Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Seattle Multimodal Construction Project in Washington State, 15497-15513 [2017-06096]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
be restricted to those issues specifically
identified in this notice and any issues
arising after publication of this notice
that require emergency action under
section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act, provided the public has been
notified of the intent to take final action
to address the emergency.
Special Accommodations
This meeting is accessible to people
with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary
aids should be directed to the SAFMC
office (see ADDRESSES) at least 10
business days prior to the meeting.
Note: The times and sequence specified in
this agenda are subject to change.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: March 24, 2017.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–06178 Filed 3–28–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
National Integrated Drought
Information System (NIDIS) Executive
Council Meeting
Climate Program Office (CPO),
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric
Research (OAR), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce (DOC).
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
AGENCY:
The National Integrated
Drought Information System (NIDIS)
Program will hold an organizational
meeting of the NIDIS Executive Council
on April 20, 2017.
DATES: The meeting will be held
Thursday, April 20, 2017 from 9:00 a.m.
EST to 4:30 p.m. EST. These times and
the agenda topics described below are
subject to change.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Hall of States, Room 383/385, 444
North Capitol St. NW., Washington, DC
20001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Veva Deheza, NIDIS Executive Director,
David Skaggs Research Center, Room
GD102, 325 Broadway, Boulder CO
80305. Email: Veva.Deheza@noaa.gov;
or visit the NIDIS Web site at
www.drought.gov.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
The
National Integrated Drought Information
System (NIDIS) was established by
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
Public Law 109–430 on December 20,
2006, and reauthorized by Public Law
113–86 on March 6, 2014, with a
mandate to provide an effective drought
early warning system for the United
States; coordinate, and integrate as
practicable, Federal research in support
of a drought early warning system; and
build upon existing forecasting and
assessment programs and partnerships.
See 15 U.S.C. 313d. The Public Law also
calls for consultation with ‘‘relevant
Federal, regional, State, tribal, and local
government agencies, research
institutions, and the private sector’’ in
the development of NIDIS. 15 U.S.C.
313d(c). The NIDIS Executive Council
provides the NIDIS Program Office with
an opportunity to engage in individual
consultation with senior resource
officials from NIDIS’s Federal partners,
as well as leaders from state and local
government, academia,
nongovernmental organizations, and the
private sector.
Status: This meeting will be open to
public participation. Individuals
interested in attending should register at
https://cpaess.ucar.edu/meetings/2017/
nidis-executive-council-meeting-april2017. Please refer to this Web page for
the most up-to-date meeting times and
agenda. Seating at the meeting will be
available on a first-come, first-served
basis.
Special Accommodations: This
meeting is physically accessible to
people with disabilities. Requests for
special accommodations may be
directed no later than 12:00 p.m. on
April 18, 2016, to Elizabeth Ossowski,
Program Coordinator, David Skaggs
Research Center, Room GD102, 325
Broadway, Boulder CO 80305; Email:
Elizabeth.Ossowski@noaa.gov.
Matters To Be Considered: The
meeting will include the following
topics: (1) NIDIS implementation
updates and 2017 priorities, (2) Council
member updates and 2017 priorities, (3)
cross-agency Federal priorities as well
as state government priorities in 2017,
(4) drought resilience efforts at the
Federal level, (5) quantifying the socioeconomic impact of drought and the
cost of inaction as well as the benefits
of action, (6) partnership between the
National Water Center and NIDIS, and
(7) open discussion on advancing the
goals of the NIDIS Public Law.
Dated: March 23, 2017.
Paul Johnson,
Acting Deputy Chief Financial Officer/CAO,
Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2017–06226 Filed 3–28–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–KB–P
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15497
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XF250
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Seattle
Multimodal Construction Project in
Washington State
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed incidental harassment
authorization; request for comment.
AGENCY:
NMFS has received an
application from Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT)
for an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to take marine
mammals, by harassment, incidental to
Seattle Multimodal Construction Project
in Washington State. Pursuant to the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments
on its proposal to issue an IHA to the
WSDOT to incidentally take marine
mammals during the specified activities.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than April 28, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the
application should be addressed to Jolie
Harrison, Chief, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service. Physical comments
should be sent to 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and
electronic comments should be sent to
ITP.Guan@noaa.gov.
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible
for comments sent by any other method,
to any other address or individual, or
received after the end of the comment
period. Comments received
electronically, including all
attachments, must not exceed a 25megabyte file size. Attachments to
electronic comments will be accepted in
Microsoft Word or Excel or Adobe PDF
file formats only. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted online at
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/construction.htm without
change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address)
voluntarily submitted by the commenter
may be publicly accessible. Do not
submit confidential business
information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shane Guan, Office of Protected
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
15498
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
Electronic copies of the applications
and supporting documents, as well as a
list of the references cited in this
document, may be obtained online at:
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/construction.htm. In case of
problems accessing these documents,
please call the contact listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
upon request by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
area, the incidental, but not intentional,
taking of small numbers of marine
mammals, provided that certain
findings are made and the necessary
prescriptions are established.
The incidental taking of small
numbers of marine mammals shall be
allowed if NMFS (through authority
delegated by the Secretary) finds that
the total taking by the specified activity
during the specified time period will (i)
have a negligible impact on the species
or stock(s) and (ii) not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
subsistence uses (where relevant).
Further, the permissible methods of
taking, as well as the other means of
effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on the species or stock and its
habitat (i.e., mitigation) must be
prescribed. Last, requirements
pertaining to the monitoring and
reporting of such taking must be set
forth.
Where there is the potential for
serious injury or death, the allowance of
incidental taking requires promulgation
of regulations under MMPA section
101(a)(5)(A). Subsequently, a Letter (or
Letters) of Authorization may be issued
as governed by the prescriptions
established in such regulations,
provided that the level of taking will be
consistent with the findings made for
the total taking allowable under the
specific regulations. Under MMPA
section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS may
authorize incidental taking by
harassment only (i.e., no serious injury
or mortality), for periods of not more
than one year, pursuant to requirements
and conditions contained within an
Incidental Harassment Authorization
(IHA). The promulgation of regulations
or issuance of IHAs (with their
associated prescribed mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting) requires
notice and opportunity for public
comment.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact
resulting from the specified activity that
cannot be reasonably expected to, and is
not reasonably likely to, adversely affect
the species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
Except with respect to certain
activities not pertinent here, 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).
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5)
authorization requires compliance with
the National Environmental Policy Act.
NMFS preliminary determined the
issuance of the proposed IHA is
consistent with categories of activities
identified in CE B4 (issuance of
incidental harassment authorizations
under section 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA for which no serious injury or
mortality is anticipated) of the
Companion Manual for NAO 216–6A
and we have not identified any
extraordinary circumstances listed in
Chapter 4 of the Companion Manual for
NAO 216–6A that would preclude this
categorical exclusion.
We will review all comments
submitted in response to this notice
prior to making a final decision on the
IHA request.
Summary of Request
On July 28, 2016, WSDOT submitted
a request to NMFS requesting an IHA for
the harassment of small numbers of 11
marine mammal species incidental to
construction associated with the Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock,
Seattle, Washington, between August 1,
2017 and July 31, 2018. NMFS initially
determined the IHA application was
complete on September 1, 2016.
However, WSDOT notified NMFS in
November 2016 that the scope of its
activities had changed. WSDOT stated
that instead of using vibratory hammers
for the majority of in-water pile driving
and using impact hammer for proofing,
it would be required to use impact
hammers to drive a large number of
piles completely due to sediment
conditions at Colman Dock. On March
2, 2017, WSDOT submitted a revised
IHA application with updated project
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
description. NMFS determined that the
revised IHA application was complete
on March 3, 2017.
NMFS is proposing to authorize the
Level A and Level B harassment of the
following eight marine mammal
species/stocks: Harbor seal (Phoca
vitulina), California sea lion (Zalophus
californianus), Steller sea lion
(Eumetopias jubatus), killer whale
(Orcinus orca), gray whale (Eschrichtius
robustus), humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae), harbor porpoise
(Phocoena phocoena), and Dall’s
porpoise (P. dalli).
Description of Specified Activities
Overview
WSDOT is proposing to preserve the
Seattle Ferry Terminal at Colman Dock.
The project will reconfigure the dock
while maintaining approximately the
same vehicle holding capacity as
current conditions. The reconfiguration
would increase total permanent
overwater coverage (OWC) by about
5,400 square feet (f2) (about 1.7 percent
more than existing overwater coverage
at the site), due to the new walkway
from the King County Passenger Only
Ferry (POF) facility to Alaskan Way and
new stairways and elevators from the
POF to the upper level of the terminal.
The additional 5,400 f2 will be mitigated
by removing a portion of Pier 48, a
condemned timber structure.
The project will remove the northern
timber trestle and replace a portion of it
with a new concrete trestle. The area
from Marion Street to the north edge of
the property will not be rebuilt and will
become, after demolition, a new area of
open water. A section of fill contained
behind a bulkhead underneath the
northeast section of the dock will also
be removed.
WSDOT will construct a new steel
and concrete trestle from Columbia
Street northward to Marion Street.
Construction of the reconfigured dock
will narrow (reduce) the OWC along the
shoreline (at the landward edge) by 180
linear feet at the north end of the site,
while 30 linear feet of new trestle would
be constructed along the shoreline at the
south end of the site. The net reduction
of OWC in the nearshore zone is 150
linear feet.
The purpose of the Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock is to
preserve the transportation function of
an aging, deteriorating and seismicallydeficient facility to continue providing
safe and reliable service. The project
will also address existing safety
concerns related to conflicts between
vehicles and pedestrian traffic and
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
operational inefficiencies. Key project
elements include:
• Replacing and re-configuring the
timber trestle portion of the dock;
• Replacing the main terminal
building;
• Reconfiguring the dock layout to
provide safer and more efficient
operations;
• Replacing the vehicle transfer span
and the overhead loading structures of
Slip 3;
• Replacing vessel landing aids;
• Maintaining a connection to the
Marion Street pedestrian overpass;
• Moving the current POF slip
temporarily to the north to make way for
south trestle construction, and then
constructing a new POF slip in the
south trestle area;
• Mitigating for the additional 5,400
f2 of overwater coverage;
• Capping existing contaminated
sediments.
The proposed Seattle Multimodal
Project would involve in-water impact
and vibratory pile driving and vibratory
pile removal. Details of the proposed
construction project that have the
potential to affect marine mammals are
provided below.
Dates and Duration
Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water
work timing restrictions to protect
Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed
salmonids, planned WSDOT in-water
construction at this location is limited
each year to July 16 through February
15. For this project, in-water
construction is planned to take place
between August 1, 2017 and February
15, 2018.
The total worst-case time for pile
installation and removal is expected to
be 83 working days (Table 1).
15499
• Vibratory driving of each of the 101
24-inch steel pile will take
approximately 20 minutes, with a
maximum of 16 piles installed per day
over 7 days.
• Vibratory removal of 103 temporary
24-inch diameter steel piles will take
approximately 20 minutes per pile, with
maximum 16 piles removed per day
over 8 days.
• Impact driving (3000 strikes per
pile) of 14 30-inch and 201 36-inch
diameter steel piles will take
approximately 45 minutes per pile, with
maximum 8 piles per day for a total of
28 days.
• Vibratory driving of 17 30- and 205
36-inch diameter steel piles will take 20
minutes per pile, with maximum 8 piles
per day over a total of 29 days.
• Vibratory removal of 215 14-inch
timber piles will take approximately 15
minutes per pile, with approximately 20
piles removed per day for 11 days.
TABLE 1— SUMMARY OF IN-WATER PILE DRIVING DURATIONS
Pile size
(inch)
Duration
(days)
Pile type
Vibratory removal ..............................................
Vibratory removal ..............................................
Vibratory driving .................................................
Vibratory driving .................................................
Vibratory driving .................................................
Impact driving ....................................................
Impact driving ....................................................
Timber .....................
Steel ........................
Steel ........................
Steel ........................
Steel ........................
Steel ........................
Steel ........................
14
24
24
30
36
30
36
215
103
101
17
205
14
201
900 seconds .......................
1200 seconds .....................
1200 seconds .....................
1200 seconds .....................
1200 seconds .....................
3000 strikes ........................
3000 strikes ........................
11
8
7
3
26
2
26
Total ............................................................
.................................
....................
856
............................................
83
Specified Geographic Region
The proposed activities will occur at
the Seattle Ferry Terminal at Colman
Dock, located in the City of Seattle,
Washington (see Figure 1–2 of the IHA
application).
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Detailed Description of In-Water Pile
Driving Associated With Seattle
Multimodal Project
The proposed project has two
elements involving noise production
that may affect marine mammals:
Vibratory hammer driving and removal,
and impact hammer driving.
Details of pile driving activities are
provided below:
• The 14-inch timber piles will be
removed with a vibratory hammer
(Table 1).
• The 24-inch temporary piles will be
installed and removed with a vibratory
hammer (no proofing) (Table 1).
• Some of the permanent 30- and 36inch steel piles would be installed with
a vibratory hammer, and some would be
installed with impact hammer (Table 1).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
Pile number
Time to vibratory drive per
pile/strikes to impact drive
per pile
Method
(1). Vibratory Hammer Driving and
Removal
Vibratory hammers are commonly
used in steel pile driving where
sediments allow and involve the same
vibratory hammer used in pile removal.
The pile is placed into position using a
choker and crane, and then vibrated
between 1,200 and 2,400 vibrations per
minute. The anticipated time required
(based on WSDOT prior experience) to
install a 14″ timber pile is up to 900
seconds; for a 24″ steel pile 1200
seconds; and for a 30″ or 36″ steel pile
2700 seconds. The vibrations liquefy the
sediment surrounding the pile allowing
it to penetrate to the required seating
depth, or to be removed. The type of
vibratory hammer that will be used for
the project will likely be an APE 400
King Kong (or equivalent) with a drive
force of 361 tons.
(2). Impact Hammer Installation
Impact hammers are used to install
plastic/steel core, wood, concrete, or
steel piles. An impact hammer is a steel
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
device that works like a piston. Impact
hammers are usually large, though small
impact hammers are used to install
small diameter plastic/steel core piles.
Impact hammers have guides (called a
lead) that hold the hammer in alignment
with the pile while a heavy piston
moves up and down, striking the top of
the pile, and drives it into the substrate
from the downward force of the hammer
on the top of the pile.
To drive the pile, the pile is first
moved into position and set in the
proper location using a choker cable.
Once the pile is set in place, pile
installation with an impact hammer is
expected to require approximately 45
minutes. It is expected that for each 30
inch and 36 inch steel pile, a maximum
of 3,000 strikes would be needed to
install a pile.
It is possible that more than 1
vibratory pile driving, up to 3 hammers,
could be conducted concurrently for the
24-, 30-, and 36-inch piles.
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures are described in in
detail later in the document (Mitigation
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
15500
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
section and Monitoring and Reporting
section).
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of Specified Activities
The marine mammal species under
NMFS jurisdiction that have the
potential to occur in the proposed
construction area include Pacific harbor
seal (Phoca vitulina), California sea lion
(Zalophus californianus), northern
elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris),
Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus),
killer whale (Orcinus orca), long-beaked
common dolphin (Delphis capensis),
gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus),
humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae), minke whale
(Balaenoptera acutorostrata), harbor
porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and
Dall’s porpoise (P. dalli). A list of
marine mammals that have the potential
to occur in the vicinity of the action and
their legal status under the MMPA and
ESA are provided in Table 2. Among
these species, northern elephant seal,
minke whale, and long-beaked common
dolphin are extralimital in the proposed
project area. NMFS does not consider
take is likely to occur for these species.
Therefore, these species are not
discussed further in this document.
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN REGION OF ACTIVITY
Species
ESA status
MMPA status
Occurrence
Harbor Seal .................................................
California Sea Lion ......................................
Northern Elephant Seal ...............................
Steller Sea Lion (eastern DPS) ..................
Harbor Porpoise ..........................................
Dall’s Porpoise ............................................
Killer Whale (Southern Resident) ...............
Killer Whale (West Coast transient) ............
Long-beaked Common Dolphin ..................
Gray Whale .................................................
Humpback Whale ........................................
Minke Whale ...............................................
Not listed .........................
Not listed .........................
Not listed .........................
Not listed .........................
Not listed .........................
Not listed .........................
Endangered ....................
Not listed .........................
Not listed .........................
Not listed .........................
Endangered ....................
Not listed .........................
Non-depleted ..................
Non-depleted ..................
Non-depleted ..................
Non-depleted ..................
Non-depleted ..................
Non-depleted ..................
Depleted ..........................
Non-depleted ..................
Non-depleted ..................
Non-depleted ..................
Depleted ..........................
Non-depleted ..................
Frequent ..........................
Frequent ..........................
Extralimital ......................
Rare ................................
Frequent ..........................
Occasional ......................
Occasional ......................
Occasional ......................
Extralimital ......................
Occasional ......................
Rare ................................
Extralimital ......................
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
General information on the marine
mammal species found in Washington
coastal waters can be found in Caretta
et al. (2016), which is available online
at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/
pdf/pacific2015_final.pdf. Refer to that
document for information on these
species. Specific information
concerning these species in the vicinity
of the proposed action area is provided
in detail in the WSDOT’s IHA
application.
Harbor Seal
There are three stocks in
Washington’s inland waters, the Hood
Canal, Northern Inland Waters, and
Southern Puget Sound stocks. Seals
belonging to the Northern Inland Waters
Stock are present at the project site.
Pupping seasons vary by geographic
region. For the northern Puget Sound
region, pups are born from late June
through August (WDFW 2012). After
October 1, all pups in the inland waters
of Washington are weaned. Of the
pinniped species that commonly occur
within the region of activity, harbor
seals are the most common and the only
pinniped that breeds and remains in the
inland marine waters of Washington
year-round (Calambokidis and Baird
1994).
In 1999, Jeffries et al. (2003) recorded
a mean count of 9,550 harbor seals in
Washington’s inland marine waters, and
estimated the total population to be
approximately 14,612 animals
(including the Strait of Juan de Fuca).
According to the 1999 Stock Assessment
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
Report (SAR), the most recent estimate
for the Washington Northern Inland
Waters Stock is 11,036 (NMFS 1999). No
minimum population estimate is
available. However, there are an
estimated 32,000 harbor seals in
Washington today, and their population
appears to have stabilized (Jeffries
2013), so the estimate of 11,036 may be
low.
The nearest documented harbor seal
haulout to the Seattle Ferry Terminal is
10.6 kilometers (km)/6.6 miles (mi) west
on Blakely Rocks, though harbor seals
also make use of docks, buoys and
beaches in the area. The level of use of
this haulout during the fall and winter
is unknown, but is expected to be much
less as air temperatures become colder
than water temperatures resulting in
seals in general hauling out less. None
of the harbor seals have been spotted
using Colman Dock as a haulout. Harbor
seals are known to haulout
opportunistically on docks and beaches
throughout the project area.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter
Pile project, 6 harbor seals were
observed during this one day project in
the area that corresponds to the
upcoming project zones of influence
(ZOIs) where received sound levels are
above 160 decibel (dB) re 1 micropascal
(mPa) and Level B harassment is
anticipated to occur (WSF 2012). During
the 2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 56
harbor seals were observed over 10 days
in the area that corresponds to the
upcoming project ZOIs. The maximum
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Abundance
Unk
296,750
179,000
71,256
11,233
25,750
78
243
101,305
20,990
1,918
636
number sighted during 1day was 13
(WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density
Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the
density of harbor seals in the Seattle
area as a range of 0.550001 and
1.219000 animals per square kilometer.
California Sea Lion
Washington California sea lions are
part of the U.S. stock, which begins at
the U.S./Mexico border and extends
northward into Canada. The minimum
population size of the U.S. stock was
estimated at 296,750 in 2011. More
recent pup counts made in 2011 totaled
61,943, the highest recorded to date.
Estimates of total population size based
on these counts are currently being
developed (NMFS 2015d). Some 3,000
to 5,000 animals are estimated to move
into northwest waters (both Washington
and British Columbia) during the fall
(September) and remain until the late
spring (May) when most return to
breeding rookeries in California and
Mexico (Jeffries et al., 2000). Peak
counts of over 1,000 animals have been
made in Puget Sound (Jeffries et al.,
2000).
The nearest documented California
sea lion haulout sites are 3 km/2 mi
southwest of the Seattle Ferry Terminal,
although sea lions also make use of
docks and other buoys in the area.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter
Pile project, 15 California sea lions were
observed during this 1 day project in the
area that corresponds to the upcoming
project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 12
California sea lions were observed over
10 days in the area that corresponds to
the upcoming project ZOIs. The
maximum number sighted during one
day was 4 (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density
Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the
density of California sea lions in the
Seattle area as a range of 0.067601 and
0.12660 animals per square kilometer.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Steller Sea Lion
The Eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea
lion may be present near the project site.
The eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea
lions is estimated to be 71,562 based on
pup and non-pup counts. In Washington
waters, Steller sea lion abundances vary
seasonally with a minimum estimate of
1,000 to 2,000 individuals present or
passing through the Strait of Juan de
Fuca in fall and winter months.
Steller sea lion numbers in
Washington State decline during the
summer months, which correspond to
the breeding season at Oregon and
British Columbia rookeries
(approximately late May to early June)
and peak during the fall and winter
months (WDFW 2000). According to
NMFS Marine Mammal Stock
Assessment Report, a new rookery has
become established on the outer
Washington coast with over 100 pups
born there in 2015 (NMFS 2016). A few
Steller sea lions can be observed yearround in Puget Sound although most of
the breeding age animals return to
rookeries in the spring and summer.
The nearest documented Steller sea
lion haulout sites are 15 km/9 mi
southwest of the Seattle Ferry Terminal
(WSDOT 2016a).
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter
Pile project, 0 Steller sea lions were
observed during this one day project in
the area that corresponds to the
upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012).
During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile
project, 0 Steller sea lions were
observed over 10 days in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project
ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density
Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the
density of Steller sea lions in the Seattle
area as a range of 0.025101 and
0.036800 animals per square kilometer.
Killer Whale
The Eastern North Pacific Southern
Resident (SRKW) and West Coast
Transient (Transient) stocks of killer
whale may be found near the project
site. The Southern Resident killer
whales live in three family groups
known as the J, K and L pods. As of
December 31, 2015, the stock
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
collectively numbers 78 individuals
(CWR 2016). Transient killer whales
generally occur in smaller (less than 10
individuals), less structured pods
(NMFS 2013c). According to the Center
for Whale Research (CWR 2015), they
tend to travel in small groups of one to
five individuals, staying close to
shorelines, often near seal rookeries
when pups are being weaned. The West
Coast Transient stock, which includes
individuals from California to
southeastern Alaska, is has a minimum
population estimate of 243, which does
not include an estimate of the number
of whales in California (NMFS 2013b).
The SRKW and West Coast Transient
stocks are both found within
Washington inland waters. Individuals
of both stocks have long-ranging
movements and regularly leave the
inland waters (Calambokidis and Baird
1994).
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter
Pile project, 0 SRKW were observed
during this one day project in the area
that corresponds to the upcoming
project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the
2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 0 SRKW
were observed over 10 days in the area
that corresponds to the upcoming
project ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density
Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates the
density of Southern Resident killer
whales in the Seattle area as a range of
0.001461 and 0.020240 animals per
square kilometer.
According to the NMFS National
Stranding Database, there were no killer
whale strandings in the Seattle and
Island County areas between 2010 and
2014 (NMFS 2016).
The West Coast Transient killer whale
sightings have become more common
since mid-2000. Unlike the SRKW pods,
transients may be present in an area for
hours or days as they hunt pinnipeds.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter
Pile project, 0 transients were observed
during this one day project in the area
that corresponds to the upcoming
project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the
2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 0
transients were observed over 10 days in
the area that corresponds to the
upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).
However, on February 5, 2016, a pod of
up to 7 transients were reported in the
area that corresponds to the upcoming
project ZOIs (Orca Network Archive
Report 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density
Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the
density of west coast transient killer
whales in the Seattle area as a range of
0.000575 and 0.002373 animals per
square kilometer.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15501
Gray Whale
The Eastern North Pacific gray whale
may be found near the project site. The
most recent population estimate for the
Eastern North Pacific stock is 20,990
individuals (NMFS 2015e). Within
Washington waters, gray whale
sightings reported to Cascadia Research
and the Whale Museum between 1990
and 1993 totaled over 1,100
(Calambokidis et al., 1994). Abundance
estimates calculated for the small
regional area between Oregon and
southern Vancouver Island, including
the San Juan Area and Puget Sound,
suggest there were 137 to 153 individual
gray whales from 2001 through 2003
(Calambokidis et al. 2004a). Forty-eight
individual gray whales were observed in
Puget Sound and Hood Canal in 2004
and 2005.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter
Pile project, 0 gray whales were
observed during this one day project in
the area that corresponds to the
upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012).
During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile
project, 0 gray whales were observed
over 10 days in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project
ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density
Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates the
density of gray whales in the Seattle
area as a range of 0.000002 to 0.000510
animals per square kilometer.
Humpback Whale
The California-Oregon-Washington
(CA-OR-WA) stock of humpback whale
may be found near the project site. In
2016, NMFS has identified three
Distinct Population Segments (DPSs) of
humpback whales off the coast of
Washington, Oregon, and California.
These are: The Hawaii DPS (found
predominately off Washington and
southern British Columbia), which is
not listed under the ESA; the Mexico
DPS (found all along the coast), which
is listed as threatened under the ESA;
and the Central America DPS (found all
along the coast), which is listed as
endangered under the ESA.
From August to November 2015,
WSDOT conducted marine mammal
monitoring during tank farm pier
removal at the Seattle Multimodal
Project. During 51 days of monitoring,
one humpback whale was observed
within the ZOI on November 4, 2015.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter
Pile project, 0 humpback whales were
observed during this one day project in
the area that corresponds to the
upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012).
During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile
project, 0 humpback whales were
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
15502
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
observed over 10 days in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project
ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density
Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates the
density of humpback whales in the
Seattle area as a range between 0.000010
and 0.00070 animals per square
kilometer.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Harbor Porpoise
The Washington Inland Waters Stock
of harbor porpoise may be found near
the project site. The Washington Inland
Waters Stock occurs in waters east of
Cape Flattery (Strait of Juan de Fuca,
San Juan Island Region, and Puget
Sound).
Aerial surveys of the Washington and
southern British Columbia were
conducted from 2013 to 2015 (Smultea
et al. 2015). These aerial surveys
included the Strait of Juan de Fuca, San
Juan Islands, Gulf Island, Strait of
Georgia, Puget Sound, and Hood Canal.
The surveys showed that for U.S.
waters, the current estimate for
Washington inland water stock harbor
porpoise is 11,233 (NMFS 2016).
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter
Pile project, 0 harbor porpoise were
observed during this one day project in
the area that corresponds to the
upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012).
During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile
project, 0 harbor porpoise were
observed over 10 days in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project
ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density
Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates the
density of harbor porpoise during the
timeframe scheduled for this project in
the Seattle area as a range between
0.061701 and 0.156000 animals/km2
(U.S. Navy 2014).
Dall’s Porpoise
The California, Oregon, and
Washington Stock of Dall’s porpoise
may be found near the project site. The
most recent estimate of Dall’s porpoise
stock abundance is 25,750, based on
2005 and 2008 summer/autumn vesselbased line transect surveys of California,
Oregon, and Washington waters (NMFS
2011d). Within the inland waters of
Washington and British Columbia, this
species is most abundant in the Strait of
Juan de Fuca east to the San Juan
Islands. The most recent Washington’s
inland waters estimate is 900 animals
(Calambokidis et al. 1997), though
sightings have become rarer since then.
Prior to the 1940s, Dall’s porpoises were
not reported in Puget Sound.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter
Pile project, 0 Dall’s porpoise were
observed during this one day project in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
the area that corresponds to the
upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012).
During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile
project, 0 Dall’s porpoise were observed
over 10 days in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project
ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density
Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates the
density of Dall’s porpoises in the Seattle
area as a range between 0.018858 and
0.047976 animals per square kilometer.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities
on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
This section includes a summary and
discussion of the ways that components
of the specified activity may impact
marine mammals and their habitat. The
‘‘Estimated Take’’ section later in this
document will include a quantitative
analysis of the number of individuals
that are expected to be taken by this
activity. The ‘‘Negligible Impact
Analyses and Determination’’ section
will consider the content of this section,
the ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment’’ section, and the
‘‘Mitigation’’ section, to draw
conclusions regarding the likely impacts
of these activities on the reproductive
success or survivorship of individuals
and how those impacts on individuals
are likely to impact marine mammal
species or stocks.
When considering the influence of
various kinds of sound on the marine
environment, it is necessary to
understand that different kinds of
marine life are sensitive to different
frequencies of sound. Based on available
behavioral data, audiograms derived
using auditory evoked potentials,
anatomical modeling, and other data,
NMFS (2016) to designate ‘‘marine
mammal hearing groups’’ for marine
mammals and estimate the lower and
upper frequencies of hearing of the
groups. The marine mammal groups and
the associated frequencies are indicated
below (though animals are less sensitive
to sounds at the outer edge of their
functional range and most sensitive to
sounds of frequencies within a smaller
range somewhere in the middle of their
hearing range):
• Low frequency cetaceans (13
species of mysticetes): Functional
hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 7 hertz (Hz) and 35
kilohertz (kHz);
• Mid-frequency cetaceans (32
species of dolphins, seven species of
larger toothed whales, and 19 species of
beaked and bottlenose whales):
Functional hearing is estimated to occur
between approximately 150 Hz and 160
kHz;
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• High frequency cetaceans (eight
species of true porpoises, seven species
of river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana,
and four species of cephalorhynchids):
Functional hearing is estimated to occur
between approximately 275 Hz and 160
kHz;
• Phocid pinnipeds in Water:
Functional hearing is estimated to occur
between approximately 50 Hz and 86
kHz; and
• Otariid pinnipeds in Water:
Functional hearing is estimated to occur
between approximately 60 Hz and 39
kHz.
As mentioned previously in this
document, eight marine mammal
species (five cetacean and four pinniped
species) are likely to occur in the
vicinity of the Seattle pile driving/
removal area. Of the five cetacean
species, three belong to the lowfrequency cetacean group (gray and
humpback whales), one is a midfrequency cetacean (killer whale), and
two high-frequency cetacean (harbor
and Dall’s porpoises). One species of
pinniped is phocid (harbor seal), and
two species of pinniped are otariid
(California and Steller sea lions). A
species’ functional hearing group is a
consideration when we analyze the
effects of exposure to sound on marine
mammals.
The WSDOT’s Seattle Colman ferry
terminal construction work using inwater pile driving and pile removal
could adversely affect marine mammal
species and stocks by exposing them to
elevated noise levels in the vicinity of
the activity area.
Exposure to high intensity sound for
a sufficient duration may result in
auditory effects such as a noise-induced
threshold shift—an increase in the
auditory threshold after exposure to
noise (Finneran et al., 2005). Factors
that influence the amount of threshold
shift include the amplitude, duration,
frequency content, temporal pattern,
and energy distribution of noise
exposure. The magnitude of hearing
threshold shift normally decreases over
time following cessation of the noise
exposure. The amount of threshold shift
just after exposure is the initial
threshold shift. If the threshold shift
eventually returns to zero (i.e., the
threshold returns to the pre-exposure
value), it is a temporary threshold shift
(Southall et al., 2007).
Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of
hearing)—When animals exhibit
reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds
must be louder for an animal to detect
them) following exposure to an intense
sound or sound for long duration, it is
referred to as a noise-induced threshold
shift (TS). An animal can experience
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
temporary threshold shift (TTS) or
permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS
can last from minutes or hours to days
(i.e., there is complete recovery), can
occur in specific frequency ranges (i.e.,
an animal might only have a temporary
loss of hearing sensitivity between the
frequencies of 1 and 10 kHz), and can
be of varying amounts (for example, an
animal’s hearing sensitivity might be
reduced initially by only 6 dB or
reduced by 30 dB). PTS is permanent,
but some recovery is possible. PTS can
also occur in a specific frequency range
and amount as mentioned above for
TTS.
For marine mammals, published data
are limited to the captive bottlenose
dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and
Yangtze finless porpoise (Finneran et
al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a,
2010b; Finneran and Schlundt, 2010;
Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a,
2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b;
Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et al.,
2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For
pinnipeds in water, data are limited to
measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an
elephant seal, and California sea lions
(Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et
al., 2012b).
Lucke et al. (2009) found a TS of a
harbor porpoise after exposing it to
airgun noise with a received sound
pressure level (SPL) at 200.2 dB (peakto-peak) re: 1 mPa, which corresponds to
a sound exposure level of 164.5 dB re:
1 mPa2 s after integrating exposure.
NMFS currently uses the root-meansquare (rms) of received SPL at 180 dB
and 190 dB re: 1 mPa as the threshold
above which PTS could occur for
cetaceans and pinnipeds, respectively.
Because the airgun noise is a broadband
impulse, one cannot directly determine
the equivalent of rms SPL from the
reported peak-to-peak SPLs. However,
applying a conservative conversion
factor of 16 dB for broadband signals
from seismic surveys (McCauley et al.,
2000) to correct for the difference
between peak-to-peak levels reported in
Lucke et al. (2009) and rms SPLs, the
rms SPL for TTS would be
approximately 184 dB re: 1 mPa, and the
received levels associated with PTS
(Level A harassment) would be higher.
However, NMFS recognizes that TTS of
harbor porpoises is lower than other
cetacean species empirically tested
(Finneran & Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et
al., 2002; Kastelein and Jennings, 2012).
Marine mammal hearing plays a
critical role in communication with
conspecifics, and interpretation of
environmental cues for purposes such
as predator avoidance and prey capture.
Depending on the degree (elevation of
threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
time), and frequency range of TTS, and
the context in which it is experienced,
TTS can have effects on marine
mammals ranging from discountable to
serious (similar to those discussed in
auditory masking, below). For example,
a marine mammal may be able to readily
compensate for a brief, relatively small
amount of TTS in a non-critical
frequency range that occurs during a
time where ambient noise is lower and
there are not as many competing sounds
present. Alternatively, a larger amount
and longer duration of TTS sustained
during time when communication is
critical for successful mother/calf
interactions could have more serious
impacts. Also, depending on the degree
and frequency range, the effects of PTS
on an animal could range in severity,
although it is considered generally more
serious because it is a permanent
condition. Of note, reduced hearing
sensitivity as a simple function of aging
has been observed in marine mammals,
as well as humans and other taxa
(Southall et al., 2007), so one can infer
that strategies exist for coping with this
condition to some degree, though likely
not without cost.
In addition, chronic exposure to
excessive, though not high-intensity,
noise could cause masking at particular
frequencies for marine mammals that
utilize sound for vital biological
functions (Clark et al., 2009). Acoustic
masking is when other noises such as
from human sources interfere with
animal detection of acoustic signals
such as communication calls,
echolocation sounds, and
environmental sounds important to
marine mammals. Therefore, under
certain circumstances, marine mammals
whose acoustical sensors or
environment are being severely masked
could also be impaired from maximizing
their performance fitness in survival
and reproduction.
Masking occurs at the frequency band
that the animals utilize. Therefore, since
noise generated from vibratory pile
driving activity is mostly concentrated
at low frequency ranges, it may have
less effect on high frequency
echolocation sounds by odontocetes
(toothed whales). However, lower
frequency man-made noises are more
likely to affect detection of
communication calls and other
potentially important natural sounds
such as surf and prey noise. It may also
affect communication signals when they
occur near the noise band and thus
reduce the communication space of
animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and
cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote
et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15503
Unlike TS, masking, which can occur
over large temporal and spatial scales,
can potentially affect the species at
population, community, or even
ecosystem levels, as well as individual
levels. Masking affects both senders and
receivers of the signals and could have
long-term chronic effects on marine
mammal species and populations.
Recent science suggests that low
frequency ambient sound levels have
increased by as much as 20 dB (more
than three times in terms of SPL) in the
world’s ocean from pre-industrial
periods, and most of these increases are
from distant shipping (Hildebrand,
2009). For WSDOT’s Seattle Colman
Ferry Terminal construction activities,
noises from vibratory pile driving and
pile removal contribute to the elevated
ambient noise levels in the project area,
thus increasing potential for or severity
of masking. Baseline ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of project area are
high due to ongoing shipping,
construction and other activities in the
Puget Sound.
Finally, marine mammals’ exposure to
certain sounds could lead to behavioral
disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995),
such as: Changing durations of surfacing
and dives, number of blows per
surfacing, or moving direction and/or
speed; reduced/increased vocal
activities; changing/cessation of certain
behavioral activities (such as socializing
or feeding); visible startle response or
aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke
slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located;
and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds
flushing into water from haulouts or
rookeries).
The onset of behavioral disturbance
from anthropogenic noise depends on
both external factors (characteristics of
noise sources and their paths) and the
receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography) and is also
difficult to predict (Southall et al.,
2007). Currently NMFS uses a received
level of 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) to predict
the onset of behavioral harassment from
impulse noises (such as impact pile
driving), and 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for
continuous noises (such as vibratory
pile driving). For the WSDOT’s Seattle
Colman Ferry Terminal construction
activities, both of these noise levels are
considered for effects analysis because
WSDOT plans to use both impact and
vibratory pile driving, as well as
vibratory pile removal.
The biological significance of many of
these behavioral disturbances is difficult
to predict, especially if the detected
disturbances appear minor. However,
the consequences of behavioral
modification could be biologically
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
Potential Effects on Marine Mammal
Habitat
The primary potential impacts to
marine mammal habitat are associated
with elevated sound levels produced by
pile driving and removal associated
with marine mammal prey species.
However, other potential impacts to the
surrounding habitat from physical
disturbance are also possible. These
potential effects are discussed below.
SPLs from impact pile driving has the
potential to injure or kill fish in the
immediate area. These few isolated fish
mortality events are not anticipated to
have a substantial effect on prey species
population or their availability as a food
resource for marine mammals.
Studies also suggest that larger fish
are generally less susceptible to death or
injury than small fish. Moreover,
elongated forms that are round in cross
section are less at risk than deep-bodied
forms. Orientation of fish relative to the
shock wave may also affect the extent of
injury. Open water pelagic fish (e.g.,
mackerel) seem to be less affected than
reef fishes. The results of most studies
are dependent upon specific biological,
environmental, explosive, and data
recording factors.
The huge variation in fish
populations, including numbers,
species, sizes, and orientation and range
from the detonation point, makes it very
difficult to accurately predict mortalities
at any specific site of detonation. Most
fish species experience a large number
of natural mortalities, especially during
early life-stages, and any small level of
mortality caused by the WSDOT’s
impact pile driving will likely be
insignificant to the population as a
whole.
For non-impulsive sound such as that
of vibratory pile driving, experiments
have shown that fish can sense both the
strength and direction of sound
(Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors
determining whether a fish can sense a
sound signal, and potentially react to it,
are the frequency of the signal and the
strength of the signal in relation to the
natural background noise level.
The level of sound at which a fish
will react or alter its behavior is usually
well above the detection level. Fish
have been found to react to sounds
when the sound level increased to about
20 dB above the detection level of 120
dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response
threshold can depend on the time of
year and the fish’s physiological
condition (Engas et al., 1993).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
During construction activity at
Colman Dock, only a small fraction of
the available habitat would be
ensonified at any given time.
Disturbance to fish species would be
short-term and fish would return to
their pre-disturbance behavior once the
pile driving activity ceases. Thus, the
proposed construction would have
little, if any, impact on the abilities of
marine mammals to feed in the area
where construction work is planned.
Finally, the time of the proposed
construction activity would avoid the
spawning season of the ESA-listed
salmonid species between March and
July.
Short-term turbidity is a water quality
effect of most in-water work, including
pile driving.
Cetaceans are not expected to be close
enough to the Colman terminal to
experience turbidity, and any pinnipeds
will be transiting the terminal area and
could avoid localized areas of turbidity.
Therefore, the impact from increased
turbidity levels is expected to be
discountable to marine mammals.
For these reasons, WSDOT’s proposed
Seattle Multimodal construction at
Colman Dock is not expected to have
adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat in the area.
Estimated Take
This section includes an estimate of
the number of incidental ‘‘takes’’ likely
to occur pursuant to this IHA, which
will inform both NMFS’ consideration
of whether the number of takes is
‘‘small’’ and the negligible impact
determination.
Harassment is the only means of take
expected to result from these activities.
Except with respect to certain activities
not pertinent here, the MMPA defines
‘‘harassment’’ as: Any act of pursuit,
torment, or annoyance which (i) has the
potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild (Level
A harassment); or (ii) has the potential
to disturb a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration,
breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering (Level B harassment).
As described previously in the section
Potential Effects of Specified Activities
on Marine Mammals and their Habitat,
no incidental take is anticipated to
result from effects on prey species or as
a result of turbidity. Level B Harassment
is expected to occur as discussed below
and is proposed to be authorized in the
numbers identified below.
As described below, a small number
of takes by Level A Harassment are
being proposed to be authorized.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4725
The death of a marine mammal is also
a type of incidental take. However, as
described previously, no mortality is
anticipated or proposed to be authorized
to result from this activity.
Basis for Takes
Take estimates are based on average
marine mammal density in the project
area multiplied by the area size of
ensonified zones within which received
noise levels exceed certain thresholds
(i.e., Level A and/or Level B
harassment) from specific activities,
then multiplied by the total number of
days such activities would occur.
Certain adjustments were made for
marine mammals whose local
abundance are known through longterm monitoring efforts. Therefore, their
local abundance data are used for take
calculation instead of general animal
density (see below).
Basis for Threshold Calculation
As discussed above, in-water pile
removal and pile driving (vibratory and
impact) generate loud noises that could
potentially harass marine mammals in
the vicinity of WSDOT’s proposed
Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman
Dock.
Under the NMFS’ Technical Guidance
for Assessing the Effects of
Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (Guidance), dual
criteria are used to assess marine
mammal auditory injury (Level A
harassment) as a result of noise
exposure (NMFS 2016). The dual
criteria under the Guidance provide
onset thresholds in instantaneous peak
SPLs (Lpk) as well as 24-hr cumulative
sound exposure levels (SELcum or LE)
that could cause PTS to marine
mammals of different hearing groups.
The peak SPL is the highest positive
value of the noise field, log transformed
to dB in reference to 1 mPa.
where p(t) is acoustic pressure in pascal
or micropascal, and pref is reference
acoustic pressure equal to 1 mPa.
The cumulative SEL is the total sound
exposure over the entire duration of a
given day’s pile driving activity,
specifically, pile driving occurring
within a 24-hr period.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
EN29MR17.001
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
significant if the change affects growth,
survival, and/or reproduction, which
depends on the severity, duration, and
context of the effects.
EN29MR17.000
15504
15505
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
where p(t) is acoustic pressure in pascal
or micropascal, pref is reference acoustic
pressure equals to 1 mPa, t1 marks the
beginning of the time, and t2 the end of
time.
For onset of Level B harassment,
NMFS continues to use the root-meansquare (rms) sound pressure level
(SPLrms) at 120 dB re 1 mPa and 160 dB
re 1 mPa as the received levels from nonimpulse (vibratory pile driving and
removal) and impulse sources (impact
pile driving) underwater, respectively.
The SPLrms for pulses (such as those
from impact pile driving) should
contain 90 percent of the pulse energy,
and is calculated by
where p(t) is acoustic pressure in pascal
or micropascal, pref is reference acoustic
pressure equals to 1 mPa, t1 marks the
beginning of the time, and t2 the end of
time. In the case of an impulse noise, t1
marks the time of 5 percent of the total
energy window, and t2 the time of 95
percent of the total energy window.
Table 3 summarizes the current
NMFS marine mammal take criteria.
TABLE 3—CURRENT ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA FOR NON-EXPLOSIVE SOUND UNDERWATER
PTS onset thresholds
Behavioral thresholds
Hearing group
Impulsive
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ....................
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ....................
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans ...................
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) ..................................
(Underwater) ..................................................
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) ..................................
(Underwater) ..................................................
Non-impulsive
Lpk,flat: 219 dB ............
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB
Lpk,flat: 230 dB ............
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB
Lpk,flat: 202 dB ............
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB
Lpk,flat: 218 dB ............
LE,PW,24h: 185 dB
Lpk,flat: 232 dB ............
LE,OW,24h: 203 dB
Impulsive
Non-impulsive
LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
LE,HF,24h: 173 dB .......
Lrms,flat: 160 dB ..........
Lrms,flat: 120 dB.
LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should
also be considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa2s.
In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure
is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being
included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated
with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF
cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level
thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for
action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.
Source Levels
The project includes vibratory
removal of 14-inch (in) timber piles,
vibratory driving and removal of 24-in
steel piles, vibratory driving of 30- and
36-in steel piles, and impact pile driving
of 30- and 36-in steel piles. In February
of 2016, WSDOT conducted a test pile
project at Colman Dock in order to
gather data to select the appropriate
piles for the project. The test pile project
measured impact pile driving of 24- and
36-in steel piles. The measured results
from the project are used here to
provide source levels for the prediction
of isopleths ensonified over thresholds
for the Seattle project. The results show
that the SPLrms for impact pile driving
of 36-in steel pile is 189 dB re 1 mPa at
14 m from the pile (WSDOT 2016b).
This value is also used for impact
driving of the 30-in steel piles, which is
a precautionary approach.
Source level of vibratory pile driving
of 36-in steel piles is based on test pile
driving at Port Townsend in 2010
(Laughlin 2011). Recordings of vibratory
pile driving were made at a distance of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
10 m from the pile. The results show
that the SPLrms for vibratory pile driving
of 36-in steel pile was 177 dB re 1 mPa
(WSDOT 2016a).
Up to three pile installation crews
may be active during the day within the
project footprint. Each crew will use one
vibratory and one impact hammer, and
it is possible that more than one
vibratory or impact hammer may be
active at the same time for pile driving
and/or removal for the 24-, 30-, and 36inch piles. Overlapping noise fields
created by multiple hammer use are
handled differently for impact and
vibratory hammers. When more than
one impact hammer is being used close
enough to another impact hammer, the
cumulative acoustic energy is accounted
for by including all hammer strikes.
When more than one vibratory hammer
is being used close enough to another
vibratory hammer to create overlapping
noise fields, additional sound levels are
added to account for the overlap,
creating a larger ZOI. A simplified
nomogram method (Kinsler et al., 2000)
is proposed to account for the addition
of noise source levels for multiple
vibratory hammers, as shown in Table 4.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Using this method, the source levels of
24-, 30-, and 36-in piles during vibratory
pile driving are adjusted to 182 dB re 1
mPa (at 10 m).
TABLE 4—MULTIPLE SOUND LEVEL
ADDITION
When two sound levels differ
by
0–1
2–3
4–9
>10
dB
dB
dB
dB
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
Add the
following to
the higher
level
(dB)
3
2
1
0
For vibratory pile removal, vibratory
pile driving data were used as proxies
because we conservatively consider
noises from pile removal would be the
same as those from pile driving.
The source level of vibratory removal
of 14-in timber piles were based on
measurements conducted at the Port
Townsend Ferry Terminal during
vibratory removal of a 12-inch timber
pile by WSDOT (Laughlin 2011). The
recorded source level is 152 dB re 1 mPa
at 16 m from the pile. In the absence of
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
EN29MR17.002
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Sound Levels and Acoustic Modeling for
the Proposed Construction Activity
15506
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
install one pile, and N is the number of
total piles to be installed.
For vibratory pile driving, cumulative
exposures were computed by summing
1-second noise exposure by the duration
needed to drive on pile (provided in
Table 1), then by the number of piles to
be driven in a given day, as shown in
the equation below:
where E1s is the 1-second noise
exposure, and Dt is the duration
(provided in Table 1) need to install 1
pile by vibratory piling.
Frequency-specific transmission
losses, TL(f), were then computed using
practical spreading along with
frequency-specific absorption
coefficients that were computed with
nominal seawater properties (i.e.,
salinity = 35 psu, pH = 8.0) at 15 °C at
the surface by
where a(f) is dB/km, and R is the
distance (radius) of the specific isopleth
to the source in meters. For broadband
sources such as those from pile driving,
the transmission loss is the summation
of the frequency-specific results.
driving) sources. Distances to marine
mammal behavior thresholds were
calculated using a simple geometric
spreading equation as shown in
Equation (4).
For Level B harassment zones from
vibratory pile driving of 30 inch and 36
inch piles, the ensonified zones are
calculated based on practical spreading
of back-calculated source level of 36
inch pile driving adjusted for 3
hammers operating concurrently by
adding 5 dB. The results show that the
120 dB re 1 mPa isopleth is at 13.6 km.
For Level B harassment zone from
vibratory pile driving of 24″ piles,
WSDOT conducted site measurements
during Seattle test pile driving project
using 24″ steel piles. The results show
that underwater noise cannot be
detected at a distance of 5 km (3 mi).
Since this measurement was based on
pile driving using 1 hammer, the Level
B harassment zone for 24 inch steel pile
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Calculation and modeling of
applicable ensonified zones are based
on source measurements of comparable
types and sizes of piles driven by
different methods (impact vs. vibratory
hammers) either during the Colman test
pile driving or at a different location
within the Puget Sound. As mentioned
earlier, isopleths for injury zones are
based on cumulative SEL (LE) criteria.
For peak SPL (Lpk), distances to
marine mammal injury thresholds were
Approach To Estimate Behavioral Zones
As mentioned earlier, isopleths to
Level B behavioral zones are based on
root-mean-square SPL (SPLrms) that are
specific for impulse (impact pile
driving) and non-impulse (vibratory pile
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
EN29MR17.004
where prms,i is the rms pressure, t is the
rms pulse duration for the specific
strike, Ns is the anticipated number of
strikes (provided in Table 1) needed to
Estimating Injury Zones
EN29MR17.005
within a strike (for impact pile driving)
or a given period of time (for vibratory
pile driving) were captured through the
fast Fourier transform, an algorithm that
converts the signal from its original
domain (in this case, time series) to a
representation in frequency domain. For
impact pile driving, broadband PSDs
were generated from SPLrms time series
of a total of 270 strikes with a time
window that contains 90 percent of
pulse energy. For vibratory pile driving,
broadband PSDs were generated from a
series of continuous 1-second SEL.
Broadband PSDs were then adjusted
based on weighting functions of marine
mammal hearing groups (Finneran
2016) by using the weighting function as
a band-pass filter. For impact pile
driving, cumulative exposures (Esum)
were computed by multiplying the
single rms pressure squared by rms
pulse duration for the specific strike,
then by the number of strikes (provided
in Table 1) required to drive one pile,
then by the number of piles to be driven
in a given day, as shown in the equation
below:
EN29MR17.003
calculated using a simple geometric
spreading model using a transmission
loss coefficient of 15:
(4) SLMeasure = EL + 15log10(R ¥
DMeasure)
where SLMeasure is the measured source
level in dB re 1 mPa, EL is the specific
received level of threshold, DMeasure is
the distance (m) from the source where
measurements were taken, and R is the
distance (radius) of the isopleth to the
source in meters.
For cumulative SEL (LE), distances to
marine mammal exposure thresholds
were computed using spectral modeling
that incorporates frequency specific
absorption. First, representative pile
driving sounds recorded during test pile
driving with impact and vibratory
hammers were used to generate power
spectral densities (PSDs), which
describe the distribution of power into
frequency components composing that
sound, in 1-Hz bins. Parserval’s
theorem, which states that the sum of
the square of a function is equal to the
sum of the square of its transform, was
applied to ensure that all energies
spectral data for timber pile vibratory
driving, the weighting factor adjustment
(WFA) recommended by NMFS acoustic
guidance (NMFS 2016) was used to
determine these zones.
These source levels are used to
compute the Level A ensonified zones
and to estimate the Level B harassment
zones. For Level A harassment zones,
zones calculated using cumulative SEL
are all larger than those calculated using
SPLpeak, therefore, only zones based on
cumulative SEL for Level A harassment
are used.
15507
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
is adjusted by factoring in a 5 dB
difference (see above) using the
following equation, based on the inverse
law of acoustic propagation (i.e., dB
difference in transmission loss is the
inverse of distance difference in
logarithm):
where dBdifference is the 5 dB difference,
R3-hammer is the distance from the pile
where piling noise is no longer audible,
and R1-hammer is the measured distance
from the pile where piling noise is no
longer audible, which is 5 km.
The result show that when using 3
vibratory hammers concurrently, the
distance from the pile to where pile
noise is no longer audible is 11 km.
A summary of the measured and
modeled harassment zones is provided
in Table 5.
TABLE 5—DISTANCES TO HARASSMENT ZONES
Injury zone
(m)
Pile type, size & pile driving method
LF cetacean
Vibratory 14″
Vibratory 24″
Vibratory 30″
Impact 30″ &
timber .................................
steel ...................................
& 36″ steel .........................
36″ steel .............................
MF cetacean
8
255
285
1845
Estimated Takes From Proposed
Construction Activity
Incidental take is estimated for each
species by estimating the likelihood of
a marine mammal being present within
a Level A or Level B harassment zone
during active pile driving or removal.
The Level A calculation includes a
duration component, along with an
assumption (which can lead to
overestimates in some cases) that
HF cetacean
0.7
65
65
75
Behavior zone
(m)
Phocid
11.9
1365
1455
2835
animals within the zone stay in that area
for the whole duration of the pile
driving activity within a day. For all
marine mammal species except harbor
seals and California sea lions, estimated
takes are calculated based on ensonified
area for a specific pile driving activity
multiplied by the marine mammal
density in the action area, multiplied by
the number of pile driving (or removal)
days. Marine mammal density data are
from the U.S. Navy Marine Species
Otariid
4.9
115
125
465
0.3
10
10
35
1000
11000
13600
1200
Density Database (Navy 2015). Harbor
seal and California sea lion takes are
based on observations near Seattle,
since these data provide the best
information on distribution and
presence of these species that are often
associated with nearby haulouts (see
below). A summary of marine mammal
density, days and Level A and Level B
harassment areas from different pile
driving and removal activities is
provided in Table 6.
TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF MARINE MAMMAL DENSITY, DAYS AND LEVEL A AND LEVEL B ENSONIFIED AREAS FROM
DIFFERENT PILE DRIVING AND REMOVAL ACTIVITIES
Vibratory
14″ timber
Vibratory
24″ steel
Vibratory
30″ steel
Vibratory
36″ steel
Impact
30″ steel
Impact
36″ steel
11
15
3
26
2
26
Days
Level A areas
Pacific harbor seal ....................................................................
California sea lion .....................................................................
Steller sea lion ..........................................................................
Killer whale, transient ................................................................
Killer whale, Southern Resident ................................................
Gray whale ................................................................................
Humpback whale .......................................................................
Harbor porpoise ........................................................................
Dall’s porpoise ...........................................................................
1.219000
0.12660
0.036800
0.020240
0.002373
0.000510
0.00070
0.156000
0.047976
50
0.126
0.126
50
50
154
154
13,273
13,273
41,548
314
314
13,273
13,273
153,311
153,311
2,547,906
2,547,906
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Species/density (km¥2)
18:22 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
49,087
314
314
13,273
13,273
189,384
189,384
2,678,940
2,678,940
394,075
3,849
3,849
17,672
17,672
4,129,836
4,129,836
8,190,639
8,190,639
394,075
3,849
3,849
17,672
17,672
4,129,836
4,129,836
8,190,639
8,190,639
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
1,926,124
Level B areas (km2)
Pacific harbor seal ....................................................................
California sea lion .....................................................................
Steller sea lion ..........................................................................
Killer whale, transient ................................................................
Killer whale, Southern Resident ................................................
Gray whale ................................................................................
Humpback whale .......................................................................
Harbor porpoise ........................................................................
Dall’s porpoise ...........................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
49,087
314
314
13,273
13,273
189,384
189,384
2,678,940
2,678,940
(m2)
1.219000
0.12660
0.036800
0.020240
0.002373
0.000510
0.00070
0.156000
0.047976
Frm 00027
5,419,792
5,419,792
5,419,792
5,419,792
5,419,792
5,419,792
5,419,792
5,419,792
5,419,792
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
58,338,838
58,338,838
58,338,838
58,338,838
58,338,838
58,338,838
58,338,838
58,338,838
58,338,838
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
74,290,934
29MRN1
EN29MR17.006
Species/density
(km¥2)
15508
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
The Level A take total was further
adjusted by subtracting animals
expected to occur within the exclusion
zone, where pile driving activities are
suspended when an animal is observed
in or approaching the zone (see
Mitigation section). Further, the number
of Level B takes was adjusted to exclude
those already counted for Level A takes.
The harbor seal take estimate is based
on local seal abundance information off
the Seattle area from WSDOT’s Seattle
Slip 2 Batter Pile Project in 2012.
Marine mammal visual monitoring
during the Batter Pile Project indicates
that a maximum of 6 harbor seals were
observed in the general area of the
Colman Dock project (WSDOT 2012).
indicates that up to 15 sea lions were
observed in the general area of the
Colman Dock project at any given time
(City of Seattle 2014). Based on a total
of 83 pile driving days for the WSDOT
Seattle Colman Dock project, it is
estimated that up to 1245 California sea
lions could be exposed to noise levels
associated with ‘‘take’’. Since the Level
A zones of otarrids are all very small
(<35m, Table 5), we do not consider it
likely that any sea lions would be taken
by Level A harassment. Therefore, all
California sea lion takes estimated here
are expected to be taken by Level B
harassment.
A summary of estimated marine
mammal takes is listed in Table 7.
Based on a total of 83 pile driving days
for the WSDOT Seattle Colman Dock
project, it is estimated that up to 498
harbor seals could be exposed to noise
levels associated with ‘‘take’’. Since 28
days would involve impact pile driving
of 30 inch and 36 inch steel piles with
Level A zones beyond shutdown zones
(465 m vs 160 m shutdown zone), we
consider that 168 harbor seals exposed
during these 28 days would experience
Level A harassment.
The California sea lion take estimate
is based on local sea lion abundance
information from the City of Seattle’s
Elliott Bay Sea Wall Project (City of
Seattle, 2014). Marine mammal visual
monitoring during the Sea Wall Project
TABLE 7—ESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY BE EXPOSED TO RECEIVED NOISE LEVELS THAT CAUSE
LEVEL A OR LEVEL B HARASSMENT
Estimated
Level A take
Species
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Pacific harbor seal ...............................................................
California sea lion ................................................................
Steller sea lion .....................................................................
Killer whale, transient ...........................................................
Killer whale, Southern Resident ..........................................
Gray whale ...........................................................................
Humpback whale .................................................................
Harbor porpoise ...................................................................
Dall’s porpoise .....................................................................
Mitigation
Under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA, NMFS shall prescribe the
‘‘permissible methods of taking by
harassment 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 subsistence uses.’’
To ensure that the ‘‘least practicable
adverse impact’’ will be achieved,
NMFS evaluates mitigation measures in
consideration of the following factors in
relation to one another: The manner in
which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the
measure(s) is expected to reduce
impacts to marine mammals, marine
mammal species or stocks, their habitat,
and their availability for subsistence
uses (latter where relevant); the proven
or likely efficacy of the measures; and
the practicability of the measures for
applicant implementation.
For WSDOT’s proposed Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock,
WSDOT worked with NMFS and
proposed the following mitigation
measures to minimize the potential
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
Estimated
Level B take
168
0
0
0
0
1
1
195
16
Estimated total
take
330
1245
114
7
0
15
2
1657
137
impacts to marine mammals in the
project vicinity. The primary purposes
of these mitigation measures are to
minimize sound levels from the
activities, to monitor marine mammals
within designated zones of influence
(ZOI) and exclusion zones
corresponding to NMFS’ current Level B
and Level A harassment thresholds and,
to implement shut-down measures for
certain marine mammal species when
they are detected approaching the
exclusion zones or actual take numbers
are approaching the authorized take
numbers (if the IHA is issued).
Time Restriction
Work would 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
August 1, 2017, and February 15, 2018.
Use of Noise Attenuation Devices
To reduce impact on marine
mammals, WSDOT 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
498
1245
114
7
0
16
3
1852
153
Abundance
11,036
296,750
71,562
243
78
20,990
1,918
11,233
25,750
Percentage
4.51%
0.42
0.16
3
0
0.08
0.15
16.49
0.59
Establishing and Monitoring Level A,
Level B Harassment Zones, and
Exclusion Zones
Before the commencement of in-water
construction activities, which include
impact pile driving and vibratory pile
driving and pile removal, WSDOT shall
establish Level A harassment zones
where received underwater SPLs or
SELcum could cause PTS (see above).
WSDOT shall also establish Level B
harassment zones where received
underwater SPLs are higher than 160
dBrms and 120 dBrms re 1 mPa for impulse
noise sources (impact pile driving) and
non-impulses noise sources (vibratory
pile driving and pile removal),
respectively.
WSDOT shall establish a maximum
160-m Level A exclusion zone for all
marine mammals. For Level A
harassment zones that are smaller than
160 m from the source, WSDOT shall
establish exclusion zones that
correspond to the estimated Level A
harassment distances, but shall not be
less than 10 m.
A summary of exclusion zones is
provided in Table 8.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
15509
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
TABLE 8—EXCLUSION ZONES FOR VARIOUS PILE DRIVING ACTIVITIES AND MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS
Exclusion zone (m)
Pile type, size & pile driving method
LF cetacean
14″
24″
30″
30″
timber pile, vibratory ......................................................
steel pile, vibratory ........................................................
& 36″ steel pile, vibratory ..............................................
& 36″ steel pile, impact .................................................
NMFS-approved protected species
observers (PSO) shall conduct an initial
survey of the exclusion zones to ensure
that no marine mammals are seen
within the zones before impact pile
driving of a pile segment begins. If
marine mammals are found within the
exclusion zone, pile driving of the
segment would be delayed until they
move out of the area. If a marine
mammal is seen above water and then
dives below, the contractor would wait
30 minutes. If no marine mammals are
seen by the observer in that time it can
be assumed that the animal has moved
beyond the exclusion zone.
If pile driving of a segment ceases for
30 minutes or more and a marine
mammal is sighted within the
designated exclusion zone prior to
commencement of pile driving, the
observer(s) must notify the pile driving
operator (or other authorized
individual) immediately and continue
to monitor the exclusion zone.
Operations may not resume until the
marine mammal has exited the
exclusion zone or 30 minutes have
elapsed since the last sighting.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Soft Start
A ‘‘soft-start’’ technique is intended to
allow marine mammals to vacate the
area before the impact pile driver
reaches full power. Whenever there has
been downtime of 30 minutes or more
without impact pile driving, the
contractor will initiate the driving with
ramp-up procedures described below.
Soft start for impact hammers requires
contractors to provide an initial set of
three strikes from the impact hammer at
40 percent energy, followed by a 1minute waiting period, then two
subsequent three-strike sets. Each day,
WSDOT will use the soft-start technique
at the beginning of impact pile driving
or removal, or if pile driving has ceased
for more than 30 minutes.
Shutdown Measures
WSDOT shall implement shutdown
measures if a marine mammal is
detected within an exclusion zone or is
about to enter an exclusion zone listed
in Table 7.
WSDOT shall also implement
shutdown measures if southern resident
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
MF cetacean
10
255
285
500
10
65
65
75
killer whales are sighted within the
vicinity of the project area and are
approaching the Level B harassment
zone (ZOI) during in-water construction
activities.
If a killer whale approaches the ZOI
during pile driving or removal, and it is
unknown whether it is a Southern
Resident killer whale or a transient
killer whale, it shall be assumed to be
a Southern Resident killer whale and
WSDOT shall implement the shutdown
measure.
If a Southern Resident killer whale or
an unidentified killer whale enters the
ZOI undetected, in-water pile driving or
pile removal shall be suspended until
the whale exits the ZOI to avoid further
level B harassment.
Further, WSDOT shall implement
shutdown measures if the number of
authorized takes for any particular
species reaches the limit under the IHA
(if issued) and if such marine mammals
are sighted within the vicinity of the
project area and are approaching the
Level B harassment zone during inwater construction activities.
Coordination With Local Marine
Mammal Research Network
Prior to the start of pile driving for the
day, the Orca Network and/or Center for
Whale Research will be contacted by
WSDOT to find out the location of the
nearest marine mammal sightings. The
Orca Sightings Network consists of a list
of over 600 (and growing) residents,
scientists, and government agency
personnel in the U.S. and Canada.
Sightings are called or emailed into the
Orca Network and immediately
distributed to other sighting networks
including: The NMFS Northwest
Fisheries Science Center, the Center for
Whale Research, Cascadia Research, the
Whale Museum Hotline and the British
Columbia Sightings Network.
Sightings information collected by the
Orca Network includes detection by
hydrophone. The SeaSound Remote
Sensing Network is a system of
interconnected hydrophones installed
in the marine environment of Haro
Strait (west side of San Juan Island) to
study orca communication, in-water
noise, bottom fish ecology and local
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
HF cetacean
12
160
160
160
Phocid
Otariid
10
115
125
160
10
10
10
35
climatic conditions. A hydrophone at
the Port Townsend Marine Science
Center measures average in-water sound
levels and automatically detects
unusual sounds. These passive acoustic
devices allow researchers to hear when
different marine mammals come into
the region. This acoustic network,
combined with the volunteer
(incidental) visual sighting network
allows researchers to document
presence and location of various marine
mammal species.
With this level of coordination in the
region of activity, WSDOT will be able
to get real-time information on the
presence or absence of whales before
starting any pile driving.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s proposed measures, as well
as other measures considered by NMFS,
all of which are described above, NMFS
has preliminarily determined that the
proposed mitigation measures provide
the means effecting the least practicable
adverse impact on the affected 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 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.
Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the
most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting
requirements prescribed by NMFS
should contribute to improved
understanding of one or more of the
following:
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
15510
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species or stocks in the action area (e.g.,
presence, abundance, distribution,
density).
• Nature, scope, or context of likely
marine mammal exposure to potential
stressors/impacts (individual or
cumulative, acute or chronic), through
better understanding of: (1) Action or
environment (e.g., source
characterization, propagation, ambient
noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life
history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the
action; or (4) biological or behavioral
context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or
feeding areas).
• Individual marine mammal
responses (behavioral or physiological)
to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or
cumulative), other stressors, or
cumulative impacts from multiple
stressors.
• How anticipated responses to
stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
fitness and survival of individual
marine mammals; or (2) populations,
species, or stocks.
• Effects on marine mammal habitat
(e.g., marine mammal prey species,
acoustic habitat, or other important
physical components of marine
mammal habitat).
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
WSDOT shall employ NMFSapproved PSOs to conduct marine
mammal monitoring for its Seattle
Multimodal Project. The PSOs will
observe and collect data on marine
mammals in and around the project area
for 30 minutes before, during, and for 30
minutes after all pile removal and pile
installation work. NMFS-approved
PSOs shall meet the following
requirements:
1. Independent observers (i.e., not
construction personnel) are required;
2. At least one observer must have
prior experience working as an observer;
3. Other observers may substitute
education (undergraduate degree
inbiological science or related field) or
training for experience;
4. Where a team of three or more
observers are required, one observer
should be designated as lead observer or
monitoring coordinator. The lead
observer must have prior experience
working as an observer; and
5. NMFS will require submission and
approval of observer CVs.;
Monitoring of marine mammals
around the construction site shall be
conducted using high-quality binoculars
(e.g., Zeiss, 10 × 42 power). Due to the
different sizes of ZOIs from different
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
pile sizes, several different ZOIs and
different monitoring protocols
corresponding to a specific pile size will
be established.
• During 14 inch timber pile removal,
two land-based PSOs will monitor the
exclusion zones and Level B harassment
zone.
• During vibratory pile driving of 24
inch, 30 inch, and 36 inch steel piles,
5 land-based PSOs and two vessel-based
PSOs on ferries will monitor the Level
A and Level B harassment zones.
• During impact pile driving of 30
inch and 36 inch steel piles, 4 landbased PSOs will monitor the Level A
and Level B harassment zones.
Locations of the land-based PSOs and
routes of monitoring vessels are shown
in WSDOT’s Marine Mammal
Monitoring Plan, which is available
online at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
permits/incidental/construction.htm.
To verify the required monitoring
distance, the exclusion zones and ZOIs
will be determined by using a range
finder or hand-held global positioning
system device.
Proposed Reporting Measures
WSDOT would be required to submit
a draft monitoring report within 90 days
after completion of the construction
work or the expiration of the IHA (if
issued), whichever comes earlier. This
report would detail the monitoring
protocol, summarize the data recorded
during monitoring, and estimate the
number of marine mammals that may
have been harassed. NMFS would have
an opportunity to provide comments on
the report, and if NMFS has comments,
WSDOT would address the comments
and submit a final report to NMFS
within 30 days.
In addition, NMFS would require
WSDOT to notify NMFS’ Office of
Protected Resources and NMFS’ West
Coast Stranding Coordinator within 48
hours of sighting an injured or dead
marine mammal in the construction site.
WSDOT shall provide NMFS and the
Stranding Network with the species or
description of the animal(s), the
condition of the animal(s) (including
carcass condition, if the animal is dead),
location, time of first discovery,
observed behaviors (if alive), and photo
or video (if available).
In the event that WSDOT finds an
injured or dead marine mammal that is
not in the construction area, WSDOT
would report the same information as
listed above to NMFS as soon as
operationally feasible.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact
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’’
(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 takes, alone, is not enough
information on which to base an impact
determination. In addition to
considering the number of marine
mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ through
harassment, NMFS considers other
factors, such as the likely nature of any
responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the
context of any responses (e.g., critical
reproductive time or location,
migration, etc.), as well as effects on
habitat, the status of the affected stocks,
and the likely effectiveness of the
mitigation. Consistent with the 1989
preamble for NMFS’s implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29,
1989), the impacts from other past and
ongoing anthropogenic activities are
incorporated into these analyses via
their impacts on the environmental
baseline (e.g., as reflected in the
regulatory status of the species,
population size and growth rate where
known, ongoing sources of humancaused mortality, or ambient noise
levels).
To avoid repetition, this introductory
discussion of our analyses applies to all
the species listed in Table 7, given that
the anticipated effects of WSDOT’s
Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman
Dock activities involving pile driving
and pile removal on marine mammals
are expected to be relatively similar in
nature. There is no information about
the nature or severity of the impacts, or
the size, status, or structure of any
species or stock that would lead to a
different analysis by species for this
activity, or else species-specific factors
would be identified and analyzed.
Although a few marine mammal
species (168 harbor seals, 1 gray whale,
1 humpback whale, 195 harbor
porpoises, and 16 Dall’s porpoise) are
estimated to experience Level A
harassment in the form of PTS if they
stay within the Level A harassment zone
during the entire pile driving for the
day, the degree of injury is expected to
be mild and is not likely to affect the
reproduction or survival of the
individual animals. It is expected that,
if hearing impairments occurs, most
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
likely the affected animal would lose a
few dB in its hearing sensitivity, which
in most cases is not likely to affect its
survival and recruitment. Hearing
impairment that occur for these
individual animals would be limited to
the dominant frequency of the noise
sources, i.e., in the low-frequency region
below 2 kHz. Therefore, the degree of
PTS is not likely to affect the
echolocation performance of the two
porpoise species, which use frequencies
mostly above 100 kHz. Nevertheless, for
all marine mammal species, it is known
that in general animals avoid areas
where sound levels could cause hearing
impairment. Therefore it is not likely
that an animal would stay in an area
with intense noise that could cause
severe levels of hearing damage. In
addition, even if an animal receives a
TTS, the TTS would be a one-time event
from the exposure, making it unlikely
that the TTS would involve into PTS.
Furthermore, Level A take estimates
were based on the assumption that the
animals are randomly distributed in the
project area and would not avoid
intense noise levels that could cause
TTS or PTS. In reality, animals tend to
avoid areas where noise levels are high
(Richardson et al. 1995).
For the rest of the three marine
mammal species, takes that are
anticipated and proposed to be
authorized are expected to be limited to
short-term Level B harassment
(behavioral and TTS). Marine mammals
present in the vicinity of the action area
and taken by Level B harassment would
most likely show overt brief disturbance
(startle reaction) and avoidance of the
area from elevated noise levels during
pile driving and pile removal and the
implosion noise. A few marine
mammals could experience TTS if they
occur within the Level B TTS ZOI.
However, as discussed earlier in this
document, TTS is a temporary loss of
hearing sensitivity when exposed to
loud sound, and the hearing threshold
is expected to recover completely
within minutes to hours. Therefore, it is
not considered an injury. In addition,
take calculation of harbor porpoise is
based on density provided U.S. Navy
Marine Species Density Database (Navy
2015), which is more relevant to open
water area of the Puget Sound. Finally,
harbor porpoise abundance in the
Seattle area based on aerial survey
showed that their abundance is lower
(Jefferson et al., 2016).
There is no ESA designated critical
habitat in the vicinity of WSDOT’s
proposed Seattle Multimodal Project at
Colman Dock area.
The project also is not expected to
have significant adverse effects on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
15511
affected marine mammals’ habitat, as
analyzed in detail in the ‘‘Anticipated
Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat’’
section. There is no ESA designated
critical area in the vicinity of the Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock
area. The project activities would not
permanently modify existing marine
mammal habitat. The activities may kill
some fish and cause other fish to leave
the area temporarily, thus 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. Therefore, given the
consideration of potential impacts to
marine mammal prey species and their
physical environment, WSDOT’s
proposed construction activity at
Colman Dock would not adversely affect
marine mammal habitat.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
proposed monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS preliminarily finds
that the total take from the proposed
activity will have a negligible impact on
all affected marine mammal species or
stocks.
much higher since animals could be
under the water or in areas not covered
by the survey (Carretta et al., 2015).
Nevertheless, consider that the take
calculation is based on daily cumulative
counts of animals that are exposed
multiplied by the activity days, a single
animal could be exposed in different
days and thus be considered as multiple
takes. Therefore, we believe that the
numbers of harbor seals being
potentially taken are low in terms of
their stock sizes.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and
monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals,
NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of each species or stock will be
taken relative to the population size of
the affected species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers
of incidental take may be authorized
under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
for specified activities other than
military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so,
in practice, NMFS compares the number
of individuals anticipated to be taken to
the most appropriate estimation of the
relevant species or stock size in our
determination of whether an
authorization would be limited to small
numbers of marine mammals.
The takes represent less than 17
percent of all populations or stocks with
known abundance potentially impacted
(see Table 6 in this document). These
take estimates represent the percentage
of each species or stock that could be
taken by both Level A and Level B
harassments. In general, the numbers of
marine mammals estimated to be taken
are small proportions of the total
populations of the affected species or
stocks.
The most recent abundance estimate
of Washington northern inland water
stock of harbor seal was assessed at
11,036 (Carretta et al., 2015). The actual
number of harbor seal is expected to be
Issuance of an MMPA authorization
requires compliance with the ESA for
any species that are listed or proposed
as threatened or endangered.
The California-Oregon-Washington
stock of humpback whale and the
Southern Resident stock of killer whale
are the only marine mammal species
listed under the ESA that could occur in
the vicinity of WSDOT’s proposed
construction projects. Two DPSs of the
humpback whale stock, the Mexico DPS
and the Central America DPS, are listed
as threatened and endangered under the
ESA, respectively. NMFS’ Permits and
Conservation Division has initiated
consultation with NMFS’ Protected
Resources Division under section 7 of
the ESA on the issuance of an IHA to
WSDOT under section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA for this activity.
NMFS will conclude the ESA
consultation prior to reaching a
determination regarding the proposed
issuance of the authorization.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Unmitigable Adverse Impact
Subsistence Analysis and
Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of the affected marine mammal stocks or
species implicated by this action.
Therefore, NMFS has determined that
the total taking of affected species or
stocks would not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of
such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5)(D)
authorization requires compliance with
the National Environmental Policy Act.
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
15512
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
NMFS preliminary determined the
issuance of the proposed IHA is
consistent with categories of activities
identified in CE B4 (issuance of
incidental harassment authorizations
under section 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA for which no serious injury or
mortality is anticipated) of the
Companion Manual for NAO 216–6A
and we have not identified any
extraordinary circumstances listed in
Chapter 4 of the Companion Manual for
NAO 216–6A that would preclude this
categorical exclusion.
We will review all comments
submitted in response to this notice
prior to making a final decision on the
IHA request.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary
determinations, NMFS proposes to issue
an IHA to the Washington State
Department of Transportation for
conducting ferry terminal construction
at Colman Dock in Seattle Washington,
provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated. This
section contains a draft of the IHA itself.
The wording contained in this section is
proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if
issued).
The proposed IHA language is
provided next.
1. This Authorization is valid from
August 1, 2017, through July 31, 2018.
2. This Authorization is valid only for
activities associated with in-water
construction work at the Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock in
the State of Washington.
3. (a) The species authorized taking
by, Level A and Level B harassment and
in the numbers shown in Table 7 are:
Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina),
California sea lion (Zalophus
californianus), Steller sea lion
(Eumetopias jubatus), killer whale
(Orcinus orca), gray whale (Eschrichtius
robustus), humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae), harbor porpoise
(Phocoena phocoena), and Dall’s
porpoise (P. dalli).
(b) The authorization for taking by
harassment is limited to the following
acoustic sources and from the following
activities:
• Impact pile driving;
• Vibratory pile driving; and
• Vibratory pile removal.
4. Prohibitions.
(a) The taking, by incidental
harassment only, is limited to the
species listed under condition 3(a)
above and by the numbers listed in
Table 6 of this notice. The taking by
death of these species or the taking by
harassment, injury or death of any other
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
species of marine mammal is prohibited
unless separately authorized or
exempted under the MMPA and may
result in the modification, suspension,
or revocation of this Authorization.
(b) The taking of any marine mammal
is prohibited whenever the required
protected species observers (PSOs),
required by condition 7(a), are not
present in conformance with condition
7(a) of this Authorization.
5. Mitigation.
(a) Time Restriction.
In-water construction work shall
occur only during daylight hours.
(b) Establishment of Level A and
Level B Harassment Zones.
(A) Before the commencement of inwater pile driving/removal activities,
WSDOT shall establish Level A
harassment zones. The modeled Level A
zones are summarized in Table 5.
(B) Before the commencement of inwater pile driving/removal activities,
WSDOT shall establish Level B
harassment zones. The modeled Level B
zones are summarized in Table 5.
(C) Before the commencement of inwater pile driving/removal activities,
WSDOT shall establish exclusion zones.
The proposed exclusion zones are
summarized in Table 8.
(c) Monitoring of marine mammals
shall take place starting 30 minutes
before pile driving begins until 30
minutes after pile driving ends.
(d) Soft Start.
(i) When there has been downtime of
30 minutes or more without pile
driving, the contractor will initiate the
driving with ramp-up procedures
described below.
(ii) Soft start for impact hammers
requires contractors to provide an initial
set of three strikes from the impact
hammer at 40 percent energy, followed
by a 1-minute waiting period, then two
subsequent three-strike sets. Each day,
WSDOT will use the soft-start technique
at the beginning of impact pile driving
or removal, or if pile driving has ceased
for more than 30 minutes.
(e) Shutdown Measures.
(i) WSDOT shall implement
shutdown measures if a marine mammal
is detected within or to be approaching
the exclusion zones provided in Table 7
of this notice.
(ii) WSDOT shall implement
shutdown measures if southern resident
killer whales (SRKWs) are sighted
within the vicinity of the project area
and are approaching the Level B
harassment zone (zone of influence, or
ZOI) during in-water construction
activities.
(iii) If a killer whale approaches the
ZOI during pile driving or removal, and
it is unknown whether it is a SRKW or
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a transient killer whale, it shall be
assumed to be a SRKW and WSDOT
shall implement the shutdown measure
identified in 6(e)(ii).
(iv) If a SRKW enters the ZOI
undetected, in-water pile driving or pile
removal shall be suspended until the
SRKW exits the ZOI to avoid further
level B harassment.
(v) WSDOT shall implement
shutdown measures if the number of
any allotted marine mammal takes
reaches the limit under the IHA, if such
marine mammals are sighted within the
vicinity of the project area and are
approaching the Level B harassment
zone during pile removal activities.
(f) Coordination with Local Marine
Mammal Research Network.
Prior to the start of pile driving,
WSDOT will contact the Orca Network
and/or Center for Whale Research to get
real-time information on the presence or
absence of whales before starting any
pile driving.
6. Monitoring.
(a) Protected Species Observers.
WSDOT shall employ NMFSapproved PSOs to conduct marine
mammal monitoring for its construction
project. NMFS-approved PSOs will meet
the following qualifications.
(i) Independent observers (i.e., not
construction personnel) are required.
(ii) At least one observer must have
prior experience working as an observer.
(iii) Other observers may substitute
education (undergraduate degree in
biological science or related field) or
training for experience.
(iv) Where a team of three or more
observers are required, one observer
should be designated as lead observer or
monitoring coordinator. The lead
observer must have prior experience
working as an observer.
(v) NMFS will require submission and
approval of observer CVs.
(b) Monitoring Protocols: PSOs shall
be present on site at all times during
pile removal and driving.
(i) A 30-minute pre-construction
marine mammal monitoring will be
required before the first pile driving or
pile removal of the day. A 30-minute
post-construction marine mammal
monitoring will be required after the last
pile driving or pile removal of the day.
If the constructors take a break between
subsequent pile driving or pile removal
for more than 30 minutes, then
additional 30-minute pre-construction
marine mammal monitoring will be
required before the next start-up of pile
driving or pile removal.
(iii) Marine mammal visual
monitoring will be conducted for
different ZOIs based on different sizes of
piles being driven or removed, as shown
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 59 / Wednesday, March 29, 2017 / Notices
in maps in WSDOT’s Marine Mammal
Monitoring Plan.
(A) During 14 inch timber pile
removal, two land-based PSO will
monitor the exclusion zones and Level
B harassment zone.
(B) During vibratory pile driving of 24
inch, 30 inch, and 36 inch steel piles,
5 land-based PSOs and two vessel-based
PSOs on ferries will monitor the Level
A and Level B harassment zones.
(C) During impact pile driving of 30
inch and 36 inch steel piles, 5 landbased PSOs and one vessel-based PSO
on a ferry will monitor the Level A and
Level B harassment zones.
(iv) If marine mammals are observed,
the following information will be
documented:
(A) Species of observed marine
mammals;
(B) Number of observed marine
mammal individuals;
(C) Behavior of observed marine
mammals;
(D) Location within the ZOI; and
7. Reporting:
(a) WSDOT shall provide NMFS with
a draft monitoring report within 90 days
of the conclusion of the construction
work or within 90 days of the expiration
of the IHA, whichever comes first. This
report shall detail the monitoring
protocol, summarize the data recorded
during monitoring, and estimate the
number of marine mammals that may
have been harassed.
(b) If comments are received from
NMFS Office of Protected Resources on
the draft report, a final report shall be
submitted to NMFS within 30 days
thereafter. If no comments are received
from NMFS, the draft report will be
considered to be the final report.
(c) In the unanticipated event that the
construction activities clearly cause the
take of a marine mammal in a manner
prohibited by this Authorization (if
issued), such as an injury, serious
injury, or mortality, WSDOT shall
immediately cease all operations and
immediately report the incident to the
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinators. The report must include
the following information:
(i) Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the incident;
(ii) description of the incident;
(iii) status of all sound source use in
the 24 hours preceding the incident;
(iv) environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, sea state,
cloud cover, visibility, and water
depth);
(v) description of marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
(vi) species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Mar 28, 2017
Jkt 241001
(vii) the fate of the animal(s); and
(viii) photographs or video footage of
the animal (if equipment is available).
Activities shall not resume until
NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take.
NMFS shall work with WSDOT to
determine what is necessary to
minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA
compliance. WSDOT may not resume
their activities until notified by NMFS
via letter, email, or telephone.
(E) In the event that WSDOT
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines
that the cause of the injury or death is
unknown and the death is relatively
recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state
of decomposition as described in the
next paragraph), WSDOT will
immediately report the incident to the
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinators. The report must include
the same information identified above.
Activities may continue while NMFS
reviews the circumstances of the
incident. NMFS will work with WSDOT
to determine whether modifications in
the activities are appropriate.
(F) In the event that WSDOT
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines
that the injury or death is not associated
with or related to the activities
authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously
wounded animal, carcass with moderate
to advanced decomposition, or
scavenger damage), WSDOT shall report
the incident to the Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast
Regional Stranding Coordinators, within
24 hours of the discovery. WSDOT shall
provide photographs or video footage (if
available) or other documentation of the
stranded animal sighting to NMFS and
the Marine Mammal Stranding Network.
WSDOT can continue its operations
under such a case.
8. This Authorization may be
modified, suspended or withdrawn if
the holder fails to abide by the
conditions prescribed herein or if NMFS
determines the authorized taking is
having more than a negligible impact on
the species or stock of affected marine
mammals.
9. A copy of this Authorization must
be in the possession of each contractor
who performs the construction work at
the Seattle Colman Dock.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses,
the draft authorization, and any other
aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA
for the WSDOT’s Seattle Multimodal
project at Colman Dock. Please include
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15513
with your comments any supporting
data or literature citations to help
inform our final decision on the request
for MMPA authorization.
Dated: March 23, 2017.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–06096 Filed 3–28–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XF269
Meeting of the Columbia Basin
Partnership Task Force of the Marine
Fisheries Advisory Committee
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of open public meeting.
AGENCY:
This notice sets forth the
proposed schedule and agenda of a
forthcoming meeting of the Marine
Fisheries Advisory Committee’s
(MAFAC’s) Columbia Basin Partnership
Task Force (CBP Task Force). The CBP
Task Force will discuss the issues
outlined in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION below.
DATES: The meeting will be held April
18, 2017, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
and on April 19, 2017, from 8:00 a.m.
to 12:30 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Hotel Monaco, 506 SW Washington
Street, Portland, OR 97204.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Katherine Cheney; NFMS West Coast
Region (503) 231–6730; email:
Katherine.Cheney@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is
hereby given of a meeting of MAFAC’s
CBP Task Force. The MAFAC was
established by the Secretary of
Commerce (Secretary) and since 1971,
advises the Secretary on all living
marine resource matters that are the
responsibility of the Department of
Commerce. The complete MAFAC
charter and summaries of prior MAFAC
meetings are located online at https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ocs/mafac/. The
CBP Task Force reports to MAFAC and
is being convened to discuss and
develop recommendations for long-term
goals to meet Columbia Basin salmon
recovery, conservation needs, and
harvest opportunities. These goals will
be developed in the context of habitat
capacity and other factors that affect
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29MRN1.SGM
29MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 59 (Wednesday, March 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15497-15513]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06096]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XF250
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Seattle Multimodal Construction
Project in Washington State
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed incidental harassment authorization; request for
comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received an application from Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) for an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to take marine mammals, by harassment, incidental
to Seattle Multimodal Construction Project in Washington State.
Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting
comments on its proposal to issue an IHA to the WSDOT to incidentally
take marine mammals during the specified activities.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than April
28, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed to Jolie
Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. Physical comments should
be sent to 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and
electronic comments should be sent to ITP.Guan@noaa.gov.
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the
end of the comment period. Comments received electronically, including
all attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. Attachments
to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel or
Adobe PDF file formats only. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted online at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm without change. All personal
identifying information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential
business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected
[[Page 15498]]
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the applications
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in
this document, may be obtained online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these
documents, please call the contact listed above.
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 by U.S.
citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial
fishing) within a specified area, the incidental, but not intentional,
taking of small numbers of marine mammals, provided that certain
findings are made and the necessary prescriptions are established.
The incidental taking of small numbers of marine mammals shall be
allowed if NMFS (through authority delegated by the Secretary) finds
that the total taking by the specified activity during the specified
time period will (i) have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) and (ii) not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant). Further, the permissible methods of taking, as well as the
other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the
species or stock and its habitat (i.e., mitigation) must be prescribed.
Last, requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such
taking must be set forth.
Where there is the potential for serious injury or death, the
allowance of incidental taking requires promulgation of regulations
under MMPA section 101(a)(5)(A). Subsequently, a Letter (or Letters) of
Authorization may be issued as governed by the prescriptions
established in such regulations, provided that the level of taking will
be consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable
under the specific regulations. Under MMPA section 101(a)(5)(D), NMFS
may authorize incidental taking by harassment only (i.e., no serious
injury or mortality), for periods of not more than one year, pursuant
to requirements and conditions contained within an Incidental
Harassment Authorization (IHA). The promulgation of regulations or
issuance of IHAs (with their associated prescribed mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting) requires notice and opportunity for public
comment.
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as an
impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably
expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival.
Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here,
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).
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5) authorization requires compliance
with the National Environmental Policy Act.
NMFS preliminary determined the issuance of the proposed IHA is
consistent with categories of activities identified in CE B4 (issuance
of incidental harassment authorizations under section 101(a)(5)(A) and
(D) of the MMPA for which no serious injury or mortality is
anticipated) of the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A and we have not
identified any extraordinary circumstances listed in Chapter 4 of the
Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A that would preclude this categorical
exclusion.
We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice
prior to making a final decision on the IHA request.
Summary of Request
On July 28, 2016, WSDOT submitted a request to NMFS requesting an
IHA for the harassment of small numbers of 11 marine mammal species
incidental to construction associated with the Seattle Multimodal
Project at Colman Dock, Seattle, Washington, between August 1, 2017 and
July 31, 2018. NMFS initially determined the IHA application was
complete on September 1, 2016. However, WSDOT notified NMFS in November
2016 that the scope of its activities had changed. WSDOT stated that
instead of using vibratory hammers for the majority of in-water pile
driving and using impact hammer for proofing, it would be required to
use impact hammers to drive a large number of piles completely due to
sediment conditions at Colman Dock. On March 2, 2017, WSDOT submitted a
revised IHA application with updated project description. NMFS
determined that the revised IHA application was complete on March 3,
2017.
NMFS is proposing to authorize the Level A and Level B harassment
of the following eight marine mammal species/stocks: Harbor seal (Phoca
vitulina), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), Steller sea
lion (Eumetopias jubatus), killer whale (Orcinus orca), gray whale
(Eschrichtius robustus), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae),
harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and Dall's porpoise (P. dalli).
Description of Specified Activities
Overview
WSDOT is proposing to preserve the Seattle Ferry Terminal at Colman
Dock. The project will reconfigure the dock while maintaining
approximately the same vehicle holding capacity as current conditions.
The reconfiguration would increase total permanent overwater coverage
(OWC) by about 5,400 square feet (f\2\) (about 1.7 percent more than
existing overwater coverage at the site), due to the new walkway from
the King County Passenger Only Ferry (POF) facility to Alaskan Way and
new stairways and elevators from the POF to the upper level of the
terminal. The additional 5,400 f\2\ will be mitigated by removing a
portion of Pier 48, a condemned timber structure.
The project will remove the northern timber trestle and replace a
portion of it with a new concrete trestle. The area from Marion Street
to the north edge of the property will not be rebuilt and will become,
after demolition, a new area of open water. A section of fill contained
behind a bulkhead underneath the northeast section of the dock will
also be removed.
WSDOT will construct a new steel and concrete trestle from Columbia
Street northward to Marion Street. Construction of the reconfigured
dock will narrow (reduce) the OWC along the shoreline (at the landward
edge) by 180 linear feet at the north end of the site, while 30 linear
feet of new trestle would be constructed along the shoreline at the
south end of the site. The net reduction of OWC in the nearshore zone
is 150 linear feet.
The purpose of the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock is to
preserve the transportation function of an aging, deteriorating and
seismically-deficient facility to continue providing safe and reliable
service. The project will also address existing safety concerns related
to conflicts between vehicles and pedestrian traffic and
[[Page 15499]]
operational inefficiencies. Key project elements include:
Replacing and re-configuring the timber trestle portion of
the dock;
Replacing the main terminal building;
Reconfiguring the dock layout to provide safer and more
efficient operations;
Replacing the vehicle transfer span and the overhead
loading structures of Slip 3;
Replacing vessel landing aids;
Maintaining a connection to the Marion Street pedestrian
overpass;
Moving the current POF slip temporarily to the north to
make way for south trestle construction, and then constructing a new
POF slip in the south trestle area;
Mitigating for the additional 5,400 f\2\ of overwater
coverage;
Capping existing contaminated sediments.
The proposed Seattle Multimodal Project would involve in-water
impact and vibratory pile driving and vibratory pile removal. Details
of the proposed construction project that have the potential to affect
marine mammals are provided below.
Dates and Duration
Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water
work timing restrictions to protect Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed
salmonids, planned WSDOT in-water construction at this location is
limited each year to July 16 through February 15. For this project, in-
water construction is planned to take place between August 1, 2017 and
February 15, 2018.
The total worst-case time for pile installation and removal is
expected to be 83 working days (Table 1).
Vibratory driving of each of the 101 24-inch steel pile
will take approximately 20 minutes, with a maximum of 16 piles
installed per day over 7 days.
Vibratory removal of 103 temporary 24-inch diameter steel
piles will take approximately 20 minutes per pile, with maximum 16
piles removed per day over 8 days.
Impact driving (3000 strikes per pile) of 14 30-inch and
201 36-inch diameter steel piles will take approximately 45 minutes per
pile, with maximum 8 piles per day for a total of 28 days.
Vibratory driving of 17 30- and 205 36-inch diameter steel
piles will take 20 minutes per pile, with maximum 8 piles per day over
a total of 29 days.
Vibratory removal of 215 14-inch timber piles will take
approximately 15 minutes per pile, with approximately 20 piles removed
per day for 11 days.
Table 1-- Summary of In-Water Pile Driving Durations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time to vibratory
Pile size drive per pile/ Duration
Method Pile type (inch) Pile number strikes to impact (days)
drive per pile
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory removal............... Timber............. 14 215 900 seconds....... 11
Vibratory removal............... Steel.............. 24 103 1200 seconds...... 8
Vibratory driving............... Steel.............. 24 101 1200 seconds...... 7
Vibratory driving............... Steel.............. 30 17 1200 seconds...... 3
Vibratory driving............... Steel.............. 36 205 1200 seconds...... 26
Impact driving.................. Steel.............. 30 14 3000 strikes...... 2
Impact driving.................. Steel.............. 36 201 3000 strikes...... 26
----------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... ................... ........... 856 .................. 83
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specified Geographic Region
The proposed activities will occur at the Seattle Ferry Terminal at
Colman Dock, located in the City of Seattle, Washington (see Figure 1-2
of the IHA application).
Detailed Description of In-Water Pile Driving Associated With Seattle
Multimodal Project
The proposed project has two elements involving noise production
that may affect marine mammals: Vibratory hammer driving and removal,
and impact hammer driving.
Details of pile driving activities are provided below:
The 14-inch timber piles will be removed with a vibratory
hammer (Table 1).
The 24-inch temporary piles will be installed and removed
with a vibratory hammer (no proofing) (Table 1).
Some of the permanent 30- and 36-inch steel piles would be
installed with a vibratory hammer, and some would be installed with
impact hammer (Table 1).
(1). Vibratory Hammer Driving and Removal
Vibratory hammers are commonly used in steel pile driving where
sediments allow and involve the same vibratory hammer used in pile
removal. The pile is placed into position using a choker and crane, and
then vibrated between 1,200 and 2,400 vibrations per minute. The
anticipated time required (based on WSDOT prior experience) to install
a 14'' timber pile is up to 900 seconds; for a 24'' steel pile 1200
seconds; and for a 30'' or 36'' steel pile 2700 seconds. The vibrations
liquefy the sediment surrounding the pile allowing it to penetrate to
the required seating depth, or to be removed. The type of vibratory
hammer that will be used for the project will likely be an APE 400 King
Kong (or equivalent) with a drive force of 361 tons.
(2). Impact Hammer Installation
Impact hammers are used to install plastic/steel core, wood,
concrete, or steel piles. An impact hammer is a steel device that works
like a piston. Impact hammers are usually large, though small impact
hammers are used to install small diameter plastic/steel core piles.
Impact hammers have guides (called a lead) that hold the hammer in
alignment with the pile while a heavy piston moves up and down,
striking the top of the pile, and drives it into the substrate from the
downward force of the hammer on the top of the pile.
To drive the pile, the pile is first moved into position and set in
the proper location using a choker cable. Once the pile is set in
place, pile installation with an impact hammer is expected to require
approximately 45 minutes. It is expected that for each 30 inch and 36
inch steel pile, a maximum of 3,000 strikes would be needed to install
a pile.
It is possible that more than 1 vibratory pile driving, up to 3
hammers, could be conducted concurrently for the 24-, 30-, and 36-inch
piles.
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are
described in in detail later in the document (Mitigation
[[Page 15500]]
section and Monitoring and Reporting section).
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
The marine mammal species under NMFS jurisdiction that have the
potential to occur in the proposed construction area include Pacific
harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), California sea lion (Zalophus
californianus), northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris),
Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), killer whale (Orcinus orca),
long-beaked common dolphin (Delphis capensis), gray whale (Eschrichtius
robustus), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), minke whale
(Balaenoptera acutorostrata), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and
Dall's porpoise (P. dalli). A list of marine mammals that have the
potential to occur in the vicinity of the action and their legal status
under the MMPA and ESA are provided in Table 2. Among these species,
northern elephant seal, minke whale, and long-beaked common dolphin are
extralimital in the proposed project area. NMFS does not consider take
is likely to occur for these species. Therefore, these species are not
discussed further in this document.
Table 2--Marine Mammal Species Potentially Present in Region of Activity
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species ESA status MMPA status Occurrence Abundance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor Seal...................... Not listed......... Non-depleted....... Frequent........... Unk
California Sea Lion.............. Not listed......... Non-depleted....... Frequent........... 296,750
Northern Elephant Seal........... Not listed......... Non-depleted....... Extralimital....... 179,000
Steller Sea Lion (eastern DPS)... Not listed......... Non-depleted....... Rare............... 71,256
Harbor Porpoise.................. Not listed......... Non-depleted....... Frequent........... 11,233
Dall's Porpoise.................. Not listed......... Non-depleted....... Occasional......... 25,750
Killer Whale (Southern Resident). Endangered......... Depleted........... Occasional......... 78
Killer Whale (West Coast Not listed......... Non-depleted....... Occasional......... 243
transient).
Long-beaked Common Dolphin....... Not listed......... Non-depleted....... Extralimital....... 101,305
Gray Whale....................... Not listed......... Non-depleted....... Occasional......... 20,990
Humpback Whale................... Endangered......... Depleted........... Rare............... 1,918
Minke Whale...................... Not listed......... Non-depleted....... Extralimital....... 636
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General information on the marine mammal species found in
Washington coastal waters can be found in Caretta et al. (2016), which
is available online at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/pdf/pacific2015_final.pdf. Refer to that document for information on these
species. Specific information concerning these species in the vicinity
of the proposed action area is provided in detail in the WSDOT's IHA
application.
Harbor Seal
There are three stocks in Washington's inland waters, the Hood
Canal, Northern Inland Waters, and Southern Puget Sound stocks. Seals
belonging to the Northern Inland Waters Stock are present at the
project site. Pupping seasons vary by geographic region. For the
northern Puget Sound region, pups are born from late June through
August (WDFW 2012). After October 1, all pups in the inland waters of
Washington are weaned. Of the pinniped species that commonly occur
within the region of activity, harbor seals are the most common and the
only pinniped that breeds and remains in the inland marine waters of
Washington year-round (Calambokidis and Baird 1994).
In 1999, Jeffries et al. (2003) recorded a mean count of 9,550
harbor seals in Washington's inland marine waters, and estimated the
total population to be approximately 14,612 animals (including the
Strait of Juan de Fuca). According to the 1999 Stock Assessment Report
(SAR), the most recent estimate for the Washington Northern Inland
Waters Stock is 11,036 (NMFS 1999). No minimum population estimate is
available. However, there are an estimated 32,000 harbor seals in
Washington today, and their population appears to have stabilized
(Jeffries 2013), so the estimate of 11,036 may be low.
The nearest documented harbor seal haulout to the Seattle Ferry
Terminal is 10.6 kilometers (km)/6.6 miles (mi) west on Blakely Rocks,
though harbor seals also make use of docks, buoys and beaches in the
area. The level of use of this haulout during the fall and winter is
unknown, but is expected to be much less as air temperatures become
colder than water temperatures resulting in seals in general hauling
out less. None of the harbor seals have been spotted using Colman Dock
as a haulout. Harbor seals are known to haulout opportunistically on
docks and beaches throughout the project area.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 6 harbor seals
were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds
to the upcoming project zones of influence (ZOIs) where received sound
levels are above 160 decibel (dB) re 1 micropascal ([micro]Pa) and
Level B harassment is anticipated to occur (WSF 2012). During the 2016
Seattle Test Pile project, 56 harbor seals were observed over 10 days
in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs. The maximum
number sighted during 1day was 13 (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates
the density of harbor seals in the Seattle area as a range of 0.550001
and 1.219000 animals per square kilometer.
California Sea Lion
Washington California sea lions are part of the U.S. stock, which
begins at the U.S./Mexico border and extends northward into Canada. The
minimum population size of the U.S. stock was estimated at 296,750 in
2011. More recent pup counts made in 2011 totaled 61,943, the highest
recorded to date. Estimates of total population size based on these
counts are currently being developed (NMFS 2015d). Some 3,000 to 5,000
animals are estimated to move into northwest waters (both Washington
and British Columbia) during the fall (September) and remain until the
late spring (May) when most return to breeding rookeries in California
and Mexico (Jeffries et al., 2000). Peak counts of over 1,000 animals
have been made in Puget Sound (Jeffries et al., 2000).
The nearest documented California sea lion haulout sites are 3 km/2
mi southwest of the Seattle Ferry Terminal, although sea lions also
make use of docks and other buoys in the area.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 15 California
sea lions were observed during this 1 day project in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the
[[Page 15501]]
2016 Seattle Test Pile project, 12 California sea lions were observed
over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs.
The maximum number sighted during one day was 4 (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates
the density of California sea lions in the Seattle area as a range of
0.067601 and 0.12660 animals per square kilometer.
Steller Sea Lion
The Eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea lion may be present near the
project site. The eastern U.S. stock of Steller sea lions is estimated
to be 71,562 based on pup and non-pup counts. In Washington waters,
Steller sea lion abundances vary seasonally with a minimum estimate of
1,000 to 2,000 individuals present or passing through the Strait of
Juan de Fuca in fall and winter months.
Steller sea lion numbers in Washington State decline during the
summer months, which correspond to the breeding season at Oregon and
British Columbia rookeries (approximately late May to early June) and
peak during the fall and winter months (WDFW 2000). According to NMFS
Marine Mammal Stock Assessment Report, a new rookery has become
established on the outer Washington coast with over 100 pups born there
in 2015 (NMFS 2016). A few Steller sea lions can be observed year-round
in Puget Sound although most of the breeding age animals return to
rookeries in the spring and summer.
The nearest documented Steller sea lion haulout sites are 15 km/9
mi southwest of the Seattle Ferry Terminal (WSDOT 2016a).
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 Steller sea
lions were observed during this one day project in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016
Seattle Test Pile project, 0 Steller sea lions were observed over 10
days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF
2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates
the density of Steller sea lions in the Seattle area as a range of
0.025101 and 0.036800 animals per square kilometer.
Killer Whale
The Eastern North Pacific Southern Resident (SRKW) and West Coast
Transient (Transient) stocks of killer whale may be found near the
project site. The Southern Resident killer whales live in three family
groups known as the J, K and L pods. As of December 31, 2015, the stock
collectively numbers 78 individuals (CWR 2016). Transient killer whales
generally occur in smaller (less than 10 individuals), less structured
pods (NMFS 2013c). According to the Center for Whale Research (CWR
2015), they tend to travel in small groups of one to five individuals,
staying close to shorelines, often near seal rookeries when pups are
being weaned. The West Coast Transient stock, which includes
individuals from California to southeastern Alaska, is has a minimum
population estimate of 243, which does not include an estimate of the
number of whales in California (NMFS 2013b).
The SRKW and West Coast Transient stocks are both found within
Washington inland waters. Individuals of both stocks have long-ranging
movements and regularly leave the inland waters (Calambokidis and Baird
1994).
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 SRKW were
observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds to
the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test Pile
project, 0 SRKW were observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds
to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates
the density of Southern Resident killer whales in the Seattle area as a
range of 0.001461 and 0.020240 animals per square kilometer.
According to the NMFS National Stranding Database, there were no
killer whale strandings in the Seattle and Island County areas between
2010 and 2014 (NMFS 2016).
The West Coast Transient killer whale sightings have become more
common since mid-2000. Unlike the SRKW pods, transients may be present
in an area for hours or days as they hunt pinnipeds.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 transients
were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds
to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test
Pile project, 0 transients were observed over 10 days in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016). However, on
February 5, 2016, a pod of up to 7 transients were reported in the area
that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (Orca Network Archive
Report 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates
the density of west coast transient killer whales in the Seattle area
as a range of 0.000575 and 0.002373 animals per square kilometer.
Gray Whale
The Eastern North Pacific gray whale may be found near the project
site. The most recent population estimate for the Eastern North Pacific
stock is 20,990 individuals (NMFS 2015e). Within Washington waters,
gray whale sightings reported to Cascadia Research and the Whale Museum
between 1990 and 1993 totaled over 1,100 (Calambokidis et al., 1994).
Abundance estimates calculated for the small regional area between
Oregon and southern Vancouver Island, including the San Juan Area and
Puget Sound, suggest there were 137 to 153 individual gray whales from
2001 through 2003 (Calambokidis et al. 2004a). Forty-eight individual
gray whales were observed in Puget Sound and Hood Canal in 2004 and
2005.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 gray whales
were observed during this one day project in the area that corresponds
to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016 Seattle Test
Pile project, 0 gray whales were observed over 10 days in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates
the density of gray whales in the Seattle area as a range of 0.000002
to 0.000510 animals per square kilometer.
Humpback Whale
The California-Oregon-Washington (CA-OR-WA) stock of humpback whale
may be found near the project site. In 2016, NMFS has identified three
Distinct Population Segments (DPSs) of humpback whales off the coast of
Washington, Oregon, and California. These are: The Hawaii DPS (found
predominately off Washington and southern British Columbia), which is
not listed under the ESA; the Mexico DPS (found all along the coast),
which is listed as threatened under the ESA; and the Central America
DPS (found all along the coast), which is listed as endangered under
the ESA.
From August to November 2015, WSDOT conducted marine mammal
monitoring during tank farm pier removal at the Seattle Multimodal
Project. During 51 days of monitoring, one humpback whale was observed
within the ZOI on November 4, 2015.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 humpback
whales were observed during this one day project in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016
Seattle Test Pile project, 0 humpback whales were
[[Page 15502]]
observed over 10 days in the area that corresponds to the upcoming
project ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) estimates
the density of humpback whales in the Seattle area as a range between
0.000010 and 0.00070 animals per square kilometer.
Harbor Porpoise
The Washington Inland Waters Stock of harbor porpoise may be found
near the project site. The Washington Inland Waters Stock occurs in
waters east of Cape Flattery (Strait of Juan de Fuca, San Juan Island
Region, and Puget Sound).
Aerial surveys of the Washington and southern British Columbia were
conducted from 2013 to 2015 (Smultea et al. 2015). These aerial surveys
included the Strait of Juan de Fuca, San Juan Islands, Gulf Island,
Strait of Georgia, Puget Sound, and Hood Canal. The surveys showed that
for U.S. waters, the current estimate for Washington inland water stock
harbor porpoise is 11,233 (NMFS 2016).
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 harbor
porpoise were observed during this one day project in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016
Seattle Test Pile project, 0 harbor porpoise were observed over 10 days
in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates
the density of harbor porpoise during the timeframe scheduled for this
project in the Seattle area as a range between 0.061701 and 0.156000
animals/km\2\ (U.S. Navy 2014).
Dall's Porpoise
The California, Oregon, and Washington Stock of Dall's porpoise may
be found near the project site. The most recent estimate of Dall's
porpoise stock abundance is 25,750, based on 2005 and 2008 summer/
autumn vessel-based line transect surveys of California, Oregon, and
Washington waters (NMFS 2011d). Within the inland waters of Washington
and British Columbia, this species is most abundant in the Strait of
Juan de Fuca east to the San Juan Islands. The most recent Washington's
inland waters estimate is 900 animals (Calambokidis et al. 1997),
though sightings have become rarer since then. Prior to the 1940s,
Dall's porpoises were not reported in Puget Sound.
During the 2012 Seattle Slip 2 Batter Pile project, 0 Dall's
porpoise were observed during this one day project in the area that
corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2012). During the 2016
Seattle Test Pile project, 0 Dall's porpoise were observed over 10 days
in the area that corresponds to the upcoming project ZOIs (WSF 2016).
The Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2014) estimates
the density of Dall's porpoises in the Seattle area as a range between
0.018858 and 0.047976 animals per square kilometer.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that
components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and
their habitat. The ``Estimated Take'' section later in this document
will include a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that
are expected to be taken by this activity. The ``Negligible Impact
Analyses and Determination'' section will consider the content of this
section, the ``Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment'' section, and
the ``Mitigation'' section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely
impacts of these activities on the reproductive success or survivorship
of individuals and how those impacts on individuals are likely to
impact marine mammal species or stocks.
When considering the influence of various kinds of sound on the
marine environment, it is necessary to understand that different kinds
of marine life are sensitive to different frequencies of sound. Based
on available behavioral data, audiograms derived using auditory evoked
potentials, anatomical modeling, and other data, NMFS (2016) to
designate ``marine mammal hearing groups'' for marine mammals and
estimate the lower and upper frequencies of hearing of the groups. The
marine mammal groups and the associated frequencies are indicated below
(though animals are less sensitive to sounds at the outer edge of their
functional range and most sensitive to sounds of frequencies within a
smaller range somewhere in the middle of their hearing range):
Low frequency cetaceans (13 species of mysticetes):
Functional hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 7 hertz
(Hz) and 35 kilohertz (kHz);
Mid-frequency cetaceans (32 species of dolphins, seven
species of larger toothed whales, and 19 species of beaked and
bottlenose whales): Functional hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;
High frequency cetaceans (eight species of true porpoises,
seven species of river dolphins, Kogia, the franciscana, and four
species of cephalorhynchids): Functional hearing is estimated to occur
between approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz;
Phocid pinnipeds in Water: Functional hearing is estimated
to occur between approximately 50 Hz and 86 kHz; and
Otariid pinnipeds in Water: Functional hearing is
estimated to occur between approximately 60 Hz and 39 kHz.
As mentioned previously in this document, eight marine mammal
species (five cetacean and four pinniped species) are likely to occur
in the vicinity of the Seattle pile driving/removal area. Of the five
cetacean species, three belong to the low-frequency cetacean group
(gray and humpback whales), one is a mid-frequency cetacean (killer
whale), and two high-frequency cetacean (harbor and Dall's porpoises).
One species of pinniped is phocid (harbor seal), and two species of
pinniped are otariid (California and Steller sea lions). A species'
functional hearing group is a consideration when we analyze the effects
of exposure to sound on marine mammals.
The WSDOT's Seattle Colman ferry terminal construction work using
in-water pile driving and pile removal could adversely affect marine
mammal species and stocks by exposing them to elevated noise levels in
the vicinity of the activity area.
Exposure to high intensity sound for a sufficient duration may
result in auditory effects such as a noise-induced threshold shift--an
increase in the auditory threshold after exposure to noise (Finneran et
al., 2005). Factors that influence the amount of threshold shift
include the amplitude, duration, frequency content, temporal pattern,
and energy distribution of noise exposure. The magnitude of hearing
threshold shift normally decreases over time following cessation of the
noise exposure. The amount of threshold shift just after exposure is
the initial threshold shift. If the threshold shift eventually returns
to zero (i.e., the threshold returns to the pre-exposure value), it is
a temporary threshold shift (Southall et al., 2007).
Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of hearing)--When animals
exhibit reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds must be louder for an
animal to detect them) following exposure to an intense sound or sound
for long duration, it is referred to as a noise-induced threshold shift
(TS). An animal can experience
[[Page 15503]]
temporary threshold shift (TTS) or permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS
can last from minutes or hours to days (i.e., there is complete
recovery), can occur in specific frequency ranges (i.e., an animal
might only have a temporary loss of hearing sensitivity between the
frequencies of 1 and 10 kHz), and can be of varying amounts (for
example, an animal's hearing sensitivity might be reduced initially by
only 6 dB or reduced by 30 dB). PTS is permanent, but some recovery is
possible. PTS can also occur in a specific frequency range and amount
as mentioned above for TTS.
For marine mammals, published data are limited to the captive
bottlenose dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and Yangtze finless
porpoise (Finneran et al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a, 2010b;
Finneran and Schlundt, 2010; Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a,
2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b; Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et
al., 2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For pinnipeds in water, data
are limited to measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an elephant seal,
and California sea lions (Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et al.,
2012b).
Lucke et al. (2009) found a TS of a harbor porpoise after exposing
it to airgun noise with a received sound pressure level (SPL) at 200.2
dB (peak-to-peak) re: 1 [mu]Pa, which corresponds to a sound exposure
level of 164.5 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa\2\ s after integrating exposure. NMFS
currently uses the root-mean-square (rms) of received SPL at 180 dB and
190 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa as the threshold above which PTS could occur for
cetaceans and pinnipeds, respectively. Because the airgun noise is a
broadband impulse, one cannot directly determine the equivalent of rms
SPL from the reported peak-to-peak SPLs. However, applying a
conservative conversion factor of 16 dB for broadband signals from
seismic surveys (McCauley et al., 2000) to correct for the difference
between peak-to-peak levels reported in Lucke et al. (2009) and rms
SPLs, the rms SPL for TTS would be approximately 184 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa,
and the received levels associated with PTS (Level A harassment) would
be higher. However, NMFS recognizes that TTS of harbor porpoises is
lower than other cetacean species empirically tested (Finneran &
Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et al., 2002; Kastelein and Jennings, 2012).
Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with
conspecifics, and interpretation of environmental cues for purposes
such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree
(elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and
frequency range of TTS, and the context in which it is experienced, TTS
can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to serious
(similar to those discussed in auditory masking, below). For example, a
marine mammal may be able to readily compensate for a brief, relatively
small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency range that occurs
during a time where ambient noise is lower and there are not as many
competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and longer
duration of TTS sustained during time when communication is critical
for successful mother/calf interactions could have more serious
impacts. Also, depending on the degree and frequency range, the effects
of PTS on an animal could range in severity, although it is considered
generally more serious because it is a permanent condition. Of note,
reduced hearing sensitivity as a simple function of aging has been
observed in marine mammals, as well as humans and other taxa (Southall
et al., 2007), so one can infer that strategies exist for coping with
this condition to some degree, though likely not without cost.
In addition, chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-
intensity, noise could cause masking at particular frequencies for
marine mammals that utilize sound for vital biological functions (Clark
et al., 2009). Acoustic masking is when other noises such as from human
sources interfere with animal detection of acoustic signals such as
communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental sounds
important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain circumstances,
marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment are being
severely masked could also be impaired from maximizing their
performance fitness in survival and reproduction.
Masking occurs at the frequency band that the animals utilize.
Therefore, since noise generated from vibratory pile driving activity
is mostly concentrated at low frequency ranges, it may have less effect
on high frequency echolocation sounds by odontocetes (toothed whales).
However, lower frequency man-made noises are more likely to affect
detection of communication calls and other potentially important
natural sounds such as surf and prey noise. It may also affect
communication signals when they occur near the noise band and thus
reduce the communication space of animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009)
and cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote et al., 2004; Holt et
al., 2009).
Unlike TS, masking, which can occur over large temporal and spatial
scales, can potentially affect the species at population, community, or
even ecosystem levels, as well as individual levels. Masking affects
both senders and receivers of the signals and could have long-term
chronic effects on marine mammal species and populations. Recent
science suggests that low frequency ambient sound levels have increased
by as much as 20 dB (more than three times in terms of SPL) in the
world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of these increases
are from distant shipping (Hildebrand, 2009). For WSDOT's Seattle
Colman Ferry Terminal construction activities, noises from vibratory
pile driving and pile removal contribute to the elevated ambient noise
levels in the project area, thus increasing potential for or severity
of masking. Baseline ambient noise levels in the vicinity of project
area are high due to ongoing shipping, construction and other
activities in the Puget Sound.
Finally, marine mammals' exposure to certain sounds could lead to
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), such as: Changing
durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or
moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities;
changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as
socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive
behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g.,
pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).
The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise
depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and
their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et
al., 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received level of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
(rms) to predict the onset of behavioral harassment from impulse noises
(such as impact pile driving), and 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for
continuous noises (such as vibratory pile driving). For the WSDOT's
Seattle Colman Ferry Terminal construction activities, both of these
noise levels are considered for effects analysis because WSDOT plans to
use both impact and vibratory pile driving, as well as vibratory pile
removal.
The biological significance of many of these behavioral
disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected
disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral
modification could be biologically
[[Page 15504]]
significant if the change affects growth, survival, and/or
reproduction, which depends on the severity, duration, and context of
the effects.
Potential Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
The primary potential impacts to marine mammal habitat are
associated with elevated sound levels produced by pile driving and
removal associated with marine mammal prey species. However, other
potential impacts to the surrounding habitat from physical disturbance
are also possible. These potential effects are discussed below.
SPLs from impact pile driving has the potential to injure or kill
fish in the immediate area. These few isolated fish mortality events
are not anticipated to have a substantial effect on prey species
population or their availability as a food resource for marine mammals.
Studies also suggest that larger fish are generally less
susceptible to death or injury than small fish. Moreover, elongated
forms that are round in cross section are less at risk than deep-bodied
forms. Orientation of fish relative to the shock wave may also affect
the extent of injury. Open water pelagic fish (e.g., mackerel) seem to
be less affected than reef fishes. The results of most studies are
dependent upon specific biological, environmental, explosive, and data
recording factors.
The huge variation in fish populations, including numbers, species,
sizes, and orientation and range from the detonation point, makes it
very difficult to accurately predict mortalities at any specific site
of detonation. Most fish species experience a large number of natural
mortalities, especially during early life-stages, and any small level
of mortality caused by the WSDOT's impact pile driving will likely be
insignificant to the population as a whole.
For non-impulsive sound such as that of vibratory pile driving,
experiments have shown that fish can sense both the strength and
direction of sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors determining whether
a fish can sense a sound signal, and potentially react to it, are the
frequency of the signal and the strength of the signal in relation to
the natural background noise level.
The level of sound at which a fish will react or alter its behavior
is usually well above the detection level. Fish have been found to
react to sounds when the sound level increased to about 20 dB above the
detection level of 120 dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response threshold
can depend on the time of year and the fish's physiological condition
(Engas et al., 1993).
During construction activity at Colman Dock, only a small fraction
of the available habitat would be ensonified at any given time.
Disturbance to fish species would be short-term and fish would return
to their pre-disturbance behavior once the pile driving activity
ceases. Thus, the proposed construction would have little, if any,
impact on the abilities of marine mammals to feed in the area where
construction work is planned.
Finally, the time of the proposed construction activity would avoid
the spawning season of the ESA-listed salmonid species between March
and July.
Short-term turbidity is a water quality effect of most in-water
work, including pile driving.
Cetaceans are not expected to be close enough to the Colman
terminal to experience turbidity, and any pinnipeds will be transiting
the terminal area and could avoid localized areas of turbidity.
Therefore, the impact from increased turbidity levels is expected to be
discountable to marine mammals.
For these reasons, WSDOT's proposed Seattle Multimodal construction
at Colman Dock is not expected to have adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat in the area.
Estimated Take
This section includes an estimate of the number of incidental
``takes'' likely to occur pursuant to this IHA, which will inform both
NMFS' consideration of whether the number of takes is ``small'' and the
negligible impact determination.
Harassment is the only means of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of pursuit, torment,
or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering (Level B harassment).
As described previously in the section Potential Effects of
Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and their Habitat, no incidental
take is anticipated to result from effects on prey species or as a
result of turbidity. Level B Harassment is expected to occur as
discussed below and is proposed to be authorized in the numbers
identified below.
As described below, a small number of takes by Level A Harassment
are being proposed to be authorized.
The death of a marine mammal is also a type of incidental take.
However, as described previously, no mortality is anticipated or
proposed to be authorized to result from this activity.
Basis for Takes
Take estimates are based on average marine mammal density in the
project area multiplied by the area size of ensonified zones within
which received noise levels exceed certain thresholds (i.e., Level A
and/or Level B harassment) from specific activities, then multiplied by
the total number of days such activities would occur. Certain
adjustments were made for marine mammals whose local abundance are
known through long-term monitoring efforts. Therefore, their local
abundance data are used for take calculation instead of general animal
density (see below).
Basis for Threshold Calculation
As discussed above, in-water pile removal and pile driving
(vibratory and impact) generate loud noises that could potentially
harass marine mammals in the vicinity of WSDOT's proposed Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock.
Under the NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of
Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Guidance), dual criteria
are used to assess marine mammal auditory injury (Level A harassment)
as a result of noise exposure (NMFS 2016). The dual criteria under the
Guidance provide onset thresholds in instantaneous peak SPLs
(Lpk) as well as 24-hr cumulative sound exposure levels
(SELcum or LE) that could cause PTS to marine mammals of
different hearing groups. The peak SPL is the highest positive value of
the noise field, log transformed to dB in reference to 1 [mu]Pa.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29MR17.000
where p(t) is acoustic pressure in pascal or micropascal, and pref is
reference acoustic pressure equal to 1 [mu]Pa.
The cumulative SEL is the total sound exposure over the entire
duration of a given day's pile driving activity, specifically, pile
driving occurring within a 24-hr period.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29MR17.001
[[Page 15505]]
where p(t) is acoustic pressure in pascal or micropascal, pref is
reference acoustic pressure equals to 1 [mu]Pa, t1 marks the
beginning of the time, and t2 the end of time.
For onset of Level B harassment, NMFS continues to use the root-
mean-square (rms) sound pressure level (SPLrms) at 120 dB re
1 [mu]Pa and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa as the received levels from non-impulse
(vibratory pile driving and removal) and impulse sources (impact pile
driving) underwater, respectively. The SPLrms for pulses
(such as those from impact pile driving) should contain 90 percent of
the pulse energy, and is calculated by
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29MR17.002
where p(t) is acoustic pressure in pascal or micropascal, pref is
reference acoustic pressure equals to 1 [mu]Pa, t1 marks the beginning
of the time, and t2 the end of time. In the case of an impulse noise,
t1 marks the time of 5 percent of the total energy window, and t2 the
time of 95 percent of the total energy window.
Table 3 summarizes the current NMFS marine mammal take criteria.
Table 3--Current Acoustic Exposure Criteria for Non-explosive Sound Underwater
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset thresholds Behavioral thresholds
Hearing group -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans.... Lpk,flat: 219 dB.. LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans.... Lpk,flat: 230 dB.. LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans... Lpk,flat: 202 dB.. LE,HF,24h: 173 dB. Lrms,flat: 160 dB. Lrms,flat: 120 dB.
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW)........... Lpk,flat: 218 dB.. LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
(Underwater).................... LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW).......... Lpk,flat: 232 dB.. LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
(Underwater).................... LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for
calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level
thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [mu]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has
a reference value of 1[mu]Pa2s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National
Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating
frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ``flat'' is
being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized
hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the
designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and
that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be
exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it
is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be
exceeded.
Sound Levels and Acoustic Modeling for the Proposed Construction
Activity
Source Levels
The project includes vibratory removal of 14-inch (in) timber
piles, vibratory driving and removal of 24-in steel piles, vibratory
driving of 30- and 36-in steel piles, and impact pile driving of 30-
and 36-in steel piles. In February of 2016, WSDOT conducted a test pile
project at Colman Dock in order to gather data to select the
appropriate piles for the project. The test pile project measured
impact pile driving of 24- and 36-in steel piles. The measured results
from the project are used here to provide source levels for the
prediction of isopleths ensonified over thresholds for the Seattle
project. The results show that the SPLrms for impact pile
driving of 36-in steel pile is 189 dB re 1 [mu]Pa at 14 m from the pile
(WSDOT 2016b). This value is also used for impact driving of the 30-in
steel piles, which is a precautionary approach.
Source level of vibratory pile driving of 36-in steel piles is
based on test pile driving at Port Townsend in 2010 (Laughlin 2011).
Recordings of vibratory pile driving were made at a distance of 10 m
from the pile. The results show that the SPLrms for
vibratory pile driving of 36-in steel pile was 177 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
(WSDOT 2016a).
Up to three pile installation crews may be active during the day
within the project footprint. Each crew will use one vibratory and one
impact hammer, and it is possible that more than one vibratory or
impact hammer may be active at the same time for pile driving and/or
removal for the 24-, 30-, and 36-inch piles. Overlapping noise fields
created by multiple hammer use are handled differently for impact and
vibratory hammers. When more than one impact hammer is being used close
enough to another impact hammer, the cumulative acoustic energy is
accounted for by including all hammer strikes. When more than one
vibratory hammer is being used close enough to another vibratory hammer
to create overlapping noise fields, additional sound levels are added
to account for the overlap, creating a larger ZOI. A simplified
nomogram method (Kinsler et al., 2000) is proposed to account for the
addition of noise source levels for multiple vibratory hammers, as
shown in Table 4. Using this method, the source levels of 24-, 30-, and
36-in piles during vibratory pile driving are adjusted to 182 dB re 1
[mu]Pa (at 10 m).
Table 4--Multiple Sound Level Addition
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Add the
following to
When two sound levels differ by the higher
level (dB)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0-1 dB.................................................. 3
2-3 dB.................................................. 2
4-9 dB.................................................. 1
>10 dB.................................................. 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For vibratory pile removal, vibratory pile driving data were used
as proxies because we conservatively consider noises from pile removal
would be the same as those from pile driving.
The source level of vibratory removal of 14-in timber piles were
based on measurements conducted at the Port Townsend Ferry Terminal
during vibratory removal of a 12-inch timber pile by WSDOT (Laughlin
2011). The recorded source level is 152 dB re 1 [mu]Pa at 16 m from the
pile. In the absence of
[[Page 15506]]
spectral data for timber pile vibratory driving, the weighting factor
adjustment (WFA) recommended by NMFS acoustic guidance (NMFS 2016) was
used to determine these zones.
These source levels are used to compute the Level A ensonified
zones and to estimate the Level B harassment zones. For Level A
harassment zones, zones calculated using cumulative SEL are all larger
than those calculated using SPLpeak, therefore, only zones
based on cumulative SEL for Level A harassment are used.
Estimating Injury Zones
Calculation and modeling of applicable ensonified zones are based
on source measurements of comparable types and sizes of piles driven by
different methods (impact vs. vibratory hammers) either during the
Colman test pile driving or at a different location within the Puget
Sound. As mentioned earlier, isopleths for injury zones are based on
cumulative SEL (LE) criteria.
For peak SPL (Lpk), distances to marine mammal injury
thresholds were calculated using a simple geometric spreading model
using a transmission loss coefficient of 15:
(4) SLMeasure = EL + 15log10(R - DMeasure)
where SLMeasure is the measured source level in dB re 1 [mu]Pa, EL is
the specific received level of threshold, DMeasure is the distance (m)
from the source where measurements were taken, and R is the distance
(radius) of the isopleth to the source in meters.
For cumulative SEL (LE), distances to marine mammal exposure
thresholds were computed using spectral modeling that incorporates
frequency specific absorption. First, representative pile driving
sounds recorded during test pile driving with impact and vibratory
hammers were used to generate power spectral densities (PSDs), which
describe the distribution of power into frequency components composing
that sound, in 1-Hz bins. Parserval's theorem, which states that the
sum of the square of a function is equal to the sum of the square of
its transform, was applied to ensure that all energies within a strike
(for impact pile driving) or a given period of time (for vibratory pile
driving) were captured through the fast Fourier transform, an algorithm
that converts the signal from its original domain (in this case, time
series) to a representation in frequency domain. For impact pile
driving, broadband PSDs were generated from SPLrms time
series of a total of 270 strikes with a time window that contains 90
percent of pulse energy. For vibratory pile driving, broadband PSDs
were generated from a series of continuous 1-second SEL. Broadband PSDs
were then adjusted based on weighting functions of marine mammal
hearing groups (Finneran 2016) by using the weighting function as a
band-pass filter. For impact pile driving, cumulative exposures (Esum)
were computed by multiplying the single rms pressure squared by rms
pulse duration for the specific strike, then by the number of strikes
(provided in Table 1) required to drive one pile, then by the number of
piles to be driven in a given day, as shown in the equation below:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29MR17.003
where prms,i is the rms pressure, [tau] is the rms pulse duration for
the specific strike, Ns is the anticipated number of strikes
(provided in Table 1) needed to install one pile, and N is the number
of total piles to be installed.
For vibratory pile driving, cumulative exposures were computed by
summing 1-second noise exposure by the duration needed to drive on pile
(provided in Table 1), then by the number of piles to be driven in a
given day, as shown in the equation below:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29MR17.004
where E1s is the 1-second noise exposure, and [Delta]t is the duration
(provided in Table 1) need to install 1 pile by vibratory piling.
Frequency-specific transmission losses, TL(f), were then computed
using practical spreading along with frequency-specific absorption
coefficients that were computed with nominal seawater properties (i.e.,
salinity = 35 psu, pH = 8.0) at 15 [deg]C at the surface by
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29MR17.005
where a(f) is dB/km, and R is the distance (radius) of the specific
isopleth to the source in meters. For broadband sources such as those
from pile driving, the transmission loss is the summation of the
frequency-specific results.
Approach To Estimate Behavioral Zones
As mentioned earlier, isopleths to Level B behavioral zones are
based on root-mean-square SPL (SPLrms) that are specific for
impulse (impact pile driving) and non-impulse (vibratory pile driving)
sources. Distances to marine mammal behavior thresholds were calculated
using a simple geometric spreading equation as shown in Equation (4).
For Level B harassment zones from vibratory pile driving of 30 inch
and 36 inch piles, the ensonified zones are calculated based on
practical spreading of back-calculated source level of 36 inch pile
driving adjusted for 3 hammers operating concurrently by adding 5 dB.
The results show that the 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa isopleth is at 13.6 km.
For Level B harassment zone from vibratory pile driving of 24'' piles,
WSDOT conducted site measurements during Seattle test pile driving
project using 24'' steel piles. The results show that underwater noise
cannot be detected at a distance of 5 km (3 mi). Since this measurement
was based on pile driving using 1 hammer, the Level B harassment zone
for 24 inch steel pile
[[Page 15507]]
is adjusted by factoring in a 5 dB difference (see above) using the
following equation, based on the inverse law of acoustic propagation
(i.e., dB difference in transmission loss is the inverse of distance
difference in logarithm):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN29MR17.006
where dBdifference is the 5 dB difference,
R3-hammer is the distance from the pile where piling noise
is no longer audible, and R1-hammer is the measured distance
from the pile where piling noise is no longer audible, which is 5 km.
The result show that when using 3 vibratory hammers concurrently,
the distance from the pile to where pile noise is no longer audible is
11 km.
A summary of the measured and modeled harassment zones is provided
in Table 5.
Table 5--Distances to Harassment Zones
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury zone (m)
Pile type, size & pile driving method -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Behavior zone
LF cetacean MF cetacean HF cetacean Phocid Otariid (m)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory 14'' timber................................... 8 0.7 11.9 4.9 0.3 1000
Vibratory 24'' steel.................................... 255 65 1365 115 10 11000
Vibratory 30'' & 36'' steel............................. 285 65 1455 125 10 13600
Impact 30'' & 36'' steel................................ 1845 75 2835 465 35 1200
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Takes From Proposed Construction Activity
Incidental take is estimated for each species by estimating the
likelihood of a marine mammal being present within a Level A or Level B
harassment zone during active pile driving or removal. The Level A
calculation includes a duration component, along with an assumption
(which can lead to overestimates in some cases) that animals within the
zone stay in that area for the whole duration of the pile driving
activity within a day. For all marine mammal species except harbor
seals and California sea lions, estimated takes are calculated based on
ensonified area for a specific pile driving activity multiplied by the
marine mammal density in the action area, multiplied by the number of
pile driving (or removal) days. Marine mammal density data are from the
U.S. Navy Marine Species Density Database (Navy 2015). Harbor seal and
California sea lion takes are based on observations near Seattle, since
these data provide the best information on distribution and presence of
these species that are often associated with nearby haulouts (see
below). A summary of marine mammal density, days and Level A and Level
B harassment areas from different pile driving and removal activities
is provided in Table 6.
Table 6--Summary of Marine Mammal Density, Days and Level A and Level B Ensonified Areas From Different Pile Driving and Removal Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Vibratory Vibratory Vibratory Impact Impact
14'' timber 24'' steel 30'' steel 36'' steel 30'' steel 36'' steel
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Days 11 15 3 26 2 26
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species/density (km-\2\) Level A areas (m\2\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor seal.......................................... 1.219000 50 41,548 49,087 49,087 394,075 394,075
California sea lion.......................................... 0.12660 0.126 314 314 314 3,849 3,849
Steller sea lion............................................. 0.036800 0.126 314 314 314 3,849 3,849
Killer whale, transient...................................... 0.020240 50 13,273 13,273 13,273 17,672 17,672
Killer whale, Southern Resident.............................. 0.002373 50 13,273 13,273 13,273 17,672 17,672
Gray whale................................................... 0.000510 154 153,311 189,384 189,384 4,129,836 4,129,836
Humpback whale............................................... 0.00070 154 153,311 189,384 189,384 4,129,836 4,129,836
Harbor porpoise.............................................. 0.156000 13,273 2,547,906 2,678,940 2,678,940 8,190,639 8,190,639
Dall's porpoise.............................................. 0.047976 13,273 2,547,906 2,678,940 2,678,940 8,190,639 8,190,639
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species/density (km-\2\) Level B areas (km\2\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor seal.......................................... 1.219000 5,419,792 58,338,838 74,290,934 74,290,934 1,926,124 1,926,124
California sea lion.......................................... 0.12660 5,419,792 58,338,838 74,290,934 74,290,934 1,926,124 1,926,124
Steller sea lion............................................. 0.036800 5,419,792 58,338,838 74,290,934 74,290,934 1,926,124 1,926,124
Killer whale, transient...................................... 0.020240 5,419,792 58,338,838 74,290,934 74,290,934 1,926,124 1,926,124
Killer whale, Southern Resident.............................. 0.002373 5,419,792 58,338,838 74,290,934 74,290,934 1,926,124 1,926,124
Gray whale................................................... 0.000510 5,419,792 58,338,838 74,290,934 74,290,934 1,926,124 1,926,124
Humpback whale............................................... 0.00070 5,419,792 58,338,838 74,290,934 74,290,934 1,926,124 1,926,124
Harbor porpoise.............................................. 0.156000 5,419,792 58,338,838 74,290,934 74,290,934 1,926,124 1,926,124
Dall's porpoise.............................................. 0.047976 5,419,792 58,338,838 74,290,934 74,290,934 1,926,124 1,926,124
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 15508]]
The Level A take total was further adjusted by subtracting animals
expected to occur within the exclusion zone, where pile driving
activities are suspended when an animal is observed in or approaching
the zone (see Mitigation section). Further, the number of Level B takes
was adjusted to exclude those already counted for Level A takes.
The harbor seal take estimate is based on local seal abundance
information off the Seattle area from WSDOT's Seattle Slip 2 Batter
Pile Project in 2012. Marine mammal visual monitoring during the Batter
Pile Project indicates that a maximum of 6 harbor seals were observed
in the general area of the Colman Dock project (WSDOT 2012). Based on a
total of 83 pile driving days for the WSDOT Seattle Colman Dock
project, it is estimated that up to 498 harbor seals could be exposed
to noise levels associated with ``take''. Since 28 days would involve
impact pile driving of 30 inch and 36 inch steel piles with Level A
zones beyond shutdown zones (465 m vs 160 m shutdown zone), we consider
that 168 harbor seals exposed during these 28 days would experience
Level A harassment.
The California sea lion take estimate is based on local sea lion
abundance information from the City of Seattle's Elliott Bay Sea Wall
Project (City of Seattle, 2014). Marine mammal visual monitoring during
the Sea Wall Project indicates that up to 15 sea lions were observed in
the general area of the Colman Dock project at any given time (City of
Seattle 2014). Based on a total of 83 pile driving days for the WSDOT
Seattle Colman Dock project, it is estimated that up to 1245 California
sea lions could be exposed to noise levels associated with ``take''.
Since the Level A zones of otarrids are all very small (<35m, Table 5),
we do not consider it likely that any sea lions would be taken by Level
A harassment. Therefore, all California sea lion takes estimated here
are expected to be taken by Level B harassment.
A summary of estimated marine mammal takes is listed in Table 7.
Table 7--Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals That May Be Exposed to Received Noise Levels That Cause Level A or
Level B Harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated Estimated
Species Level A take Level B take total take Abundance Percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor seal............. 168 330 498 11,036 4.51%
California sea lion............. 0 1245 1245 296,750 0.42
Steller sea lion................ 0 114 114 71,562 0.16
Killer whale, transient......... 0 7 7 243 3
Killer whale, Southern Resident. 0 0 0 78 0
Gray whale...................... 1 15 16 20,990 0.08
Humpback whale.................. 1 2 3 1,918 0.15
Harbor porpoise................. 195 1657 1852 11,233 16.49
Dall's porpoise................. 16 137 153 25,750 0.59
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitigation
Under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS shall prescribe the
``permissible methods of taking by harassment 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 subsistence
uses.''
To ensure that the ``least practicable adverse impact'' will be
achieved, NMFS evaluates mitigation measures in consideration of the
following factors in relation to one another: The manner in which, and
the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure(s) is
expected to reduce impacts to marine mammals, marine mammal species or
stocks, their habitat, and their availability for subsistence uses
(latter where relevant); the proven or likely efficacy of the measures;
and the practicability of the measures for applicant implementation.
For WSDOT's proposed Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock,
WSDOT worked with NMFS and proposed the following mitigation measures
to minimize the potential impacts to marine mammals in the project
vicinity. The primary purposes of these mitigation measures are to
minimize sound levels from the activities, to monitor marine mammals
within designated zones of influence (ZOI) and exclusion zones
corresponding to NMFS' current Level B and Level A harassment
thresholds and, to implement shut-down measures for certain marine
mammal species when they are detected approaching the exclusion zones
or actual take numbers are approaching the authorized take numbers (if
the IHA is issued).
Time Restriction
Work would 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 August 1, 2017, and
February 15, 2018.
Use of Noise Attenuation Devices
To reduce impact on marine mammals, WSDOT 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.
Establishing and Monitoring Level A, Level B Harassment Zones, and
Exclusion Zones
Before the commencement of in-water construction activities, which
include impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving and pile
removal, WSDOT shall establish Level A harassment zones where received
underwater SPLs or SELcum could cause PTS (see above).
WSDOT shall also establish Level B harassment zones where received
underwater SPLs are higher than 160 dBrms and 120
dBrms re 1 [micro]Pa for impulse noise sources (impact pile
driving) and non-impulses noise sources (vibratory pile driving and
pile removal), respectively.
WSDOT shall establish a maximum 160-m Level A exclusion zone for
all marine mammals. For Level A harassment zones that are smaller than
160 m from the source, WSDOT shall establish exclusion zones that
correspond to the estimated Level A harassment distances, but shall not
be less than 10 m.
A summary of exclusion zones is provided in Table 8.
[[Page 15509]]
Table 8--Exclusion Zones for Various Pile Driving Activities and Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exclusion zone (m)
Pile type, size & pile driving -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
method LF cetacean MF cetacean HF cetacean Phocid Otariid
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14'' timber pile, vibratory..... 10 10 12 10 10
24'' steel pile, vibratory...... 255 65 160 115 10
30'' & 36'' steel pile, 285 65 160 125 10
vibratory......................
30'' & 36'' steel pile, impact.. 500 75 160 160 35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NMFS-approved protected species observers (PSO) shall conduct an
initial survey of the exclusion zones to ensure that no marine mammals
are seen within the zones before impact pile driving of a pile segment
begins. If marine mammals are found within the exclusion zone, pile
driving of the segment would be delayed until they move out of the
area. If a marine mammal is seen above water and then dives below, the
contractor would wait 30 minutes. If no marine mammals are seen by the
observer in that time it can be assumed that the animal has moved
beyond the exclusion zone.
If pile driving of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or more and a
marine mammal is sighted within the designated exclusion zone prior to
commencement of pile driving, the observer(s) must notify the pile
driving operator (or other authorized individual) immediately and
continue to monitor the exclusion zone. Operations may not resume until
the marine mammal has exited the exclusion zone or 30 minutes have
elapsed since the last sighting.
Soft Start
A ``soft-start'' technique is intended to allow marine mammals to
vacate the area before the impact pile driver reaches full power.
Whenever there has been downtime of 30 minutes or more without impact
pile driving, the contractor will initiate the driving with ramp-up
procedures described below.
Soft start for impact hammers requires contractors to provide an
initial set of three strikes from the impact hammer at 40 percent
energy, followed by a 1-minute waiting period, then two subsequent
three-strike sets. Each day, WSDOT will use the soft-start technique at
the beginning of impact pile driving or removal, or if pile driving has
ceased for more than 30 minutes.
Shutdown Measures
WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if a marine mammal is
detected within an exclusion zone or is about to enter an exclusion
zone listed in Table 7.
WSDOT shall also implement shutdown measures if southern resident
killer whales are sighted within the vicinity of the project area and
are approaching the Level B harassment zone (ZOI) during in-water
construction activities.
If a killer whale approaches the ZOI during pile driving or
removal, and it is unknown whether it is a Southern Resident killer
whale or a transient killer whale, it shall be assumed to be a Southern
Resident killer whale and WSDOT shall implement the shutdown measure.
If a Southern Resident killer whale or an unidentified killer whale
enters the ZOI undetected, in-water pile driving or pile removal shall
be suspended until the whale exits the ZOI to avoid further level B
harassment.
Further, WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if the number of
authorized takes for any particular species reaches the limit under the
IHA (if issued) and if such marine mammals are sighted within the
vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment
zone during in-water construction activities.
Coordination With Local Marine Mammal Research Network
Prior to the start of pile driving for the day, the Orca Network
and/or Center for Whale Research will be contacted by WSDOT to find out
the location of the nearest marine mammal sightings. The Orca Sightings
Network consists of a list of over 600 (and growing) residents,
scientists, and government agency personnel in the U.S. and Canada.
Sightings are called or emailed into the Orca Network and immediately
distributed to other sighting networks including: The NMFS Northwest
Fisheries Science Center, the Center for Whale Research, Cascadia
Research, the Whale Museum Hotline and the British Columbia Sightings
Network.
Sightings information collected by the Orca Network includes
detection by hydrophone. The SeaSound Remote Sensing Network is a
system of interconnected hydrophones installed in the marine
environment of Haro Strait (west side of San Juan Island) to study orca
communication, in-water noise, bottom fish ecology and local climatic
conditions. A hydrophone at the Port Townsend Marine Science Center
measures average in-water sound levels and automatically detects
unusual sounds. These passive acoustic devices allow researchers to
hear when different marine mammals come into the region. This acoustic
network, combined with the volunteer (incidental) visual sighting
network allows researchers to document presence and location of various
marine mammal species.
With this level of coordination in the region of activity, WSDOT
will be able to get real-time information on the presence or absence of
whales before starting any pile driving.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, all of which are described
above, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the proposed mitigation
measures provide the means effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on the affected 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
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. Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
[[Page 15510]]
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the
action area (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, density).
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas).
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors.
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks.
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat).
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
WSDOT shall employ NMFS-approved PSOs to conduct marine mammal
monitoring for its Seattle Multimodal Project. The PSOs will observe
and collect data on marine mammals in and around the project area for
30 minutes before, during, and for 30 minutes after all pile removal
and pile installation work. NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet the following
requirements:
1. Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are
required;
2. At least one observer must have prior experience working as an
observer;
3. Other observers may substitute education (undergraduate degree
inbiological science or related field) or training for experience;
4. Where a team of three or more observers are required, one
observer should be designated as lead observer or monitoring
coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an
observer; and
5. NMFS will require submission and approval of observer CVs.;
Monitoring of marine mammals around the construction site shall be
conducted using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power).
Due to the different sizes of ZOIs from different pile sizes, several
different ZOIs and different monitoring protocols corresponding to a
specific pile size will be established.
During 14 inch timber pile removal, two land-based PSOs
will monitor the exclusion zones and Level B harassment zone.
During vibratory pile driving of 24 inch, 30 inch, and 36
inch steel piles, 5 land-based PSOs and two vessel-based PSOs on
ferries will monitor the Level A and Level B harassment zones.
During impact pile driving of 30 inch and 36 inch steel
piles, 4 land-based PSOs will monitor the Level A and Level B
harassment zones.
Locations of the land-based PSOs and routes of monitoring vessels
are shown in WSDOT's Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan, which is available
online at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm.
To verify the required monitoring distance, the exclusion zones and
ZOIs will be determined by using a range finder or hand-held global
positioning system device.
Proposed Reporting Measures
WSDOT would be required to submit a draft monitoring report within
90 days after completion of the construction work or the expiration of
the IHA (if issued), whichever comes earlier. This report would detail
the monitoring protocol, summarize the data recorded during monitoring,
and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have been harassed.
NMFS would have an opportunity to provide comments on the report, and
if NMFS has comments, WSDOT would address the comments and submit a
final report to NMFS within 30 days.
In addition, NMFS would require WSDOT to notify NMFS' Office of
Protected Resources and NMFS' West Coast Stranding Coordinator within
48 hours of sighting an injured or dead marine mammal in the
construction site. WSDOT shall provide NMFS and the Stranding Network
with the species or description of the animal(s), the condition of the
animal(s) (including carcass condition, if the animal is dead),
location, time of first discovery, observed behaviors (if alive), and
photo or video (if available).
In the event that WSDOT finds an injured or dead marine mammal that
is not in the construction area, WSDOT would report the same
information as listed above to NMFS as soon as operationally feasible.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact 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'' (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 takes, alone, is not
enough information on which to base an impact determination. In
addition to considering the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration, etc.), as well as effects on habitat, the status of the
affected stocks, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation.
Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing regulations
(54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and
ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into these analyses
via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as reflected in
the regulatory status of the species, population size and growth rate
where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient
noise levels).
To avoid repetition, this introductory discussion of our analyses
applies to all the species listed in Table 7, given that the
anticipated effects of WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman
Dock activities involving pile driving and pile removal on marine
mammals are expected to be relatively similar in nature. There is no
information about the nature or severity of the impacts, or the size,
status, or structure of any species or stock that would lead to a
different analysis by species for this activity, or else species-
specific factors would be identified and analyzed.
Although a few marine mammal species (168 harbor seals, 1 gray
whale, 1 humpback whale, 195 harbor porpoises, and 16 Dall's porpoise)
are estimated to experience Level A harassment in the form of PTS if
they stay within the Level A harassment zone during the entire pile
driving for the day, the degree of injury is expected to be mild and is
not likely to affect the reproduction or survival of the individual
animals. It is expected that, if hearing impairments occurs, most
[[Page 15511]]
likely the affected animal would lose a few dB in its hearing
sensitivity, which in most cases is not likely to affect its survival
and recruitment. Hearing impairment that occur for these individual
animals would be limited to the dominant frequency of the noise
sources, i.e., in the low-frequency region below 2 kHz. Therefore, the
degree of PTS is not likely to affect the echolocation performance of
the two porpoise species, which use frequencies mostly above 100 kHz.
Nevertheless, for all marine mammal species, it is known that in
general animals avoid areas where sound levels could cause hearing
impairment. Therefore it is not likely that an animal would stay in an
area with intense noise that could cause severe levels of hearing
damage. In addition, even if an animal receives a TTS, the TTS would be
a one-time event from the exposure, making it unlikely that the TTS
would involve into PTS. Furthermore, Level A take estimates were based
on the assumption that the animals are randomly distributed in the
project area and would not avoid intense noise levels that could cause
TTS or PTS. In reality, animals tend to avoid areas where noise levels
are high (Richardson et al. 1995).
For the rest of the three marine mammal species, takes that are
anticipated and proposed to be authorized are expected to be limited to
short-term Level B harassment (behavioral and TTS). Marine mammals
present in the vicinity of the action area and taken by Level B
harassment would most likely show overt brief disturbance (startle
reaction) and avoidance of the area from elevated noise levels during
pile driving and pile removal and the implosion noise. A few marine
mammals could experience TTS if they occur within the Level B TTS ZOI.
However, as discussed earlier in this document, TTS is a temporary loss
of hearing sensitivity when exposed to loud sound, and the hearing
threshold is expected to recover completely within minutes to hours.
Therefore, it is not considered an injury. In addition, take
calculation of harbor porpoise is based on density provided U.S. Navy
Marine Species Density Database (Navy 2015), which is more relevant to
open water area of the Puget Sound. Finally, harbor porpoise abundance
in the Seattle area based on aerial survey showed that their abundance
is lower (Jefferson et al., 2016).
There is no ESA designated critical habitat in the vicinity of
WSDOT's proposed Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock area.
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. There is
no ESA designated critical area in the vicinity of the Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock area. The project activities would
not permanently modify existing marine mammal habitat. The activities
may kill some fish and cause other fish to leave the area temporarily,
thus 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. Therefore, given
the consideration of potential impacts to marine mammal prey species
and their physical environment, WSDOT's proposed construction activity
at Colman Dock would not adversely affect marine mammal habitat.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total take from
the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected
marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified
activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not
define small numbers and so, in practice, NMFS compares the number of
individuals anticipated to be taken to the most appropriate estimation
of the relevant species or stock size in our determination of whether
an authorization would be limited to small numbers of marine mammals.
The takes represent less than 17 percent of all populations or
stocks with known abundance potentially impacted (see Table 6 in this
document). These take estimates represent the percentage of each
species or stock that could be taken by both Level A and Level B
harassments. In general, the numbers of marine mammals estimated to be
taken are small proportions of the total populations of the affected
species or stocks.
The most recent abundance estimate of Washington northern inland
water stock of harbor seal was assessed at 11,036 (Carretta et al.,
2015). The actual number of harbor seal is expected to be much higher
since animals could be under the water or in areas not covered by the
survey (Carretta et al., 2015). Nevertheless, consider that the take
calculation is based on daily cumulative counts of animals that are
exposed multiplied by the activity days, a single animal could be
exposed in different days and thus be considered as multiple takes.
Therefore, we believe that the numbers of harbor seals being
potentially taken are low in terms of their stock sizes.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of each species or stock will be taken relative to the
population size of the affected species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Subsistence Analysis and Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
Issuance of an MMPA authorization requires compliance with the ESA
for any species that are listed or proposed as threatened or
endangered.
The California-Oregon-Washington stock of humpback whale and the
Southern Resident stock of killer whale are the only marine mammal
species listed under the ESA that could occur in the vicinity of
WSDOT's proposed construction projects. Two DPSs of the humpback whale
stock, the Mexico DPS and the Central America DPS, are listed as
threatened and endangered under the ESA, respectively. NMFS' Permits
and Conservation Division has initiated consultation with NMFS'
Protected Resources Division under section 7 of the ESA on the issuance
of an IHA to WSDOT under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for this
activity.
NMFS will conclude the ESA consultation prior to reaching a
determination regarding the proposed issuance of the authorization.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5)(D) authorization requires compliance
with the National Environmental Policy Act.
[[Page 15512]]
NMFS preliminary determined the issuance of the proposed IHA is
consistent with categories of activities identified in CE B4 (issuance
of incidental harassment authorizations under section 101(a)(5)(A) and
(D) of the MMPA for which no serious injury or mortality is
anticipated) of the Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A and we have not
identified any extraordinary circumstances listed in Chapter 4 of the
Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A that would preclude this categorical
exclusion.
We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice
prior to making a final decision on the IHA request.
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to the Washington State Department of Transportation for
conducting ferry terminal construction at Colman Dock in Seattle
Washington, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring,
and reporting requirements are incorporated. This section contains a
draft of the IHA itself. The wording contained in this section is
proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if issued).
The proposed IHA language is provided next.
1. This Authorization is valid from August 1, 2017, through July
31, 2018.
2. This Authorization is valid only for activities associated with
in-water construction work at the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman
Dock in the State of Washington.
3. (a) The species authorized taking by, Level A and Level B
harassment and in the numbers shown in Table 7 are: Pacific harbor seal
(Phoca vitulina), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), Steller
sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), killer whale (Orcinus orca), gray whale
(Eschrichtius robustus), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae),
harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and Dall's porpoise (P. dalli).
(b) The authorization for taking by harassment is limited to the
following acoustic sources and from the following activities:
Impact pile driving;
Vibratory pile driving; and
Vibratory pile removal.
4. Prohibitions.
(a) The taking, by incidental harassment only, is limited to the
species listed under condition 3(a) above and by the numbers listed in
Table 6 of this notice. The taking by death of these species or the
taking by harassment, injury or death of any other species of marine
mammal is prohibited unless separately authorized or exempted under the
MMPA and may result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of
this Authorization.
(b) The taking of any marine mammal is prohibited whenever the
required protected species observers (PSOs), required by condition
7(a), are not present in conformance with condition 7(a) of this
Authorization.
5. Mitigation.
(a) Time Restriction.
In-water construction work shall occur only during daylight hours.
(b) Establishment of Level A and Level B Harassment Zones.
(A) Before the commencement of in-water pile driving/removal
activities, WSDOT shall establish Level A harassment zones. The modeled
Level A zones are summarized in Table 5.
(B) Before the commencement of in-water pile driving/removal
activities, WSDOT shall establish Level B harassment zones. The modeled
Level B zones are summarized in Table 5.
(C) Before the commencement of in-water pile driving/removal
activities, WSDOT shall establish exclusion zones. The proposed
exclusion zones are summarized in Table 8.
(c) Monitoring of marine mammals shall take place starting 30
minutes before pile driving begins until 30 minutes after pile driving
ends.
(d) Soft Start.
(i) When there has been downtime of 30 minutes or more without pile
driving, the contractor will initiate the driving with ramp-up
procedures described below.
(ii) Soft start for impact hammers requires contractors to provide
an initial set of three strikes from the impact hammer at 40 percent
energy, followed by a 1-minute waiting period, then two subsequent
three-strike sets. Each day, WSDOT will use the soft-start technique at
the beginning of impact pile driving or removal, or if pile driving has
ceased for more than 30 minutes.
(e) Shutdown Measures.
(i) WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if a marine mammal is
detected within or to be approaching the exclusion zones provided in
Table 7 of this notice.
(ii) WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if southern resident
killer whales (SRKWs) are sighted within the vicinity of the project
area and are approaching the Level B harassment zone (zone of
influence, or ZOI) during in-water construction activities.
(iii) If a killer whale approaches the ZOI during pile driving or
removal, and it is unknown whether it is a SRKW or a transient killer
whale, it shall be assumed to be a SRKW and WSDOT shall implement the
shutdown measure identified in 6(e)(ii).
(iv) If a SRKW enters the ZOI undetected, in-water pile driving or
pile removal shall be suspended until the SRKW exits the ZOI to avoid
further level B harassment.
(v) WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if the number of any
allotted marine mammal takes reaches the limit under the IHA, if such
marine mammals are sighted within the vicinity of the project area and
are approaching the Level B harassment zone during pile removal
activities.
(f) Coordination with Local Marine Mammal Research Network.
Prior to the start of pile driving, WSDOT will contact the Orca
Network and/or Center for Whale Research to get real-time information
on the presence or absence of whales before starting any pile driving.
6. Monitoring.
(a) Protected Species Observers.
WSDOT shall employ NMFS-approved PSOs to conduct marine mammal
monitoring for its construction project. NMFS-approved PSOs will meet
the following qualifications.
(i) Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are
required.
(ii) At least one observer must have prior experience working as an
observer.
(iii) Other observers may substitute education (undergraduate
degree in biological science or related field) or training for
experience.
(iv) Where a team of three or more observers are required, one
observer should be designated as lead observer or monitoring
coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an
observer.
(v) NMFS will require submission and approval of observer CVs.
(b) Monitoring Protocols: PSOs shall be present on site at all
times during pile removal and driving.
(i) A 30-minute pre-construction marine mammal monitoring will be
required before the first pile driving or pile removal of the day. A
30-minute post-construction marine mammal monitoring will be required
after the last pile driving or pile removal of the day. If the
constructors take a break between subsequent pile driving or pile
removal for more than 30 minutes, then additional 30-minute pre-
construction marine mammal monitoring will be required before the next
start-up of pile driving or pile removal.
(iii) Marine mammal visual monitoring will be conducted for
different ZOIs based on different sizes of piles being driven or
removed, as shown
[[Page 15513]]
in maps in WSDOT's Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan.
(A) During 14 inch timber pile removal, two land-based PSO will
monitor the exclusion zones and Level B harassment zone.
(B) During vibratory pile driving of 24 inch, 30 inch, and 36 inch
steel piles, 5 land-based PSOs and two vessel-based PSOs on ferries
will monitor the Level A and Level B harassment zones.
(C) During impact pile driving of 30 inch and 36 inch steel piles,
5 land-based PSOs and one vessel-based PSO on a ferry will monitor the
Level A and Level B harassment zones.
(iv) If marine mammals are observed, the following information will
be documented:
(A) Species of observed marine mammals;
(B) Number of observed marine mammal individuals;
(C) Behavior of observed marine mammals;
(D) Location within the ZOI; and
7. Reporting:
(a) WSDOT shall provide NMFS with a draft monitoring report within
90 days of the conclusion of the construction work or within 90 days of
the expiration of the IHA, whichever comes first. This report shall
detail the monitoring protocol, summarize the data recorded during
monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have
been harassed.
(b) If comments are received from NMFS Office of Protected
Resources on the draft report, a final report shall be submitted to
NMFS within 30 days thereafter. If no comments are received from NMFS,
the draft report will be considered to be the final report.
(c) In the unanticipated event that the construction activities
clearly cause the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by
this Authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury, or
mortality, WSDOT shall immediately cease all operations and immediately
report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the
West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinators. The report must include the
following information:
(i) Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
(ii) description of the incident;
(iii) status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding the
incident;
(iv) environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, sea
state, cloud cover, visibility, and water depth);
(v) description of marine mammal observations in the 24 hours
preceding the incident;
(vi) species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
(vii) the fate of the animal(s); and
(viii) photographs or video footage of the animal (if equipment is
available).
Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS shall work with WSDOT to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. WSDOT may not resume their
activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone.
(E) In the event that WSDOT discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than
a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph),
WSDOT will immediately report the incident to the Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinators.
The report must include the same information identified above.
Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the
incident. NMFS will work with WSDOT to determine whether modifications
in the activities are appropriate.
(F) In the event that WSDOT discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not
associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), WSDOT shall report the incident to
the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional
Stranding Coordinators, within 24 hours of the discovery. WSDOT shall
provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other
documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine
Mammal Stranding Network. WSDOT can continue its operations under such
a case.
8. This Authorization may be modified, suspended or withdrawn if
the holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if
NMFS determines the authorized taking is having more than a negligible
impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammals.
9. A copy of this Authorization must be in the possession of each
contractor who performs the construction work at the Seattle Colman
Dock.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses, the draft authorization, and
any other aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA for the WSDOT's Seattle
Multimodal project at Colman Dock. Please include with your comments
any supporting data or literature citations to help inform our final
decision on the request for MMPA authorization.
Dated: March 23, 2017.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-06096 Filed 3-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P