Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Construction of the East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, 43710-43719 [2015-18021]
Download as PDF
43710
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices
determination ‘‘is clearly erroneous and
would work a manifest injustice.’’ 9 The
Court also granted the Department’s
voluntary remand request to examine
possible double-counting errors in the
land benchmark dataset, and instructed
the Department to supply additional
explanation regarding the use of simple
averaging, the expansion of the dataset
with additional prices, and the use of
different benchmark prices for the 2008
and 2010 parcels.10
On February 13, 2015, the Department
filed the Final Remand Results with the
Court, in which it restored the
benchmark originally calculated for the
2008 land subsidy in the 2010 CVD
Review and further explained aspects of
the benchmark used to value the 2010
land subsidy. In addition, the
Department examined and corrected as
necessary duplication errors in the
dataset used to calculate the benchmark
for the 2010 land subsidy.11 On April 1,
2015, the Court entered judgment
sustaining the Final Remand Results.12
Timken Notice
In Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades, 626
F.3d at 1381, the CAFC held that,
pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the
Department must publish a notice of a
court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’
with a Department determination and
must suspend liquidation of entries
pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision.
The Court’s judgment in Toscelik II
sustaining the Final Remand Results
constitutes a final decision of the Court
that is not in harmony with the
Department’s Final Results. This notice
is published in fulfillment of the
publication requirement of Timken.
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court
decision, the Department is amending
the Final Results with respect to
Toscelik. The revised net subsidy rate
for Toscelik during the period January 1,
2011, through December 31, 2011, is as
follows:
Producer/exporter
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Toscelik Profil ve Sac
Endustrisi A.S.
Total net
subsidy rate
de minimis.
Since the Court’s ruling is final and
no party has appealed, the Department
will instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection to assess without regard to
9 See
Toscelik I at 10.
10 Id. at 14–16.
11 See Final Remand Results at 5–12.
12 See Toscelik II at 6.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:39 Jul 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
countervailing duties unliquidated
entries of subject merchandise for the
producer/exporter listed above during
the POR.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Cash Deposit Requirements
Availability
An electronic copy of CALTRANS’
application and supporting documents,
as well as a list of the references cited
in this document, may be obtained by
visiting the Internet at:
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/construction.htm. In case of
problems accessing these documents,
please call the contact listed above (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Since the Final Results, the
Department has established a new cash
deposit rate for Toscelik.13 Therefore,
the cash deposit rate for Toscelik does
not need to be updated as a result of
these amended final results.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: July 16, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015–18087 Filed 7–22–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XD829
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental
to Specified Activities; Construction of
the East Span of the San FranciscoOakland Bay Bridge
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
AGENCY:
Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
ACTION:
In accordance with the
regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as
amended, notification is hereby given
that we have issued an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to
California Department of Transportation
(CALTRANS) to incidentally harass, by
Level B harassment only, four species of
marine mammals during activities
related to the construction of Pier 3 of
the East Span of the San FranciscoOakland Bay Bridge (SF–OBB) in
California
SUMMARY:
This authorization is effective
from July 15, 2015 through July 14,
2016.
DATES:
13 See Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and
Tubes From Turkey: Final Results of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review; Calendar Year 2012
and Rescission of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review, in Part, 79 FR 51140
(August 27, 2014).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Robert Pauline, 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.
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.’’
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
established an expedited process by
which citizens of the U.S. can apply for
an authorization to incidentally take
small numbers of marine mammals by
harassment. Section 101(a)(5)(D)
establishes a 45-day time limit for
NMFS’ review of an application
followed by a 30-day public notice and
comment period on any proposed
authorizations for the incidental
harassment of marine mammals. Within
45 days of the close of the comment
period, NMFS must either issue or deny
the authorization. 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
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices
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 December 15, 2014, CALTRANS
submitted its most recent request to
NOAA requesting an IHA for the
possible harassment of small numbers of
California sea lions (Zalophus
californianus), Pacific harbor seals
(Phoca vitulina richardsii), harbor
porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), and
gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus)
incidental to construction associated
with a replacement bridge for the East
Span of the SF–OBB, in San Francisco
Bay (SFB, or Bay), California.
An IHA was previously issued to
CALTRANS for this activity on January
8, 2014 (79 FR 2421; January 14, 2014),
based on activities described on
CALTRANS’ IHA application dated
April 13, 2013. That IHA expired on
January 7, 2015. Since the construction
activity would continue for another two
years, CALTRANS requests to renew its
IHA. In its IHA renewal request,
CALTRANS also states that there has
been no change in the scope of work for
the SF–OBB Project from what was
outlined in its April 13, 2013, IHA
application project description, the
Federal Register notice for the proposed
IHA (78 FR 60852; October 2, 2013), and
the Federal Register notice for the
issuance of that IHA (79 FR 2421;
January 14, 2014). On November 10,
2003, NMFS issued the first projectrelated IHA authorizing the take of
small numbers of marine mammals
incidental to the construction of the
SFOBB Project. CALTRANS has been
issued a total of seven subsequent IHAs
for the SF–OBB Project to date,
excluding the application currently
under review.
Description of the Specified Activity
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Overview
Construction activities for the
replacement of the SF–OBB East Span
commenced in 2002 and are expected to
be completed in 2016 with the
completion of the bike/pedestrian path
and eastbound on ramp from Yerba
Buena Island. The new east span is now
open to traffic.
This stage of the project covered
under the IHA will include the
mechanical dismantling of marine
foundations of the East Span of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:39 Jul 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
bridge as well as the installation of
approximately 200 steel piles.
Dates and Duration
In-water activities are expected to
begin in July 2015. Up to 128 days of
pile driving may occur under the IHA.
However, the schedule for this project is
highly variable. As such, activities
covered under this IHA may occur
anytime between July 15, 2015 and July
14, 2016 which are the effective dates of
the IHA.
Specific Geographic Region
The project site is located in San
Francisco Bay around the east span of
the SFOBB.
Detailed Description of Activities
We provided a description of the
proposed action in our Federal Register
notice announcing the proposed
authorization (80 FR 23774; April 29,
2015). Please refer to that document; we
provide only summary information
here.
The proposed action would involve
the mechanical dismantling of marine
foundations and superstructure
components of the East Span of the
bridge as well as the installation of
approximately 200 steel piles. These
piles include 0.45-meter, 0.61-meter,
0.91-meter (18-inch, 24-inch, and 36inch) diameter pipe piles, and 0.34
meter (14-inch) H-piles on up to 128
days. These piles will be installed in the
water to construct temporary supports
between Piers E4–E8, which will help
with the dismantling process by
providing support to the original bridge
superstructure as it is taken down. Both
vibratory and impact hammers could be
used to install pipe piles depending on
the substrate. In addition, CALTRANS
would remove various bridge
superstructures including trusses, road
decks, and steel and concrete support
towers. The concrete foundation of the
bridge would be removed using various
mechanical means including saw
cutting, flame cutting, mechanical
splitting, drilling, pulverizing, and/or
hydrocutting. Some of the installed
piles may be removed under this IHA,
but the contractor has until 2018 to
remove all 200 piles.
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS’ proposal to issue
an IHA was published in the Federal
Register on April 29, 2015 (80 FR
23774). During the 30-day public
comment period, the Marine Mammal
Commission submitted a letter. The
letter is available on the Internet
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/construction.htm. All
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43711
comments specific to CALTRANS’
application that address the statutory
and regulatory requirements or findings
NMFS must make to issue an IHA are
addressed in this section of the Federal
Register notice.
Comment 1: The Commission noted
that during the last authorization marine
mammal monitoring did not occur 100
percent of time spent on activities
authorized under the IHA. The
Commission believes that this results in
underestimates the number of takes of
marine mammals known to occur in the
project area. Monitoring during all inwater sound-producing activities is the
only way for CALTRANS and NMFS to
be confident that the numbers of marine
mammals taken are within the limits
authorized and the least practicable
impact occurs. For these reasons, the
Commission recommended that NMFS
require CALTRANS to implement fulltime monitoring of Level A and B
harassment zones during all in- water
sound-producing activities (i.e., pile
driving and dismantling activities).
Response 1: NMFS does not agree
with the Commission’s
recommendation. NMFS had discussed
with CALTRANS specific protocols
concerning marine mammal monitoring
during its proposed in-water
construction activities. As described in
detail in the Federal Register notice for
the previous proposed IHA (79 FR 2421;
January 14, 2014) and in CALTRANS’
IHA application, CALTRANS’ planned
construction includes installation of up
to 635 temporary falsework piles, 1,925
steel sheet piles, and various
mechanical dismantling activities over
several years. The extent of the work
made it infeasible and costly to
implement marine mammal monitoring
for Level A and B harassment zones at
all times, particularly since some of the
Level B harassment zones for vibratory
pile driving extend to a radius of 2 km.
CALTRANS will monitor the 180 and
190 dB exclusion zones and 160 dB
behavioral harassment zone for all
unattenuated impact pile driving of Hpiles, and the 180 and 190 dB exclusion
zones for attenuated impact pile driving
and mechanical dismantling, thereby
minimizing the possibility of injury.
Further, for the purposes of better
understand behavioral efforts,
CALTRANS will also monitor the 160
dB behavioral harassment zone for 20%
of the attenuated impact pile driving,
and 120 dB behavioral harassment zone
for 20% of vibratory pile driving and
mechanic dismantling. Results have
been extrapolated in past monitoring
reports and will continue to be
extrapolated in the future reports.
Results of past monitoring reports are
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
43712
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices
discussed later in this notice in the
section in Monitoring and reporting.
CALTRANS, however, will not monitor
the unattenuated impact pile proofing,
which only lasts for less than one
minute. Proposed proofing of piles will
be limited to a maximum of two piles
per day, and for less than 1 minute per
pile, administering a maximum of
twenty blows per pile. CALTRANS
states, and NMFS agrees, that the
logistics of scheduling and mobilizing a
monitoring team for activities that will
last less than one minute is not
practical.
Comment 2: The Commission noted
that each authorization under section
101(a)(5)(D) is a separate undertaking
and should contain sufficient
information to allow for meaningful
public review and comment. The
Commission recommended in 2013 that
NMFS include in each proposed
incidental harassment authorization it
publishes in the Federal Register a
detailed description of the proposed
activities rather than referring to
previous documents. NMFS agreed and
stated that it would provide such
detailed descriptions in the Federal
Register notices moving forward (see 79
FR 2422). However, NMFS’ current
notice did not include such a
description. The Commission again
recommends that NMFS include in each
proposed incidental harassment
authorization published in the Federal
Register a detailed description of the
proposed activities rather than referring
to previous documents.
Response 2: The CALTRANS bridge
project is a multi-year, multi-stage
construction initiative. The schedule
and scope of this project have
undergone multiple revisions. NMFS
felt that it captured the essential
elements of what is proposed to occur
under the proposed authorization under
review. NMFS has added additional
information to the Detailed Description
of Activity section of this Federal
Register Notice. NMFS will include a
comprehensive description of proposed
activities in future proposed notices.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
There are four marine mammal
species known to occur in the vicinity
of the SF–OBB in California which may
be subjected to Level B harassment.
These are the Pacific harbor seal,
California sea lion, gray whale, and
harbor porpoise.
We have reviewed CALTRANS’
detailed species descriptions, including
life history information, for accuracy
and completeness and refer the reader to
Section 3 of CALTRANS’ application as
well as the proposed incidental
harassment authorization published in
the Federal Register (80 FR 23774)
instead of reprinting the information
here. Please also refer to NMFS’ Web
site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/
mammals) for generalized species
accounts which provide information
regarding the biology and behavior of
the marine resources that occur in SE
Alaska. We provided additional
information for the potentially affected
stocks, including details of stock-wide
status, trends, and threats, in our
Federal Register notice of proposed
authorization (80 FR 23774).
Table 1 lists marine mammal stocks
that could occur in the vicinity of the
SFOBB project that may be subject to
Level B harassment and summarizes key
information regarding stock status and
abundance. Taxonomically, we follow
Committee on Taxonomy (2014). Please
see NMFS’ Stock Assessment Reports
(SAR), available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
pr/sars, for more detailed accounts of
these stocks’ status and abundance.
TABLE 1—LIST OF MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES UNDER NMFS JURISDICTION THAT OCCUR IN THE VICINITY OF SF–OBB
PROJECT AREA *
Stock
abundance
Common name
Stock
Scientific name
ESA Status
Harbor Seal ...................
California sea lion .........
Gray whale ....................
California .....................
United States ..............
Eastern North Pacific
Stock.
San Francisco-Russian
River.
Phoca vitulina ..............
Zalophus californianus
Eschrichtius robustus ..
Not listed .....................
Not listed .....................
Not listed .....................
30,196
296,750
19,126
Phocoena phocoena ...
Not listed .....................
9,886
Harbor porpoise ............
Population trend
Decreasing.
Increasing.
Increasing.
Stable.
* Estimated abundance numbers come primarily from NMFS 2014 Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report (Carretta et al. 2014).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals
The Federal Register notice of
proposed authorization (80 FR 23744),
incorporated here by reference, provides
a general background on sound relevant
to the specified activity as well as a
detailed description of marine mammal
hearing and of the potential effects of
these construction activities on marine
mammals.
impacting marine mammals’ foraging
opportunities in a limited portion of the
foraging range; but, because of the short
duration of the activities and the
relatively small area of the habitat that
may be affected, the impacts to marine
mammal habitat are not expected to
cause significant or long-term negative
consequences for individual marine
mammals or their populations
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
We described potential impacts to
marine mammal habitat in detail in our
Federal Register notice of proposed
authorization. In summary, the project
activities would not modify existing
marine mammal habitat. The activities
may cause some fish to leave the area
of disturbance, thus temporarily
In order to issue an IHA 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:39 Jul 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
Mitigation
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the availability of such species or stock
for taking’’ for certain subsistence uses.
Measurements from similar pile
driving events were coupled with
practical spreading loss to estimate
zones of influence (ZOI; see ‘‘Estimated
Take by Incidental Harassment’’). ZOIs
are often used to establish a mitigation
zone around each pile (when deemed
practicable) to prevent Level A
harassment to marine mammals, and
also provide estimates of the areas
within which Level B harassment might
occur. ZOIs may vary between different
diameter piles and types of installation
methods. CALTRANS will employ the
following mitigation measures:
(a) Conduct briefings between
construction supervisors and crews,
marine mammal monitoring team, and
CALTRANS staff prior to the start of all
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
43713
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices
pile driving activity, and when new
personnel join the work, in order to
explain responsibilities, communication
procedures, marine mammal monitoring
protocol, and operational procedures.
(b) For in-water heavy machinery
work other than pile driving (using, e.g.,
standard barges, tug boats, bargemounted excavators, or clamshell
equipment used to place or remove
material), if a marine mammal comes
within 10 m, operations shall cease and
vessels shall reduce speed to the
minimum level required to maintain
steerage and safe working conditions.
This type of work could include the
following activities: (1) Movement of the
barge to the pile location or (2)
positioning of the pile on the substrate
via a crane (i.e., stabbing the pile).
Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile
Driving
The following measures apply to
CALTRANS’ mitigation through
shutdown and disturbance zones:
Shutdown Zone—For all pile driving
activities, CALTRANS will establish
shutdown zones in which SPLs equal or
exceed the 180/190 dB rms acoustic
injury criteria to define the areas where
shutdown of activity will occur upon
sighting of a marine mammal (or in
anticipation of an animal entering the
defined area), thus preventing injury of
marine mammals. For impact driving
this is 235 meters. For vibratory driving,
CALTRANS’s activities are not expected
to produce sound at or above the 180 dB
rms injury criterion. Before the sizes of
actual zones are determined based on
hydroacoustic measurements,
CALTRANS shall establish this zone
based on prior measurements conducted
during SF–OBB constructions, as
described in Table 1 of this document.
CALTRANS will also implement a
minimum shutdown zone of 10 m
radius for all marine mammals around
all vibratory pile driving and removal
activity and 100 m radius around any
dismantling activity. These
precautionary measures are intended to
further reduce the unlikely possibility of
injury from direct physical interaction
with construction operations.
Disturbance Zone—Disturbance zones
are the areas in which SPLs equal or
exceed 120 dB rms (for continuous
sound) for pile driving installation and
removal. This is 2,000 meters for
vibratory driving and 1,000 meters for
impact driving. Disturbance zones
provide utility for monitoring
conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e.,
shutdown zone monitoring) by
establishing monitoring protocols for
areas adjacent to the shutdown zones.
Monitoring of disturbance zones enables
observers to be aware of and
communicate the presence of marine
mammals in the project area but outside
the shutdown zone and thus prepare for
potential shutdowns of activity.
However, the primary purpose of
disturbance zone monitoring is for
documenting incidents of Level B
harassment; disturbance zone
monitoring is discussed in greater detail
later (see ‘‘Monitoring and Reporting’’).
Nominal radial distances for
disturbance zones are shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1—TEMPORARY EXCLUSION AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ZONES FOR VARIOUS PILE DRIVING AND DISMANTLING
ACTIVITIES
Distance to
120
dB re 1 μPa
(rms) (m)
Pile driving/dismantling activities
Pile size (m)
Vibratory Driving ...............................
24 .....................................................
36 .....................................................
Sheet pile .........................................
24 .....................................................
36 .....................................................
24 .....................................................
36 .....................................................
H-pile ................................................
...........................................................
Attenuated Impact Driving ................
Unattenuated Proofing ......................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Unattenuated Impact Driving ............
Dismantling .......................................
Once hydroacoustic measurements of
pile driving and mechanical
dismantling activities have been
conducted, CALTRANS shall revise the
sizes of the zones based on actual
measurements.
Use of Noise Attenuation Devices—To
reduce impact on marine mammals,
CALTRANS shall use a marine pile
driving energy attenuator (i.e., air
bubble curtain system), or other equally
effective sound attenuation method
(e.g., dewatered cofferdam) for all
impact pile driving, with the exception
of pile proofing or impact driving of Hpiles.
In order to document observed
incidents of harassment, observers
record all marine mammal observations,
regardless of location. The observer’s
location, as well as the location of the
pile being driven, is known from a GPS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:39 Jul 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
2,000
2,000
2,000
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2,000
The location of the animal is estimated
as a distance from the observer, which
is then compared to the location from
the pile and the estimated ZOIs for
relevant activities (i.e., pile installation
and removal). This information may
then be used to extrapolate observed
takes to reach an approximate
understanding of actual total takes.
Time Restrictions—Work will occur
only during daylight hours, when visual
monitoring of marine mammals can be
conducted. In addition, all in-water
construction will be limited to the
period between July 15, 2015 and July
14, 2016.
Soft Start—The use of a soft start
procedure is believed to provide
additional protection to marine
mammals by warning or providing a
chance to leave the area prior to the
hammer operating at full capacity, and
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Distance to
160
dB re 1 μPa
(rms) (m)
NA
NA
NA
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
NA
Distance to
180
dB re 1 μPa
(rms) (m)
NA
NA
NA
235
235
235
235
235
100
Distance to
190
dB re 1 μPa
(rms) (m)
NA
NA
NA
95
95
95
95
95
100
typically involves a requirement to
initiate sound from the hammer at
reduced energy followed by a waiting
period. This procedure is repeated two
additional times. It is difficult to specify
the reduction in energy for any given
hammer because of variation across
drivers and, for impact hammers, the
actual number of strikes at reduced
energy will vary because operating the
hammer at less than full power results
in ‘‘bouncing’’ of the hammer as it
strikes the pile, resulting in multiple
‘‘strikes.’’ The project will utilize soft
start techniques for both impact and
vibratory pile driving. We require
CALTRANS to initiate sound from
vibratory hammers for fifteen seconds at
reduced energy followed by a thirtysecond waiting period, with the
procedure repeated two additional
times. For impact driving, we require an
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
43714
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices
initial set of three strikes from the
impact hammer at reduced energy,
followed by a thirty-second waiting
period, then two subsequent three strike
sets. Soft start will be required at the
beginning of each day’s pile driving
work and at any time following a
cessation of pile driving of 20 minutes
or longer (specific to either vibratory or
impact driving).
Power Down and Shut-down—
Although power down and shut-down
measures will not be required for impact
pile driving and removal activities due
to the nature of sediments in the Bay,
these measures will be required for
mechanical dismantling activities. The
contractor performing mechanical
dismantling work will stop in-water
noise generation.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Monitoring
Monitoring Protocols—Monitoring
would be conducted before, during, and
after pile driving, pile and mechanical
dismantling. In addition, observers shall
record all incidents of marine mammal
occurrence, regardless of distance from
activity, and shall document any
behavioral reactions in concert with
distance from piles being driven.
Observations made outside the
shutdown zone will not result in
shutdown and that pile segment would
be completed without cessation, unless
the animal approaches or enters the
shutdown zone, at which point all pile
driving activities would be halted,
except in the case of impact driving
when driving will be allowed to
continue. Monitoring will take place
from thirty minutes prior to initiation
through thirty minutes post-completion
of pile driving activities. Pile driving
activities include the time to remove a
single pile or series of piles, as long as
the time elapsed between uses of the
pile driving equipment is no more than
thirty minutes.
The following additional measures
apply to visual monitoring:
(1) Monitoring will be conducted by
qualified observers, who will be placed
at the best vantage point(s) practicable
to monitor for marine mammals and
implement shutdown/delay procedures
when applicable by calling for the
shutdown to the hammer operator.
Qualified observers are trained
biologists, with the following minimum
qualifications:
(a) Visual acuity in both eyes
(correction is permissible) sufficient for
discernment of moving targets at the
water’s surface with ability to estimate
target size and distance; use of
binoculars may be necessary to correctly
identify the target;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:39 Jul 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
(b) Advanced education in biological
science or related field (undergraduate
degree or higher required);
(c) Experience and ability to conduct
field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols (this
may include academic experience);
(d) Experience or training in the field
identification of marine mammals,
including the identification of
behaviors;
(e) Sufficient training, orientation, or
experience with the construction
operation to provide for personal safety
during observations;
(f) Writing skills sufficient to prepare
a report of observations including but
not limited to the number and species
of marine mammals observed; dates and
times when in-water construction
activities were conducted; dates and
times when in-water construction
activities were suspended to avoid
potential incidental injury from
construction sound of marine mammals
observed within a defined shutdown
zone; and marine mammal behavior;
and
(g) Ability to communicate orally, by
radio or in person, with project
personnel to provide real-time
information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
(2) Prior to the start of pile driving
activity, the shutdown zone will be
monitored for 30 minutes to ensure that
it is clear of marine mammals. Pile
driving will only commence once
observers have declared the shutdown
zone clear of marine mammals; animals
will be allowed to remain in the
shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their
own volition) and their behavior will be
monitored and documented. The
shutdown zone may only be declared
clear, and pile driving started, when the
entire shutdown zone is visible (i.e.,
when not obscured by dark, rain, fog,
etc.).
If a marine mammal approaches or
enters the shutdown zone during the
course of vibratory pile driving
operations, activity will be halted and
delayed until he animal has voluntarily
left and been visually confirmed beyond
the shutdown zone. If a marine mammal
is seen above water and then dives
below, the contractor would wait 15
minutes for pinnipeds and harbor
porpoise and 30 minutes for gray whale.
If no marine mammals are seen by the
observer in that time it will be assumed
that the animal has moved beyond the
exclusion zone.
Monitoring will be conducted
throughout the time required to drive a
pile. In impact driving situations, once
the pile driving of a segment begins it
will not be stopped until that segment
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
has reached its predetermined depth
due to the nature of the sediments
underlying the Bay. If impact pile
driving were to stop and then resumes,
it would potentially have to occur for a
longer time and at increased energy
levels. If marine mammals enter the
safety zone after pile driving of a
segment has begun, pile driving will
continue and marine mammal observers
will monitor and record marine
mammal numbers and behavior.
(3) The area within the Level B
harassment zone shall be conducted by
a minimum of three qualified NMFSapproved marine mammal observers
(MMOs) placed in strategic locations
that will afford visual coverage of these
zones. Observers may be stationed on
boats, Yerba Buena Island and/or
Treasure Island, the new bridge or
construction barges. Marine mammal
presence within the Level B harassment
zone will be monitored, but vibratory
and impact pile driving as well as
dismantling activity will not be stopped
if marine mammals are found to be
present. Any marine mammal
documented within the Level B
harassment zone during vibratory and
impact driving or mechanical
dismantling activities would constitute
a Level B take (harassment), and will be
recorded and reported as such.
Mitigation Conclusions
We have carefully evaluated
CALTRANS’ proposed mitigation
measures and considered their
effectiveness in past implementation to
determine whether they are likely to
effect 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: (1) The manner
in which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the
measure is expected to minimize
adverse impacts to marine mammals, (2)
the proven or likely efficacy of the
specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned; and (3) the
practicability of the measure for
applicant implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) we
prescribe 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 number (total
number or number at biologically
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices
important time or location) of
individual marine mammals exposed to
stimuli expected to result in incidental
take (this goal may contribute to 1,
above, or to reducing takes by
behavioral harassment only).
(3) A reduction in the number (total
number or number at biologically
important time or location) of times any
individual marine mammal would be
exposed to stimuli expected to result in
incidental take (this goal may contribute
to 1, above, or to reducing takes by
behavioral harassment only).
(4) A reduction in the intensity of
exposure to stimuli expected to result in
incidental take (this goal may contribute
to 1, above, or to reducing the severity
of behavioral harassment only).
(5) Avoidance or minimization of
adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying particular attention to
the prey base, blockage or limitation of
passage to or from biologically
important areas, permanent destruction
of habitat, or temporary 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
CALTRANS’ proposed measures,
including information from monitoring
of implementation of mitigation
measures very similar to those described
here under previous IHAs from other
marine construction projects, we have
determined that the proposed mitigation
measures provide the means of effecting
the least practicable impact on marine
mammal species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA 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 incidental take
authorizations 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.
Any monitoring requirement we
prescribe should improve our
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:39 Jul 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
understanding of one or more of the
following:
(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 pile
driving that we associate with specific
adverse effects, such as behavioral
harassment, TTS, or PTS;
(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:
D 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);
D 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);
D 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.
CALTRANS has submitted monitoring
reports for each of the IHAs that have
been issued to them for this project.
NMFS received the most recent report
on April 28, 2015 covering the IHA
issued for the period between January 8,
2014 and January 7, 2015. CALTRANS
observed all required monitoring and
mitigation protocols during this period.
Recorded takes were below permitted
levels for all species except for harbor
seals. After extrapolating observed
numbers during 30 percent of driving
activities, CALTRANS determined that
130 harbor seals were taken. This
exceeded the allowable take limit of 50
stated in the IHA. CALTRANS reported
that most of these seals were within the
ZOI in Coast Guard Cove and Clipper
Cove north of Yurba Buena Island (YBI)
as well as an area 200–400 m off the
southeast shore of YBI. Most seals
appeared to be foraging and none
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43715
showed any response to pile driving
noise and continued to forage in those
areas for up to several hours during pile
driving. Based on the high number of
harbor seal takes recorded, CALTRANS
has requested an increase in takes under
the IHA discussed in this Federal
Register Notice. NMFS has approved an
increase in harbor seal takes, which is
discussed in a following section.
CALTRANS consulted with NMFS to
create a marine mammal monitoring
plan as part of the IHA application for
this project.
Visual Marine Mammal Observations
• CALTRANS will implement onsite
marine mammal monitoring for 100% of
all unattenuated impact pile driving of
H-piles for 180- and 190-dB re 1 mPa
exclusion zones (235 meter radius) and
160-dB re 1 mPa Level B harassment
zone, attenuated impact pile driving
(except pile proofing) and mechanical
dismantling for 180- and 190-dB re 1
mPa exclusion zones. CALTRANS will
also monitor 20% of the attenuated
impact pile driving for the 160-dB re 1
mPa Level B harassment zone (1,000
meter radius), and 20% of vibratory pile
driving and mechanic dismantling for
the 120-dB re 1 mPa Level B harassment
zone (2,000 meter radius).
• Three individuals meeting the
minimum qualification previously
identified will monitor the Level A and
B harassment zones during impact pile
driving and the Level B harassment
zone during vibratory pile driving and
dismantling. Monitors may be stationed
on boats, Yerba Buena Island and/or
Treasure Island, the new bridge or
construction barges.
• During impact pile driving, the area
within 235 meters of pile driving
activity will be monitored and
maintained as marine mammal buffer
area in which pile installation will not
commence if any marine mammals are
observed within or approaching the area
of potential disturbance. If a marine
mammal approaches or appears within
the zone, pile driving of a segment will
continue until that segment has reached
its predetermined depth due to the
nature of the sediments underlying the
Bay.
• The area within the Level B
harassment threshold for impact driving
will be monitored by three field
monitors stationed in a positon
permitting visual access to the 1,000
meter limit of the Level B harassment
zone. Marine mammal presence within
this Level B harassment zone, if any,
will be monitored, but impact pile
driving activity will not be stopped if
marine mammals are found to be
present. Any marine mammal
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
43716
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices
documented within the Level B
harassment zone during impact driving
would constitute a Level B take
(harassment), and will be recorded and
reported as such.
• During vibratory pile driving, the
area within 10 meters of pile driving
activity will be monitored and
maintained as a marine mammal buffer
area in which pile installation will not
commence or will be suspended
temporarily if any marine mammals are
observed within or approaching the area
of potential disturbance. The Level B
harassment area with a 2,000 meter
radius will be monitored by three
qualified observers stationed at strategic
locations that provide adequate visual
coverage of the disturbance zone. The
monitoring staff will record any
presence of marine mammals by
species, will document any behavioral
responses noted, and record Level B
takes when sightings overlap with pile
installation activities.
• During mechanical dismantling
activities a 100 meters radius will be
monitored and maintained as a marine
mammal buffer area in which pile
installation will not commence or will
be suspended temporarily if any marine
mammals are observed within or
approaching the area.
• The individuals will scan the
waters within each monitoring zone
activity using binoculars (Vector 10X42
or equivalent), spotting scopes
(Swarovski 20–60 zoom or equivalent),
and visual observation.
• The area within which the Level B
harassment thresholds could be
exceeded during impact pile driving
and vibratory pile driving will be
monitored for the presence of marine
mammals during all impact and
vibratory pile driving. Marine mammal
presence within these zones, if any, will
be monitored but pile driving activity
will not be stopped if marine mammals
were found to be present. Any marine
mammal documented within the Level
B harassment zone will constitute a
Level B take, and will be recorded and
used to document the number of take
incidents.
• If waters exceed a sea-state which
restricts the observers’ ability to make
observations within the marine mammal
buffer zone (the 235 meter radius) (e.g.,
excessive wind or fog), impact pile
installation will cease until conditions
allow the resumption of monitoring.
• The waters will be scanned for 30
minutes before, during, and 30 minutes
after any and all pile driving and
removal activities.
• If marine mammals enter or are
observed within the designated marine
mammal buffer zone (the 235m radius)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:39 Jul 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
during or 30 minutes prior to pile
driving, the monitors will notify the onsite construction manager to not begin
until the animal has moved outside the
designated radius.
• If a marine mammal approaches the
Level A harassment zone prior to
initiation of pile driving, CALTRANS
cannot commence activities until the
marine mammal (a) is observed to have
left the Level A harassment zone or (b)
has not been seen or otherwise detected
within the Level A harassment zone for
30 minutes.
• The waters will continue to be
scanned for at least 30 minutes after pile
driving has completed each day, and
after each stoppage of 30 minutes or
greater.
Data Collection
We require that observers use
approved data forms. Among other
pieces of information, CALTRANS will
record detailed information about any
implementation of shutdowns,
including the distance of animals to the
pile and description of specific actions
that ensued and resulting behavior of
the animal, if any. In addition,
CALTRANS will attempt to distinguish
between the number of individual
animals taken and the number of
incidents of take. We require that, at a
minimum, the following information be
collected on the sighting forms:
• Date and time that monitored
activity begins or ends;
• Construction activities occurring
during each observation period;
• Weather parameters (e.g., percent
cover, visibility);
• Water conditions (e.g., sea state,
tide state);
• Species, numbers, and, if possible,
sex and age class of marine mammals;
• Description of any observable
marine mammal behavior patterns,
including bearing and direction of travel
and distance from pile driving activity;
• Distance from pile driving activities
to marine mammals and distance from
the marine mammals to the observation
point;
• Locations of all marine mammal
observations; and
• Other human activity in the area.
Reporting
CALTRANS will notify NMFS prior to
the initiation of the pile driving and
dismantling activities for the removal of
the existing east span. NMFS will be
informed of the initial sound pressure
level measurements for both pile driving
and foundation dismantling activities,
including the final exclusion zone and
Level B harassment zone radii
established for impact and vibratory pile
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
driving and marine foundation
dismantling activities.
Monitoring reports will be posted on
the SF–OBB Project’s biological
mitigation Web site
(www.biomitigation.org) on a weekly
basis if in-water construction activities
are conducted. Marine mammal
monitoring reports will include species
and numbers of marine mammals
observed, time and location of
observation and behavior of the animal.
In addition, the reports will include an
estimate of the number and species of
marine mammals that may have been
harassed as a result of activities.
CALTRANS will provide NMFS with
a draft monitoring report within 90 days
of the conclusion of the proposed
construction work. This report will
detail the monitoring protocol,
summarize the data recorded during
monitoring, and estimate the number of
marine mammals that may have been
harassed. If no comments are received
from NMFS within 30 days, the draft
final report will constitute the final
report. If comments are received, a final
report must be submitted within 30 days
after receipt of comments.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, section
3(18) of 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].’’
All anticipated takes would be by
Level B harassment resulting from
impact and vibratory pile driving/
removal and involving temporary
changes in behavior. Injurious or lethal
takes are not expected due to the
expected source levels and sound
source characteristics associated with
the activity, and the planned mitigation
and monitoring measures are expected
to further minimize the possibility of
such take.
Given the many uncertainties in
predicting the quantity and types of
impacts of sound in every given
situation on marine mammals, it is
common practice to estimate how many
animals are likely to be present within
a particular distance of a given activity,
or exposed to a particular level of
sound, based on the available science.
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices
This practice potentially
overestimates the numbers of marine
mammals taken for stationary activities,
as it is likely that some smaller number
of individuals may accrue a number of
incidences of harassment per individual
than for each incidence to accrue to a
new individual, especially if those
individuals display some degree of
residency or site fidelity and the
impetus to use the site (e.g., because of
foraging opportunities) is stronger than
the deterrence presented by the
harassing activity.
CALTRANS has requested
authorization for the incidental taking of
small numbers of California sea lions
(Zalophus californianus), Pacific harbor
seals (Phoca vitulina richardsii), harbor
porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), and
gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus)
incidental to construction associated
with a replacement bridge for the East
Span of the SF–OBB, in San Francisco
Bay (SFB, or Bay), California.
In order to estimate the potential
incidents of take that may occur
incidental to the specified activity, we
must first estimate the extent of the
sound field that may be produced by the
activity and then consider in
combination with information about
marine mammal density or abundance
in the project area. We provided
detailed information on applicable
sound thresholds for determining effects
to marine mammals as well as
describing the information used in
estimating the sound fields, the
available marine mammal density or
abundance information, and the method
of estimating potential incidences of
take, in our Federal Register notice of
proposed authorization (80 FR 23744;
March 20, 2015).
Table 1 illustrated the 190 dB rms
Level A harassment (injury) threshold
for underwater noise for pinniped
species could be exceeded at a distance
of up to approximately 95 meters during
impact pile driving activities, and the
180 dB rms Level A harassment (injury)
threshold for cetacean species could be
exceeded at a distance of up to
approximately 235 meters during
impact pile driving activities.
Additionally, the 160 dB rms Level B
harassment (behavioral disruption)
threshold for impulsive source
underwater noise for pinniped and
cetacean species could be exceeded at a
distance of up to approximately 1,000
meters during impact pile driving and
the 120 dB Level B harassment
threshold could be exceeded at 2,000
meters. Note that the actual area
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:39 Jul 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
insonified by pile driving activities is
significantly constrained by local
topography relative to the identified
threshold radii.
Marine mammal density estimates
were based on marine mammal
monitoring reports and marine mammal
observations made during pile driving
activities associated with the SF–OBB
construction work authorized under
prior IHAs. Pacific harbor seal densities
were calculated and described in the
Federal Register notice of proposed
authorization (80 FR 23744; March 20,
2015). During monitoring for the East
Span of the SF–OBB, there were 657
observations of harbor seals made
during over 210 days from 2000 to 2014.
Two densities were calculated because
of the higher density of seals observed
foraging near YBI and Treasure Island.
Foraging seals tended to remain in the
area for several hours while transiting
seals passing under the SF–OBB were
only observed 1–2 times. Therefore,
densities east of Pier E3–E8 are much
lower than the density than west of Pier
E3.
The area of 2,000-meter threshold for
the Level B behavioral harassment zone
is 12.57 km2 (12,570,000 m2). Half of
that area to the west of Piers E3–E8 (6.29
km2) would have a higher density of
harbor seals which are frequently
observed in the three foraging areas. The
range of seals observed within the
foraging areas is 0–8 seals and the mean
is 3.6 seals per day (combined for all
three areas). The other half of the Level
B harassment zone would have a lower
density due to the infrequent
observations of seals moving through
the area. In addition the density of seals
will vary with season therefore a density
for the spring-summer season when
seals spend more time onshore as they
are pupping and molting and the fall/
winter season.
This estimate of 460 harbor seal takes
is above the number of seals that have
been permitted for take in previous
IHAs that have been issued related to
this project. However, the estimate
presented here represents a more
complete picture of the marine mammal
density in the project area and the
potential for exposure to project
activities.
California sea lions are based on
CALTRANS observations over 15 years
of monitoring on the Bay Bridge, 2000
to 2014, including baseline monitoring
in 2003 before bridge construction
began. It should be noted that
monitoring was not year round and
there was little monitoring required
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43717
during the period of mid-2010 to mid2013 due to no pile driving. During
2013 and 2014, there was a large
increase in pile driving to construct
temporary falsework and for mechanical
dismantling so the current estimates of
animals do include recent monitoring.
California sea lion numbers fluctuate
from year to year. For example, in 2014
no sea lions were observed in the
harassment zone while in 2004, 36 sea
lions were recorded near the Bay Bridge
construction areas during pile driving.
The larger number of sea lions in 2004
was probably related to a run of herring
that was near the Bay Bridge and sea
lions were observed feeding on dense
aggregations of herring in the area.
Therefore, an allowed take 50 sea lions
is considered a conservative estimate.
Harbor porpoises were observed near
the tower of the new Bay Bridge in 2013
and 2014. Each of those was a single
animal and far out of their normal range
for the Bay. If 1 or 2 pods of porpoises
were to enter the construction area, then
there might be up to 6 takes (pod size
of 2–3 porpoises). Based on this NMFS
believes that an allowed take of up to 10
harbor porpoises is conservative, but
reasonable.
Gray whale take estimates were based
on sighting reports collected by the
Marine Mammal Center in Sausalito (the
NMFS stranding facility for northern
California). The Center collects whale
sightings information from the general
public, researchers, and the U.S. Coast
Guard. For the gray whale, 5 permitted
takes is likely to be a conservative, but
reasonable, estimate as they have never
been observed within any of the
behavioral zones during monitoring.
Additionally, there has only been one
report of a gray whale swimming under
the original East Span of the Bay Bridge
a number of years ago.
Based on these results, and
accounting for a certain level of
uncertainty regarding the next phase of
construction, NMFS concludes that at
maximum 460 harbor seals, 50
California sea lions, 10 harbor
porpoises, and 5 gray whales could be
exposed to noise levels that could cause
Level B harassment as a result of the
CALTRAN’ SF–OBB construction
activities. These numbers represent
1.5%, <0.01%, <0.01% and 0.10% of
the California stock harbor seal, the U.S.
stock California sea lion, the Eastern
North Pacific stock gray whale, and the
San Francisco-Russian River stock
harbor porpoise, respectively (Table 2).
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
43718
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices
TABLE 2—ESTIMATES OF THE POSSIBLE MAXIMUM NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS TAKEN BY LEVEL B HARASSMENT AS
A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED CALTRANS’ SF–OBB CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
Species
Stocks
Level B takes
Percent
population
Pinnipeds
Harbor seal ...................................................................
California sea lion .........................................................
California .......................................................................
U.S. ...............................................................................
460
50
1.5
<0.01
5
10
<0.01
0.10
Cetaceans
Gray whale ...................................................................
Harbor porpoise ............................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Analyses and Determinations
Negligible Impact Analysis
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., 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
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
and nature of estimated Level A
harassment takes, the number of
estimated mortalities, effects on habitat,
and the status of the species.
To avoid repetition, the discussion of
our analyses applies to all the species
listed in Table 2, given that the
anticipated effects of this pile driving
project on marine mammals are
expected to be relatively similar in
nature. There is no information about
the size, status, or structure of any
species or stock that would lead to a
different analysis for this activity.
Pile driving, pile removal and
mechanical dismantling activities
associated with the construction of a
replacement bridge for the East Span of
the SF–OBB, as outlined previously,
have the potential to disturb or displace
marine mammals. Specifically, the
specified activities may result in take, in
the form of Level B harassment
(behavioral disturbance) only, from
underwater sounds generated from pile
driving. Potential takes could occur if
individuals of these species are present
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:39 Jul 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
Eastern North Pacific ....................................................
San Francisco-Russian River .......................................
in the ensonified zone when pile
driving and removal are happening.
No injury, serious injury, or mortality
is anticipated given the nature of the
activity and measures designed to
minimize the possibility of injury to
marine mammals. The known potential
for serious injury or mortality is
minimized through the construction
method and the implementation of the
planned mitigation measures. Both
vibratory hammers and impact hammers
will be utilized based on local substrate
conditions. Vibratory driving will be
used wherever conditions are favorable
for this technique. Vibratory driving
does not have significant potential to
cause injury to marine mammals due to
the relatively low source levels
produced and the lack of potentially
injurious source characteristics. Impact
pile driving produces short, sharp
pulses with higher peak levels and
much sharper rise time to reach those
peaks. When impact driving is
necessary, required measures
(implementation of shutdown zones)
significantly reduce any possibility of
injury. Given sufficient ‘‘notice’’
through use of soft start (for impact
driving), marine mammals are expected
to move away from a sound source that
is annoying prior to its becoming
potentially injurious. The likelihood
that marine mammal detection ability
by trained observers is high under the
environmental conditions described for
this area of San Francisco Bay further
enables the implementation of
shutdowns to avoid injury, serious
injury, or mortality.
Effects on individuals that are taken
by Level B harassment, on the basis of
reports in the literature as well as
monitoring from other similar activities,
will likely be limited to reactions such
as increased swimming speeds,
increased surfacing time, or decreased
foraging (if such activity were occurring)
(e.g., Thorson and Reyff, 2006; HDR,
2012; Lerma, 2014). Most likely,
individuals will simply move away
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
from the sound source and be
temporarily displaced from the areas of
pile driving, although even this reaction
has been observed primarily only in
association with impact pile driving. In
response to vibratory driving, pinnipeds
(which may become somewhat
habituated to human activity in
industrial or urban waterways) have
been observed to orient towards and
sometimes move towards the sound.
The pile driving activities analyzed here
are similar to, or less impactful than,
numerous construction activities
conducted in other similar locations,
which have taken place with no
reported injuries or mortality to marine
mammals, and no known long-term
adverse consequences from behavioral
harassment. Repeated exposures of
individuals to levels of sound that may
cause Level B harassment are unlikely
to result in hearing impairment or to
significantly disrupt foraging behavior.
Thus, even repeated Level B harassment
of some small subset of the overall stock
is unlikely to result in any significant
realized decrease in fitness for the
affected individuals, and thus would
not result in any adverse impact to the
stock as a whole. Level B harassment
will be reduced to the level of least
practicable impact through use of
mitigation measures described herein
and, if sound produced by project
activities is sufficiently disturbing,
animals are likely to simply avoid the
project area while the activity is
occurring.
CALTRANS’ proposed activities are
localized and of short duration. The
entire project area is limited to the East
Span of the bridge and its immediate
surroundings. The project will require
the installation of a total of
approximately 200 piles. Impact driving
of pipe piles will be limited to a
maximum of 20 piles per day and
proofing of the pipe piles will not
exceed a maximum of 2 piles per day—
each pile would be driven with no more
than 20 blows during a one-minute
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 141 / Thursday, July 23, 2015 / Notices
period. Total hammer time is scheduled
to occur over 128 days between July 15,
2015 and July 14, 2016. These localized
and short-term noise exposures may
cause brief startle reactions or shortterm behavioral modification by the
animals. These reactions and behavioral
changes are expected to subside quickly
when the exposures cease. Moreover,
the proposed mitigation and monitoring
measures are expected to reduce
potential exposures and behavioral
modifications even further.
Additionally, no important feeding and/
or reproductive areas for marine
mammals are known to be near the
proposed action area. Therefore, the
take resulting from this CALTRANS
project is not reasonably expected to
and is not reasonably likely to adversely
affect the marine mammal species or
stocks through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival and, therefore,
will have a negligible impact on the
affected species or stocks.
The project also is not expected to
have significant adverse effects on
affected marine mammals’ habitat, as
analyzed in detail in the ‘‘Anticipated
Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat’’
section. The project activities would not
modify existing marine mammal habitat.
The activities may cause some fish to
leave the area of disturbance, thus
temporarily impacting marine
mammals’ foraging opportunities in a
limited portion of the foraging range;
but, because of the short duration of the
activities and the relatively small area of
the habitat that may be affected, the
impacts to marine mammal habitat are
not expected to cause significant or
long-term negative consequences.
In summary, this negligible impact
analysis is founded on the following
factors: (1) The possibility of injury,
serious injury, or mortality may
reasonably be considered discountable;
(2) the anticipated incidents of Level B
harassment consist of, at worst,
temporary modifications in behavior
with no significant adverse impacts on
habitat and; (3) the presumed efficacy of
the proposed mitigation measures in
reducing the effects of the specified
activity to the level of least practicable
impact. In combination, we believe that
these factors, as well as the available
body of evidence from other similar
activities, demonstrate that the potential
effects of the specified activity will have
only short-term effects on individuals.
The specified activity is not expected to
impact rates of recruitment or survival
and will therefore not result in
population-level impacts.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:39 Jul 22, 2015
Jkt 235001
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
proposed monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS finds that the total
marine mammal take from CALTRANS’
construction of a replacement bridge for
the East Span of the SF–OBB will have
a negligible impact on the affected
marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers Analysis
Table 2 demonstrates the number of
animals that could be exposed to
received noise levels that could cause
Level B behavioral harassment for the
proposed work associated with the
replacement bridge construction. These
numbers represent 1.5%, <0.01%,
<0.01% and 0.10% of the California
stock harbor seal, the U.S. stock
California sea lion, the Eastern North
Pacific stock gray whale, and the San
Francisco-Russian River stock harbor
porpoise, respectively (Table 3).
The numbers of animals authorized to
be taken for all species are small relative
to the relevant stocks or populations
even if each estimated taking occurred
to a new individual—an extremely
unlikely scenario. For pinnipeds
occurring in the vicinity of the SF–OBB
project, there will almost certainly be
some overlap in individuals present
day-to-day, and these takes are likely to
occur only within some small portion of
the overall regional stock, such as the
number of harbor seals that regularly
use nearby haul-out rocks.
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
mitigation and monitoring measures,
which are expected to reduce the
number of marine mammals potentially
affected by the proposed action, NMFS
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 subsistence uses of
marine mammals in the proposed
project area; and, thus, no subsistence
uses impacted by this action.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No marine mammal species listed
under the ESA are expected to be
affected by these activities. Therefore,
we have determined that a section 7
consultation under the ESA is not
required.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43719
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
NMFS’ prepared an Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the take of marine
mammals incidental to construction of
the East Span of the SF–OBB and made
a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) on November 4, 2003. Due to
the modification of part of the
construction project and the mitigation
measures, NMFS reviewed additional
information from CALTRANS regarding
empirical measurements of pile driving
noises for the smaller temporary piles
without an air bubble curtain system
and the use of vibratory pile driving.
NMFS prepared a Supplemental
Environmental Assessment (SEA) and
analyzed the potential impacts to
marine mammals that would result from
the modification of the action. A
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) was signed on August 5, 2009.
A copy of the SEA and FONSI is
available upon request.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations,
we have issued an IHA to CALTRANS
for conducting the described activities
related to the construction of the East
Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge, from July 15, 2015 through July
14, 2016 provided the previously
described mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: July 16, 2015.
Perry Gayaldo,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–18021 Filed 7–22–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XE040
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative
Management Act Provisions; General
Provisions for Domestic Fisheries;
Application for Exempted Fishing
Permits
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
AGENCY:
The NMFS Assistant Regional
Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries,
Greater Atlantic Region, has made a
preliminary determination that an
Exempted Fishing Permit renewal
application from the Commercial
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 141 (Thursday, July 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43710-43719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18021]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XD829
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Construction of the East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS) to incidentally
harass, by Level B harassment only, four species of marine mammals
during activities related to the construction of Pier 3 of the East
Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SF-OBB) in California
DATES: This authorization is effective from July 15, 2015 through July
14, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Pauline, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability
An electronic copy of CALTRANS' application and supporting
documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document,
may be obtained by visiting the Internet at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing
these documents, please call the contact listed above (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
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.
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.''
Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process
by which citizens of the U.S. can apply for an authorization to
incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by harassment.
Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS' review
of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and comment period
on any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of marine
mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the comment period, NMFS must
either issue or deny the authorization. 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
[[Page 43711]]
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 December 15, 2014, CALTRANS submitted its most recent request to
NOAA requesting an IHA for the possible harassment of small numbers of
California sea lions (Zalophus californianus), Pacific harbor seals
(Phoca vitulina richardsii), harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), and
gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) incidental to construction
associated with a replacement bridge for the East Span of the SF-OBB,
in San Francisco Bay (SFB, or Bay), California.
An IHA was previously issued to CALTRANS for this activity on
January 8, 2014 (79 FR 2421; January 14, 2014), based on activities
described on CALTRANS' IHA application dated April 13, 2013. That IHA
expired on January 7, 2015. Since the construction activity would
continue for another two years, CALTRANS requests to renew its IHA. In
its IHA renewal request, CALTRANS also states that there has been no
change in the scope of work for the SF-OBB Project from what was
outlined in its April 13, 2013, IHA application project description,
the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (78 FR 60852; October
2, 2013), and the Federal Register notice for the issuance of that IHA
(79 FR 2421; January 14, 2014). On November 10, 2003, NMFS issued the
first project-related IHA authorizing the take of small numbers of
marine mammals incidental to the construction of the SFOBB Project.
CALTRANS has been issued a total of seven subsequent IHAs for the SF-
OBB Project to date, excluding the application currently under review.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
Construction activities for the replacement of the SF-OBB East Span
commenced in 2002 and are expected to be completed in 2016 with the
completion of the bike/pedestrian path and eastbound on ramp from Yerba
Buena Island. The new east span is now open to traffic.
This stage of the project covered under the IHA will include the
mechanical dismantling of marine foundations of the East Span of the
bridge as well as the installation of approximately 200 steel piles.
Dates and Duration
In-water activities are expected to begin in July 2015. Up to 128
days of pile driving may occur under the IHA. However, the schedule for
this project is highly variable. As such, activities covered under this
IHA may occur anytime between July 15, 2015 and July 14, 2016 which are
the effective dates of the IHA.
Specific Geographic Region
The project site is located in San Francisco Bay around the east
span of the SFOBB.
Detailed Description of Activities
We provided a description of the proposed action in our Federal
Register notice announcing the proposed authorization (80 FR 23774;
April 29, 2015). Please refer to that document; we provide only summary
information here.
The proposed action would involve the mechanical dismantling of
marine foundations and superstructure components of the East Span of
the bridge as well as the installation of approximately 200 steel
piles. These piles include 0.45-meter, 0.61-meter, 0.91-meter (18-inch,
24-inch, and 36-inch) diameter pipe piles, and 0.34 meter (14-inch) H-
piles on up to 128 days. These piles will be installed in the water to
construct temporary supports between Piers E4-E8, which will help with
the dismantling process by providing support to the original bridge
superstructure as it is taken down. Both vibratory and impact hammers
could be used to install pipe piles depending on the substrate. In
addition, CALTRANS would remove various bridge superstructures
including trusses, road decks, and steel and concrete support towers.
The concrete foundation of the bridge would be removed using various
mechanical means including saw cutting, flame cutting, mechanical
splitting, drilling, pulverizing, and/or hydrocutting. Some of the
installed piles may be removed under this IHA, but the contractor has
until 2018 to remove all 200 piles.
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA was published in the
Federal Register on April 29, 2015 (80 FR 23774). During the 30-day
public comment period, the Marine Mammal Commission submitted a letter.
The letter is available on the Internet www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. All comments specific to CALTRANS'
application that address the statutory and regulatory requirements or
findings NMFS must make to issue an IHA are addressed in this section
of the Federal Register notice.
Comment 1: The Commission noted that during the last authorization
marine mammal monitoring did not occur 100 percent of time spent on
activities authorized under the IHA. The Commission believes that this
results in underestimates the number of takes of marine mammals known
to occur in the project area. Monitoring during all in-water sound-
producing activities is the only way for CALTRANS and NMFS to be
confident that the numbers of marine mammals taken are within the
limits authorized and the least practicable impact occurs. For these
reasons, the Commission recommended that NMFS require CALTRANS to
implement full-time monitoring of Level A and B harassment zones during
all in- water sound-producing activities (i.e., pile driving and
dismantling activities).
Response 1: NMFS does not agree with the Commission's
recommendation. NMFS had discussed with CALTRANS specific protocols
concerning marine mammal monitoring during its proposed in-water
construction activities. As described in detail in the Federal Register
notice for the previous proposed IHA (79 FR 2421; January 14, 2014) and
in CALTRANS' IHA application, CALTRANS' planned construction includes
installation of up to 635 temporary falsework piles, 1,925 steel sheet
piles, and various mechanical dismantling activities over several
years. The extent of the work made it infeasible and costly to
implement marine mammal monitoring for Level A and B harassment zones
at all times, particularly since some of the Level B harassment zones
for vibratory pile driving extend to a radius of 2 km. CALTRANS will
monitor the 180 and 190 dB exclusion zones and 160 dB behavioral
harassment zone for all unattenuated impact pile driving of H-piles,
and the 180 and 190 dB exclusion zones for attenuated impact pile
driving and mechanical dismantling, thereby minimizing the possibility
of injury. Further, for the purposes of better understand behavioral
efforts, CALTRANS will also monitor the 160 dB behavioral harassment
zone for 20% of the attenuated impact pile driving, and 120 dB
behavioral harassment zone for 20% of vibratory pile driving and
mechanic dismantling. Results have been extrapolated in past monitoring
reports and will continue to be extrapolated in the future reports.
Results of past monitoring reports are
[[Page 43712]]
discussed later in this notice in the section in Monitoring and
reporting. CALTRANS, however, will not monitor the unattenuated impact
pile proofing, which only lasts for less than one minute. Proposed
proofing of piles will be limited to a maximum of two piles per day,
and for less than 1 minute per pile, administering a maximum of twenty
blows per pile. CALTRANS states, and NMFS agrees, that the logistics of
scheduling and mobilizing a monitoring team for activities that will
last less than one minute is not practical.
Comment 2: The Commission noted that each authorization under
section 101(a)(5)(D) is a separate undertaking and should contain
sufficient information to allow for meaningful public review and
comment. The Commission recommended in 2013 that NMFS include in each
proposed incidental harassment authorization it publishes in the
Federal Register a detailed description of the proposed activities
rather than referring to previous documents. NMFS agreed and stated
that it would provide such detailed descriptions in the Federal
Register notices moving forward (see 79 FR 2422). However, NMFS'
current notice did not include such a description. The Commission again
recommends that NMFS include in each proposed incidental harassment
authorization published in the Federal Register a detailed description
of the proposed activities rather than referring to previous documents.
Response 2: The CALTRANS bridge project is a multi-year, multi-
stage construction initiative. The schedule and scope of this project
have undergone multiple revisions. NMFS felt that it captured the
essential elements of what is proposed to occur under the proposed
authorization under review. NMFS has added additional information to
the Detailed Description of Activity section of this Federal Register
Notice. NMFS will include a comprehensive description of proposed
activities in future proposed notices.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
There are four marine mammal species known to occur in the vicinity
of the SF-OBB in California which may be subjected to Level B
harassment. These are the Pacific harbor seal, California sea lion,
gray whale, and harbor porpoise.
We have reviewed CALTRANS' detailed species descriptions, including
life history information, for accuracy and completeness and refer the
reader to Section 3 of CALTRANS' application as well as the proposed
incidental harassment authorization published in the Federal Register
(80 FR 23774) instead of reprinting the information here. Please also
refer to NMFS' Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals) for
generalized species accounts which provide information regarding the
biology and behavior of the marine resources that occur in SE Alaska.
We provided additional information for the potentially affected stocks,
including details of stock-wide status, trends, and threats, in our
Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (80 FR 23774).
Table 1 lists marine mammal stocks that could occur in the vicinity
of the SFOBB project that may be subject to Level B harassment and
summarizes key information regarding stock status and abundance.
Taxonomically, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2014). Please see NMFS'
Stock Assessment Reports (SAR), available at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars,
for more detailed accounts of these stocks' status and abundance.
Table 1--List of Marine Mammal Species Under NMFS Jurisdiction That Occur in the Vicinity of SF-OBB Project Area
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock Population
Common name Stock Scientific name ESA Status abundance trend
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor Seal................. California..... Phoca vitulina. Not listed..... 30,196 Decreasing.
California sea lion......... United States.. Zalophus Not listed..... 296,750 Increasing.
californianus.
Gray whale.................. Eastern North Eschrichtius Not listed..... 19,126 Increasing.
Pacific Stock. robustus.
Harbor porpoise............. San Francisco- Phocoena Not listed..... 9,886 Stable.
Russian River. phocoena.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Estimated abundance numbers come primarily from NMFS 2014 Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report
(Carretta et al. 2014).
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals
The Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (80 FR
23744), incorporated here by reference, provides a general background
on sound relevant to the specified activity as well as a detailed
description of marine mammal hearing and of the potential effects of
these construction activities on marine mammals.
Anticipated Effects on Habitat
We described potential impacts to marine mammal habitat in detail
in our Federal Register notice of proposed authorization. In summary,
the project activities would not modify existing marine mammal habitat.
The activities may cause some fish to leave the area of disturbance,
thus temporarily impacting marine mammals' foraging opportunities in a
limited portion of the foraging range; but, because of the short
duration of the activities and the relatively small area of the habitat
that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not
expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences for
individual marine mammals or their populations
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA 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.
Measurements from similar pile driving events were coupled with
practical spreading loss to estimate zones of influence (ZOI; see
``Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment''). ZOIs are often used to
establish a mitigation zone around each pile (when deemed practicable)
to prevent Level A harassment to marine mammals, and also provide
estimates of the areas within which Level B harassment might occur.
ZOIs may vary between different diameter piles and types of
installation methods. CALTRANS will employ the following mitigation
measures:
(a) Conduct briefings between construction supervisors and crews,
marine mammal monitoring team, and CALTRANS staff prior to the start of
all
[[Page 43713]]
pile driving activity, and when new personnel join the work, in order
to explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal
monitoring protocol, and operational procedures.
(b) For in-water heavy machinery work other than pile driving
(using, e.g., standard barges, tug boats, barge-mounted excavators, or
clamshell equipment used to place or remove material), if a marine
mammal comes within 10 m, operations shall cease and vessels shall
reduce speed to the minimum level required to maintain steerage and
safe working conditions. This type of work could include the following
activities: (1) Movement of the barge to the pile location or (2)
positioning of the pile on the substrate via a crane (i.e., stabbing
the pile).
Monitoring and Shutdown for Pile Driving
The following measures apply to CALTRANS' mitigation through
shutdown and disturbance zones:
Shutdown Zone--For all pile driving activities, CALTRANS will
establish shutdown zones in which SPLs equal or exceed the 180/190 dB
rms acoustic injury criteria to define the areas where shutdown of
activity will occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in
anticipation of an animal entering the defined area), thus preventing
injury of marine mammals. For impact driving this is 235 meters. For
vibratory driving, CALTRANS's activities are not expected to produce
sound at or above the 180 dB rms injury criterion. Before the sizes of
actual zones are determined based on hydroacoustic measurements,
CALTRANS shall establish this zone based on prior measurements
conducted during SF-OBB constructions, as described in Table 1 of this
document. CALTRANS will also implement a minimum shutdown zone of 10 m
radius for all marine mammals around all vibratory pile driving and
removal activity and 100 m radius around any dismantling activity.
These precautionary measures are intended to further reduce the
unlikely possibility of injury from direct physical interaction with
construction operations.
Disturbance Zone--Disturbance zones are the areas in which SPLs
equal or exceed 120 dB rms (for continuous sound) for pile driving
installation and removal. This is 2,000 meters for vibratory driving
and 1,000 meters for impact driving. Disturbance zones provide utility
for monitoring conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e., shutdown zone
monitoring) by establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to
the shutdown zones. Monitoring of disturbance zones enables observers
to be aware of and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the
project area but outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for
potential shutdowns of activity. However, the primary purpose of
disturbance zone monitoring is for documenting incidents of Level B
harassment; disturbance zone monitoring is discussed in greater detail
later (see ``Monitoring and Reporting''). Nominal radial distances for
disturbance zones are shown in Table 1.
Table 1--Temporary exclusion and Level B Harassment Zones for Various Pile Driving and Dismantling Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance to Distance to Distance to Distance to
Pile driving/dismantling 120 dB re 1 160 dB re 1 180 dB re 1 190 dB re 1
activities Pile size (m) [micro]Pa [micro]Pa [micro]Pa [micro]Pa
(rms) (m) (rms) (m) (rms) (m) (rms) (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Driving............. 24.............. 2,000 NA NA NA
36.............. 2,000 NA NA NA
Sheet pile...... 2,000 NA NA NA
Attenuated Impact Driving..... 24.............. NA 1,000 235 95
36.............. NA 1,000 235 95
Unattenuated Proofing......... 24.............. NA 1,000 235 95
36.............. NA 1,000 235 95
Unattenuated Impact Driving... H-pile.......... NA 1,000 235 95
Dismantling................... ................ 2,000 NA 100 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once hydroacoustic measurements of pile driving and mechanical
dismantling activities have been conducted, CALTRANS shall revise the
sizes of the zones based on actual measurements.
Use of Noise Attenuation Devices--To reduce impact on marine
mammals, CALTRANS shall use a marine pile driving energy attenuator
(i.e., air bubble curtain system), or other equally effective sound
attenuation method (e.g., dewatered cofferdam) for all impact pile
driving, with the exception of pile proofing or impact driving of H-
piles.
In order to document observed incidents of harassment, observers
record all marine mammal observations, regardless of location. The
observer's location, as well as the location of the pile being driven,
is known from a GPS. The location of the animal is estimated as a
distance from the observer, which is then compared to the location from
the pile and the estimated ZOIs for relevant activities (i.e., pile
installation and removal). This information may then be used to
extrapolate observed takes to reach an approximate understanding of
actual total takes.
Time Restrictions--Work will occur only during daylight hours, when
visual monitoring of marine mammals can be conducted. In addition, all
in-water construction will be limited to the period between July 15,
2015 and July 14, 2016.
Soft Start--The use of a soft start procedure is believed to
provide additional protection to marine mammals by warning or providing
a chance to leave the area prior to the hammer operating at full
capacity, and typically involves a requirement to initiate sound from
the hammer at reduced energy followed by a waiting period. This
procedure is repeated two additional times. It is difficult to specify
the reduction in energy for any given hammer because of variation
across drivers and, for impact hammers, the actual number of strikes at
reduced energy will vary because operating the hammer at less than full
power results in ``bouncing'' of the hammer as it strikes the pile,
resulting in multiple ``strikes.'' The project will utilize soft start
techniques for both impact and vibratory pile driving. We require
CALTRANS to initiate sound from vibratory hammers for fifteen seconds
at reduced energy followed by a thirty-second waiting period, with the
procedure repeated two additional times. For impact driving, we require
an
[[Page 43714]]
initial set of three strikes from the impact hammer at reduced energy,
followed by a thirty-second waiting period, then two subsequent three
strike sets. Soft start will be required at the beginning of each day's
pile driving work and at any time following a cessation of pile driving
of 20 minutes or longer (specific to either vibratory or impact
driving).
Power Down and Shut-down--Although power down and shut-down
measures will not be required for impact pile driving and removal
activities due to the nature of sediments in the Bay, these measures
will be required for mechanical dismantling activities. The contractor
performing mechanical dismantling work will stop in-water noise
generation.
Monitoring
Monitoring Protocols--Monitoring would be conducted before, during,
and after pile driving, pile and mechanical dismantling. In addition,
observers shall record all incidents of marine mammal occurrence,
regardless of distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral
reactions in concert with distance from piles being driven.
Observations made outside the shutdown zone will not result in shutdown
and that pile segment would be completed without cessation, unless the
animal approaches or enters the shutdown zone, at which point all pile
driving activities would be halted, except in the case of impact
driving when driving will be allowed to continue. Monitoring will take
place from thirty minutes prior to initiation through thirty minutes
post-completion of pile driving activities. Pile driving activities
include the time to remove a single pile or series of piles, as long as
the time elapsed between uses of the pile driving equipment is no more
than thirty minutes.
The following additional measures apply to visual monitoring:
(1) Monitoring will be conducted by qualified observers, who will
be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for
marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when applicable
by calling for the shutdown to the hammer operator. Qualified observers
are trained biologists, with the following minimum qualifications:
(a) Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible)
sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface
with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars
may be necessary to correctly identify the target;
(b) Advanced education in biological science or related field
(undergraduate degree or higher required);
(c) Experience and ability to conduct field observations and
collect data according to assigned protocols (this may include academic
experience);
(d) Experience or training in the field identification of marine
mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
(e) Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
(f) Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations
including but not limited to the number and species of marine mammals
observed; dates and times when in-water construction activities were
conducted; dates and times when in-water construction activities were
suspended to avoid potential incidental injury from construction sound
of marine mammals observed within a defined shutdown zone; and marine
mammal behavior; and
(g) Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
(2) Prior to the start of pile driving activity, the shutdown zone
will be monitored for 30 minutes to ensure that it is clear of marine
mammals. Pile driving will only commence once observers have declared
the shutdown zone clear of marine mammals; animals will be allowed to
remain in the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their own volition)
and their behavior will be monitored and documented. The shutdown zone
may only be declared clear, and pile driving started, when the entire
shutdown zone is visible (i.e., when not obscured by dark, rain, fog,
etc.).
If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone during
the course of vibratory pile driving operations, activity will be
halted and delayed until he animal has voluntarily left and been
visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone. If a marine mammal is seen
above water and then dives below, the contractor would wait 15 minutes
for pinnipeds and harbor porpoise and 30 minutes for gray whale. If no
marine mammals are seen by the observer in that time it will be assumed
that the animal has moved beyond the exclusion zone.
Monitoring will be conducted throughout the time required to drive
a pile. In impact driving situations, once the pile driving of a
segment begins it will not be stopped until that segment has reached
its predetermined depth due to the nature of the sediments underlying
the Bay. If impact pile driving were to stop and then resumes, it would
potentially have to occur for a longer time and at increased energy
levels. If marine mammals enter the safety zone after pile driving of a
segment has begun, pile driving will continue and marine mammal
observers will monitor and record marine mammal numbers and behavior.
(3) The area within the Level B harassment zone shall be conducted
by a minimum of three qualified NMFS-approved marine mammal observers
(MMOs) placed in strategic locations that will afford visual coverage
of these zones. Observers may be stationed on boats, Yerba Buena Island
and/or Treasure Island, the new bridge or construction barges. Marine
mammal presence within the Level B harassment zone will be monitored,
but vibratory and impact pile driving as well as dismantling activity
will not be stopped if marine mammals are found to be present. Any
marine mammal documented within the Level B harassment zone during
vibratory and impact driving or mechanical dismantling activities would
constitute a Level B take (harassment), and will be recorded and
reported as such.
Mitigation Conclusions
We have carefully evaluated CALTRANS' proposed mitigation measures
and considered their effectiveness in past implementation to determine
whether they are likely to effect 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: (1) The manner in which,
and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure
is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals, (2) the
proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned; and (3) the practicability of the measure for
applicant implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) we prescribe 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 number (total number or number at
biologically
[[Page 43715]]
important time or location) of individual marine mammals exposed to
stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may contribute
to 1, above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment only).
(3) A reduction in the number (total number or number at
biologically important time or location) of times any individual marine
mammal would be exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental
take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by
behavioral harassment only).
(4) A reduction in the intensity of exposure to stimuli expected to
result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to
reducing the severity of behavioral harassment only).
(5) Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying particular attention to the prey base, blockage or
limitation of passage to or from biologically important areas,
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary 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 CALTRANS' proposed measures, including
information from monitoring of implementation of mitigation measures
very similar to those described here under previous IHAs from other
marine construction projects, we have determined that the proposed
mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least
practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and
areas of similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA 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
incidental take authorizations 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.
Any monitoring requirement we prescribe should improve our
understanding of one or more of the following:
(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 pile driving that we associate with
specific adverse effects, such as behavioral harassment, TTS, or PTS;
(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:
[ssquf] 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);
[ssquf] 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);
[ssquf] 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.
CALTRANS has submitted monitoring reports for each of the IHAs that
have been issued to them for this project. NMFS received the most
recent report on April 28, 2015 covering the IHA issued for the period
between January 8, 2014 and January 7, 2015. CALTRANS observed all
required monitoring and mitigation protocols during this period.
Recorded takes were below permitted levels for all species except for
harbor seals. After extrapolating observed numbers during 30 percent of
driving activities, CALTRANS determined that 130 harbor seals were
taken. This exceeded the allowable take limit of 50 stated in the IHA.
CALTRANS reported that most of these seals were within the ZOI in Coast
Guard Cove and Clipper Cove north of Yurba Buena Island (YBI) as well
as an area 200-400 m off the southeast shore of YBI. Most seals
appeared to be foraging and none showed any response to pile driving
noise and continued to forage in those areas for up to several hours
during pile driving. Based on the high number of harbor seal takes
recorded, CALTRANS has requested an increase in takes under the IHA
discussed in this Federal Register Notice. NMFS has approved an
increase in harbor seal takes, which is discussed in a following
section.
CALTRANS consulted with NMFS to create a marine mammal monitoring
plan as part of the IHA application for this project.
Visual Marine Mammal Observations
CALTRANS will implement onsite marine mammal monitoring
for 100% of all unattenuated impact pile driving of H-piles for 180-
and 190-dB re 1 [mu]Pa exclusion zones (235 meter radius) and 160-dB re
1 [mu]Pa Level B harassment zone, attenuated impact pile driving
(except pile proofing) and mechanical dismantling for 180- and 190-dB
re 1 [mu]Pa exclusion zones. CALTRANS will also monitor 20% of the
attenuated impact pile driving for the 160-dB re 1 [mu]Pa Level B
harassment zone (1,000 meter radius), and 20% of vibratory pile driving
and mechanic dismantling for the 120-dB re 1 [mu]Pa Level B harassment
zone (2,000 meter radius).
Three individuals meeting the minimum qualification
previously identified will monitor the Level A and B harassment zones
during impact pile driving and the Level B harassment zone during
vibratory pile driving and dismantling. Monitors may be stationed on
boats, Yerba Buena Island and/or Treasure Island, the new bridge or
construction barges.
During impact pile driving, the area within 235 meters of
pile driving activity will be monitored and maintained as marine mammal
buffer area in which pile installation will not commence if any marine
mammals are observed within or approaching the area of potential
disturbance. If a marine mammal approaches or appears within the zone,
pile driving of a segment will continue until that segment has reached
its predetermined depth due to the nature of the sediments underlying
the Bay.
The area within the Level B harassment threshold for
impact driving will be monitored by three field monitors stationed in a
positon permitting visual access to the 1,000 meter limit of the Level
B harassment zone. Marine mammal presence within this Level B
harassment zone, if any, will be monitored, but impact pile driving
activity will not be stopped if marine mammals are found to be present.
Any marine mammal
[[Page 43716]]
documented within the Level B harassment zone during impact driving
would constitute a Level B take (harassment), and will be recorded and
reported as such.
During vibratory pile driving, the area within 10 meters
of pile driving activity will be monitored and maintained as a marine
mammal buffer area in which pile installation will not commence or will
be suspended temporarily if any marine mammals are observed within or
approaching the area of potential disturbance. The Level B harassment
area with a 2,000 meter radius will be monitored by three qualified
observers stationed at strategic locations that provide adequate visual
coverage of the disturbance zone. The monitoring staff will record any
presence of marine mammals by species, will document any behavioral
responses noted, and record Level B takes when sightings overlap with
pile installation activities.
During mechanical dismantling activities a 100 meters
radius will be monitored and maintained as a marine mammal buffer area
in which pile installation will not commence or will be suspended
temporarily if any marine mammals are observed within or approaching
the area.
The individuals will scan the waters within each
monitoring zone activity using binoculars (Vector 10X42 or equivalent),
spotting scopes (Swarovski 20-60 zoom or equivalent), and visual
observation.
The area within which the Level B harassment thresholds
could be exceeded during impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving
will be monitored for the presence of marine mammals during all impact
and vibratory pile driving. Marine mammal presence within these zones,
if any, will be monitored but pile driving activity will not be stopped
if marine mammals were found to be present. Any marine mammal
documented within the Level B harassment zone will constitute a Level B
take, and will be recorded and used to document the number of take
incidents.
If waters exceed a sea-state which restricts the
observers' ability to make observations within the marine mammal buffer
zone (the 235 meter radius) (e.g., excessive wind or fog), impact pile
installation will cease until conditions allow the resumption of
monitoring.
The waters will be scanned for 30 minutes before, during,
and 30 minutes after any and all pile driving and removal activities.
If marine mammals enter or are observed within the
designated marine mammal buffer zone (the 235m radius) during or 30
minutes prior to pile driving, the monitors will notify the on-site
construction manager to not begin until the animal has moved outside
the designated radius.
If a marine mammal approaches the Level A harassment zone
prior to initiation of pile driving, CALTRANS cannot commence
activities until the marine mammal (a) is observed to have left the
Level A harassment zone or (b) has not been seen or otherwise detected
within the Level A harassment zone for 30 minutes.
The waters will continue to be scanned for at least 30
minutes after pile driving has completed each day, and after each
stoppage of 30 minutes or greater.
Data Collection
We require that observers use approved data forms. Among other
pieces of information, CALTRANS will record detailed information about
any implementation of shutdowns, including the distance of animals to
the pile and description of specific actions that ensued and resulting
behavior of the animal, if any. In addition, CALTRANS will attempt to
distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the
number of incidents of take. We require that, at a minimum, the
following information be collected on the sighting forms:
Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;
Construction activities occurring during each observation
period;
Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);
Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);
Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of
marine mammals;
Description of any observable marine mammal behavior
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from
pile driving activity;
Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals
and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
Locations of all marine mammal observations; and
Other human activity in the area.
Reporting
CALTRANS will notify NMFS prior to the initiation of the pile
driving and dismantling activities for the removal of the existing east
span. NMFS will be informed of the initial sound pressure level
measurements for both pile driving and foundation dismantling
activities, including the final exclusion zone and Level B harassment
zone radii established for impact and vibratory pile driving and marine
foundation dismantling activities.
Monitoring reports will be posted on the SF-OBB Project's
biological mitigation Web site (www.biomitigation.org) on a weekly
basis if in-water construction activities are conducted. Marine mammal
monitoring reports will include species and numbers of marine mammals
observed, time and location of observation and behavior of the animal.
In addition, the reports will include an estimate of the number and
species of marine mammals that may have been harassed as a result of
activities.
CALTRANS will provide NMFS with a draft monitoring report within 90
days of the conclusion of the proposed construction work. This report
will detail the monitoring protocol, summarize the data recorded during
monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have
been harassed. If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days,
the draft final report will constitute the final report. If comments
are received, a final report must be submitted within 30 days after
receipt of comments.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here,
section 3(18) of 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].''
All anticipated takes would be by Level B harassment resulting from
impact and vibratory pile driving/removal and involving temporary
changes in behavior. Injurious or lethal takes are not expected due to
the expected source levels and sound source characteristics associated
with the activity, and the planned mitigation and monitoring measures
are expected to further minimize the possibility of such take.
Given the many uncertainties in predicting the quantity and types
of impacts of sound in every given situation on marine mammals, it is
common practice to estimate how many animals are likely to be present
within a particular distance of a given activity, or exposed to a
particular level of sound, based on the available science.
[[Page 43717]]
This practice potentially overestimates the numbers of marine
mammals taken for stationary activities, as it is likely that some
smaller number of individuals may accrue a number of incidences of
harassment per individual than for each incidence to accrue to a new
individual, especially if those individuals display some degree of
residency or site fidelity and the impetus to use the site (e.g.,
because of foraging opportunities) is stronger than the deterrence
presented by the harassing activity.
CALTRANS has requested authorization for the incidental taking of
small numbers of California sea lions (Zalophus californianus), Pacific
harbor seals (Phoca vitulina richardsii), harbor porpoises (Phocoena
phocoena), and gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) incidental to
construction associated with a replacement bridge for the East Span of
the SF-OBB, in San Francisco Bay (SFB, or Bay), California.
In order to estimate the potential incidents of take that may occur
incidental to the specified activity, we must first estimate the extent
of the sound field that may be produced by the activity and then
consider in combination with information about marine mammal density or
abundance in the project area. We provided detailed information on
applicable sound thresholds for determining effects to marine mammals
as well as describing the information used in estimating the sound
fields, the available marine mammal density or abundance information,
and the method of estimating potential incidences of take, in our
Federal Register notice of proposed authorization (80 FR 23744; March
20, 2015).
Table 1 illustrated the 190 dB rms Level A harassment (injury)
threshold for underwater noise for pinniped species could be exceeded
at a distance of up to approximately 95 meters during impact pile
driving activities, and the 180 dB rms Level A harassment (injury)
threshold for cetacean species could be exceeded at a distance of up to
approximately 235 meters during impact pile driving activities.
Additionally, the 160 dB rms Level B harassment (behavioral disruption)
threshold for impulsive source underwater noise for pinniped and
cetacean species could be exceeded at a distance of up to approximately
1,000 meters during impact pile driving and the 120 dB Level B
harassment threshold could be exceeded at 2,000 meters. Note that the
actual area insonified by pile driving activities is significantly
constrained by local topography relative to the identified threshold
radii.
Marine mammal density estimates were based on marine mammal
monitoring reports and marine mammal observations made during pile
driving activities associated with the SF-OBB construction work
authorized under prior IHAs. Pacific harbor seal densities were
calculated and described in the Federal Register notice of proposed
authorization (80 FR 23744; March 20, 2015). During monitoring for the
East Span of the SF-OBB, there were 657 observations of harbor seals
made during over 210 days from 2000 to 2014. Two densities were
calculated because of the higher density of seals observed foraging
near YBI and Treasure Island. Foraging seals tended to remain in the
area for several hours while transiting seals passing under the SF-OBB
were only observed 1-2 times. Therefore, densities east of Pier E3-E8
are much lower than the density than west of Pier E3.
The area of 2,000-meter threshold for the Level B behavioral
harassment zone is 12.57 km\2\ (12,570,000 m\2\). Half of that area to
the west of Piers E3-E8 (6.29 km\2\) would have a higher density of
harbor seals which are frequently observed in the three foraging areas.
The range of seals observed within the foraging areas is 0-8 seals and
the mean is 3.6 seals per day (combined for all three areas). The other
half of the Level B harassment zone would have a lower density due to
the infrequent observations of seals moving through the area. In
addition the density of seals will vary with season therefore a density
for the spring-summer season when seals spend more time onshore as they
are pupping and molting and the fall/winter season.
This estimate of 460 harbor seal takes is above the number of seals
that have been permitted for take in previous IHAs that have been
issued related to this project. However, the estimate presented here
represents a more complete picture of the marine mammal density in the
project area and the potential for exposure to project activities.
California sea lions are based on CALTRANS observations over 15
years of monitoring on the Bay Bridge, 2000 to 2014, including baseline
monitoring in 2003 before bridge construction began. It should be noted
that monitoring was not year round and there was little monitoring
required during the period of mid-2010 to mid-2013 due to no pile
driving. During 2013 and 2014, there was a large increase in pile
driving to construct temporary falsework and for mechanical dismantling
so the current estimates of animals do include recent monitoring.
California sea lion numbers fluctuate from year to year. For example,
in 2014 no sea lions were observed in the harassment zone while in
2004, 36 sea lions were recorded near the Bay Bridge construction areas
during pile driving. The larger number of sea lions in 2004 was
probably related to a run of herring that was near the Bay Bridge and
sea lions were observed feeding on dense aggregations of herring in the
area. Therefore, an allowed take 50 sea lions is considered a
conservative estimate.
Harbor porpoises were observed near the tower of the new Bay Bridge
in 2013 and 2014. Each of those was a single animal and far out of
their normal range for the Bay. If 1 or 2 pods of porpoises were to
enter the construction area, then there might be up to 6 takes (pod
size of 2-3 porpoises). Based on this NMFS believes that an allowed
take of up to 10 harbor porpoises is conservative, but reasonable.
Gray whale take estimates were based on sighting reports collected
by the Marine Mammal Center in Sausalito (the NMFS stranding facility
for northern California). The Center collects whale sightings
information from the general public, researchers, and the U.S. Coast
Guard. For the gray whale, 5 permitted takes is likely to be a
conservative, but reasonable, estimate as they have never been observed
within any of the behavioral zones during monitoring. Additionally,
there has only been one report of a gray whale swimming under the
original East Span of the Bay Bridge a number of years ago.
Based on these results, and accounting for a certain level of
uncertainty regarding the next phase of construction, NMFS concludes
that at maximum 460 harbor seals, 50 California sea lions, 10 harbor
porpoises, and 5 gray whales could be exposed to noise levels that
could cause Level B harassment as a result of the CALTRAN' SF-OBB
construction activities. These numbers represent 1.5%, <0.01%, <0.01%
and 0.10% of the California stock harbor seal, the U.S. stock
California sea lion, the Eastern North Pacific stock gray whale, and
the San Francisco-Russian River stock harbor porpoise, respectively
(Table 2).
[[Page 43718]]
Table 2--Estimates of the Possible Maximum Numbers of Marine Mammals Taken by Level B Harassment as a Result of
the Proposed CALTRANS' SF-OBB Construction Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent
Species Stocks Level B takes population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pinnipeds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal................................ California......................... 460 1.5
California sea lion........................ U.S................................ 50 <0.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cetaceans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale................................. Eastern North Pacific.............. 5 <0.01
Harbor porpoise............................ San Francisco-Russian River........ 10 0.10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyses and Determinations
Negligible Impact Analysis
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 and nature of estimated Level A harassment takes,
the number of estimated mortalities, effects on habitat, and the status
of the species.
To avoid repetition, the discussion of our analyses applies to all
the species listed in Table 2, given that the anticipated effects of
this pile driving project on marine mammals are expected to be
relatively similar in nature. There is no information about the size,
status, or structure of any species or stock that would lead to a
different analysis for this activity.
Pile driving, pile removal and mechanical dismantling activities
associated with the construction of a replacement bridge for the East
Span of the SF-OBB, as outlined previously, have the potential to
disturb or displace marine mammals. Specifically, the specified
activities may result in take, in the form of Level B harassment
(behavioral disturbance) only, from underwater sounds generated from
pile driving. Potential takes could occur if individuals of these
species are present in the ensonified zone when pile driving and
removal are happening.
No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated given the
nature of the activity and measures designed to minimize the
possibility of injury to marine mammals. The known potential for
serious injury or mortality is minimized through the construction
method and the implementation of the planned mitigation measures. Both
vibratory hammers and impact hammers will be utilized based on local
substrate conditions. Vibratory driving will be used wherever
conditions are favorable for this technique. Vibratory driving does not
have significant potential to cause injury to marine mammals due to the
relatively low source levels produced and the lack of potentially
injurious source characteristics. Impact pile driving produces short,
sharp pulses with higher peak levels and much sharper rise time to
reach those peaks. When impact driving is necessary, required measures
(implementation of shutdown zones) significantly reduce any possibility
of injury. Given sufficient ``notice'' through use of soft start (for
impact driving), marine mammals are expected to move away from a sound
source that is annoying prior to its becoming potentially injurious.
The likelihood that marine mammal detection ability by trained
observers is high under the environmental conditions described for this
area of San Francisco Bay further enables the implementation of
shutdowns to avoid injury, serious injury, or mortality.
Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the
basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other
similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as
increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased
foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff,
2006; HDR, 2012; Lerma, 2014). Most likely, individuals will simply
move away from the sound source and be temporarily displaced from the
areas of pile driving, although even this reaction has been observed
primarily only in association with impact pile driving. In response to
vibratory driving, pinnipeds (which may become somewhat habituated to
human activity in industrial or urban waterways) have been observed to
orient towards and sometimes move towards the sound. The pile driving
activities analyzed here are similar to, or less impactful than,
numerous construction activities conducted in other similar locations,
which have taken place with no reported injuries or mortality to marine
mammals, and no known long-term adverse consequences from behavioral
harassment. Repeated exposures of individuals to levels of sound that
may cause Level B harassment are unlikely to result in hearing
impairment or to significantly disrupt foraging behavior. Thus, even
repeated Level B harassment of some small subset of the overall stock
is unlikely to result in any significant realized decrease in fitness
for the affected individuals, and thus would not result in any adverse
impact to the stock as a whole. Level B harassment will be reduced to
the level of least practicable impact through use of mitigation
measures described herein and, if sound produced by project activities
is sufficiently disturbing, animals are likely to simply avoid the
project area while the activity is occurring.
CALTRANS' proposed activities are localized and of short duration.
The entire project area is limited to the East Span of the bridge and
its immediate surroundings. The project will require the installation
of a total of approximately 200 piles. Impact driving of pipe piles
will be limited to a maximum of 20 piles per day and proofing of the
pipe piles will not exceed a maximum of 2 piles per day--each pile
would be driven with no more than 20 blows during a one-minute
[[Page 43719]]
period. Total hammer time is scheduled to occur over 128 days between
July 15, 2015 and July 14, 2016. These localized and short-term noise
exposures may cause brief startle reactions or short-term behavioral
modification by the animals. These reactions and behavioral changes are
expected to subside quickly when the exposures cease. Moreover, the
proposed mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to reduce
potential exposures and behavioral modifications even further.
Additionally, no important feeding and/or reproductive areas for marine
mammals are known to be near the proposed action area. Therefore, the
take resulting from this CALTRANS project is not reasonably expected to
and is not reasonably likely to adversely affect the marine mammal
species or stocks through effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival and, therefore, will have a negligible impact on the affected
species or stocks.
The project also is not expected to have significant adverse
effects on affected marine mammals' habitat, as analyzed in detail in
the ``Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat'' section. The
project activities would not modify existing marine mammal habitat. The
activities may cause some fish to leave the area of disturbance, thus
temporarily impacting marine mammals' foraging opportunities in a
limited portion of the foraging range; but, because of the short
duration of the activities and the relatively small area of the habitat
that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not
expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences.
In summary, this negligible impact analysis is founded on the
following factors: (1) The possibility of injury, serious injury, or
mortality may reasonably be considered discountable; (2) the
anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist of, at worst,
temporary modifications in behavior with no significant adverse impacts
on habitat and; (3) the presumed efficacy of the proposed mitigation
measures in reducing the effects of the specified activity to the level
of least practicable impact. In combination, we believe that these
factors, as well as the available body of evidence from other similar
activities, demonstrate that the potential effects of the specified
activity will have only short-term effects on individuals. The
specified activity is not expected to impact rates of recruitment or
survival and will therefore not result in population-level impacts.
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 finds that the total marine mammal take from
CALTRANS' construction of a replacement bridge for the East Span of the
SF-OBB will have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal
species or stocks.
Small Numbers Analysis
Table 2 demonstrates the number of animals that could be exposed to
received noise levels that could cause Level B behavioral harassment
for the proposed work associated with the replacement bridge
construction. These numbers represent 1.5%, <0.01%, <0.01% and 0.10% of
the California stock harbor seal, the U.S. stock California sea lion,
the Eastern North Pacific stock gray whale, and the San Francisco-
Russian River stock harbor porpoise, respectively (Table 3).
The numbers of animals authorized to be taken for all species are
small relative to the relevant stocks or populations even if each
estimated taking occurred to a new individual--an extremely unlikely
scenario. For pinnipeds occurring in the vicinity of the SF-OBB
project, there will almost certainly be some overlap in individuals
present day-to-day, and these takes are likely to occur only within
some small portion of the overall regional stock, such as the number of
harbor seals that regularly use nearby haul-out rocks.
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 mitigation and monitoring
measures, which are expected to reduce the number of marine mammals
potentially affected by the proposed action, NMFS 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 subsistence uses of marine mammals in the proposed
project area; and, thus, no subsistence uses impacted by this action.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No marine mammal species listed under the ESA are expected to be
affected by these activities. Therefore, we have determined that a
section 7 consultation under the ESA is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
NMFS' prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the take of
marine mammals incidental to construction of the East Span of the SF-
OBB and made a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on November 4,
2003. Due to the modification of part of the construction project and
the mitigation measures, NMFS reviewed additional information from
CALTRANS regarding empirical measurements of pile driving noises for
the smaller temporary piles without an air bubble curtain system and
the use of vibratory pile driving. NMFS prepared a Supplemental
Environmental Assessment (SEA) and analyzed the potential impacts to
marine mammals that would result from the modification of the action. A
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was signed on August 5, 2009.
A copy of the SEA and FONSI is available upon request.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, we have issued an IHA to
CALTRANS for conducting the described activities related to the
construction of the East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge,
from July 15, 2015 through July 14, 2016 provided the previously
described mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are
incorporated.
Dated: July 16, 2015.
Perry Gayaldo,
Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-18021 Filed 7-22-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P