
Humpback whale.......................................... 0.00 0.11 15 0.11 2 17
North Atlantic right whale.............................. 0.00 0.06 7 0.06 1 8
Gray seal............................................... 14.16 14.16 739 14.16 41 780
Harbor seal............................................. 9.74 9.74 509 9.74 29 538
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--Species Information and Take Proposed for Authorization by NMFS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of
Take proposed Abundance of stock
Common species name for stock potentially Population trend
authorization affected
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic white-sided dolphin......... 456 23,390 1.95 N/A.
Short-beaked common dolphin.......... 644 120,743 0.53 N/A.
Harbor porpoise...................... 108 89,054 0.12 N/A.
Minke whale.......................... 43 8,987 0.48 N/A.
Fin whale............................ 153 3,985 3.84 N/A.
Humpback whale....................... 17 11,570 0.15 Increasing.
North Atlantic right whale........... 8 444 1.80 Increasing.
Gray seal............................ 784 348,900 0.22 Increasing.
Harbor seal.......................... 540 99,340 0.54 N/A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis and Preliminary Determinations
Negligible Impact
Negligible impact is ``an impact resulting from the specified
activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably
likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival'' (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of Level B harassment takes,
alone, is not enough information on which to base an impact
determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of
marine mammals that might be ``taken'' through behavioral harassment,
NMFS must consider other factors, such as the likely nature of any
responses (their intensity, duration, etc.), the context of any
responses (critical reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), as
well as the number
[[Page 15584]]
and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes, the number of
estimated mortalities, and effects on habitat.
DWBIT did not request, and NMFS is not proposing, take of marine
mammals by injury, serious injury, or mortality. NMFS expects that take
would be in the form of behavioral harassment. Exposure to sound levels
above 120 dB during vibratory pile driving would not last for more than
12 hours per day for 4 non-consecutive days. Exposure to sound levels
above 120 dB during use of the DP vessel thruster may last for 24 hours
per day for 42 days. While use of the DP thruster may last for
consecutive days, the vessel would be moving and therefore not focused
on one specific area for the entire duration. Given the duration and
intensity of the activity, and the fact that shipping contributes to
the ambient sound levels around Rhode Island, NMFS does not anticipate
the proposed take estimates to impact annual rates of recruitment or
survival. Animals may temporarily avoid the immediate area, but are not
expected to permanently abandon the area. Marine mammal habitat may be
impacted by elevated sound levels and sediment disturbance, but these
impacts would be temporary. Furthermore, there are no feeding areas,
rookeries, or mating grounds known to be biologically important to
marine mammals within the proposed project area. There is also no
designated critical habitat for any ESA-listed marine mammals. The
proposed mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number and/or
severity of takes by (1) giving animals the opportunity to move away
from the sound source before the pile driver reaches full energy; (2)
reducing the intensity of exposure within a certain distance by
reducing the DP vessel thruster power; and (3) preventing animals from
being exposed to increased sound levels within 200 m of vibratory pile
driving.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine
mammal take from DWBIT's BITS project will have a negligible impact on
the affected marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
The number of individual animals that may be exposed to sound
levels above 120 dB is small relative to the species or stock size
(Table 6). The proposed take numbers are the maximum numbers of animals
that are expected to be harassed during the BITS project; it is
possible that some of these exposures may occur to the same individual.
NMFS preliminarily finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be
taken relative to the populations of the affected species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence
Uses
There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated
by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of
affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
There are three marine mammal species that are listed as endangered
under the ESA: Fin whale, humpback whale, and North Atlantic right
whale. Under section 7 of the ESA, the USACE (the federal permitting
agency for the actual construction) consulted with NMFS on the proposed
BITS project. NMFS Northeast Region issued a Biological Opinion on
January 30, 2014, concluding that the Block Island Wind Farm project
(which includes the BITS) may adversely affect but is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of fin whale, humpback whale, or
North Atlantic right whale. NMFS is also consulting internally on the
issuance of an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for this
activity. The Biological Opinion may be amended to include an
incidental take exemption for these marine mammal species.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
The USACE is preparing an Environmental Assessment on the
construction and operation of the BITS. The USACE's EA is not expected
to be finalized prior to NMFS making a determination on the issuance of
an IHA. Therefore, NMFS is currently conducting an analysis, pursuant
to the NEPA, to determine whether or not DWBIT's proposed activity may
have a significant effect on the human environment. This analysis will
be completed prior to the issuance or denial of this proposed IHA.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to DWBIT for conducting vibratory pile driving and use of
a DP vessel thruster during construction of the BITS from late 2014 to
late 2015, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring,
and reporting requirements are incorporated. The proposed IHA language
is provided next.
This section contains a draft of the IHA itself. The wording
contained in this section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if
issued).
Deepwater Wind Block Island Transmission, LLC (DWBIT) (56 Exchange
Terrace, Suite 101, Providence, RI 02903-1772) is hereby authorized
under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16
U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(D)) and 50 CFR 216.107, to harass marine mammals
incidental to vibratory pile driving and DP vessel thruster use during
construction of the Block Island Transmission System (BITS).
1. This Authorization is valid from December 1, 2014 through
November 31, 2015.
2. This Authorization is valid for construction of the BITS off
Block Island, Rhode Island, as described in the Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) application.
3. The holder of this authorization (Holder) is hereby authorized
to take, by Level B harassment only, 456 Atlantic white-sided dolphins
(Lagenorhynchus acutus), 644 short-beaked common dolphins (Delphinus
delphis), 108 harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), 43 minke whales
(Balaenoptera acutorostrata), 153 fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus),
17 humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae), 8 North Atlantic right
whales (Eubalaena glacialis), 780 gray seals (Halichoerus grypus), and
538 harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) incidental to vibratory pile driving
DP vessel thruster use associated with construction of the BITS.
4. The taking of any marine mammal in a manner prohibited under
this IHA must be reported immediately to NMFS' Northeast Region, 55
Great Republic Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-2276; phone 978-281-9328,
and NMFS' Office of Protected Resources, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver
Spring, MD 20910; phone 301-427-8401; fax 301-713-0376.
5. The Holder or designees must notify NMFS' Northeast Region and
Headquarters at least 24 hours prior to the seasonal commencement of
the specified activity (see contact information in 4 above).
6. Mitigation Requirements
The Holder is required to abide by the following mitigation
conditions listed in 6(a)-(e). Failure to comply with these conditions
may result in the
[[Page 15585]]
modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA.
(a) Marine Mammal Exclusion Zone: Protected species observers shall
visually monitor an estimated 160-dB isopleth during all vibratory pile
driving activity to ensure that no marine mammals enter this zone. A
minimum of two observers shall be stationed aboard the noise-producing
support vessel and shall monitor a 360-degree field of vision.
Observers shall begin monitoring at least 30 minutes prior to vibratory
pile driving, continue monitoring during vibratory pile driving, and
stop monitoring 30 minutes after vibratory pile driving has ended.
(b) Soft-start Procedures: Soft-start procedures shall be
implemented at the beginning of each day and if pile driving has
stopped for more than 30 minutes. Contractors shall initiate a set of
three strikes form the vibratory hammer at 40 percent energy with a 1-
minute waiting period between subsequent three-strike sets. This
procedure shall be repeated two additional times before full energy is
reached.
(c) Delay and Shutdown Procedures: The Holder shall delay vibratory
pile driving if a marine mammal is observed within the estimated 160-dB
isopleth marine mammal exclusion zone and until the exclusion zone is
clear of marine mammals. The Holder shall stop vibratory pile driving
if a marine mammal is seen within the estimated 160-dB isopleth from
the sound source at the Scarborough State Beach cofferdam and would not
reinitiate vibratory pile driving until the exclusion zone is clear of
marine mammals for at least 30 minutes.
(d) DP Thruster Power Reduction: The Holder shall reduce DP
thruster power to the maximum extent possible if a marine mammal
approaches or enters the estimated 160-dB isopleth from the vessel. The
Holder shall not increase power until the zone is clear of marine
mammals for 30 minutes.
(e) Time of Day and Weather Restrictions: The Holder shall conduct
vibratory pile driving during daylight hours only, starting
approximately 30 minutes after dawn and ending 30 minutes before dusk.
The Holder shall not initiate vibratory pile driving until the entire
marine mammal exclusion zone is visible.
7. Monitoring Requirements
The Holder is required to abide by the following monitoring
conditions listed in 7(a)-(b). Failure to comply with these conditions
may result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of this IHA.
(a) General: If the Level B harassment area is obscured by fog or
poor lighting conditions, the start of vibratory pile driving shall be
delayed until the area is visible.
(b) Visual Monitoring: Protected species observers shall survey
beyond the estimated 160-dB isopleths 30 minutes before, during, and 30
minutes after all in-water vibratory pile driving and use of DP vessel
thrusters. The observers shall be stationed on the highest available
vantage point on the associated operating platform. Observers shall
estimate distances to marine mammals visually, using laser range
finders, or by using reticle binoculars during daylight hours. During
night operations (DP vessel thruster use only), observers shall use
night-vision binoculars. Information recorded during each observation
shall be used to estimate numbers of animals potentially taken and
shall include the following:
Numbers of individuals observed;
Frequency of observation;
Location (i.e., distance from the sound source);
Vibratory pile driving status (i.e., soft-start, active,
post pile driving, etc.);
DP vessel thruster status (i.e., energy level); and
Reaction of the animal(s) to relevant sound source (if
any) and observed behavior, including bearing and direction of travel.
(c) Acoustic Field Verification: The Holder shall conduct field
verification of the estimated 160-dB isopleths during vibratory pile
driving and use of the DP vessel thruster. Acoustic measurements shall
be taken during vibratory pile driving of the last half (deepest sheet
pile segment) for any given open-water pile and from two reference
locations at two water depths (a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m
above the seafloor). If the field measurements show that the 160-dB
isopleth is less than or beyond the initially proposed 200-m distance,
a new zone may be established accordingly. The Holder shall notify NMFS
within 24 hours if a new marine mammal exclusion zone is established
that extends beyond 200 m. Implementation of a smaller zone shall be
contingent on NMFS' review and shall not be used until NMFS approves
the change.
The Holder shall also perform field verification of the 160-dB
isopleth associated with DP vessel thruster use during cable
installation. Acoustic measurements shall be taken from two reference
locations at two water depths (a depth at mid-water and at about 1 m
above the seafloor). Similar to field verification during vibratory
pile driving, the DP thruster power reduction zone may be modified as
necessary.
8. Reporting Requirements
The Holder shall provide the following notifications during
construction activities:
Notification to NMFS within 24-hours of beginning
construction and again within 24-hours of completion;
Detailed report of field-verification measurements within
7 days of completion and notification to NMFS within 24-hours if a new
zone is established; and
Notification to NMFS within 24-hours if field verification
measurements suggest a larger marine mammal exclusion zone.
The Holder shall submit a technical report to the Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, within 120 days of the conclusion of
monitoring.
(a) The report shall contain the following information:
A summary of the activity and monitoring plan (i.e.,
dates, times, locations);
A summary of mitigation implementation;
Monitoring results and a summary that addresses the goals
of the monitoring plan, including the following:
[cir] Environmental conditions when observations were made:
[cir] Water conditions (i.e., Beaufort sea-state, tidal state)
[cir] Weather conditions (i.e., percent cloud cover, visibility,
percent glare)
[cir] Date and time survey initiated and terminated
[cir] Date, time, number, species, and any other relevant data
regarding marine mammals observed (for pre-activity, during activity,
and post-activity surveys)
[cir] Description of the observed behaviors (in both the presence
and absence of activities):
[ssquf] If possible, the correlation to underwater sound level
occurring at the time of any observable behavior
Estimated exposure/take numbers during activities; and
An assessment of the implementation and effectiveness of
prescribed mitigation and monitoring measures.
(b) In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner not permitted by the
authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury, or
mortality (e.g., ship-strike, gear interaction, and/or entanglement),
the Holder shall immediately cease the specified activities and
immediately report the incident to the Incidental
[[Page 15586]]
Take Program Supervisor, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, at 301-427-8401 and/or by email to
Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov and Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov. The report
must include the following information:
Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the
incident;
Name and type of vessel involved;
Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;
Description of the incident;
Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
Water depth;
Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction,
Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, and visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
The Holder shall not resume its activities until we are able to
review the circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS will work with
the Holder to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of
further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. The Holder may not
resume activities until notified by us via letter, email, or telephone.
(c) In the event that the Holder discovers an injured or dead
marine mammal, and the lead visual observer determines that the cause
of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent
(i.e., in less than a moderate state of decomposition as we describe in
the next paragraph), the Holder shall immediately report the incident
to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 301-427-8401 and/or by
email to Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov, Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov, and
Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov. The report must include the same information
identified in the paragraph above this section. Activities may continue
while we review the circumstances of the incident. NMFS will work with
the Holder to determine whether modifications in the activities are
appropriate.
(d) In the event that the Holder discovers an injured or dead
marine mammal, and the lead visual observer determines that the injury
or death is not associated with or related to the authorized activities
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), the Holder shall report the
incident to the Incidental Take Program Supervisor, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, at 301-427-8401
and/or by email to Jolie.Harrison@noaa.gov,
Michelle.Magliocca@noaa.gov, and Mendy.Garron@noaa.gov within 24 hours
of the discovery. The Holder shall provide photographs or video footage
(if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting
to us.
9. A copy of this IHA must be in the possession of the lead
contractor on site and protected species observers operating under the
authority of this authorization.
10. This IHA may be modified, suspended, or withdrawn if the Holder
fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if the authorized
taking is having more than a negligible impact on the species or stock
of affected marine mammals.
Request for Public Comments
NMFS requests comment on our analysis, the draft authorization, and
any other aspect of the Notice of Proposed IHA for DWBIT's construction
of the BITS. Please include with your comments any supporting data or
literature citations to help inform our final decision on DWBIT's
request for an MMPA authorization.
Dated: March 14, 2014.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-06140 Filed 3-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P