Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Dismantling of the Original East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, 26063-26079 [2017-11646]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
of exactly when the unit is transmitting
and is unable to alter the signal or the
time of transmission. The VMS unit is
passive and automatic, requiring no
reporting effort by the vessel operator. A
communications service provider
receives the transmission and relays it
to the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) Office of Law Enforcement and
the U.S. Coast Guard. Enforcement of
management measures, such as directed
fishing closures and critical habitat nofishing zones, relies heavily on the use
of VMS.
II. Method of Collection
Automatic GPS position reporting
starts after VMS transceiver installation
and power activation on board the
vessel. The unit is pre-configured and
tested for NMFS VMS operations. Vessel
operators who purchase and install a
VMS on a vessel must fax a one-time
VMS check-in report to NMFS.
Thereafter, submittal is automatic by
satellite.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 0648–0445.
Form Number(s): None.
Type of Review: Regular submission
(extension of a currently approved
collection).
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations; individuals or
households.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
83.
Estimated Time per Response: 12
minutes for VMS check-in report; 2
hours for VMS operation (includes
installation and maintenance).
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 130.
Estimated Total Annual Cost to
Public: $67,793 in recordkeeping/
reporting costs.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and/or
included in the request for OMB
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
approval of this information collection;
they also will become a matter of public
record.
Dated: June 1, 2017.
Sarah Brabson,
NOAA PRA Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017–11627 Filed 6–5–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XF411
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental
to Specified Activities; Dismantling of
the Original East Span of the San
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental
harassment authorization; request for
comments and information.
AGENCY:
NMFS has received a request
from the California Department of
Transportation (CALTRANS) for an
incidental take authorization to take
small numbers of six species of marine
mammals, by harassment, incidental to
the dismantling of the original East
Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge (SFOBB) in the San Francisco
Bay (SFB), California. Pursuant to the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments
on its proposal to issue an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to
incidentally take marine mammals
during the specified activities.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than July 6, 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, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and
electronic comments should be sent to
ITP.Youngkin@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
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26063
and will generally be posted online at
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/construction.htm without
change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.)
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: Dale
Youngkin, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
Electronic copies of the application and
supporting documents, as well as a list
of references cited in this document,
may be obtained 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, the incidental, but not
intentional, taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and either regulations are
issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, a notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public
for review.
An authorization for incidental
takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible
impact on the species or stock(s), will
not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of the species or
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible
methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of such takings are set
forth.
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact
resulting from the specified activity that
cannot be reasonably expected to, and is
not reasonably likely to, adversely affect
the species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
The MMPA states that the term ‘‘take’’
means to harass, hunt, capture, kill, or
attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill
any marine mammal.
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
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
26064
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
the potential to disturb a marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns
including, but not limited to, migration,
breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering (Level B harassment).
Summary of Request
On April 5, 2017, CALTRANS
submitted a request to NMFS for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to
the dismantling of the original East
Span of the SFOBB in the San Francisco
Bay. On May 1, 2017, NMFS deemed the
application adequate and complete.
CALTRANS requested authorization for
incidental take by harassment only and
NMFS concurs that mortality is not
expected to result from this activity.
NMFS is proposing to issue an IHA that
will authorize take by Level B
harassment of Pacific harbor seal,
California sea lion, northern elephant
seal, northern fur seal, harbor porpoise,
and bottlenose dolphin incidental to
CALTRANS’ activities. As described in
the Overview section, previous IHAs
have been issued to CALTRANS for
similar activities, specifically for the use
of mechanical dismantling and
controlled blasts to implode piers of the
original East Span of the SFOBB.
Description of the Specified Activity
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Overview
CALTRANS proposes removal of the
original East Span of the SFOBB by
mechanical dismantling and by use of
controlled charges to implode 13 piers
(Piers E6–E18) into their open cellular
chambers below the mudline. Activities
associated with dismantling the original
East Span may potentially result in
incidental take of marine mammals due
to the use of highly controlled charges
to dismantle the marine foundations of
the piers.
Several previous one-year IHAs have
been issued to CALTRANS for pile
driving/removal and construction of the
new SFOBB East Span beginning in
2003. NMFS has issued 10 IHAs to
CALTRANS for the SFOBB Project. The
first five IHAs (2003, 2005, 2007, 2009,
and 2011) addressed potential impacts
associated with pile driving for the
construction of the new East Span of the
SFOBB. IHAs issued in 2013, 2014 and
July 2015 addressed activities associated
with both constructing the new East
Span and dismantling the original East
Span, specifically addressing vibratory
pile driving, vibratory pile extraction/
removal, attenuated impact pile driving,
pile proof testing, and mechanical
dismantling of temporary and
permanent marine foundations. On
September 9, 2015, NMFS issued an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
IHA to CALTRANS for incidental take
associated with the demolition of Pier
E3 of the original SFOBB by highly
controlled explosives (80 FR 57584;
September 24, 2015). On September 30,
2016, NMFS issued an IHA authorizing
the incidental take of marine mammals
associated with both pile driving/
removal and controlled implosion of
Piers E4 and E5 (81 FR 67313).
CALTRANS is requesting this IHA to
continue dismantling the original East
Span of the SFOBB using mechanical
means as well as five to six implosion
events to dismantle 13 piers (Piers E6–
E18). CALTRANS does not anticipate
any further in-water pile installation or
pile removal for the SFOBB project, and
is not requesting coverage under this
IHA to conduct pile driving/removal
activities.
Dates and Duration
The demolition of Piers E6 through
E18 through controlled implosion are
planned to begin in September 2017.
Implosion events would consist of the
use of highly controlled charges to
implode 1 to 4 piers per event,
amounting to a total of 5 to 6 implosion
events to dismantle the 13 piers (Piers
E6–E18). CALTRANS is requesting
issuance of an IHA for a period of one
year. Therefore, an IHA, if issued,
would cover the period from September
1, 2017 through August 31, 2018.
Specified Geographic Region
The SFOBB project area is located in
the central San Francisco Bay (SFB or
Bay), between Yerba Buena Island (YBI)
and the city of Oakland. The western
limit of the project area is the east portal
of the YBI tunnel, located in the city of
San Francisco. The eastern limit of the
project area is located approximately
1,312 feet (ft) (400 meters (m)) west of
the Bay Bridge toll plaza, where the new
and former spans connect with land at
the Oakland Touchdown (OTD) in the
city of Oakland.
Detailed Description of the Specified
Activities
CALTRANS proposes the removal of
Piers E6 through E18 (13 piers) of the
original East Span by use of mechanical
dismantling and controlled charges to
implode each pier into its open cellular
chambers below the mudline. A Blast
Attenuation System (BAS) will be used
to minimize potential impacts on
biological resources in the Bay. Both
NMFS and CALTRANS believe that the
results from the 2015 Pier E3
Demonstration Project implosion, as
well as the results from the 2016
implosions of Piers E4 and E5, support
the use of controlled charges as a more
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
expedient method of removal that will
cause less environmental impact
compared to mechanical methods using
a dry (fully dewatered) cofferdam.
Piers E6 through E18 of the original
East Span are located between the OTD
area and YBI, and just south of the
SFOBB new East Span. These piers
consist of lightly reinforced concrete
cellular structures that are supported by
timber piles driven into the Bay mud
and occupy areas below the mudline,
within the water column, and above the
water line of the Bay. Unlike Piers E3,
E4, and E5, which were dismantled
using highly controlled charges
previously, Piers E6 through E18 do not
extend deep below the mudline. The
timber piles and concrete slabs that are
below approved removal limits will
remain in place. Piers E6, E7, and E8
supported the 504-ft bridge spans of the
original SFOBB. Pier E9 is located at the
connection point between the 504-ft
bridge spans and the 288-ft bridge
spans. Piers E10 through E18 supported
the original SFOBB 288-ft bridge spans.
The use of controlled charges would
greatly reduce in-water work periods
and shorten the overall duration of
marine foundation removal compared
with mechanical removal. Because of
the similar structures for each pier, each
would be removed following the same
five steps:
• Mechanical dismantling of the pier
cap and concrete pedestals;
• Drilling bore holes into the marine
foundation;
• Installing and testing the BAS;
• Installing charges, activating the
BAS, and imploding the pier; and
• Managing and removing remaining
dismantling debris.
Details of these steps are provided
below.
Mechanical Dismantling of Concrete
Pedestals and Pier Caps
For all piers, support barges will be
used to move hydraulic excavators
equipped with hoe rams, shearing
attachments, drills, saws, and other
equipment including cutting lances and
torches to be used during the
mechanical dismantling. A bargemounted crane will be used to move
equipment onto and off each pier.
For all piers, the concrete pedestals
and pier cap will be removed by
mechanical means using tools including
those listed above to break the concrete
structure to pieces. Concrete rubble and
rebar will be managed using excavators
and cranes that will be mounted with
buckets. Throughout concrete
dismantling operations on each pier,
support platforms will be installed to
provide a working surface for the
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
excavators to dismantle the upper
portion of the pier. The support
platforms will be made up of timber
crane mats. A debris catchment system,
accepted by the San Francisco Regional
Water Quality Control Board, will be in
place to contain concrete debris from
discharging into the Bay during
dismantling operations.
All concrete rubble from mechanical
dismantling of concrete pedestals will
be taken off-site for disposal. Rubble
will be loaded onto receiving barges to
be taken to Berth 9 in the Port of
Oakland to be sorted and disposed of at
an approved upland facility. The pier
caps covering the central chambers will
be dismantled last and will be broken
with a ram hoe. The broken pier caps
will remain in the hollow void during
the controlled blasting, and all other
mechanical dismantling activities
would occur above the waterline.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Drill Boreholes
After the mechanical dismantling
operations are complete, access
platforms will be installed on top of
each pier to support the drilling
equipment. The exposed interior cell
walls, buttress walls, and outside walls
will be drilled from the top down, to
remove concrete and create boreholes to
just below the controlled blasting
removal limit for each pier. Boreholes
that are drilled in areas that are
inundated with water (i.e., to the
buttress walls and concrete slabs) will
be done using a drill bit working within
a tubular casing for guidance and to
provide containment during in-water
work. Monitoring will be performed to
minimize and avoid impacts on water
quality during this activity.
Pier 9 has additional buttress walls
compared to other piers. Drilling holes
for buttress walls on Pier 9 will be done
by the same method that was used for
the buttress wall of Pier 3
(Demonstration Project). Divers will cut
notches into the buttress walls and will
install conduit to the work platform on
top of the pier. The drilling will be done
within the casings from the work
platform.
Blast Attenuation System (BAS)
Installation and Deployment
The BAS that will be used at Piers E6
to E 18 is the same system that was
successfully used for Piers E3
(Demonstration Project), E4, and E5. The
BAS is a modular system of pipe
manifold frames, placed around each
pier and fed by air compressors to create
a curtain of air. The BAS will be
activated before and during implosion.
As shown during previous implosions,
the BAS will help minimize noise and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
pressure waves generated during each
controlled blast, to minimize potentially
adverse effects on biological resources.
Each BAS frame is approximately 50.5
ft (15.4 m) long by 6 ft (1.8 m) wide. The
BAS to be used at Piers E6 through E18
will be same system that was used at
Piers E3, E4, and E5, and will meet the
same specifications.
To remove the 13 pier foundations of
Piers E6 through E18 in 2017, multiple
pier implosions may be performed on
the same day, sequentially. Smaller
piers will be combined into single blast
events. The implosion of each pier
within the blast events will be spaced 1
to 5 seconds apart. All pier implosion
events involving multiple piers will use
fewer explosives and will have shorter
blast durations than the previous
implosion of Pier E3. Up to 2 piers that
formerly supported either the 504-foot
spans of the bridge may be imploded on
the same day. Two to four small piers
(that formerly supported the 288-foot
spans) may be imploded on the same
day. A total of five to six pier implosion
events, consisting of the implosion of
one to four piers per event, may be
required. An individual BAS will be
installed around each pier included in
a multiple-pier implosion event.
The complete BAS will be installed
and tested during the weeks leading up
to each controlled blast. Before
installing the BAS, CALTRANS will
move any existing debris on the Bay
floor that may interrupt proper
installation of the BAS. Existing debris
identified as a risk to proper installation
of the BAS will be moved outside the
path of the BAS layout. Each BAS frame
will be lowered to the bottom of the Bay
by a barge-mounted crane and
positioned into place. Divers will be
used to assist frame placement, and to
connect air hoses to the frames. Frames
will be situated to contiguously
surround the pier. Each frame will be
weighted to negative buoyancy for
activation. Compressors will provide
enough pressure to achieve a minimal
air volume fraction of three to four
percent, consistent with the successful
use of BAS systems in past controlled
blasting activities, including Pier E3
(CALTRANS 2016 and CALTRANS
2017). System performance is
anticipated to provide 70 to 80 percent
sound and pressure attenuation, based
on the results from the previous
controlled blasting activities
(CALTRANS 2016, 2017).
Test Blasts
At the beginning of the implosion
season, test blasts will be conducted
within the completely installed and
operating BAS so that the hydroacoustic
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26065
monitoring equipment will be properly
triggered and functional before each pier
implosion event. A key requirement of
the implosion involves accurately
capturing hydroacoustic information
from the controlled blast. To accomplish
this, a smaller test charge will be used
to trigger recording instrumentation.
Multiple test blast events may be
required to verify proper instrument
operation and calibrate the equipment
for the implosion event. These same
instruments and others of the same type
will use high-speed recording devices to
capture hydroacoustic data at both nearfield and far-field monitoring locations
during the implosion.
Test charges will be scheduled to
occur within two weeks of the first
implosion scheduled for the implosion
season and after the BAS is positioned
into place and is functional. Additional
test blasts may be needed prior to
subsequent implosion events to ensure
triggering of the data acquisition and
recording instruments as well as
calibration of the equipment. The BAS
will be operational during all tests.
Tests will use a charge weight of
approximately 18 grains (0.0025 pound)
or less. The test charge will be placed
along one of the longer faces of the pier
and inside the BAS while it is operating.
Results from test blasts that occurred
during the Piers E3–E5 indicate that
these test blasts did not reach or exceed
marine mammal threshold criteria
beyond the bubble flux of the BAS (See
Appendix A of the IHA application and
CALTRANS 2016). Therefore, no take of
marine mammals is anticipated due to
test blasts.
Controlled Implosion of Piers E6
Through E18
Before pier removal via controlled
blasting, the bore holes in the pier will
be loaded with controlled charges.
Individual cartridge charges, using
electronic blasting caps versus
pumpable liquid blasting agents, have
been selected to provide greater control
and accuracy in determining the
individual and total charge weights. Use
of individual cartridges will allow a
refined blast plan that efficiently breaks
concrete while minimizing the amount
of charges needed.
Boreholes will vary in diameter and
depth, and have been designed to
provide optimal efficiency in
transferring the energy created by the
controlled charges to dismantle the pier.
Individual charge weights will vary
from 20 to 35 pounds (lbs) (9 to 16
kilograms (kg)), and the total charge
weight for each controlled blast event
will be approximately 2,132 to 15,800
lbs (967 to 7,167 kg). Depending on the
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
26066
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
location, size, and removal limit of the
pier to be removed, the total number of
individual charges to be used will range
from approximately 100 to 455. The
charges will be arranged in different
levels (decks) and will be separated in
boreholes by stemming, which is the
insertion of inert materials (e.g., sand or
gravel) to insulate and retain charges in
an enclosed space. Stemming will allow
more efficient transfer of energy into the
structural concrete for fracture, and will
further reduce the release of potential
energy into the surrounding water
column. The entire detonation
sequence, consisting of approximately
100 to 455 detonations, will last
approximately 1 to 4 seconds for each
pier with a minimum delay time of 9
milliseconds (msec) between
detonations.
Controlled blasting of Pier E6 will
remove concrete by blasting down
through the concrete slab and top 3 ft (1
m) of the concrete seal. Controlled
blasting of Pier E7 will remove concrete
by blasting down through the concrete
slab but not the concrete seal.
Controlled blasting of Piers E8 through
E18 will remove concrete by blasting
down through the concrete cellular
structure, but not through the concrete
slab, seal, and timber piles below. For
Pier E6, site conditions will require the
pier to be blasted further into the
structure to remove the upper 3 ft (1 m)
of the concrete seal and remove the
structure to the approved removal
elevation. Remaining concrete seals and
timber piles below the mudline will not
be removed.
As stated above, to remove the 13
marine foundations of Piers E6 through
E18 in the 2017 season, multiple pier
implosions may be performed on the
same day, sequentially. Smaller piers
will be combined into single blast
events. All pier implosion events
involving multiple piers will use fewer
explosives and will have a shorter total
blast duration than the previous
implosion of Pier E3.
Debris Removal and Site Restoration
Following the controlled implosion
event and confirmation that the area is
safe to work in, construction crews will
begin to remove all associated
equipment, including barges,
compressors, the BAS, and blast mats.
CALTRANS expects that a small portion
of rubble from each pier will fall outside
its respective footprint and/or mound
within the footprint of each pier, and
will need to be managed after each
controlled implosion. The portions of
each pier that do not break apart during
controlled blasting and remain above
the removal limits will be demolished
by mechanical means. This may require
the use of underwater mechanical
equipment, including hydraulic
crushing or grinding machinery or
diver-operated jackhammers.
Rubble from the controlled implosion
of Piers E6 through E18 will be removed
down to each pier’s respective planned
debris removal limit elevation by bargemounted crane with a clamming bucket.
The clamming bucket will be equipped
with a GPS unit to accurately guide the
movement of the bucket during
underwater operation. The planned
debris removal limit elevations are
shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1—APPROXIMATE MUDLINE AND REMOVAL ELEVATIONS OF SFOBB ORIGINAL EAST SPAN MARINE FOUNDATIONS
Mudline
elevation
(feet)
Pier
¥40.0
¥28.0
¥19.0
¥17.5
¥18.0
¥14.0
¥14.0
¥14.0
¥15.0
¥12.5
¥12.5
¥12.5
¥12.5
E6 .................................................................................................................................................
E7 .................................................................................................................................................
E8 .................................................................................................................................................
E9 .................................................................................................................................................
E10 ...............................................................................................................................................
E11 ...............................................................................................................................................
E12 ...............................................................................................................................................
E13 ...............................................................................................................................................
E14 ...............................................................................................................................................
E15 ...............................................................................................................................................
E16 ...............................................................................................................................................
E17 ...............................................................................................................................................
E18 ...............................................................................................................................................
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures are described in
detail later in this document (please see
‘‘Proposed Mitigation’’ and ‘‘Proposed
Monitoring and Reporting’’).
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
Seven species, representing seven
stocks, of marine mammals may be
affected by the SFOBB project. The two
most common species observed are the
Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina
richardii) and the California sea lion
(Zalophus californianus). Juvenile
northern elephant seals (Mirounga
angustirostris) seasonally enter the Bay
(spring and fall), while harbor porpoises
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
(Phocoena phocoena) may enter the
western side of the Bay throughout the
year, but rarely occur near the SFOBB
east span. Gray whales (Eschrichtius
robustus) may enter the Bay during their
northward migration in the late winter
and spring, but are unlikely to occur
near the project area during September,
October, and November when pier
implosions would take place. Therefore,
no take of gray whales from the
proposed pier implosions was
requested, and NMFS is not proposing
to authorize take of gray whales. In
addition, though rare, northern fur seals
(Callorhinus ursinus) and bottlenose
dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) have also
been sighted in the Bay. None of these
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Required
removal
elevation
(1.5 ft below
mudline; ft)
¥41.5
¥29.5
¥20.5
¥19.0
¥19.5
¥15.5
¥15.5
¥15.5
¥16.5
¥14.0
¥14.0
¥14.0
¥14.0
Planned
removal limits
(3 ft below
mudline; ft)
¥43.0
¥31.0
¥22.0
¥20.5
¥21.0
¥17.0
¥17.0
¥17.0
¥18.0
¥15.5
¥15.5
¥15.5
¥15.5
species are listed as endangered or
threatened under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), or as depleted or a
strategic stock under the MMPA.
We have reviewed CALTRANS’
species information, which summarizes
available information regarding status
and trends, distribution, and habitat
preferences, behavior and life history,
and auditory capabilities of the
potentially affected species, for accuracy
and completeness. We refer the reader
to Chapters 3 and 4 of the CALTRANS
IHA application as well as to NMFS’
Stock Assessment Reports (SR;
www.nmgs.noaa/.gov/pr/sars/), for
detailed information. Additional general
information about these species and
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
26067
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
stocks (e.g., physical and behavioral
descriptions) may be found on NMFS’
Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
species/mammals/). Table 2 lists all
species and stocks with potential for
occurrence in the San Francisco Bay
and summarizes information related to
the species or stock, including potential
biological removal (PBR). For taxonomy,
we follow Committee on Taxonomy
(2016). PBR is defined by the MMPA as
the maximum number of animals, not
including natural mortalities, that may
be removed from a marine mammal
stock while allowing that stock to reach
or maintain its optimum sustainable
population. PBR is considered in
concert with the known sources of
ongoing anthropogenic mortality to
assess the population-level effects of the
anticipated mortality from a specific
project (as described in NMFS’s SARs).
While no mortality is anticipated or
authorized here, PBR information is
included here as a gross indicator of the
status of the species and other threats.
Gray whales are a species that could
potentially occur in the proposed survey
area but are not expected to have
reasonable potential to be harassed by
CALTRANS’ SFOBB actions because
they are unlikely to occur in the project
area, as discussed above. This species is
included in Table 2 but is omitted from
further analysis. For species status, we
provide information regarding U.S.
regulatory status under the MMPA and
ESA in Table 2.
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN REGION OF ACTIVITY
ESA/
MMPA
status
Common name
Scientific name
Harbor seal (CA stock) ..................
California sea lion (US stock) ........
Northern fur seal (CA stock) .........
Northern elephant seal (CA breeding stock).
Gray whale (Eastern north Pacific
stock).
Phoca vitulina richardii ...............
Zalophus californianus ................
Callorhinus ursinus .....................
Mirounga angustirostris ..............
NL/ND
NL/ND
NL/ND
NL/ND
Harbor
porpoise
(SF-Russian
River stock).
Coastal Bottlenose dolphin (CA
coastal stock).
Range
Potential
biological
removal
(PBR)
Stock
abundance
Occurrence
Seasonality
.....
.....
.....
.....
Common ....
Common ....
Rare ...........
Occasional
Year round ......
Year round ......
Year round ......
Spring & fall .....
California
California
California
California
...........
...........
...........
...........
30,968
296,750
12,844
179,000
1,641
9,200
451
4,882
Eschrichtius robustus .................
NL*/ND ...
Rare ...........
Spring & fall .....
20,990
624
Phocoena phocoena ...................
NL/ND .....
Rare ...........
Year round ......
Mexico to the
U.S. Arctic
Ocean.
California ...........
9,886
66
Tursiops truncatus ......................
NL/ND .....
Rare ...........
Year round ......
California ...........
323
2.4
NL = Not Listed; * The E. North Pacific population is not listed under the ESA.; ND = Not Depleted under the MMPA.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section includes a summary and
discussion of the ways that the specified
activity may impact marine mammals
and their habitat. The ‘‘Estimated Take
by Incidental Harassment’’ section later
in this document will include a
quantitative analysis of the number of
individuals that are expected to be taken
by this activity. The ‘‘Negligible Impact
Analysis and Determination’’ section
will consider the context of this section,
the ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment’’ section, and the ‘‘Proposed
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. In August 2016,
NMFS released its Technical Guidance
for Assessing the Effects of
Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (NMFS 2016 Acoustic
Technical Guidance). Under the NMFS
2016 Acoustic Technical Guidance,
there are five marine mammal hearing
group categories, with associated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
generalized hearing ranges as shown in
Table 3 (note that animals are less
sensitive to sounds at the outer edge of
their generalized hearing range and
most sensitive to sounds of frequencies
within a smaller range somewhere in
the middle of their functional hearing
range).
TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING
GROUPS (NMFS, 2016)
Generalized
hearing
range 1
Hearing group
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans
(baleen whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans
(dolphins, toothed whales,
beaked whales, bottlenose
whales).
High-frequency (HF)
cetaceans (true porpoises,
Kogia, river dolphins,
cephalorhynchid,
Lagenorhynchus cruciger &
L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds underwater
(PW) (true seals).
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7 Hz to 35
kHz.
150 Hz to
160 kHz.
275 Hz to
160 kHz.
50 Hz to 86
kHz.
TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING
GROUPS (NMFS, 2016)—Continued
Hearing group
Otariid pinnipeds underwater
(OW) (sea lions and fur
seals).
Generalized
hearing
range 1
60 Hz to 39
kHz.
1 Represents the generalized hearing range
for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all
species within the group), where individual
species’ hearing ranges are typically not as
broad. Generalized hearing range chosen
based on ∼65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for
lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al.
2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
As mentioned previously, six marine
mammal species (two cetacean and four
pinniped species) are likely to be
incidentally taken by the proposed
SFOBB controlled pier implosions. Of
the two cetacean species, one belongs to
the MF cetacean (bottlenose dolphin)
hearing group, and one to the HF
cetacean hearing group (harbor
porpoise). Two species of pinniped are
phocid (Pacific harbor seal and northern
elephant seal), and two species of
pinniped are otariid (California sea lion
and northern fur seal). A species’
hearing group is a consideration when
we analyze the effects of exposure to
sound on marine mammals.
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
26068
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
General Information on Potential Effects
Explosives are impulsive sounds,
which are characterized by short
duration, abrupt onset, and rapid decay.
The proposed CALTRANS SFOBB work
using controlled charges (i.e., implosion
events) could adversely affect marine
mammal species and stocks by exposing
them to elevated noise levels in the
vicinity of the activity area. Based on
the nature of the other activities
associated with the dismantling of Piers
E6 through E18 of the original SFOBB
East Span (mechanical dismantling) and
measured sound levels from those
activities during past monitoring
associated with previous IHAs, NMFS
does not expect activities other than
implosion events to contribute to
underwater noise levels such that take
of marine mammals would potentially
occur.
Exposure to high intensity sound for
a sufficient duration may result in
behavioral reactions and 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).
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
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 kilohertz (kHz)),
and can be of varying amounts (for
example, an animal’s hearing sensitivity
might be reduced initially by only 6
decibel (dB) or reduced by 30 dB). PTS
is a permanent loss within a specific
frequency range, but some recovery is
possible.
For cetaceans, 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).
Based on the best available scientific
data, NMFS’ 2016 Technical Guidance
for Assessing the Effects of
Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing includes acoustic
thresholds related to PTS and TTS for
impulsive sounds that are expressed as
weighted, cumulative sound exposure
levels (SELcum) and unweighted peak
sound pressure levels (SPLPK), as
presented in Table 4.
TABLE 4—NMFS TAKE THRESHOLDS FOR MARINE MAMMALS FROM UNDERWATER IMPLOSIONS
Level B harassment
Group
Species
Behavioral
TTS
Level A
harassment
Serious injury
Mortality
Gastrointestinal tract
PTS
Lung
Mid-freq cetacean ..
Bottlenose dolphin.
165 dB SEL
170 dB SEL
or 224 dB
SPLpk.
185 dB SEL
or 230 dB
SPLpk.
237 dB SPL ..
High-freq cetacean
Harbor porpoise
135 dB SEL
.......................
Phocidae ................
Harbor seal &
northern elephant seal.
California sea
lion & northern fur seal.
165 dB SEL
155 dB SEL
140 dB SEL
or 202 dB
or 196 dB
SPLpk.
SPLpk.
185 dB SEL
170 dB SEL
or 218 dB
or 212 dB
SPLpk.
SPLpk.
203 dB SEL
188 dB SEL
or 232 dB
or 226 dBpk.
SPLpk.
39.1M1/3 (1+[D/10.081])1/2
Pa-sec. where: M =
mass of the animals in
kg. D = depth of animal
in m..
............................................
.......................
............................................
.......................
............................................
Otariidae .................
183 dB SEL
91.4M1/3 (1+[D/10.081])1/2
Pa-sec. where: M =
mass of the animals in
kg. D = depth of animal
in m.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Note: All dB values are referenced to 1 μPa. SPLpk = Peak sound pressure level; psi = pounds per square inch.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:18 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 occurs when other noises, such
as those 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
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
whose acoustical sensors or
environment are being severely masked
could also be impaired from maximizing
their performance fitness in survival
and reproduction.
Masking occurs at the frequency band
which the animals utilize. 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 3 times in terms of sound pressure
level) in the world’s ocean from preindustrial periods, and most of these
increases are from distant shipping
(Hildebrand 2009). For CALTRANS’
proposed SFOBB construction activities,
noises from controlled blasting is not
likely to contribute to the elevated
ambient noise levels in the project area
in such a way as to increasing potential
for or severity of masking. Baseline
ambient noise levels in the Bay are very
high due to ongoing shipping,
construction and other activities in the
Bay, and the sound associated with the
controlled blasting activities would be
very brief.
Finally, exposure of marine mammals
to certain sounds could lead to
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et
al., 1995), such as: Changing durations
of surfacing and dives, number of blows
per surfacing, or moving direction and/
or speed; reduced/increased vocal
activities; changing/cessation of certain
behavioral activities (such as socializing
or feeding); visible startle response or
aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke
slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located;
and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds
flushing into water from haulouts or
rookeries).
The 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
difficult to predict (Southall et al.,
2007). For impulse noises (such as the
proposed controlled implosions
associated with the dismantling of the
original SFOBB spans), NMFS uses
received levels of 165 dB SEL to predict
the onset of behavioral harassment for
mid-frequency cetaceans and phocid
pinnipeds (bottlenose dolphins and
harbor seals and northern elephant
seals, respectively); 135 dB SEP for
high-frequency cetaceans (harbor
porpoises); and 183 dB SEL for otariid
pinnipeds (California sea lions and
northern fur seals).
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
significant if the change affects growth,
survival, and/or reproduction, which
depends on the severity, duration, and
context of the effects.
Potential Effects From Controlled Pier
Implosion
It is expected that an intense impulse
from the proposed controlled blasting of
Piers E6 through E18 would have the
potential to impact marine mammals in
the vicinity of the activity. The majority
of impacts would be startle behavioral
responses and temporary behavioral
modification of marine mammals.
However, a few individual animals
could be exposed to sound levels that
would cause TTS.
The underwater explosion would
send a shock wave and blast noise
through the water, release gaseous byproducts, create an oscillating bubble,
and cause a plume of water to shoot up
from the water surface. The shock wave
and blast noise are of most concern to
marine animals. The effects of an
underwater explosion on a marine
mammal depends on many factors,
including the size, type, and depth of
both the animal and the explosive
charge; the depth of the water column;
and the standoff distance between the
charge and the animal, as well as the
sound propagation properties of the
environment. Potential impacts can
range from brief effects (such as
behavioral disturbance), tactile
perception, physical discomfort, slight
injury of the internal organs and the
auditory system, to death of the animal
(Yelverton et al., 1973; DoN, 2001).
Non-lethal injury includes slight injury
to internal organs and the auditory
system; however, delayed lethality can
be a result of individual or cumulative
sublethal injuries (DoN, 2001).
Immediate lethal injury would be a
result of massive combined trauma to
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26069
internal organs as a direct result of
proximity to the point of detonation
(DoN, 2001). Generally, the higher the
level of impulse and pressure level
exposure, the more severe the impact to
an individual.
Injuries resulting from a shock wave
take place at boundaries between tissues
of different density. Different velocities
are imparted to tissues of different
densities, and this can lead to their
physical disruption. Blast effects are
greatest at the gas-liquid interface
(Landsberg 2000). Gas-containing
organs, particularly the lungs and
gastrointestinal (GI) tract, are especially
susceptible (Goertner 1982; Hill 1978;
Yelverton et al., 1973). In addition, gascontaining organs including the nasal
sacs, larynx, pharynx, trachea, and
lungs may be damaged by compression/
expansion caused by the oscillations of
the blast gas bubble. Intestinal walls can
bruise or rupture, with subsequent
hemorrhage and escape of gut contents
into the body cavity. Less severe
gastrointestinal tract injuries include
contusions, petechiae (small red or
purple spots caused by bleeding in the
skin), and slight hemorrhaging
(Yelverton et al., 1973).
Because the ears are the most
sensitive to pressure, they are the organs
most sensitive to injury (Ketten 2000).
Sound-related damage associated with
blast noise can be theoretically distinct
from injury from the shock wave,
particularly farther from the explosion.
If an animal is able to hear a noise, at
some level it can damage its hearing by
causing decreased sensitivity (Ketten
1995). Sound-related trauma can be
lethal or sublethal. Lethal impacts are
those that result in immediate death or
serious debilitation in or near an intense
source and are not, technically, pure
acoustic trauma (Ketten 1995). Sublethal
impacts include hearing loss, which is
caused by exposures to perceptible
sounds. Severe damage (from the shock
wave) to the ears includes tympanic
membrane rupture, fracture of the
ossicles, damage to the cochlea,
hemorrhage, and cerebrospinal fluid
leakage into the middle ear. Moderate
injury implies partial hearing loss due
to tympanic membrane rupture and
blood in the middle ear. Permanent
hearing loss also can occur when the
hair cells are damaged by one very loud
event, as well as by prolonged exposure
to a loud noise or chronic exposure to
noise. The level of impact from blasts
depends on both an animal’s location
and, at outer zones, on its sensitivity to
the residual noise (Ketten, 1995).
The above discussion concerning
underwater explosions only pertains to
open water detonations in a free field.
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
26070
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
CALTRANS’ demolition of Piers E6
through E18 using controlled implosion
uses a confined detonation method,
meaning that the charges would be
placed within the structure. Therefore,
most energy from the explosive shock
wave would be absorbed through the
destruction of the structure itself, and
would not propagate through the open
water. Measurements and modeling
from confined underwater detonation
for structure removal showed that
energy from shock waves and noise
impulses were greatly reduced in the
water column compared to expected
levels from open water detonations
(Hempen et al., 2007; CALTRANS
2016). Therefore, with monitoring and
mitigation measures discussed below,
CALTRANS’ controlled implosions of
Piers E6 through E18 are not likely to
have injury or mortality effects on
marine mammals in the project vicinity.
Instead, NMFS considers that
CALTRANS’ proposed controlled
implosions in the San Francisco Bay are
most likely to cause behavioral
harassment and may cause TTS in a few
individual of marine mammals, as
discussed below.
Changes in marine mammal behavior
are expected to result from acute stress,
or startle, responses. This expectation is
based on the idea that some sort of
physiological trigger must exist to
change any behavior that is already
being performed, and this may occur
due to being startled by the implosion
events. The exception to this
expectation is the case of behavioral
changes due to auditory masking
(increasing call rates or volumes to
counteract increased ambient noise).
Masking is not likely since the
CALTRANS’ controlled implosion
would only consist of five to six short,
sequential detonations that last for
approximately 3–4 seconds each.
The removal of the SFOBB East Span
is not likely to negatively affect the
habitat of marine mammal populations
because no permanent loss of habitat
will occur, and only a minor, temporary
modification of habitat will occur due to
the addition of sound and activity
associated with the dismantling
activities.
Project activities will not affect any
pinniped haul-out sites or pupping
sites. The YBI harbor seal haul-out site
is on the opposite site of the island from
the SFOBB Project area. Because of the
distance and the island blocking the
sound, underwater noise and pressure
levels from the SFOBB Project will not
reach the haul-out site. Other haul-out
sites for sea lions and harbor seals are
at a sufficient distance from the SFOBB
Project area that they will not be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
affected. The closest recognized harbor
seal pupping site is at Castro Rocks,
approximately 8.7 miles (mi) (14
kilometers (km)) from the SFOBB
Project area. No sea lion rookeries are
found in the Bay.
The addition of underwater sound
from SFOBB Project activities to
background noise levels can constitute a
potential cumulative impact on marine
mammals. However, these potential
cumulative noise impacts will be short
in duration and would not occur in
biologically important areas, would not
significantly affect biologically
important activities, and are not
expected to have significant
environmental effects, as noted in the
original FHWA 2001 FEIS for the
SFOBB project, incorporated by
reference into NMFS’ 2003 EA and
subsequent Supplemental EAs (2009
and 2015) for the issuance of IHAs for
the SFOBB project.
SPLs from pier implosions have the
potential to injure or kill fish in the
immediate area. During previous pier
implosion and pile driving activities,
CALTRANS reported mortality to prey
species of marine mammals, including
northern anchovies and Pacific herring
(CALTRANS 2016), averaging
approximately 200 fish per implosion
event (none of which were ESA-listed
species and none of which are managed
under a Fishery Management Plan).
These few isolated fish mortality events
are not anticipated to have a substantial
effect on prey species populations or
their availability as a food resource for
marine mammals.
Studies on explosives also suggest
that larger fish are generally less
susceptible to death or injury than small
fish, and results of most studies are
dependent upon specific biological,
environmental, explosive, and data
recording factors. For example,
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; and finally, open water pelagic
fish, such as those expected to be in the
project area, seem to be less affected
than reef fishes.
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 CALTRANS’
controlled implosion events will likely
be insignificant to the population as a
whole.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of
the number of incidental takes proposed
for authorization through an IHA, which
will inform both NMFS’ consideration
of whether the number of takes is
‘‘small’’ and the negligible impact
determination.
Harassment is the only type 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).
Authorized takes would be by Level B
harassment only, in the form of
disruption of behavioral patterns and/or
TTS for individual marine mammals
resulting from exposure to noise from
the controlled implosions of 13 piers of
the original East Span of the SFOBB.
Based on the nature of activity and past
results from controlled implosions of
Piers E3, E4, and E5, Level A
harassment is neither anticipated nor
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 for this
activity. Below we describe how the
take is estimated.
The distance to marine mammal
threshold criteria for implosion
activities, and corresponding zones of
influence (ZOI) have been determined
based on underwater sound and
pressure measurements collected during
previous activities in the SFOBB Project
area. The numbers of marine mammals
by stock that may be taken by each type
of take were calculated based on
distance to the marine mammal
threshold criteria, duration of the
activity, and the estimated density of
each stock in the ZOI. NMFS worked
with CALTRANS and adjusted those
estimated numbers upwards based on
past monitoring data and/or other
sightings data in the San Francisco Bay
area to come up with a maximum
number of potential occurrences for the
requested takes, given that the number
of marine mammals in the area is highly
variable.
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
Estimates of Species Densities of Marine
Mammals
No systematic line transect surveys of
marine mammals have been performed
in the San Francisco Bay. Therefore, the
in-water densities of harbor seals,
California sea lions, and harbor
porpoises were calculated based on
marine mammal monitoring conducted
intermittently from 2000 to 2016 during
observations made during monitoring
for the SFOBB construction and
demolition activities. The amount of
monitoring performed per year varied
depending on the frequency and
duration of construction activities with
the potential to affect marine mammals.
During the 251 days of monitoring from
2000 through 2016 (including 15 days of
baseline monitoring in 2003), 958
harbor seals, 80 California sea lions, and
9 harbor porpoises were observed
within the waters of the SFOBB east
span (CLATRANS, 2001, 2004, 2013,
2014, 2015, 2016, 2017). Northern
elephant seal density in the project area
was calculated from stranding records of
the Marine Mammal Center (MMC). Too
few observations or strandings of
northern fur seals have occurred to
determine density estimates. However,
take estimates for northern fur seals
were made based on stranding data,
which was provided by the MMC.
Similarly, too few observations of
26071
bottlenose dolphins have occurred to
determine density estimates.
Observations of bottlenose dolphins are
primarily west of Treasure Island and
concentrated along the nearshore areas
of San Francisco south to Redwood City.
One individual has been observed near
Alameda and is thought to have likely
passed by the project area, but no other
reports of bottlenose dolphins exist in
the project area. Therefore, bottlenose
dolphin takes are based on the
possibility of a few individuals
potentially passing by the project area.
Table 5 provides the estimated in-water
densities used for calculating take of
marine mammals in the SFOBB project
area.
TABLE 5—ESTIMATED IN-WATER DENSITIES OF MARINE MAMMALS IN THE SFOBB PROJECT AREA
Species
Pacific Harbor seal (2015–2016) ........................
Northern elephant seal .......................................
California sea lion ...............................................
Northern fur seal ................................................
Bottlenose dolphin ..............................................
Harbor porpoise ..................................................
Fall–Winter .......................................................
Late Spring–Early Winter .................................
Late Summer–Fall (post breeding season) .....
Late Fall–Early Spring .....................................
Year Round ......................................................
Year Round ......................................................
Density
(animals/km2)
Main season of occurrence
4.1
0.03
0.09
Insufficient data.
Insufficient data.
0.21
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Notes: Pacific harbor seal, California sea lion, and harbor porpoise densities based on monitoring for the east span of SFOBB from 2000 to
2016. Elephant seal densities estimated from sighting and stranding data from MMC; A second set of Pacific harbor seal densities were estimated based on increases of sightings recorded during 2015–2016 monitoring; Insufficient sighting data exist to estimate bottlenose dolphin density. However, a single animal has been regularly observed near the SFOBB east span; Insufficient sighting data exist to estimate northern fur
seal densities in the Bay. Approximately 2–4 strandings occur in the entire Bay per year (unlikely to occur in the SFOBB project area).
1. Pacific Harbor Seal Density Estimates
Most data on harbor seal populations
are collected while the seals are hauled
out because they are much easier to
count when they are out of the water.
In-water density estimates rely on haulout counts, the percentage of seals not
on shore based on radio telemetry
studies, and the size of the foraging
range of the population. Harbor seal
density in the water can vary greatly
depending on weather conditions or the
availability of prey. For example, during
Pacific herring runs further north in the
Bay in February 2014 (outside of the
hydroacoustic zone for Piers E6 to E18),
very few harbor seals were observed
foraging near YBI or transiting through
the project area for approximately two
weeks. Sightings went from a high of 27
harbor seals in one day to no seals
observed (CALTRANS 2014). In 2015
and 2016, the number of harbor seals
sighted in the project area increased up
to 41 seals per day (CALTRANS 2015
and 2016).
Calculated harbor seal density for the
proposed project is a per day estimate
of harbor seals in a 1 square kilometer
(km2) during the fall/winter or spring/
summer season. Harbor seal density was
calculated from all observations during
the SFOBB project monitoring from
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
2000 to 2016, with a second set of
density estimates for 2015–2016 to
account for an increase in daily harbor
seal observations during monitoring in
the fall of these years. Although
multiple density estimates were
calculated for harbor seals, the highest
density (4.1/km2) was used to calculate
estimated take to be conservative.
2. California Sea Lion Density Estimates
Within the SFOBB Project area,
California sea lion density was
calculated from all observations of
animals in the water during SFOBB
Project monitoring from 2000 to 2016.
These observations included data from
baseline, pre, during, and post-pile
driving, mechanical dismantling,
onshore blasting, and offshore
implosion activities. All sea lion
observations within a 1 km2 area were
used in the estimate. Distances were
recorded using a laser range finder
(Bushnell Yardage Pro Elite 1500; ± 1.0
yard accuracy). Care was taken to
eliminate multiple observations of the
same animal, although most sea lion
observations involve a single animal.
Calculated California sea lion density
was a per day estimate of sea lions in
1 km2 during the fall/winter or spring/
summer season in Table 4. The highest
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
density value (0.09/km2) was used to
calculate estimated take in order to be
conservative.
3. Northern Elephant Seal Density
Estimates
Northern elephant seal density in the
project area was calculated from the
stranding records of the MMC, from
2004 to 2014. These data included both
injured or sick seals and healthy seals.
Approximately 100 elephant seals were
reported in the Bay during this time;
most of these hauled out and likely were
sick or starving. The actual number of
individuals in the Bay may have been
higher because not all individuals
would necessarily have hauled out.
Some individuals may have simply left
the Bay soon after entering because the
Bay is not a usual haul-out area for
elephant seals. Data from the MMC
show several elephant seals stranding
on Treasure Island, and one healthy
elephant seal was observed resting on
the beach in Clipper Cove in 2012.
Elephant seal pups or juveniles also
may have stranded after weaning in the
spring and when they returned to
California in the fall (September through
November). The density estimate of 0.03
animals/km2 was conservatively
estimated for the entire San Francisco
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
26072
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
Bay based on stranding data over the 10year period from 2004–2014, and
adjusting to account for the time period
of the proposed SFOBB activities.
However, to be conservative, the actual
number of takes requested was not
based on the calculated takes using the
density estimate. Instead, take estimates
were requested based on qualitative
worst-case (and unlikely) estimates
assuming six implosion events may
occur and assuming presence of three
northern elephant seals at half (three) of
the implosion events.
4. Northern Fur Seal
Too few observations or strandings of
northern fur seals have occurred to
determine densities. Juveniles of this
species occasionally strand in San
Francisco Bay, particularly during El
Nino events. During the 2016 El Nino
event, northern fur seal juveniles were
observed and stranded inside San
Francisco Bay more frequently but were
still not considered common. The MMC
reported rescuing more than 80 stranded
northern fur seal pups in 2015 and
2016, but only two to four northern fur
seal strandings occurred in the Bay.
That number is likely to decrease
because the El Nino and warm water
blob that affected the species’ food
resources has dissipated. Requested take
was based on qualitative worst-case
(and unlikely) estimates assuming six
implosion events may occur and
assuming presence of three northern fur
seals at half (three) of the implosion
events.
5. Common Bottlenose Dolphin Density
Estimates
Too few observations of bottlenose
dolphins have occurred to determine
density. Observations of bottlenose
dolphins primarily have occurred west
of Treasure Island and were
concentrated along the nearshore area of
San Francisco south to Redwood City.
One individual has been observed
regularly near Alameda and likely
passed by the project area, but no other
reports of bottlenose dolphins exist in
the project area (Perlman 2017).
Requested take was based on qualitative
worst-case (and unlikely) estimates
assuming six implosion events may
occur and assuming presence of three
bottlenose dolphins at half (three) of the
implosion events.
6. Harbor Porpoise Density Estimates
Harbor porpoise density was
calculated from all observations during
SFOBB Project monitoring, from 2000 to
2016. These observations included data
from baseline, pre, during and post-pile
driving, and onshore implosion
activities. Over this period, the number
of harbor porpoises that were observed
entering and using the Bay increased.
During the 16 years of monitoring in the
SFOBB Project area, only 9 harbor
porpoises were observed, and all
occurred between 2006 and 2015
(including two in 2014 and 5 in 2015).
Based on this data, a density estimate of
0.21 animals/km2 was used to calculate
estimated take.
Distance Calculations for Marine
Mammal Threshold Criteria and
Corresponding Zones of Influence (ZOI)
Utilizing the marine mammal
threshold criteria from NMFS’ 2016
Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on
Marine Mammal Hearing (NMFS 2016),
presented in Table 4, distances to these
threshold criteria were calculated using
the results from previous hydroacoustic
monitoring associated with the
implosions of Piers E3, E4, and E5. In
addition, the criteria for lung injury and
mortality to marine mammals is
dependent on the mass of the animal
and depth of the animal in the water
column. Animals that are smaller in
mass are more susceptible to injury from
impulse pressures from blasting, so the
mass of juveniles (6 to 16 months old)
from each species was used in the
calculations because these would be the
smallest animals potentially exposed.
As Piers E6 through E18 are in water
that ranges from 10 to 40 ft (3 to 12 m),
and due to the fact that the species that
may be present in the project area
surface frequently, and average depth of
20 ft (6 m) was used in the threshold
calculations for lung injury and
mortality.
Distances to marine mammal
threshold criteria were calculated for
each of the potential pier implosion
scenarios:
• Implosion of Pier E6.
• Implosion of two 504-ft span piers
in one implosion event.
• Implosion of two 288-ft span piers
in one implosion event.
• Implosion of three 288-ft span piers
in one implosion event.
• Implosion of four 288-ft span piers
in one implosion event.
Methods used to calculate distances
to threshold criteria for the implosion of
multiple piers are presented in detail in
Appendix C of CALTRANS’ application.
Table 6 presents the distances
calculated to each threshold for each of
the anticipated pier implosion
scenarios.
TABLE 6—THRESHOLD DISTANCES (FEET) CALCULATED FOR EACH IMPLOSION SCENARIO
Level B harassment
Group
Species
Behavioral
TTS (pk/
SELcum)
Level A
harassment
Serious injury
Mortality
PTS (pk/
SELcum)
GI tract
Slight lung
Implosion of Pier E6
Mid-freq cetacean ............
High-freq cetacean ...........
Phocidae ..........................
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Otariidae ...........................
Bottlenose dolphin .....................
Harbor porpoise ........................
Harbor seal & northern elephant
seal.
California sea lion & northern
fur seal.
1,330
12,567
2,220
180/881
3,127/8,358
613/1,484
98/256
1,697/2,459
332/443
48
48
48
48
48
48
<40
<40
<40
554
147/367
80/106
48
48
<40
Implosion of Two 504-ft Span Piers
Mid-freq cetacean ............
High-freq cetacean ...........
Phocidae ..........................
Otariidae ...........................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Bottlenose dolphin .....................
Harbor porpoise ........................
Harbor seal & northern elephant
seal.
California sea lion & northern
fur seal.
22:54 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00031
1,055
10,300
1,790
166/685
2,882/6,800
565/1,186
90/190
1,564/1,966
306/333
44
44
44
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
421
136/274
74/78
44
<40
<40
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
26073
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
TABLE 6—THRESHOLD DISTANCES (FEET) CALCULATED FOR EACH IMPLOSION SCENARIO—Continued
Level B harassment
Group
Species
Behavioral
Level A
harassment
Serious injury
Mortality
TTS (pk/
SELcum)
GI tract
PTS (pk/
SELcum)
Slight lung
Implosion of Two 288-ft Span Piers
Mid-freq cetacean ............
High-freq cetacean ...........
Phocidae ..........................
Otariidae ...........................
Bottlenose dolphin .....................
Harbor porpoise ........................
Harbor seal & northern elephant
seal.
California sea lion & northern
fur seal.
798
7,700
1,359
166/517
2,882/5,140
565/900
90/126
1,564/1,493
306/232
44
44
44
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
304
136/185
74/52
44
<40
<40
Implosion of Three 504-ft Span Piers
Mid-freq cetacean ............
High-freq cetacean ...........
Phocidae ..........................
Otariidae ...........................
Bottlenose dolphin .....................
Harbor porpoise ........................
Harbor seal & northern elephant
seal.
California sea lion & northern
fur seal.
920
9,403
1,580
166/588
2,882/5,900
565/1,045
90/132
1,564/1,722
306/258
44
44
44
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
339
136/201
74/52
44
<40
<40
Implosion of Four 504-ft Span Piers
Mid-freq cetacean ............
High-freq cetacean ...........
Phocidae ..........................
Otariidae ...........................
Bottlenose dolphin .....................
Harbor porpoise ........................
Harbor seal & northern elephant
seal.
California sea lion & northern
fur seal.
Estimated Takes of Marine Mammals
The number of marine mammals by
stock that may be taken by implosion of
Piers E6 through E18 were calculated
based on distances to the marine
mammal threshold criteria, duration of
the activity, and the estimated density
of each species in the ZOI (for species
with insufficient data to calculate
densities, estimated number of takes
were based on potential for occurrence
as described above). For each pier
implosion scenario, the total area of the
criteria zone was calculated and
multiplied by the density of each
920
9,935
1,730
166/558
2,882/6,590
565/1,135
90/132
1,564/1,917
306/264
44
44
44
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
<40
349
136/204
74/52
44
<40
<40
species. Combining multiple piers in a
single implosion event results in fewer
implosion events and, therefore, fewer
marine mammals that would potentially
be taken. However, take estimates were
calculated based on a worst-case
scenario of a total of six implosion
events.. Based on calculated sound
pressure levels and the implementation
of avoidance and minimization
measures discussed below, no injury
(Level A harassment) or mortality is
anticipated to occur as a result of the
implosion activities and NMFS is not
authorizing any Level A takes for this
activity. For more detailed information
on the number of takes calculated for
each implosion scenario, see Table 19 of
the CALTRANS IHA application. For
spreadsheets showing the calculations
that were performed to estimate marine
mammal exposures for each pier
implosion scenario, see Appendix D of
the IHA application. Table 7 provides a
summary of the estimated exposure of
marine mammals based on calculations
using density estimates or past
monitoring efforts in cases where
density estimates were not able to be
calculated (northern fur seal and
bottlenose dolphin).
TABLE 7—ESTIMATED COMBINED EXPOSURES OF MARINE MAMMALS TO THE IMPLOSIONS OF PIERS E6 THROUGH E18
FOR LEVELS A AND B AND MORTALITY THRESHOLD CRITERIA
Level A exposures 1
Level B exposures for all
implosions
Species
GI injury
Slight lung
injury
Mortality 1
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Behavior
TTS
PTS
Harbor seal .............................................................................
California sea lion ...................................................................
Northern elephant seal ...........................................................
Northern fur seal .....................................................................
Bottlenose dolphin ..................................................................
Harbor porpoise ......................................................................
22 .............
0 ...............
0 ...............
2 NA (0) .....
2 NA (0) .....
0 ...............
16 .............
0 ...............
0 ...............
2 NA (0) .....
2 NA (0) .....
0 ...............
0 ...............
0 ...............
0 ...............
2 NA (0) .....
2 NA (0) .....
0 ...............
0 ...............
0 ...............
0 ...............
2 NA (0) .....
2 NA (0) .....
0 ...............
0 ...............
0 ...............
0 ...............
2 NA (0) .....
2 NA (0) .....
0 ...............
0
0
0
TOTAL .............................................................................
22 .............
16 .............
0 ...............
0 ...............
0 ...............
0
1 No
2 NA
2 NA
(0)
(0)
0
implosions would occur if any marine mammal is within the Level A or mortality threshold criteria zones.
density estimates were calculated, so calculations of take were not completed; However, no takes are estimated in this table based on
the fact that none of these species have been observed since monitoring efforts for the SFOBB project began in 2000.
2 No
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:54 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
26074
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
However, the number of marine
mammals in the area at any given time
is highly variable. Animal movement
depends on time of day, tide levels,
weather, and availability and
distribution of prey species. Therefore,
to account for potential high animal
density that could occur during the
short window of controlled implosion,
NMFS worked with CALTRANS and
adjusted the estimated number upwards
based on past monitoring data and/or
other sightings data in the San Francisco
Bay area to come up with a maximum
number of potential occurrences for the
requested takes. These adjustments were
based on likely group sizes of these
animals and were developed
quantitatively to account for variability
in animal occurrence and activity.
A summary of the requested number
of takes by implosion of Piers E6
through E18 is provided in Table 8.
TABLE 8—SUMMARY OF REQUESTED TAKES OF MARINE MAMMALS FOR THE PIER E4 AND E5 IMPLOSIONS
Level B
behavioral
Species
Level B TTS
Stock
abundance
Percent take
of population
Pacific harbor seal ...........................................................................................
California sea lion ............................................................................................
Northern elephant seal ....................................................................................
Northern fur seal ..............................................................................................
Harbor porpoise ...............................................................................................
Bottlenose dolphin ...........................................................................................
66
18
6
6
18
6
48
12
3
3
9
3
30,968
296,750
179,000
12,844
9,886
323
0.37
0.01
0.01
0.21
0.09
2.8
Total ..........................................................................................................
120
78
........................
........................
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take
authorization under section 101(a)(5)(D)
of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the
permissible methods of taking pursuant
to such activity, and other means of
effecting the least practicable adverse
impact on such species or stock and its
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance, and on the
availability of such species or stock for
taking for certain subsistence uses (the
latter is not applicable for this action).
NMFS’ regulations require applicants
for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the
availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment,
methods, and manner of conducting
such activity or other means of effecting
the least practicable adverse impact
upon the affected species or stocks and
their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or
may not be appropriate to ensure the
least practicable adverse impact on
species or stocks and their habitat, as
well as subsistence uses where
applicable, we carefully weigh two
primary factors: (1) 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, and their
habitat, which considers the nature of
the potential adverse impact being
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range), as
well as the likelihood that the measure
will be effective if implemented; and (2)
the practicability of the measures for
applicant implementation, which may
consider such things as cost and impact
on operations.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
Proposed Mitigation Measures for
Confined Implosion
Establishment of Level A Exclusion
Zone
For CALTRANS’s proposed controlled
implosions of Piers E6 through E18,
CALTRANS will utilize the mitigation
measures discussed below to minimize
the potential impacts to marine
mammals in the project vicinity, which
were developed and successfully
employed for previous controlled
implosions of other piers of the original
East Span of the SFOBB. The primary
purposes of these mitigation measures
are to minimize impacts by reducing
sound levels from the activities and to
monitor for marine mammals within
designated exclusion zones and zones of
influence (ZOI). Specific proposed
mitigation measures are:
CALTRANS will establish marine
mammal exclusion zones (MMEZ) for
both the mortality and Level A
harassment zone (including PTS, GI
track injury, and slight lung injury)
using the criteria threshold that extends
out the furthest distance (refer to Table
6). As an additional conservative
measure to ensure that no marine
mammals are taken by Level A
harassment, the field-implemented
MMEZ will be 20 percent larger than the
calculated distances to threshold criteria
in Table 6.
The isopleths for PTS for phocids
(harbor seal and elephant seal) cover the
entire area for both Level A harassment
and mortality for all pinnipeds
(including California sea lions and
northern fur seals), as well as bottlenose
dolphins. Therefore, the pinniped and
dolphin exclusion zone will be
established at the radial distance to the
phocid PTS Level A harassment
threshold plus an additional 20 percent
conservative factor. The harbor porpoise
exclusion zone will be established at the
radial distance to the high-frequency
cetacean PTS Level A harassment
threshold plus an additional 20 percent
conservative factor (see Table 23 and
Figures 12–14 and 17–21 of the IHA
application). These MMEZs will be
monitored by marine mammal observers
(MMOs), and if any marine mammals
are observed within the MMEZs, the
implosion will be delayed until the
animal leaves the area or at least 15
minutes have passed since the last
observation of pinnipeds and small
cetaceans and at least 30 minutes have
passed since the last observation of
bottlenose dolphins.
Time Restriction
Implosion of Piers E6 through E18
would only be conducted during
daylight hours, with enough time for pre
and post implosion monitoring during
daylight hours. Implosion events would
also only be conducted during periods
with good visibility when the largest
exclusion zone can be visually
monitored. In addition, to minimize
impacts on biological resources,
implosion events would be conducted at
slack tides between September and
November.
Installation of Blast Attenuation System
(BAS)
Prior to the demolition of Piers E6
through E18, CALTRANS would install
a Blast Attenuation System (BAS) as
described above to reduce the noise and
shockwave from the implosion.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
Establishment of Level B Behavioral
Harassment and Temporary Hearing
Threshold Shift (TTS) Monitoring Zones
Marine mammal monitoring zones
will be established for both behavioral
response and TTS (Level B harassment).
Hydroacoustic monitoring results from
the implosions of Piers E3, E4, and E5
were used to calculate distances to these
thresholds for the implosions of Piers E6
through E18 (see Chapter 6 and Tables
9 to 18 of the IHA application). As a
conservative measure, the fieldimplemented behavioral response and
TTS monitoring zones will be 20
percent larger than the calculated
distances to threshold criteria shown in
Tables 9 to 18 of the IHA application.
The isopleths for Level B harassment
to phocids (harbor seals and elephant
seals) for all pier implosion scenarios
cover the entire area for Level B
harassment to all pinnipeds including
otariids (California sea lions and fur
seals) as well as bottlenose dolphins.
Therefore, the pinniped and dolphin
Level B harassment monitoring zones
for each pier implosion scenario will be
established at the radial distance to the
phocid Level B harassment threshold
plus an additional 20 percent
conservative factor (see Tables 24 and
25 and Figures 12–16 of the IHA
application).
Communication
All Marine Mammal Observers
(MMOs) will be equipped with mobile
phones and a VHF radio as a backup.
One person will be designated as the
Lead MMO and will be in constant
contact with the Resident Engineer on
site and the blasting crew. The Lead
MMO will coordinate marine mammal
sightings with the other MMOs. MMOs
will contact the other MMOs when a
sighting is made within the exclusion
zone or near the exclusion zone so that
the MMOOs within overlapping areas of
responsibility can continue to track the
animal and the Lead MMO is aware of
the animal. If an animal has entered the
exclusion zone or is near it within 30
minutes of blasting, the Lead MMO will
notify the Resident Engineer and
blasting crew. The Lead MMO will keep
them informed of the disposition of the
animal.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Mitigation Conclusions
NMFS has carefully evaluated the
applicant’s proposed mitigation
measures and considered a range of
other measures in the context of
ensuring that NMFS prescribes the
means of effecting the least practicable
impact on the affected marine mammal
species and stocks and their habitat. Our
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
evaluation of potential measures
included consideration of the following
factors in relation to one another:
• The manner in which, and the
degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure is
expected to minimize adverse impacts
to marine mammals.
• The proven or likely efficacy of the
specific measure to minimize adverse
impacts as planned.
• The practicability of the measure
for applicant implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed
by NMFS should be able to accomplish,
have a reasonable likelihood of
accomplishing (based on current
science), or contribute to the
accomplishment of one or more of the
general goals listed below:
(1) Avoidance or minimization of
injury or death of marine mammals
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may
contribute to this goal).
(2) A reduction in the numbers of
marine mammals (total number or
number at biologically important time
or location) exposed to received levels
of activities expected to result in the
take of marine mammals (this goal may
contribute to 1, above, or to reducing
harassment takes only).
(3) A reduction in the number of
times (total number or number at
biologically important time or location)
individuals would be exposed to
received levels of activities expected to
result in the take of marine mammals
(this goal may contribute to 1, above, or
to reducing harassment takes only).
(4) A reduction in the intensity of
exposures (either total number or
number at biologically important time
or location) to received levels of
activities expected to result in the take
of marine mammals (this goal may
contribute to a, above, or to reducing the
severity of harassment takes only).
(5) Avoidance or minimization of
adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying special attention to the
food base, activities that block or limit
passage to or from biologically
important areas, permanent destruction
of habitat, or temporary destruction/
disturbance of habitat during a
biologically important time.
(6) For monitoring directly related to
mitigation—an increase in the
probability of detecting marine
mammals, thus allowing for more
effective implementation of the
mitigation.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s proposed measures, as well
as other measures considered by NMFS,
NMFS has preliminarily determined
that the proposed mitigation measures
provide the means of effecting the least
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26075
practicable impact on marine mammals
species or stocks and their habitat,
paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth,
‘‘requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such
taking.’’ The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13)
indicate that requests for Incidental
Take Authorizations (ITA) 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 to both
compliance as well as ensuring that the
most value is obtained from the required
monitoring. CALTRANS has proposed
marine mammal monitoring measures as
part of the IHA application found at
https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental.htm. The plan may be
modified or supplemented based on
comments or new information received
from the public during the public
comment period.
Monitoring measures prescribed by
NMFS should accomplish one or more
of the following general goals:
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species or stocks in the area in which
take is anticipated (e.g., presence,
absence, 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 animals; or (2) populations,
species, or stocks.
• Effects on marine mammal habitat
(e.g., marine mammal prey species,
acoustic habitat, or other important
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
26076
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
physical components of marine
mammal habitat).
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
As most elements of marine mammal
monitoring plans for pile driving
activities are similar to what would be
required for underwater implosions,
monitoring for impacts to marine
mammals from the implosion activities
for Piers E3, E4, and E5 were based on
the SFOBB pile driving monitoring
protocol. Monitoring for the implosion
events for Piers E6 through E18 will also
be based on the SFOBB pile driving
monitoring protocol and past implosion
activities for Piers E3, E4, and E5. These
monitoring plans would include
monitoring an exclusion zone and ZOIs
for TTS and behavioral harassment
described above as well as the
following:
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
(1) Marine Mammal Observers (MMOs)
A minimum of 10 MMOs would be
required during the controlled
implosions of Piers E6 through E18 so
that the MMEZ, Level B Harassment
TTS and Behavioral ZOIs, and
surrounding area can be monitored. Up
to 15 MMOs will be required for
implosion events involving multiple
piers in order to monitor the full extent
of these areas. One MMO would be
designated as the Lead MMO and would
receive updates from other MMOs on
the presence or absence of marine
mammals within the MMEZ and would
notify the Environmental Compliance
Manager of a cleared exclusion zone to
the implosion(s).
(2) Monitoring Protocol
Implosions of Piers E6 through E18
will be conducted only during daylight
hours and with enough time for pre and
post-implosion monitoring during
daylight hours, and with good visibility
(i.e., clear skies and no high winds).
This work will be completed so that
MMOs will be able to detect marine
mammals within the exclusion zones
and beyond. The Lead MMO will be in
contact with other MMOs and if any
marine mammals enter an exclusion
zone within 30 minutes of blasting, the
Lead MMO will notify the
Environmental Compliance Manager
that the implosion may need to be
delayed. The Lead MMO will keep the
Environmental Compliance Manager
informed about the disposition of the
animal. If the animal remains in the
MMEZ, blasting will be delayed until it
has left the exclusion zone. If the animal
dives and is not seen again, blasting will
be delayed at least 15 minutes for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
pinnipeds and small cetacean (harbor
porpoise), and 30 minutes for bottlenose
dolphin. After the implosion has
occurred, the MMOs will continue to
monitor the area for at least 60 minutes.
(3) Data Collection
Each MMO will record the
observation position, start and end
times of observations, and weather
conditions (i.e., sunny/cloudy, wind
speed, fog, visibility). For each marine
mammal sighting, the following will be
recorded, if possible:
• Species.
• Number of animals (with or without
pup/calf).
• Age class (pup/calf, juvenile, adult).
• Identifying marks or color (e.g.,
scars, red pelage, damaged dorsal fin).
• Position relative to piers being
imploded (distance and direction).
• Movement (direction and relative
speed).
• Behavior (e.g., logging (resting at
the surface), swimming, spy-hopping
(raising above the water surface to view
the area), foraging).
(4) Post-Implosion Survey
Although any injury or mortality from
the implosions of Piers E6 through E18
is very unlikely, boat or shore surveys
will be conducted daily for 3 days
following the event, to determine
whether any injured or stranded marine
mammals are in the area. If an injured
or dead animal is discovered during
these surveys or by other means, the
NMFS-designated stranding team will
be contacted to pick up the animal.
Veterinarians will treat the animal or
will conduct a necropsy to attempt to
determine whether it stranded because
of the pier implosions.
Proposed Reporting Measures
CALTRANS 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 draft 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 draft report
within 30 days, and if NMFS has
comments, CALTRANS would address
the comments and submit a final report
to NMFS within 30 days. If no
comments are provided by NMFS after
30 days receiving the report, the draft
report is considered to be final.
Marine Mammal Stranding Plan
Stranding plans for the pier
implosions of Piers E3, E4, and E5 were
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
prepared in cooperation with the local
NMFS-designated marine mammal
stranding, rescue, and rehabilitation
center. An updated version of this plan
will be implemented during implosions
of Piers E6 through E18. Although
avoidance and minimization measures
likely will prevent any injuries,
preparations will be made in the
unlikely event that marine mammals are
injured. Elements of the plan will
include the following:
1. The stranding crew will prepare
treatment areas at an NMFS-designated
facility for cetaceans or pinnipeds that
may be injured from the implosions.
Preparation will include equipment to
treat lung injuries, auditory testing
equipment, dry and wet caged areas to
hold animals, and operating rooms if
surgical procedures are necessary.
2. A stranding crew and a veterinarian
will be on call near the piers at the time
of the implosions to quickly recover any
injured marine mammals, provide
emergency veterinary care, stabilize the
animal’s condition, and transport
individuals to an NMFS-designated
facility. If an injured or dead animal is
found, NMFS (both the regional office
and headquarters) will be notified
immediately, even if the animal appears
to be sick or injured from causes other
than the implosions.
3. Post-implosion surveys will be
conducted immediately after the event
and over the following 3 days to
determine whether any injured or dead
marine mammals are in the area.
4. Any veterinarian procedures,
euthanasia, rehabilitation decisions, and
time of release or disposition of the
animal will be at the discretion of the
NMFS-designated facility staff and the
veterinarians treating the animals. Any
necropsies to determine whether the
injuries or death of an animal was the
result of an implosion or other
anthropogenic or natural causes will be
conducted at an NMFS-designated
facility by the stranding crew and
veterinarians. The results will be
communicated to both the CALTRANS
and to NMFS as soon as possible,
followed by a written report within a
month.
Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determinations
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
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of Level B harassment takes, alone, is
not enough information on which to
base an impact determination. In
addition to considering estimates of the
number of marine mammals that might
be ‘‘taken’’ through behavioral
harassment, NMFS must consider other
factors, such as the likely nature of any
responses (their intensity, duration,
etc.), the context of any responses (e.g.,
critical reproductive time or location,
migration, etc.), as well as effects on
habitat, and the likely effectiveness of
the mitigation. We also assess the
number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this
information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989
preamble for NMFS’ implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September,
29, 1989), the impacts from other past
and ongoing anthropogenic activities are
incorporated into this analysis 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 and stocks listed in Table 8,
given that the anticipated effects of
CALTRANS’ SFOBB construction
activities involving controlled
implosions for Piers E6 through E18 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 for
this activity, or else species-specific
factors would be identified and
analyzed.
No injuries or mortalities are
anticipated to occur as a result of
CALTRANS’ SFOBB activity associated
with the controlled implosions to
demolish Piers E6 through E18, and
none are proposed to be authorized. The
relatively low marine mammal density
and small Level A exclusion zones make
injury takes of marine mammals
unlikely, based on take calculation
described above. In addition, the Level
A exclusion zones would be thoroughly
monitored before the proposed
implosion, and detonation activity
would be postponed if an marine
mammal is sighted within the exclusion
zone.
The takes that are anticipated and
authorized are expected to be limited to
short-term Level B harassment
(behavioral responses and TTS). Due to
implementation of mitigation measures
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
and proven success in implementation
of these measures as evidenced during
previous SFOBB activities, more
significant acute stress responses,
serious injury or mortality, and more
significant behavioral responses are not
anticipated as a result of the proposed
activities. Marine mammals (Pacific
harbor seal, northern elephant seal,
California sea lion, northern fur seal,
harbor porpoise, and bottlenose
dolphin) 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 level during the implosion noise.
A few marine mammals could
experience TTS if they occur within the
Level B TTS ZOI. However, as discussed
early 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, even if an animal receives
a TTS, the TTS would be a one-time
event from a brief impulse noise (about
5 seconds), making it unlikely that the
TTS would lead to PTS. Finally, there
is no critical habitat or other
biologically important areas in the
vicinity of CALTRANS’ proposed
controlled implosion areas
(Calambokidis et al., 2015).
The project also is not expected to
have significant adverse effects on
affected marine mammals’ habitat, as
analyzed in detail in the ‘‘Potential
Effects of the Specified Activity on
Marine Mammals and their Habitat’’
section. There is no biologically
important area in the vicinity of the
SFOBB project 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.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
proposed monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS preliminarily finds
that the total marine mammal take from
CALTRANS’s SFOBB demolition via
controlled implosions of Piers E6
through E18 will have a negligible
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26077
impact on the affected marine mammal
species or stocks.
Small Numbers
Table 8 presents the numbers of
marine mammals that could be taken by
Level B harassment incidental to
CALTRAN’s activities. Our analysis
shows that less than 2.8 percent of the
affected stocks could be taken by
behavioral harassment and TTS (see
Table 8 in this document). Therefore,
the numbers of marine mammals
estimated to be taken are small relative
to total populations of the affected
species or stocks. In addition, the
mitigation and monitoring measures
(described previously in this document)
prescribed in the proposed IHA are
expected to reduce even further any
potential disturbance to marine
mammals.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
mitigation and monitoring measures,
NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals will be
taken relative to the populations of the
affected species or stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected
Species for Taking for Subsistence Uses
There are no subsistence uses of
marine mammals in the proposed
project area; and, thus, no subsistence
uses impacted 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)
NMFS has determined that issuance
of the IHA will have no effect on listed
marine mammals, as none are known to
occur in the action area.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
NMFS prepared an Environmental
Assessment (EA) for the take of marine
mammals incidental to construction of
the East Span of the SFOBB and made
a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) on November 4, 2003. Due to
the modification of part of the
construction project and the mitigation
measures, NMFS reviewed additional
information from CALTRANS regarding
empirical measurements of pile driving
noises for the smaller temporary piles
without an air bubble curtain system
and the use of vibratory pile driving.
NMFS prepared a Supplemental
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
26078
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Environmental Assessment (SEA) and
analyzed the potential impacts to
marine mammals that would result from
the modification of the action. A FONSI
was signed on August 5, 2009. In
addition, for CALTRANS’ Piers E4 and
E5 demolition using controlled
implosion, NMFS prepared an SEA and
analyzed the potential impacts to
marine mammals that would result from
the modification. A FONSI was signed
on September 3, 2015. The proposed
activity and expected impacts remain
within what was previously analyzed in
the EA and SEAs. Therefore, no
additional NEPA analysis is warranted.
A copy of the SEA and FONSI is
available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary
determinations, NMFS proposes to issue
an IHA to CALTRANS for conducting
SFOBB activities involving demolition
via controlled implosion of Piers E6
through E18, provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
The proposed IHA language is provided
next.
1. This Authorization is valid from
September 1, 2017, through August 31,
2018.
2. This Authorization is valid only for
activities associated with the SFOBB
demolition activities in San Francisco
Bay.
3. (a) The species authorized for
incidental harassment takings, Level B
harassment only, are: Pacific harbor seal
(Phoca vitulina richardii), California sea
lion (Zalophus californianus), northern
elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris),
northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus),
harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena),
and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops
truncatus).
(b) The authorization for taking by
harassment is limited to the dismantling
of Piers E6 through E18 via controlled
implosion.
(c) The taking of any marine mammal
in a manner prohibited under this
Authorization must be reported within
24 hours of the taking to the West Coast
Administrator of the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) at 206–526–
6150, and the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, at (301)
427–8401, or her designee (301–427–
8418).
4. The holder of this Authorization
must notify the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, at least 48 hours
prior to the start of activities identified
in 3(b) (unless constrained by the date
of issuance of this Authorization in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
which case notification shall be made as
soon as possible).
5. 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 8 of this notice. The taking by
Level A harassment, injury, or death of
these species or the taking by
harassment, injury, or death of any other
species of marine mammal is prohibited
and may result in the modification,
suspension, or revocation of this
Authorization.
(b) The taking of any marine mammal
is prohibited whenever the required
marine mammal observers (MMOs),
required by condition 7(a), are not
present in conformance with condition
7(a) of this Authorization.
6. Mitigation
(a) Time Restriction
Controlled implosion of Piers E6
through E18 shall only be conducted
during daylight hours on slack tides
between September and November and
with enough time for pre- and postactivity monitoring during daylight
hours. Further, controlled implosion
shall only be conducted during periods
of good visibility when the largest
exclusion zone can be visually
monitored.
(b) For controlled implosion of Piers
E6 through E18, CALTRANS will install
a Blast Attenuation System (BAS) prior
to demolition to reduce the noise and
shockwave from the implosion.
(c) For controlled implosion of Piers
E6 though E18 and associated test
blasting, CALTRANS shall establish
exclusions zones and zones of influence
(ZOIs) that are appropriate to specific
marine mammal functional hearing
group (Tables 1–10, Attachment 1; see
Tables 9–18 of the application) .
(d) Exclusion Zone Monitoring for
Mitigation Measures.
(i) NMFS-approved MMOs shall
survey the exclusion zone for 30
minutes prior to the start of controlled
implosion activities to ensure that no
marine mammals are seen within the
zones
(ii) If marine mammals are found
within the exclusion zones, controlled
implosion of the pier(s) shall be delayed
until they move out of the area. If a
marine mammal is seen above water and
then dives below, the contractor shall
wait 15 minutes for pinnipeds and small
cetaceans (harbor porpoise) and 30
minutes for bottlenose dolphins prior to
initiating implosion activities. If no
marine mammals are seen by the
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
observer in that time it would be
assumed that the animal has moved
beyond the exclusion zone.
(e) Communication
For controlled implosion, the Lead
MMO shall be in constant contact with
the Resident Engineer on site and the
blasting crew to ensure that no marine
mammal is within the exclusion zone
before the controlled implosion.
7. Monitoring:
(a) Marine Mammal Observers.
(i) CALTRANS shall employ NMFSapproved MMOs to conduct marine
mammal monitoring for its SFOBB
controlled pier implosion.
(ii) Marine mammal monitoring shall
begin at least 30 minutes prior to the
start of the activities, shall occur
through the entire activities, and shall
continue for 60 minutes after the
implosion events.
(iii) Observations shall be made using
high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x
42 power). MMOs shall be equipped
with radios or cell phones for
maintaining contact with other
observers and CALTRANS engineers,
and range finders to determine distance
to marine mammals, boats, buoys, and
construction equipment.
(iv) For controlled implosion of Piers
E6 through E18:
(A) A minimum of 10 MMOs shall be
required during controlled implosion so
that the exclusion zone, Level B
Harassment TTS and Behavioral ZOIs,
and surrounding area can be monitored.
Up to 15 MMOs will be required for
implosion events involving multiple
piers.
(B) MMOs shall be positioned near
the edge of each of the threshold criteria
zones and shall utilize boats, barges,
and bridge piers and roadway.
(C) Boat or shore surveys shall be
conducted immediately after the event
and daily for the three days following
the event to determine if there are any
injured or stranded marine mammals in
the area.
(D) Monitoring Data Collection:
For each marine mammal sighting, the
following shall be recorded, if possible:
• Species.
• Number of animals (with or without
pup/calf).
• Age class (pup/calf, juvenile, adult).
• Identifying marks or color (scars,
red pelage, damaged dorsal fin, etc.).
• Position relative to pier implosion
(distance and direction).
• Movement (direction and relative
speed).
• Behavior (logging [resting at the
surface], swimming, spyhopping
[raising above the water surface to view
the area], foraging, etc.)
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 107 / Tuesday, June 6, 2017 / Notices
• Duration of sighting or times of
multiple sightings of the same
individual
8. Reporting:
(a) CALTRANS shall submit a draft
monitoring report within 90 days after
completion of the dismantling 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.
(b) NMFS will have an opportunity to
provide comments within 30 days after
receiving the draft report. If NMFS has
comments, CALTRANS shall address
the comments and submit a final report
to NMFS within 30 days.
(c) If NMFS does not provide
comments within 30 days after receiving
the report, the draft report is considered
to be final.
(d) In the unanticipated event that the
dismantling 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, CALTRANS shall
immediately cease all operations and
immediately report the incident to the
Chief, Permits and Conservation
Division, 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 CALTRANS to
determine what is necessary to
minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA
compliance. CALTRANS may not
resume their activities until notified by
NMFS via letter, email, or telephone.
(e) In the event that CALTRANS
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead MMO determines
that the cause of the injury or death is
unknown and the death is relatively
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:52 Jun 05, 2017
Jkt 241001
recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state
of decomposition as described in the
next paragraph), CALTRANS will
immediately report the incident to the
Chief, Permits and Conservation
Division, 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
CALTRANS to determine whether
modifications in the activities are
appropriate.
(f) In the event that CALTRANS
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead MMO 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), CALTRANS shall
report the incident to the Chief, Permits
and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the
West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinators, within 24 hours of the
discovery. CALTRANS shall provide
photographs or video footage (if
available) or other documentation of the
stranded animal sighting to NMFS and
the Marine Mammal Stranding Network.
CALTRANS can continue its operations
under such a case.
9. Marine Mammal Stranding Plan:
A marine mammal stranding plan
shall be prepared in cooperation with
the local NMFS-designated marine
mammal stranding, rescue, and
rehabilitation center. Elements of that
plan would include the following:
(a) The stranding crew shall prepare
treatment areas at the NMFS-designated
facility for cetaceans or pinnipeds that
may be injured from the implosion.
Preparation shall include equipment to
treat lung injuries, auditory testing
equipment, dry and wet caged areas to
hold animals, and operating rooms if
surgical procedures are necessary.
Equipment to conduct auditory
brainstem response hearing testing
would be available to determine if any
inner ear threshold shifts (TTS or PTS)
have occurred.
(b) A stranding crew and a
veterinarian shall be on call near the
implosion event sites at the time of the
implosion to quickly recover any
injured marine mammals, provide
emergency veterinary care, stabilize the
animal’s condition, and transport
individuals to the NMFS-designated
facility. If an injured or dead animal is
found, NMFS (both the regional office
and headquarters) shall be notified
immediately even if the animal appears
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26079
to be sick or injured from other than
blasting.
(c) Post-implosion surveys shall be
conducted immediately after the event
and over the following three days to
determine if there are any injured or
dead marine mammals in the area.
(d) Any veterinarian procedures,
euthanasia, rehabilitation decisions and
time of release or disposition of the
animal shall be at the discretion of the
NMFS-designated facility staff and the
veterinarians treating the animals. Any
necropsies to determine if the injuries or
death of an animal was the result of the
blast or other anthropogenic or natural
causes will be conducted at the NMFSdesignated facility by the stranding crew
and veterinarians. The results shall be
communicated to both CALTRANS and
to NMFS as soon as possible with a
written report within a month.
10. This Authorization may be
modified, suspended or withdrawn if
the holder fails to abide by the
conditions prescribed herein or if the
authorized taking is having more than a
negligible impact on the species or stock
of affected marine mammals, or if there
is an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of such species or stocks for
subsistence uses.
11. A copy of this Authorization must
be in the possession of each contractor
who performs the controlled implosion
work for Piers E6 through E18 and
associated Test Blasts.
Dated: June 1, 2017.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–11646 Filed 6–5–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive
Patent License: Evolva, Inc.
Department of the Navy, DOD.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of the Navy
herby gives notice of its intent to grant
to Evolva, Inc., a revocable,
nonassignable, exclusive license to
practice in the field of use of thermoset
compositions for composites
manufacturing in the United States and
its territories, the Government-owned
inventions described in U.S. Patent No.
8,853,343 entitled: Thermoset
compositions from plant polyphenols;
U.S. Patent No. 8,921,614 entitled:
Selective deoxygenation of
hydroxybenzaldehydes; U.S. Patent No.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 107 (Tuesday, June 6, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26063-26079]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11646]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XF411
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Dismantling of the Original East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request
for comments and information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the California Department of
Transportation (CALTRANS) for an incidental take authorization to take
small numbers of six species of marine mammals, by harassment,
incidental to the dismantling of the original East Span of the San
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB) in the San Francisco Bay (SFB),
California. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS
is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to incidentally take marine mammals
during the specified activities.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than July 6,
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, 1315 East-West Highway,
Silver Spring, MD 20910 and electronic comments should be sent to
ITP.Youngkin@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 https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm without
change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address,
etc.) 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: Dale Youngkin, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
and supporting documents, as well as a list of references cited in this
document, may be obtained 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, the
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking
is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is
provided to the public for review.
An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings
are set forth.
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as an
impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably
expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival.
The MMPA states that the term ``take'' means to harass, hunt,
capture, kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine
mammal.
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
[[Page 26064]]
the potential to disturb a marine mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level
B harassment).
Summary of Request
On April 5, 2017, CALTRANS submitted a request to NMFS for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to the dismantling of the original
East Span of the SFOBB in the San Francisco Bay. On May 1, 2017, NMFS
deemed the application adequate and complete. CALTRANS requested
authorization for incidental take by harassment only and NMFS concurs
that mortality is not expected to result from this activity. NMFS is
proposing to issue an IHA that will authorize take by Level B
harassment of Pacific harbor seal, California sea lion, northern
elephant seal, northern fur seal, harbor porpoise, and bottlenose
dolphin incidental to CALTRANS' activities. As described in the
Overview section, previous IHAs have been issued to CALTRANS for
similar activities, specifically for the use of mechanical dismantling
and controlled blasts to implode piers of the original East Span of the
SFOBB.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
CALTRANS proposes removal of the original East Span of the SFOBB by
mechanical dismantling and by use of controlled charges to implode 13
piers (Piers E6-E18) into their open cellular chambers below the
mudline. Activities associated with dismantling the original East Span
may potentially result in incidental take of marine mammals due to the
use of highly controlled charges to dismantle the marine foundations of
the piers.
Several previous one-year IHAs have been issued to CALTRANS for
pile driving/removal and construction of the new SFOBB East Span
beginning in 2003. NMFS has issued 10 IHAs to CALTRANS for the SFOBB
Project. The first five IHAs (2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, and 2011)
addressed potential impacts associated with pile driving for the
construction of the new East Span of the SFOBB. IHAs issued in 2013,
2014 and July 2015 addressed activities associated with both
constructing the new East Span and dismantling the original East Span,
specifically addressing vibratory pile driving, vibratory pile
extraction/removal, attenuated impact pile driving, pile proof testing,
and mechanical dismantling of temporary and permanent marine
foundations. On September 9, 2015, NMFS issued an IHA to CALTRANS for
incidental take associated with the demolition of Pier E3 of the
original SFOBB by highly controlled explosives (80 FR 57584; September
24, 2015). On September 30, 2016, NMFS issued an IHA authorizing the
incidental take of marine mammals associated with both pile driving/
removal and controlled implosion of Piers E4 and E5 (81 FR 67313).
CALTRANS is requesting this IHA to continue dismantling the original
East Span of the SFOBB using mechanical means as well as five to six
implosion events to dismantle 13 piers (Piers E6-E18). CALTRANS does
not anticipate any further in-water pile installation or pile removal
for the SFOBB project, and is not requesting coverage under this IHA to
conduct pile driving/removal activities.
Dates and Duration
The demolition of Piers E6 through E18 through controlled implosion
are planned to begin in September 2017. Implosion events would consist
of the use of highly controlled charges to implode 1 to 4 piers per
event, amounting to a total of 5 to 6 implosion events to dismantle the
13 piers (Piers E6-E18). CALTRANS is requesting issuance of an IHA for
a period of one year. Therefore, an IHA, if issued, would cover the
period from September 1, 2017 through August 31, 2018.
Specified Geographic Region
The SFOBB project area is located in the central San Francisco Bay
(SFB or Bay), between Yerba Buena Island (YBI) and the city of Oakland.
The western limit of the project area is the east portal of the YBI
tunnel, located in the city of San Francisco. The eastern limit of the
project area is located approximately 1,312 feet (ft) (400 meters (m))
west of the Bay Bridge toll plaza, where the new and former spans
connect with land at the Oakland Touchdown (OTD) in the city of
Oakland.
Detailed Description of the Specified Activities
CALTRANS proposes the removal of Piers E6 through E18 (13 piers) of
the original East Span by use of mechanical dismantling and controlled
charges to implode each pier into its open cellular chambers below the
mudline. A Blast Attenuation System (BAS) will be used to minimize
potential impacts on biological resources in the Bay. Both NMFS and
CALTRANS believe that the results from the 2015 Pier E3 Demonstration
Project implosion, as well as the results from the 2016 implosions of
Piers E4 and E5, support the use of controlled charges as a more
expedient method of removal that will cause less environmental impact
compared to mechanical methods using a dry (fully dewatered) cofferdam.
Piers E6 through E18 of the original East Span are located between
the OTD area and YBI, and just south of the SFOBB new East Span. These
piers consist of lightly reinforced concrete cellular structures that
are supported by timber piles driven into the Bay mud and occupy areas
below the mudline, within the water column, and above the water line of
the Bay. Unlike Piers E3, E4, and E5, which were dismantled using
highly controlled charges previously, Piers E6 through E18 do not
extend deep below the mudline. The timber piles and concrete slabs that
are below approved removal limits will remain in place. Piers E6, E7,
and E8 supported the 504-ft bridge spans of the original SFOBB. Pier E9
is located at the connection point between the 504-ft bridge spans and
the 288-ft bridge spans. Piers E10 through E18 supported the original
SFOBB 288-ft bridge spans.
The use of controlled charges would greatly reduce in-water work
periods and shorten the overall duration of marine foundation removal
compared with mechanical removal. Because of the similar structures for
each pier, each would be removed following the same five steps:
Mechanical dismantling of the pier cap and concrete
pedestals;
Drilling bore holes into the marine foundation;
Installing and testing the BAS;
Installing charges, activating the BAS, and imploding the
pier; and
Managing and removing remaining dismantling debris.
Details of these steps are provided below.
Mechanical Dismantling of Concrete Pedestals and Pier Caps
For all piers, support barges will be used to move hydraulic
excavators equipped with hoe rams, shearing attachments, drills, saws,
and other equipment including cutting lances and torches to be used
during the mechanical dismantling. A barge-mounted crane will be used
to move equipment onto and off each pier.
For all piers, the concrete pedestals and pier cap will be removed
by mechanical means using tools including those listed above to break
the concrete structure to pieces. Concrete rubble and rebar will be
managed using excavators and cranes that will be mounted with buckets.
Throughout concrete dismantling operations on each pier, support
platforms will be installed to provide a working surface for the
[[Page 26065]]
excavators to dismantle the upper portion of the pier. The support
platforms will be made up of timber crane mats. A debris catchment
system, accepted by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control
Board, will be in place to contain concrete debris from discharging
into the Bay during dismantling operations.
All concrete rubble from mechanical dismantling of concrete
pedestals will be taken off-site for disposal. Rubble will be loaded
onto receiving barges to be taken to Berth 9 in the Port of Oakland to
be sorted and disposed of at an approved upland facility. The pier caps
covering the central chambers will be dismantled last and will be
broken with a ram hoe. The broken pier caps will remain in the hollow
void during the controlled blasting, and all other mechanical
dismantling activities would occur above the waterline.
Drill Boreholes
After the mechanical dismantling operations are complete, access
platforms will be installed on top of each pier to support the drilling
equipment. The exposed interior cell walls, buttress walls, and outside
walls will be drilled from the top down, to remove concrete and create
boreholes to just below the controlled blasting removal limit for each
pier. Boreholes that are drilled in areas that are inundated with water
(i.e., to the buttress walls and concrete slabs) will be done using a
drill bit working within a tubular casing for guidance and to provide
containment during in-water work. Monitoring will be performed to
minimize and avoid impacts on water quality during this activity.
Pier 9 has additional buttress walls compared to other piers.
Drilling holes for buttress walls on Pier 9 will be done by the same
method that was used for the buttress wall of Pier 3 (Demonstration
Project). Divers will cut notches into the buttress walls and will
install conduit to the work platform on top of the pier. The drilling
will be done within the casings from the work platform.
Blast Attenuation System (BAS) Installation and Deployment
The BAS that will be used at Piers E6 to E 18 is the same system
that was successfully used for Piers E3 (Demonstration Project), E4,
and E5. The BAS is a modular system of pipe manifold frames, placed
around each pier and fed by air compressors to create a curtain of air.
The BAS will be activated before and during implosion. As shown during
previous implosions, the BAS will help minimize noise and pressure
waves generated during each controlled blast, to minimize potentially
adverse effects on biological resources. Each BAS frame is
approximately 50.5 ft (15.4 m) long by 6 ft (1.8 m) wide. The BAS to be
used at Piers E6 through E18 will be same system that was used at Piers
E3, E4, and E5, and will meet the same specifications.
To remove the 13 pier foundations of Piers E6 through E18 in 2017,
multiple pier implosions may be performed on the same day,
sequentially. Smaller piers will be combined into single blast events.
The implosion of each pier within the blast events will be spaced 1 to
5 seconds apart. All pier implosion events involving multiple piers
will use fewer explosives and will have shorter blast durations than
the previous implosion of Pier E3. Up to 2 piers that formerly
supported either the 504-foot spans of the bridge may be imploded on
the same day. Two to four small piers (that formerly supported the 288-
foot spans) may be imploded on the same day. A total of five to six
pier implosion events, consisting of the implosion of one to four piers
per event, may be required. An individual BAS will be installed around
each pier included in a multiple-pier implosion event.
The complete BAS will be installed and tested during the weeks
leading up to each controlled blast. Before installing the BAS,
CALTRANS will move any existing debris on the Bay floor that may
interrupt proper installation of the BAS. Existing debris identified as
a risk to proper installation of the BAS will be moved outside the path
of the BAS layout. Each BAS frame will be lowered to the bottom of the
Bay by a barge-mounted crane and positioned into place. Divers will be
used to assist frame placement, and to connect air hoses to the frames.
Frames will be situated to contiguously surround the pier. Each frame
will be weighted to negative buoyancy for activation. Compressors will
provide enough pressure to achieve a minimal air volume fraction of
three to four percent, consistent with the successful use of BAS
systems in past controlled blasting activities, including Pier E3
(CALTRANS 2016 and CALTRANS 2017). System performance is anticipated to
provide 70 to 80 percent sound and pressure attenuation, based on the
results from the previous controlled blasting activities (CALTRANS
2016, 2017).
Test Blasts
At the beginning of the implosion season, test blasts will be
conducted within the completely installed and operating BAS so that the
hydroacoustic monitoring equipment will be properly triggered and
functional before each pier implosion event. A key requirement of the
implosion involves accurately capturing hydroacoustic information from
the controlled blast. To accomplish this, a smaller test charge will be
used to trigger recording instrumentation. Multiple test blast events
may be required to verify proper instrument operation and calibrate the
equipment for the implosion event. These same instruments and others of
the same type will use high-speed recording devices to capture
hydroacoustic data at both near-field and far-field monitoring
locations during the implosion.
Test charges will be scheduled to occur within two weeks of the
first implosion scheduled for the implosion season and after the BAS is
positioned into place and is functional. Additional test blasts may be
needed prior to subsequent implosion events to ensure triggering of the
data acquisition and recording instruments as well as calibration of
the equipment. The BAS will be operational during all tests. Tests will
use a charge weight of approximately 18 grains (0.0025 pound) or less.
The test charge will be placed along one of the longer faces of the
pier and inside the BAS while it is operating. Results from test blasts
that occurred during the Piers E3-E5 indicate that these test blasts
did not reach or exceed marine mammal threshold criteria beyond the
bubble flux of the BAS (See Appendix A of the IHA application and
CALTRANS 2016). Therefore, no take of marine mammals is anticipated due
to test blasts.
Controlled Implosion of Piers E6 Through E18
Before pier removal via controlled blasting, the bore holes in the
pier will be loaded with controlled charges. Individual cartridge
charges, using electronic blasting caps versus pumpable liquid blasting
agents, have been selected to provide greater control and accuracy in
determining the individual and total charge weights. Use of individual
cartridges will allow a refined blast plan that efficiently breaks
concrete while minimizing the amount of charges needed.
Boreholes will vary in diameter and depth, and have been designed
to provide optimal efficiency in transferring the energy created by the
controlled charges to dismantle the pier. Individual charge weights
will vary from 20 to 35 pounds (lbs) (9 to 16 kilograms (kg)), and the
total charge weight for each controlled blast event will be
approximately 2,132 to 15,800 lbs (967 to 7,167 kg). Depending on the
[[Page 26066]]
location, size, and removal limit of the pier to be removed, the total
number of individual charges to be used will range from approximately
100 to 455. The charges will be arranged in different levels (decks)
and will be separated in boreholes by stemming, which is the insertion
of inert materials (e.g., sand or gravel) to insulate and retain
charges in an enclosed space. Stemming will allow more efficient
transfer of energy into the structural concrete for fracture, and will
further reduce the release of potential energy into the surrounding
water column. The entire detonation sequence, consisting of
approximately 100 to 455 detonations, will last approximately 1 to 4
seconds for each pier with a minimum delay time of 9 milliseconds
(msec) between detonations.
Controlled blasting of Pier E6 will remove concrete by blasting
down through the concrete slab and top 3 ft (1 m) of the concrete seal.
Controlled blasting of Pier E7 will remove concrete by blasting down
through the concrete slab but not the concrete seal. Controlled
blasting of Piers E8 through E18 will remove concrete by blasting down
through the concrete cellular structure, but not through the concrete
slab, seal, and timber piles below. For Pier E6, site conditions will
require the pier to be blasted further into the structure to remove the
upper 3 ft (1 m) of the concrete seal and remove the structure to the
approved removal elevation. Remaining concrete seals and timber piles
below the mudline will not be removed.
As stated above, to remove the 13 marine foundations of Piers E6
through E18 in the 2017 season, multiple pier implosions may be
performed on the same day, sequentially. Smaller piers will be combined
into single blast events. All pier implosion events involving multiple
piers will use fewer explosives and will have a shorter total blast
duration than the previous implosion of Pier E3.
Debris Removal and Site Restoration
Following the controlled implosion event and confirmation that the
area is safe to work in, construction crews will begin to remove all
associated equipment, including barges, compressors, the BAS, and blast
mats. CALTRANS expects that a small portion of rubble from each pier
will fall outside its respective footprint and/or mound within the
footprint of each pier, and will need to be managed after each
controlled implosion. The portions of each pier that do not break apart
during controlled blasting and remain above the removal limits will be
demolished by mechanical means. This may require the use of underwater
mechanical equipment, including hydraulic crushing or grinding
machinery or diver-operated jackhammers.
Rubble from the controlled implosion of Piers E6 through E18 will
be removed down to each pier's respective planned debris removal limit
elevation by barge-mounted crane with a clamming bucket. The clamming
bucket will be equipped with a GPS unit to accurately guide the
movement of the bucket during underwater operation. The planned debris
removal limit elevations are shown in Table 1.
Table 1--Approximate Mudline and Removal Elevations of SFOBB Original East Span Marine Foundations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required
Mudline removal Planned
Pier elevation elevation (1.5 removal limits
(feet) ft below (3 ft below
mudline; ft) mudline; ft)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E6.............................................................. -40.0 -41.5 -43.0
E7.............................................................. -28.0 -29.5 -31.0
E8.............................................................. -19.0 -20.5 -22.0
E9.............................................................. -17.5 -19.0 -20.5
E10............................................................. -18.0 -19.5 -21.0
E11............................................................. -14.0 -15.5 -17.0
E12............................................................. -14.0 -15.5 -17.0
E13............................................................. -14.0 -15.5 -17.0
E14............................................................. -15.0 -16.5 -18.0
E15............................................................. -12.5 -14.0 -15.5
E16............................................................. -12.5 -14.0 -15.5
E17............................................................. -12.5 -14.0 -15.5
E18............................................................. -12.5 -14.0 -15.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are
described in detail later in this document (please see ``Proposed
Mitigation'' and ``Proposed Monitoring and Reporting'').
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
Seven species, representing seven stocks, of marine mammals may be
affected by the SFOBB project. The two most common species observed are
the Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina richardii) and the California
sea lion (Zalophus californianus). Juvenile northern elephant seals
(Mirounga angustirostris) seasonally enter the Bay (spring and fall),
while harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) may enter the western side
of the Bay throughout the year, but rarely occur near the SFOBB east
span. Gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) may enter the Bay during
their northward migration in the late winter and spring, but are
unlikely to occur near the project area during September, October, and
November when pier implosions would take place. Therefore, no take of
gray whales from the proposed pier implosions was requested, and NMFS
is not proposing to authorize take of gray whales. In addition, though
rare, northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) and bottlenose dolphins
(Tursiops truncatus) have also been sighted in the Bay. None of these
species are listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), or as depleted or a strategic stock under the MMPA.
We have reviewed CALTRANS' species information, which summarizes
available information regarding status and trends, distribution, and
habitat preferences, behavior and life history, and auditory
capabilities of the potentially affected species, for accuracy and
completeness. We refer the reader to Chapters 3 and 4 of the CALTRANS
IHA application as well as to NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SR;
www.nmgs.noaa/.gov/pr/sars/), for detailed information. Additional
general information about these species and
[[Page 26067]]
stocks (e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on
NMFS' Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/). Table 2 lists
all species and stocks with potential for occurrence in the San
Francisco Bay and summarizes information related to the species or
stock, including potential biological removal (PBR). For taxonomy, we
follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the
maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may
be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to
reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population. PBR is considered
in concert with the known sources of ongoing anthropogenic mortality to
assess the population-level effects of the anticipated mortality from a
specific project (as described in NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is
anticipated or authorized here, PBR information is included here as a
gross indicator of the status of the species and other threats. Gray
whales are a species that could potentially occur in the proposed
survey area but are not expected to have reasonable potential to be
harassed by CALTRANS' SFOBB actions because they are unlikely to occur
in the project area, as discussed above. This species is included in
Table 2 but is omitted from further analysis. For species status, we
provide information regarding U.S. regulatory status under the MMPA and
ESA in Table 2.
Table 2--Marine Mammal Species Potentially Present in Region of Activity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potential
Stock biological
Common name Scientific name ESA/MMPA status Occurrence Seasonality Range abundance removal
(PBR)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal (CA stock)......... Phoca vitulina NL/ND............ Common........... Year round....... California....... 30,968 1,641
richardii.
California sea lion (US stock). Zalophus NL/ND............ Common........... Year round....... California....... 296,750 9,200
californianus.
Northern fur seal (CA stock)... Callorhinus NL/ND............ Rare............. Year round....... California....... 12,844 451
ursinus.
Northern elephant seal (CA Mirounga NL/ND............ Occasional....... Spring & fall.... California....... 179,000 4,882
breeding stock). angustirostris.
Gray whale (Eastern north Eschrichtius NL*/ND........... Rare............. Spring & fall.... Mexico to the 20,990 624
Pacific stock). robustus. U.S. Arctic
Ocean.
Harbor porpoise (SF-Russian Phocoena phocoena NL/ND............ Rare............. Year round....... California....... 9,886 66
River stock).
Coastal Bottlenose dolphin (CA Tursiops NL/ND............ Rare............. Year round....... California....... 323 2.4
coastal stock). truncatus.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NL = Not Listed; * The E. North Pacific population is not listed under the ESA.; ND = Not Depleted under the MMPA.
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that the
specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat. The
``Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment'' section later in this
document will include a quantitative analysis of the number of
individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. The
``Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination'' section will consider
the context of this section, the ``Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment'' section, and the ``Proposed 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. In
August 2016, NMFS released its Technical Guidance for Assessing the
Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (NMFS 2016
Acoustic Technical Guidance). Under the NMFS 2016 Acoustic Technical
Guidance, there are five marine mammal hearing group categories, with
associated generalized hearing ranges as shown in Table 3 (note that
animals are less sensitive to sounds at the outer edge of their
generalized hearing range and most sensitive to sounds of frequencies
within a smaller range somewhere in the middle of their functional
hearing range).
Table 3--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups (NMFS, 2016)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized hearing range 1
Hearing group
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
whales).
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose
whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins,
cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus cruciger
& L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds underwater (PW) (true 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
seals).
Otariid pinnipeds underwater (OW) (sea 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
lions and fur seals).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a
composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual
species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized
hearing range chosen based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized
composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
As mentioned previously, six marine mammal species (two cetacean
and four pinniped species) are likely to be incidentally taken by the
proposed SFOBB controlled pier implosions. Of the two cetacean species,
one belongs to the MF cetacean (bottlenose dolphin) hearing group, and
one to the HF cetacean hearing group (harbor porpoise). Two species of
pinniped are phocid (Pacific harbor seal and northern elephant seal),
and two species of pinniped are otariid (California sea lion and
northern fur seal). A species' hearing group is a consideration when we
analyze the effects of exposure to sound on marine mammals.
[[Page 26068]]
General Information on Potential Effects
Explosives are impulsive sounds, which are characterized by short
duration, abrupt onset, and rapid decay. The proposed CALTRANS SFOBB
work using controlled charges (i.e., implosion events) could adversely
affect marine mammal species and stocks by exposing them to elevated
noise levels in the vicinity of the activity area. Based on the nature
of the other activities associated with the dismantling of Piers E6
through E18 of the original SFOBB East Span (mechanical dismantling)
and measured sound levels from those activities during past monitoring
associated with previous IHAs, NMFS does not expect activities other
than implosion events to contribute to underwater noise levels such
that take of marine mammals would potentially occur.
Exposure to high intensity sound for a sufficient duration may
result in behavioral reactions and 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).
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 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 kilohertz (kHz)), and can be of varying amounts (for example, an
animal's hearing sensitivity might be reduced initially by only 6
decibel (dB) or reduced by 30 dB). PTS is a permanent loss within a
specific frequency range, but some recovery is possible.
For cetaceans, 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).
Based on the best available scientific data, NMFS' 2016 Technical
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing includes acoustic thresholds related to PTS and TTS for
impulsive sounds that are expressed as weighted, cumulative sound
exposure levels (SELcum) and unweighted peak sound pressure
levels (SPLPK), as presented in Table 4.
Table 4--NMFS Take Thresholds for Marine Mammals From Underwater Implosions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B harassment Level A Serious injury
----------------------------------- harassment -----------------------------------
Group Species ------------------ Gastro- Mortality
Behavioral TTS PTS intestinal tract Lung
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid-freq cetacean............ Bottlenose 165 dB SEL..... 170 dB SEL or 185 dB SEL or 237 dB SPL...... 39.1M1/3 (1+[D/ 91.4M1/3 (1+[D/
dolphin. 224 dB SPLpk. 230 dB SPLpk. 10.081])1/2 Pa- 10.081])1/2 Pa-
sec. where: M sec. where: M
= mass of the = mass of the
animals in kg. animals in kg.
D = depth of D = depth of
animal in m.. animal in m.
High-freq cetacean........... Harbor porpoise. 135 dB SEL..... 140 dB SEL or 155 dB SEL or ................ ............... ...............
196 dB SPLpk. 202 dB SPLpk.
Phocidae..................... Harbor seal & 165 dB SEL..... 170 dB SEL or 185 dB SEL or ................ ............... ...............
northern 212 dB SPLpk. 218 dB SPLpk.
elephant seal.
Otariidae.................... California sea 183 dB SEL..... 188 dB SEL or 203 dB SEL or ................ ............... ...............
lion & northern 226 dBpk. 232 dB SPLpk.
fur seal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: All dB values are referenced to 1 [micro]Pa. SPLpk = Peak sound pressure level; psi = pounds per square inch.
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 occurs when other noises, such as those
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
[[Page 26069]]
whose acoustical sensors or environment are being severely masked could
also be impaired from maximizing their performance fitness in survival
and reproduction.
Masking occurs at the frequency band which the animals utilize.
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 3 times in terms of sound pressure
level) in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of
these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand 2009). For
CALTRANS' proposed SFOBB construction activities, noises from
controlled blasting is not likely to contribute to the elevated ambient
noise levels in the project area in such a way as to increasing
potential for or severity of masking. Baseline ambient noise levels in
the Bay are very high due to ongoing shipping, construction and other
activities in the Bay, and the sound associated with the controlled
blasting activities would be very brief.
Finally, exposure of marine mammals to certain sounds could lead to
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), such as: Changing
durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or
moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities;
changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as
socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive
behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g.,
pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).
The 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). For impulse noises (such as the proposed controlled
implosions associated with the dismantling of the original SFOBB
spans), NMFS uses received levels of 165 dB SEL to predict the onset of
behavioral harassment for mid-frequency cetaceans and phocid pinnipeds
(bottlenose dolphins and harbor seals and northern elephant seals,
respectively); 135 dB SEP for high-frequency cetaceans (harbor
porpoises); and 183 dB SEL for otariid pinnipeds (California sea lions
and northern fur seals).
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 significant if the change affects
growth, survival, and/or reproduction, which depends on the severity,
duration, and context of the effects.
Potential Effects From Controlled Pier Implosion
It is expected that an intense impulse from the proposed controlled
blasting of Piers E6 through E18 would have the potential to impact
marine mammals in the vicinity of the activity. The majority of impacts
would be startle behavioral responses and temporary behavioral
modification of marine mammals. However, a few individual animals could
be exposed to sound levels that would cause TTS.
The underwater explosion would send a shock wave and blast noise
through the water, release gaseous by-products, create an oscillating
bubble, and cause a plume of water to shoot up from the water surface.
The shock wave and blast noise are of most concern to marine animals.
The effects of an underwater explosion on a marine mammal depends on
many factors, including the size, type, and depth of both the animal
and the explosive charge; the depth of the water column; and the
standoff distance between the charge and the animal, as well as the
sound propagation properties of the environment. Potential impacts can
range from brief effects (such as behavioral disturbance), tactile
perception, physical discomfort, slight injury of the internal organs
and the auditory system, to death of the animal (Yelverton et al.,
1973; DoN, 2001). Non-lethal injury includes slight injury to internal
organs and the auditory system; however, delayed lethality can be a
result of individual or cumulative sublethal injuries (DoN, 2001).
Immediate lethal injury would be a result of massive combined trauma to
internal organs as a direct result of proximity to the point of
detonation (DoN, 2001). Generally, the higher the level of impulse and
pressure level exposure, the more severe the impact to an individual.
Injuries resulting from a shock wave take place at boundaries
between tissues of different density. Different velocities are imparted
to tissues of different densities, and this can lead to their physical
disruption. Blast effects are greatest at the gas-liquid interface
(Landsberg 2000). Gas-containing organs, particularly the lungs and
gastrointestinal (GI) tract, are especially susceptible (Goertner 1982;
Hill 1978; Yelverton et al., 1973). In addition, gas-containing organs
including the nasal sacs, larynx, pharynx, trachea, and lungs may be
damaged by compression/expansion caused by the oscillations of the
blast gas bubble. Intestinal walls can bruise or rupture, with
subsequent hemorrhage and escape of gut contents into the body cavity.
Less severe gastrointestinal tract injuries include contusions,
petechiae (small red or purple spots caused by bleeding in the skin),
and slight hemorrhaging (Yelverton et al., 1973).
Because the ears are the most sensitive to pressure, they are the
organs most sensitive to injury (Ketten 2000). Sound-related damage
associated with blast noise can be theoretically distinct from injury
from the shock wave, particularly farther from the explosion. If an
animal is able to hear a noise, at some level it can damage its hearing
by causing decreased sensitivity (Ketten 1995). Sound-related trauma
can be lethal or sublethal. Lethal impacts are those that result in
immediate death or serious debilitation in or near an intense source
and are not, technically, pure acoustic trauma (Ketten 1995). Sublethal
impacts include hearing loss, which is caused by exposures to
perceptible sounds. Severe damage (from the shock wave) to the ears
includes tympanic membrane rupture, fracture of the ossicles, damage to
the cochlea, hemorrhage, and cerebrospinal fluid leakage into the
middle ear. Moderate injury implies partial hearing loss due to
tympanic membrane rupture and blood in the middle ear. Permanent
hearing loss also can occur when the hair cells are damaged by one very
loud event, as well as by prolonged exposure to a loud noise or chronic
exposure to noise. The level of impact from blasts depends on both an
animal's location and, at outer zones, on its sensitivity to the
residual noise (Ketten, 1995).
The above discussion concerning underwater explosions only pertains
to open water detonations in a free field.
[[Page 26070]]
CALTRANS' demolition of Piers E6 through E18 using controlled implosion
uses a confined detonation method, meaning that the charges would be
placed within the structure. Therefore, most energy from the explosive
shock wave would be absorbed through the destruction of the structure
itself, and would not propagate through the open water. Measurements
and modeling from confined underwater detonation for structure removal
showed that energy from shock waves and noise impulses were greatly
reduced in the water column compared to expected levels from open water
detonations (Hempen et al., 2007; CALTRANS 2016). Therefore, with
monitoring and mitigation measures discussed below, CALTRANS'
controlled implosions of Piers E6 through E18 are not likely to have
injury or mortality effects on marine mammals in the project vicinity.
Instead, NMFS considers that CALTRANS' proposed controlled implosions
in the San Francisco Bay are most likely to cause behavioral harassment
and may cause TTS in a few individual of marine mammals, as discussed
below.
Changes in marine mammal behavior are expected to result from acute
stress, or startle, responses. This expectation is based on the idea
that some sort of physiological trigger must exist to change any
behavior that is already being performed, and this may occur due to
being startled by the implosion events. The exception to this
expectation is the case of behavioral changes due to auditory masking
(increasing call rates or volumes to counteract increased ambient
noise). Masking is not likely since the CALTRANS' controlled implosion
would only consist of five to six short, sequential detonations that
last for approximately 3-4 seconds each.
The removal of the SFOBB East Span is not likely to negatively
affect the habitat of marine mammal populations because no permanent
loss of habitat will occur, and only a minor, temporary modification of
habitat will occur due to the addition of sound and activity associated
with the dismantling activities.
Project activities will not affect any pinniped haul-out sites or
pupping sites. The YBI harbor seal haul-out site is on the opposite
site of the island from the SFOBB Project area. Because of the distance
and the island blocking the sound, underwater noise and pressure levels
from the SFOBB Project will not reach the haul-out site. Other haul-out
sites for sea lions and harbor seals are at a sufficient distance from
the SFOBB Project area that they will not be affected. The closest
recognized harbor seal pupping site is at Castro Rocks, approximately
8.7 miles (mi) (14 kilometers (km)) from the SFOBB Project area. No sea
lion rookeries are found in the Bay.
The addition of underwater sound from SFOBB Project activities to
background noise levels can constitute a potential cumulative impact on
marine mammals. However, these potential cumulative noise impacts will
be short in duration and would not occur in biologically important
areas, would not significantly affect biologically important
activities, and are not expected to have significant environmental
effects, as noted in the original FHWA 2001 FEIS for the SFOBB project,
incorporated by reference into NMFS' 2003 EA and subsequent
Supplemental EAs (2009 and 2015) for the issuance of IHAs for the SFOBB
project.
SPLs from pier implosions have the potential to injure or kill fish
in the immediate area. During previous pier implosion and pile driving
activities, CALTRANS reported mortality to prey species of marine
mammals, including northern anchovies and Pacific herring (CALTRANS
2016), averaging approximately 200 fish per implosion event (none of
which were ESA-listed species and none of which are managed under a
Fishery Management Plan). These few isolated fish mortality events are
not anticipated to have a substantial effect on prey species
populations or their availability as a food resource for marine
mammals.
Studies on explosives also suggest that larger fish are generally
less susceptible to death or injury than small fish, and results of
most studies are dependent upon specific biological, environmental,
explosive, and data recording factors. For example, 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; and finally, open water pelagic fish, such as
those expected to be in the project area, seem to be less affected than
reef fishes.
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 CALTRANS' controlled implosion events will
likely be insignificant to the population as a whole.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
proposed for authorization through an IHA, which will inform both NMFS'
consideration of whether the number of takes is ``small'' and the
negligible impact determination.
Harassment is the only type 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).
Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form
of disruption of behavioral patterns and/or TTS for individual marine
mammals resulting from exposure to noise from the controlled implosions
of 13 piers of the original East Span of the SFOBB. Based on the nature
of activity and past results from controlled implosions of Piers E3,
E4, and E5, Level A harassment is neither anticipated nor 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 for this activity. Below we
describe how the take is estimated.
The distance to marine mammal threshold criteria for implosion
activities, and corresponding zones of influence (ZOI) have been
determined based on underwater sound and pressure measurements
collected during previous activities in the SFOBB Project area. The
numbers of marine mammals by stock that may be taken by each type of
take were calculated based on distance to the marine mammal threshold
criteria, duration of the activity, and the estimated density of each
stock in the ZOI. NMFS worked with CALTRANS and adjusted those
estimated numbers upwards based on past monitoring data and/or other
sightings data in the San Francisco Bay area to come up with a maximum
number of potential occurrences for the requested takes, given that the
number of marine mammals in the area is highly variable.
[[Page 26071]]
Estimates of Species Densities of Marine Mammals
No systematic line transect surveys of marine mammals have been
performed in the San Francisco Bay. Therefore, the in-water densities
of harbor seals, California sea lions, and harbor porpoises were
calculated based on marine mammal monitoring conducted intermittently
from 2000 to 2016 during observations made during monitoring for the
SFOBB construction and demolition activities. The amount of monitoring
performed per year varied depending on the frequency and duration of
construction activities with the potential to affect marine mammals.
During the 251 days of monitoring from 2000 through 2016 (including 15
days of baseline monitoring in 2003), 958 harbor seals, 80 California
sea lions, and 9 harbor porpoises were observed within the waters of
the SFOBB east span (CLATRANS, 2001, 2004, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016,
2017). Northern elephant seal density in the project area was
calculated from stranding records of the Marine Mammal Center (MMC).
Too few observations or strandings of northern fur seals have occurred
to determine density estimates. However, take estimates for northern
fur seals were made based on stranding data, which was provided by the
MMC. Similarly, too few observations of bottlenose dolphins have
occurred to determine density estimates. Observations of bottlenose
dolphins are primarily west of Treasure Island and concentrated along
the nearshore areas of San Francisco south to Redwood City. One
individual has been observed near Alameda and is thought to have likely
passed by the project area, but no other reports of bottlenose dolphins
exist in the project area. Therefore, bottlenose dolphin takes are
based on the possibility of a few individuals potentially passing by
the project area. Table 5 provides the estimated in-water densities
used for calculating take of marine mammals in the SFOBB project area.
Table 5--Estimated In-Water Densities of Marine Mammals in the SFOBB
Project Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Main season of Density (animals/
Species occurrence km\2\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific Harbor seal (2015- Fall-Winter......... 4.1
2016).
Northern elephant seal...... Late Spring-Early 0.03
Winter.
California sea lion......... Late Summer-Fall 0.09
(post breeding
season).
Northern fur seal........... Late Fall-Early Insufficient data.
Spring.
Bottlenose dolphin.......... Year Round.......... Insufficient data.
Harbor porpoise............. Year Round.......... 0.21
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Pacific harbor seal, California sea lion, and harbor porpoise
densities based on monitoring for the east span of SFOBB from 2000 to
2016. Elephant seal densities estimated from sighting and stranding
data from MMC; A second set of Pacific harbor seal densities were
estimated based on increases of sightings recorded during 2015-2016
monitoring; Insufficient sighting data exist to estimate bottlenose
dolphin density. However, a single animal has been regularly observed
near the SFOBB east span; Insufficient sighting data exist to estimate
northern fur seal densities in the Bay. Approximately 2-4 strandings
occur in the entire Bay per year (unlikely to occur in the SFOBB
project area).
1. Pacific Harbor Seal Density Estimates
Most data on harbor seal populations are collected while the seals
are hauled out because they are much easier to count when they are out
of the water. In-water density estimates rely on haul-out counts, the
percentage of seals not on shore based on radio telemetry studies, and
the size of the foraging range of the population. Harbor seal density
in the water can vary greatly depending on weather conditions or the
availability of prey. For example, during Pacific herring runs further
north in the Bay in February 2014 (outside of the hydroacoustic zone
for Piers E6 to E18), very few harbor seals were observed foraging near
YBI or transiting through the project area for approximately two weeks.
Sightings went from a high of 27 harbor seals in one day to no seals
observed (CALTRANS 2014). In 2015 and 2016, the number of harbor seals
sighted in the project area increased up to 41 seals per day (CALTRANS
2015 and 2016).
Calculated harbor seal density for the proposed project is a per
day estimate of harbor seals in a 1 square kilometer (km\2\) during the
fall/winter or spring/summer season. Harbor seal density was calculated
from all observations during the SFOBB project monitoring from 2000 to
2016, with a second set of density estimates for 2015-2016 to account
for an increase in daily harbor seal observations during monitoring in
the fall of these years. Although multiple density estimates were
calculated for harbor seals, the highest density (4.1/km\2\) was used
to calculate estimated take to be conservative.
2. California Sea Lion Density Estimates
Within the SFOBB Project area, California sea lion density was
calculated from all observations of animals in the water during SFOBB
Project monitoring from 2000 to 2016. These observations included data
from baseline, pre, during, and post-pile driving, mechanical
dismantling, onshore blasting, and offshore implosion activities. All
sea lion observations within a 1 km\2\ area were used in the estimate.
Distances were recorded using a laser range finder (Bushnell Yardage
Pro Elite 1500; 1.0 yard accuracy). Care was taken to
eliminate multiple observations of the same animal, although most sea
lion observations involve a single animal.
Calculated California sea lion density was a per day estimate of
sea lions in 1 km\2\ during the fall/winter or spring/summer season in
Table 4. The highest density value (0.09/km\2\) was used to calculate
estimated take in order to be conservative.
3. Northern Elephant Seal Density Estimates
Northern elephant seal density in the project area was calculated
from the stranding records of the MMC, from 2004 to 2014. These data
included both injured or sick seals and healthy seals. Approximately
100 elephant seals were reported in the Bay during this time; most of
these hauled out and likely were sick or starving. The actual number of
individuals in the Bay may have been higher because not all individuals
would necessarily have hauled out. Some individuals may have simply
left the Bay soon after entering because the Bay is not a usual haul-
out area for elephant seals. Data from the MMC show several elephant
seals stranding on Treasure Island, and one healthy elephant seal was
observed resting on the beach in Clipper Cove in 2012. Elephant seal
pups or juveniles also may have stranded after weaning in the spring
and when they returned to California in the fall (September through
November). The density estimate of 0.03 animals/km\2\ was
conservatively estimated for the entire San Francisco
[[Page 26072]]
Bay based on stranding data over the 10-year period from 2004-2014, and
adjusting to account for the time period of the proposed SFOBB
activities. However, to be conservative, the actual number of takes
requested was not based on the calculated takes using the density
estimate. Instead, take estimates were requested based on qualitative
worst-case (and unlikely) estimates assuming six implosion events may
occur and assuming presence of three northern elephant seals at half
(three) of the implosion events.
4. Northern Fur Seal
Too few observations or strandings of northern fur seals have
occurred to determine densities. Juveniles of this species occasionally
strand in San Francisco Bay, particularly during El Nino events. During
the 2016 El Nino event, northern fur seal juveniles were observed and
stranded inside San Francisco Bay more frequently but were still not
considered common. The MMC reported rescuing more than 80 stranded
northern fur seal pups in 2015 and 2016, but only two to four northern
fur seal strandings occurred in the Bay. That number is likely to
decrease because the El Nino and warm water blob that affected the
species' food resources has dissipated. Requested take was based on
qualitative worst-case (and unlikely) estimates assuming six implosion
events may occur and assuming presence of three northern fur seals at
half (three) of the implosion events.
5. Common Bottlenose Dolphin Density Estimates
Too few observations of bottlenose dolphins have occurred to
determine density. Observations of bottlenose dolphins primarily have
occurred west of Treasure Island and were concentrated along the
nearshore area of San Francisco south to Redwood City. One individual
has been observed regularly near Alameda and likely passed by the
project area, but no other reports of bottlenose dolphins exist in the
project area (Perlman 2017). Requested take was based on qualitative
worst-case (and unlikely) estimates assuming six implosion events may
occur and assuming presence of three bottlenose dolphins at half
(three) of the implosion events.
6. Harbor Porpoise Density Estimates
Harbor porpoise density was calculated from all observations during
SFOBB Project monitoring, from 2000 to 2016. These observations
included data from baseline, pre, during and post-pile driving, and
onshore implosion activities. Over this period, the number of harbor
porpoises that were observed entering and using the Bay increased.
During the 16 years of monitoring in the SFOBB Project area, only 9
harbor porpoises were observed, and all occurred between 2006 and 2015
(including two in 2014 and 5 in 2015). Based on this data, a density
estimate of 0.21 animals/km\2\ was used to calculate estimated take.
Distance Calculations for Marine Mammal Threshold Criteria and
Corresponding Zones of Influence (ZOI)
Utilizing the marine mammal threshold criteria from NMFS' 2016
Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on
Marine Mammal Hearing (NMFS 2016), presented in Table 4, distances to
these threshold criteria were calculated using the results from
previous hydroacoustic monitoring associated with the implosions of
Piers E3, E4, and E5. In addition, the criteria for lung injury and
mortality to marine mammals is dependent on the mass of the animal and
depth of the animal in the water column. Animals that are smaller in
mass are more susceptible to injury from impulse pressures from
blasting, so the mass of juveniles (6 to 16 months old) from each
species was used in the calculations because these would be the
smallest animals potentially exposed. As Piers E6 through E18 are in
water that ranges from 10 to 40 ft (3 to 12 m), and due to the fact
that the species that may be present in the project area surface
frequently, and average depth of 20 ft (6 m) was used in the threshold
calculations for lung injury and mortality.
Distances to marine mammal threshold criteria were calculated for
each of the potential pier implosion scenarios:
Implosion of Pier E6.
Implosion of two 504-ft span piers in one implosion event.
Implosion of two 288-ft span piers in one implosion event.
Implosion of three 288-ft span piers in one implosion
event.
Implosion of four 288-ft span piers in one implosion
event.
Methods used to calculate distances to threshold criteria for the
implosion of multiple piers are presented in detail in Appendix C of
CALTRANS' application. Table 6 presents the distances calculated to
each threshold for each of the anticipated pier implosion scenarios.
Table 6--Threshold Distances (feet) Calculated for Each Implosion Scenario
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B harassment Level A Serious injury
-------------------------- harassment ------------------------
Group Species ------------- Mortality
Behavioral TTS (pk/ PTS (pk/ GI tract Slight lung
SELcum) SELcum)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implosion of Pier E6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid-freq cetacean............................ Bottlenose dolphin............. 1,330 180/881 98/256 48 48 <40
High-freq cetacean........................... Harbor porpoise................ 12,567 3,127/8,358 1,697/2,459 48 48 <40
Phocidae..................................... Harbor seal & northern elephant 2,220 613/1,484 332/443 48 48 <40
seal.
Otariidae.................................... California sea lion & northern 554 147/367 80/106 48 48 <40
fur seal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implosion of Two 504-ft Span Piers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid-freq cetacean............................ Bottlenose dolphin............. 1,055 166/685 90/190 44 <40 <40
High-freq cetacean........................... Harbor porpoise................ 10,300 2,882/6,800 1,564/1,966 44 <40 <40
Phocidae..................................... Harbor seal & northern elephant 1,790 565/1,186 306/333 44 <40 <40
seal.
Otariidae.................................... California sea lion & northern 421 136/274 74/78 44 <40 <40
fur seal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 26073]]
Implosion of Two 288-ft Span Piers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid-freq cetacean............................ Bottlenose dolphin............. 798 166/517 90/126 44 <40 <40
High-freq cetacean........................... Harbor porpoise................ 7,700 2,882/5,140 1,564/1,493 44 <40 <40
Phocidae..................................... Harbor seal & northern elephant 1,359 565/900 306/232 44 <40 <40
seal.
Otariidae.................................... California sea lion & northern 304 136/185 74/52 44 <40 <40
fur seal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implosion of Three 504-ft Span Piers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid-freq cetacean............................ Bottlenose dolphin............. 920 166/588 90/132 44 <40 <40
High-freq cetacean........................... Harbor porpoise................ 9,403 2,882/5,900 1,564/1,722 44 <40 <40
Phocidae..................................... Harbor seal & northern elephant 1,580 565/1,045 306/258 44 <40 <40
seal.
Otariidae.................................... California sea lion & northern 339 136/201 74/52 44 <40 <40
fur seal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implosion of Four 504-ft Span Piers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mid-freq cetacean............................ Bottlenose dolphin............. 920 166/558 90/132 44 <40 <40
High-freq cetacean........................... Harbor porpoise................ 9,935 2,882/6,590 1,564/1,917 44 <40 <40
Phocidae..................................... Harbor seal & northern elephant 1,730 565/1,135 306/264 44 <40 <40
seal.
Otariidae.................................... California sea lion & northern 349 136/204 74/52 44 <40 <40
fur seal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Takes of Marine Mammals
The number of marine mammals by stock that may be taken by
implosion of Piers E6 through E18 were calculated based on distances to
the marine mammal threshold criteria, duration of the activity, and the
estimated density of each species in the ZOI (for species with
insufficient data to calculate densities, estimated number of takes
were based on potential for occurrence as described above). For each
pier implosion scenario, the total area of the criteria zone was
calculated and multiplied by the density of each species. Combining
multiple piers in a single implosion event results in fewer implosion
events and, therefore, fewer marine mammals that would potentially be
taken. However, take estimates were calculated based on a worst-case
scenario of a total of six implosion events.. Based on calculated sound
pressure levels and the implementation of avoidance and minimization
measures discussed below, no injury (Level A harassment) or mortality
is anticipated to occur as a result of the implosion activities and
NMFS is not authorizing any Level A takes for this activity. For more
detailed information on the number of takes calculated for each
implosion scenario, see Table 19 of the CALTRANS IHA application. For
spreadsheets showing the calculations that were performed to estimate
marine mammal exposures for each pier implosion scenario, see Appendix
D of the IHA application. Table 7 provides a summary of the estimated
exposure of marine mammals based on calculations using density
estimates or past monitoring efforts in cases where density estimates
were not able to be calculated (northern fur seal and bottlenose
dolphin).
Table 7--Estimated Combined Exposures of Marine Mammals to the Implosions of Piers E6 Through E18 for Levels A and B and Mortality Threshold Criteria
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B exposures for all implosions Level A exposures \1\
Species ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mortality \1\
Behavior TTS PTS GI injury Slight lung injury
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal..................... 22................ 16................ 0................. 0................. 0................. 0
California sea lion............. 0................. 0................. 0................. 0................. 0................. 0
Northern elephant seal.......... 0................. 0................. 0................. 0................. 0................. 0
Northern fur seal............... \2\ NA (0)........ \2\ NA (0)........ \2\ NA (0)........ \2\ NA (0)........ \2\ NA (0)........ \2\ NA (0)
Bottlenose dolphin.............. \2\ NA (0)........ \2\ NA (0)........ \2\ NA (0)........ \2\ NA (0)........ \2\ NA (0)........ \2\ NA (0)
Harbor porpoise................. 0................. 0................. 0................. 0................. 0................. 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL....................... 22................ 16................ 0................. 0................. 0................. 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No implosions would occur if any marine mammal is within the Level A or mortality threshold criteria zones.
\2\ No density estimates were calculated, so calculations of take were not completed; However, no takes are estimated in this table based on the fact
that none of these species have been observed since monitoring efforts for the SFOBB project began in 2000.
[[Page 26074]]
However, the number of marine mammals in the area at any given time
is highly variable. Animal movement depends on time of day, tide
levels, weather, and availability and distribution of prey species.
Therefore, to account for potential high animal density that could
occur during the short window of controlled implosion, NMFS worked with
CALTRANS and adjusted the estimated number upwards based on past
monitoring data and/or other sightings data in the San Francisco Bay
area to come up with a maximum number of potential occurrences for the
requested takes. These adjustments were based on likely group sizes of
these animals and were developed quantitatively to account for
variability in animal occurrence and activity.
A summary of the requested number of takes by implosion of Piers E6
through E18 is provided in Table 8.
Table 8--Summary of Requested Takes of Marine Mammals for the Pier E4 and E5 Implosions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Stock Percent take
Species behavioral Level B TTS abundance of population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor seal............................. 66 48 30,968 0.37
California sea lion............................. 18 12 296,750 0.01
Northern elephant seal.......................... 6 3 179,000 0.01
Northern fur seal............................... 6 3 12,844 0.21
Harbor porpoise................................. 18 9 9,886 0.09
Bottlenose dolphin.............................. 6 3 323 2.8
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 120 78 .............. ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an incidental take authorization under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods
of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the
least practicable adverse impact on such species or stock and its
habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and
areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species
or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (the latter is not
applicable for this action). NMFS' regulations require applicants for
incidental take authorizations to include information about the
availability and feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment,
methods, and manner of conducting such activity or other means of
effecting the least practicable adverse impact upon the affected
species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we
carefully weigh two primary factors: (1) 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, and their habitat, which considers the nature of the potential
adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range), as well as
the likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented; and
(2) the practicability of the measures for applicant implementation,
which may consider such things as cost and impact on operations.
Proposed Mitigation Measures for Confined Implosion
For CALTRANS's proposed controlled implosions of Piers E6 through
E18, CALTRANS will utilize the mitigation measures discussed below to
minimize the potential impacts to marine mammals in the project
vicinity, which were developed and successfully employed for previous
controlled implosions of other piers of the original East Span of the
SFOBB. The primary purposes of these mitigation measures are to
minimize impacts by reducing sound levels from the activities and to
monitor for marine mammals within designated exclusion zones and zones
of influence (ZOI). Specific proposed mitigation measures are:
Time Restriction
Implosion of Piers E6 through E18 would only be conducted during
daylight hours, with enough time for pre and post implosion monitoring
during daylight hours. Implosion events would also only be conducted
during periods with good visibility when the largest exclusion zone can
be visually monitored. In addition, to minimize impacts on biological
resources, implosion events would be conducted at slack tides between
September and November.
Installation of Blast Attenuation System (BAS)
Prior to the demolition of Piers E6 through E18, CALTRANS would
install a Blast Attenuation System (BAS) as described above to reduce
the noise and shockwave from the implosion.
Establishment of Level A Exclusion Zone
CALTRANS will establish marine mammal exclusion zones (MMEZ) for
both the mortality and Level A harassment zone (including PTS, GI track
injury, and slight lung injury) using the criteria threshold that
extends out the furthest distance (refer to Table 6). As an additional
conservative measure to ensure that no marine mammals are taken by
Level A harassment, the field-implemented MMEZ will be 20 percent
larger than the calculated distances to threshold criteria in Table 6.
The isopleths for PTS for phocids (harbor seal and elephant seal)
cover the entire area for both Level A harassment and mortality for all
pinnipeds (including California sea lions and northern fur seals), as
well as bottlenose dolphins. Therefore, the pinniped and dolphin
exclusion zone will be established at the radial distance to the phocid
PTS Level A harassment threshold plus an additional 20 percent
conservative factor. The harbor porpoise exclusion zone will be
established at the radial distance to the high-frequency cetacean PTS
Level A harassment threshold plus an additional 20 percent conservative
factor (see Table 23 and Figures 12-14 and 17-21 of the IHA
application). These MMEZs will be monitored by marine mammal observers
(MMOs), and if any marine mammals are observed within the MMEZs, the
implosion will be delayed until the animal leaves the area or at least
15 minutes have passed since the last observation of pinnipeds and
small cetaceans and at least 30 minutes have passed since the last
observation of bottlenose dolphins.
[[Page 26075]]
Establishment of Level B Behavioral Harassment and Temporary Hearing
Threshold Shift (TTS) Monitoring Zones
Marine mammal monitoring zones will be established for both
behavioral response and TTS (Level B harassment). Hydroacoustic
monitoring results from the implosions of Piers E3, E4, and E5 were
used to calculate distances to these thresholds for the implosions of
Piers E6 through E18 (see Chapter 6 and Tables 9 to 18 of the IHA
application). As a conservative measure, the field-implemented
behavioral response and TTS monitoring zones will be 20 percent larger
than the calculated distances to threshold criteria shown in Tables 9
to 18 of the IHA application.
The isopleths for Level B harassment to phocids (harbor seals and
elephant seals) for all pier implosion scenarios cover the entire area
for Level B harassment to all pinnipeds including otariids (California
sea lions and fur seals) as well as bottlenose dolphins. Therefore, the
pinniped and dolphin Level B harassment monitoring zones for each pier
implosion scenario will be established at the radial distance to the
phocid Level B harassment threshold plus an additional 20 percent
conservative factor (see Tables 24 and 25 and Figures 12-16 of the IHA
application).
Communication
All Marine Mammal Observers (MMOs) will be equipped with mobile
phones and a VHF radio as a backup. One person will be designated as
the Lead MMO and will be in constant contact with the Resident Engineer
on site and the blasting crew. The Lead MMO will coordinate marine
mammal sightings with the other MMOs. MMOs will contact the other MMOs
when a sighting is made within the exclusion zone or near the exclusion
zone so that the MMOOs within overlapping areas of responsibility can
continue to track the animal and the Lead MMO is aware of the animal.
If an animal has entered the exclusion zone or is near it within 30
minutes of blasting, the Lead MMO will notify the Resident Engineer and
blasting crew. The Lead MMO will keep them informed of the disposition
of the animal.
Mitigation Conclusions
NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation
measures and considered a range of other measures in the context of
ensuring that NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least
practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and
their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included
consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:
The manner in which, and the degree to which, the
successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize
adverse impacts to marine mammals.
The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to
minimize adverse impacts as planned.
The practicability of the measure for applicant
implementation.
Any mitigation measure(s) prescribed by NMFS should be able to
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of
the general goals listed below:
(1) Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal).
(2) A reduction in the numbers of marine mammals (total number or
number at biologically important time or location) exposed to received
levels of activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals
(this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing harassment takes
only).
(3) A reduction in the number of times (total number or number at
biologically important time or location) individuals would be exposed
to received levels of activities expected to result in the take of
marine mammals (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing
harassment takes only).
(4) A reduction in the intensity of exposures (either total number
or number at biologically important time or location) to received
levels of activities expected to result in the take of marine mammals
(this goal may contribute to a, above, or to reducing the severity of
harassment takes only).
(5) Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying special attention to the food base, activities that
block or limit passage to or from biologically important areas,
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary destruction/disturbance
of habitat during a biologically important time.
(6) For monitoring directly related to mitigation--an increase in
the probability of detecting marine mammals, thus allowing for more
effective implementation of the mitigation.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily
determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of
effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammals species or
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, ``requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such taking.'' The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
Incidental Take Authorizations (ITA) 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 to
both compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained
from the required monitoring. CALTRANS has proposed marine mammal
monitoring measures as part of the IHA application found at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. The plan may be modified
or supplemented based on comments or new information received from the
public during the public comment period.
Monitoring measures prescribed by NMFS should accomplish one or
more of the following general goals:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, absence, 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 animals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks.
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important
[[Page 26076]]
physical components of marine mammal habitat).
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
As most elements of marine mammal monitoring plans for pile driving
activities are similar to what would be required for underwater
implosions, monitoring for impacts to marine mammals from the implosion
activities for Piers E3, E4, and E5 were based on the SFOBB pile
driving monitoring protocol. Monitoring for the implosion events for
Piers E6 through E18 will also be based on the SFOBB pile driving
monitoring protocol and past implosion activities for Piers E3, E4, and
E5. These monitoring plans would include monitoring an exclusion zone
and ZOIs for TTS and behavioral harassment described above as well as
the following:
(1) Marine Mammal Observers (MMOs)
A minimum of 10 MMOs would be required during the controlled
implosions of Piers E6 through E18 so that the MMEZ, Level B Harassment
TTS and Behavioral ZOIs, and surrounding area can be monitored. Up to
15 MMOs will be required for implosion events involving multiple piers
in order to monitor the full extent of these areas. One MMO would be
designated as the Lead MMO and would receive updates from other MMOs on
the presence or absence of marine mammals within the MMEZ and would
notify the Environmental Compliance Manager of a cleared exclusion zone
to the implosion(s).
(2) Monitoring Protocol
Implosions of Piers E6 through E18 will be conducted only during
daylight hours and with enough time for pre and post-implosion
monitoring during daylight hours, and with good visibility (i.e., clear
skies and no high winds). This work will be completed so that MMOs will
be able to detect marine mammals within the exclusion zones and beyond.
The Lead MMO will be in contact with other MMOs and if any marine
mammals enter an exclusion zone within 30 minutes of blasting, the Lead
MMO will notify the Environmental Compliance Manager that the implosion
may need to be delayed. The Lead MMO will keep the Environmental
Compliance Manager informed about the disposition of the animal. If the
animal remains in the MMEZ, blasting will be delayed until it has left
the exclusion zone. If the animal dives and is not seen again, blasting
will be delayed at least 15 minutes for pinnipeds and small cetacean
(harbor porpoise), and 30 minutes for bottlenose dolphin. After the
implosion has occurred, the MMOs will continue to monitor the area for
at least 60 minutes.
(3) Data Collection
Each MMO will record the observation position, start and end times
of observations, and weather conditions (i.e., sunny/cloudy, wind
speed, fog, visibility). For each marine mammal sighting, the following
will be recorded, if possible:
Species.
Number of animals (with or without pup/calf).
Age class (pup/calf, juvenile, adult).
Identifying marks or color (e.g., scars, red pelage,
damaged dorsal fin).
Position relative to piers being imploded (distance and
direction).
Movement (direction and relative speed).
Behavior (e.g., logging (resting at the surface),
swimming, spy-hopping (raising above the water surface to view the
area), foraging).
(4) Post-Implosion Survey
Although any injury or mortality from the implosions of Piers E6
through E18 is very unlikely, boat or shore surveys will be conducted
daily for 3 days following the event, to determine whether any injured
or stranded marine mammals are in the area. If an injured or dead
animal is discovered during these surveys or by other means, the NMFS-
designated stranding team will be contacted to pick up the animal.
Veterinarians will treat the animal or will conduct a necropsy to
attempt to determine whether it stranded because of the pier
implosions.
Proposed Reporting Measures
CALTRANS 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 draft
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 draft report within 30 days, and if NMFS has comments,
CALTRANS would address the comments and submit a final report to NMFS
within 30 days. If no comments are provided by NMFS after 30 days
receiving the report, the draft report is considered to be final.
Marine Mammal Stranding Plan
Stranding plans for the pier implosions of Piers E3, E4, and E5
were prepared in cooperation with the local NMFS-designated marine
mammal stranding, rescue, and rehabilitation center. An updated version
of this plan will be implemented during implosions of Piers E6 through
E18. Although avoidance and minimization measures likely will prevent
any injuries, preparations will be made in the unlikely event that
marine mammals are injured. Elements of the plan will include the
following:
1. The stranding crew will prepare treatment areas at an NMFS-
designated facility for cetaceans or pinnipeds that may be injured from
the implosions. Preparation will include equipment to treat lung
injuries, auditory testing equipment, dry and wet caged areas to hold
animals, and operating rooms if surgical procedures are necessary.
2. A stranding crew and a veterinarian will be on call near the
piers at the time of the implosions to quickly recover any injured
marine mammals, provide emergency veterinary care, stabilize the
animal's condition, and transport individuals to an NMFS-designated
facility. If an injured or dead animal is found, NMFS (both the
regional office and headquarters) will be notified immediately, even if
the animal appears to be sick or injured from causes other than the
implosions.
3. Post-implosion surveys will be conducted immediately after the
event and over the following 3 days to determine whether any injured or
dead marine mammals are in the area.
4. Any veterinarian procedures, euthanasia, rehabilitation
decisions, and time of release or disposition of the animal will be at
the discretion of the NMFS-designated facility staff and the
veterinarians treating the animals. Any necropsies to determine whether
the injuries or death of an animal was the result of an implosion or
other anthropogenic or natural causes will be conducted at an NMFS-
designated facility by the stranding crew and veterinarians. The
results will be communicated to both the CALTRANS and to NMFS as soon
as possible, followed by a written report within a month.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determinations
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
[[Page 26077]]
recruitment or survival (i.e., population-level effects). An estimate
of the number of Level B harassment takes, alone, is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through behavioral harassment, NMFS must consider other
factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (their intensity,
duration, etc.), the context of any responses (e.g., critical
reproductive time or location, migration, etc.), as well as effects on
habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We also assess
the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by evaluating
this information relative to population status. Consistent with the
1989 preamble for NMFS' implementing regulations (54 FR 40338;
September, 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing
anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis 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 and stocks listed in Table 8, given that the
anticipated effects of CALTRANS' SFOBB construction activities
involving controlled implosions for Piers E6 through E18 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 for this activity, or else species-specific factors
would be identified and analyzed.
No injuries or mortalities are anticipated to occur as a result of
CALTRANS' SFOBB activity associated with the controlled implosions to
demolish Piers E6 through E18, and none are proposed to be authorized.
The relatively low marine mammal density and small Level A exclusion
zones make injury takes of marine mammals unlikely, based on take
calculation described above. In addition, the Level A exclusion zones
would be thoroughly monitored before the proposed implosion, and
detonation activity would be postponed if an marine mammal is sighted
within the exclusion zone.
The takes that are anticipated and authorized are expected to be
limited to short-term Level B harassment (behavioral responses and
TTS). Due to implementation of mitigation measures and proven success
in implementation of these measures as evidenced during previous SFOBB
activities, more significant acute stress responses, serious injury or
mortality, and more significant behavioral responses are not
anticipated as a result of the proposed activities. Marine mammals
(Pacific harbor seal, northern elephant seal, California sea lion,
northern fur seal, harbor porpoise, and bottlenose dolphin) 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 level during the implosion
noise. A few marine mammals could experience TTS if they occur within
the Level B TTS ZOI. However, as discussed early 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, even if an animal receives a TTS, the TTS would be a one-time
event from a brief impulse noise (about 5 seconds), making it unlikely
that the TTS would lead to PTS. Finally, there is no critical habitat
or other biologically important areas in the vicinity of CALTRANS'
proposed controlled implosion areas (Calambokidis et al., 2015).
The project also is not expected to have significant adverse
effects on affected marine mammals' habitat, as analyzed in detail in
the ``Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals and
their Habitat'' section. There is no biologically important area in the
vicinity of the SFOBB project 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.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine
mammal take from CALTRANS's SFOBB demolition via controlled implosions
of Piers E6 through E18 will have a negligible impact on the affected
marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
Table 8 presents the numbers of marine mammals that could be taken
by Level B harassment incidental to CALTRAN's activities. Our analysis
shows that less than 2.8 percent of the affected stocks could be taken
by behavioral harassment and TTS (see Table 8 in this document).
Therefore, the numbers of marine mammals estimated to be taken are
small relative to total populations of the affected species or stocks.
In addition, the mitigation and monitoring measures (described
previously in this document) prescribed in the proposed IHA are
expected to reduce even further any potential disturbance to marine
mammals.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring
measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that small numbers of marine mammals
will be taken relative to the populations of the affected species or
stocks.
Impact on Availability of Affected Species for Taking for Subsistence
Uses
There are no subsistence uses of marine mammals in the proposed
project area; and, thus, no subsistence uses impacted 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)
NMFS has determined that issuance of the IHA will have no effect on
listed marine mammals, as none are known to occur in the action area.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
NMFS prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the take of
marine mammals incidental to construction of the East Span of the SFOBB
and made a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on November 4,
2003. Due to the modification of part of the construction project and
the mitigation measures, NMFS reviewed additional information from
CALTRANS regarding empirical measurements of pile driving noises for
the smaller temporary piles without an air bubble curtain system and
the use of vibratory pile driving. NMFS prepared a Supplemental
[[Page 26078]]
Environmental Assessment (SEA) and analyzed the potential impacts to
marine mammals that would result from the modification of the action. A
FONSI was signed on August 5, 2009. In addition, for CALTRANS' Piers E4
and E5 demolition using controlled implosion, NMFS prepared an SEA and
analyzed the potential impacts to marine mammals that would result from
the modification. A FONSI was signed on September 3, 2015. The proposed
activity and expected impacts remain within what was previously
analyzed in the EA and SEAs. Therefore, no additional NEPA analysis is
warranted. A copy of the SEA and FONSI is available upon request (see
ADDRESSES).
Proposed Authorization
As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to
issue an IHA to CALTRANS for conducting SFOBB activities involving
demolition via controlled implosion of Piers E6 through E18, provided
the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated. The proposed IHA language is provided
next.
1. This Authorization is valid from September 1, 2017, through
August 31, 2018.
2. This Authorization is valid only for activities associated with
the SFOBB demolition activities in San Francisco Bay.
3. (a) The species authorized for incidental harassment takings,
Level B harassment only, are: Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina
richardii), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), northern
elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris), northern fur seal (Callorhinus
ursinus), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and bottlenose dolphin
(Tursiops truncatus).
(b) The authorization for taking by harassment is limited to the
dismantling of Piers E6 through E18 via controlled implosion.
(c) The taking of any marine mammal in a manner prohibited under
this Authorization must be reported within 24 hours of the taking to
the West Coast Administrator of the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) at 206-526-6150, and the Chief of the Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, at (301) 427-8401, or
her designee (301-427-8418).
4. The holder of this Authorization must notify the Chief of the
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, at
least 48 hours prior to the start of activities identified in 3(b)
(unless constrained by the date of issuance of this Authorization in
which case notification shall be made as soon as possible).
5. 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 8 of this notice. The taking by Level A harassment, injury, or
death of these species or the taking by harassment, injury, or death of
any other species of marine mammal is prohibited and may result in the
modification, suspension, or revocation of this Authorization.
(b) The taking of any marine mammal is prohibited whenever the
required marine mammal observers (MMOs), required by condition 7(a),
are not present in conformance with condition 7(a) of this
Authorization.
6. Mitigation
(a) Time Restriction
Controlled implosion of Piers E6 through E18 shall only be
conducted during daylight hours on slack tides between September and
November and with enough time for pre- and post-activity monitoring
during daylight hours. Further, controlled implosion shall only be
conducted during periods of good visibility when the largest exclusion
zone can be visually monitored.
(b) For controlled implosion of Piers E6 through E18, CALTRANS will
install a Blast Attenuation System (BAS) prior to demolition to reduce
the noise and shockwave from the implosion.
(c) For controlled implosion of Piers E6 though E18 and associated
test blasting, CALTRANS shall establish exclusions zones and zones of
influence (ZOIs) that are appropriate to specific marine mammal
functional hearing group (Tables 1-10, Attachment 1; see Tables 9-18 of
the application) .
(d) Exclusion Zone Monitoring for Mitigation Measures.
(i) NMFS-approved MMOs shall survey the exclusion zone for 30
minutes prior to the start of controlled implosion activities to ensure
that no marine mammals are seen within the zones
(ii) If marine mammals are found within the exclusion zones,
controlled implosion of the pier(s) shall be delayed until they move
out of the area. If a marine mammal is seen above water and then dives
below, the contractor shall wait 15 minutes for pinnipeds and small
cetaceans (harbor porpoise) and 30 minutes for bottlenose dolphins
prior to initiating implosion activities. If no marine mammals are seen
by the observer in that time it would be assumed that the animal has
moved beyond the exclusion zone.
(e) Communication
For controlled implosion, the Lead MMO shall be in constant contact
with the Resident Engineer on site and the blasting crew to ensure that
no marine mammal is within the exclusion zone before the controlled
implosion.
7. Monitoring:
(a) Marine Mammal Observers.
(i) CALTRANS shall employ NMFS-approved MMOs to conduct marine
mammal monitoring for its SFOBB controlled pier implosion.
(ii) Marine mammal monitoring shall begin at least 30 minutes prior
to the start of the activities, shall occur through the entire
activities, and shall continue for 60 minutes after the implosion
events.
(iii) Observations shall be made using high-quality binoculars
(e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power). MMOs shall be equipped with radios or
cell phones for maintaining contact with other observers and CALTRANS
engineers, and range finders to determine distance to marine mammals,
boats, buoys, and construction equipment.
(iv) For controlled implosion of Piers E6 through E18:
(A) A minimum of 10 MMOs shall be required during controlled
implosion so that the exclusion zone, Level B Harassment TTS and
Behavioral ZOIs, and surrounding area can be monitored. Up to 15 MMOs
will be required for implosion events involving multiple piers.
(B) MMOs shall be positioned near the edge of each of the threshold
criteria zones and shall utilize boats, barges, and bridge piers and
roadway.
(C) Boat or shore surveys shall be conducted immediately after the
event and daily for the three days following the event to determine if
there are any injured or stranded marine mammals in the area.
(D) Monitoring Data Collection:
For each marine mammal sighting, the following shall be recorded,
if possible:
Species.
Number of animals (with or without pup/calf).
Age class (pup/calf, juvenile, adult).
Identifying marks or color (scars, red pelage, damaged
dorsal fin, etc.).
Position relative to pier implosion (distance and
direction).
Movement (direction and relative speed).
Behavior (logging [resting at the surface], swimming,
spyhopping [raising above the water surface to view the area],
foraging, etc.)
[[Page 26079]]
Duration of sighting or times of multiple sightings of the
same individual
8. Reporting:
(a) CALTRANS shall submit a draft monitoring report within 90 days
after completion of the dismantling 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.
(b) NMFS will have an opportunity to provide comments within 30
days after receiving the draft report. If NMFS has comments, CALTRANS
shall address the comments and submit a final report to NMFS within 30
days.
(c) If NMFS does not provide comments within 30 days after
receiving the report, the draft report is considered to be final.
(d) In the unanticipated event that the dismantling 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, CALTRANS shall immediately cease all operations and
immediately report the incident to the Chief, Permits and Conservation
Division, 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 CALTRANS to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. CALTRANS may not resume
their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or
telephone.
(e) In the event that CALTRANS discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead MMO 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),
CALTRANS will immediately report the incident to the Chief, Permits and
Conservation Division, 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 CALTRANS
to determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.
(f) In the event that CALTRANS discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead MMO 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), CALTRANS shall report the incident
to the Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinators,
within 24 hours of the discovery. CALTRANS shall provide photographs or
video footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded
animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network.
CALTRANS can continue its operations under such a case.
9. Marine Mammal Stranding Plan:
A marine mammal stranding plan shall be prepared in cooperation
with the local NMFS-designated marine mammal stranding, rescue, and
rehabilitation center. Elements of that plan would include the
following:
(a) The stranding crew shall prepare treatment areas at the NMFS-
designated facility for cetaceans or pinnipeds that may be injured from
the implosion. Preparation shall include equipment to treat lung
injuries, auditory testing equipment, dry and wet caged areas to hold
animals, and operating rooms if surgical procedures are necessary.
Equipment to conduct auditory brainstem response hearing testing would
be available to determine if any inner ear threshold shifts (TTS or
PTS) have occurred.
(b) A stranding crew and a veterinarian shall be on call near the
implosion event sites at the time of the implosion to quickly recover
any injured marine mammals, provide emergency veterinary care,
stabilize the animal's condition, and transport individuals to the
NMFS-designated facility. If an injured or dead animal is found, NMFS
(both the regional office and headquarters) shall be notified
immediately even if the animal appears to be sick or injured from other
than blasting.
(c) Post-implosion surveys shall be conducted immediately after the
event and over the following three days to determine if there are any
injured or dead marine mammals in the area.
(d) Any veterinarian procedures, euthanasia, rehabilitation
decisions and time of release or disposition of the animal shall be at
the discretion of the NMFS-designated facility staff and the
veterinarians treating the animals. Any necropsies to determine if the
injuries or death of an animal was the result of the blast or other
anthropogenic or natural causes will be conducted at the NMFS-
designated facility by the stranding crew and veterinarians. The
results shall be communicated to both CALTRANS and to NMFS as soon as
possible with a written report within a month.
10. This Authorization may be modified, suspended or withdrawn if
the holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if the
authorized taking is having more than a negligible impact on the
species or stock of affected marine mammals, or if there is an
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or
stocks for subsistence uses.
11. A copy of this Authorization must be in the possession of each
contractor who performs the controlled implosion work for Piers E6
through E18 and associated Test Blasts.
Dated: June 1, 2017.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-11646 Filed 6-5-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P