Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Biorka Island Dock Replacement Project, 50397-50411 [2017-23563]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
Numbering System (‘‘U.N.S.’’) C2000.
The orders do not cover products the
chemical compositions of which are
defined by other C.D.A. or U.N.S. series.
In physical dimensions, the product
covered by the orders has a solid
rectangular cross section over 0.006
inches (0.15 millimeters) through 0.188
inches (4.8 millimeters) in finished
thickness or gauge, regardless of width.
Coiled, wound-on-reels (traverse
wound), and cut-to-length products are
included. The merchandise is currently
classified under Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’) item numbers 7409.21.00
and 7409.29.00.
Although the HTSUS item numbers
are provided for convenience and
customs purposes, the written
description of the scope of the orders
remains dispositive.
Continuation of the Orders
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
As a result of the determinations by
the Department and the ITC that
revocation of the AD orders would
likely lead to continuation or recurrence
of dumping and material injury to an
industry in the United States, pursuant
to section 751(d)(2) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.218(a), the Department hereby
orders the continuation of the AD orders
on brass sheet and strip from France,
Germany, Italy, and Japan.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
will continue to collect AD cash
deposits at the rates in effect at the time
of entry for all imports of subject
merchandise. The effective date of
continuation of these orders will be the
date of publication in the Federal
Register of this notice of continuation.
Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act,
the Department intends to initiate the
next five-year review of these orders not
later than 30 days prior to the fifth
anniversary of the effective date of
continuation.
These five-year sunset reviews and
this notice are in accordance with
section 751(c) of the Act and published
pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act,
and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4).
Dated: October 24, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations,
performing the non-exclusive functions and
duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2017–23642 Filed 10–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XF797
New England Fishery Management
Council; Public Meeting
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; public meeting.
AGENCY:
The New England Fishery
Management Council (Council) is
scheduling a public meeting of its
Herring Advisory Panel to consider
actions affecting New England fisheries
in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
Recommendations from this group will
be brought to the full Council for formal
consideration and action, if appropriate.
DATES: This meeting will be held on
Monday, November 20, 2017 at 10 a.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Holiday Inn, 700 Myles Standish
Blvd., Taunton, MA 02780; telephone:
(508) 823–0430.
Council Address: New England
Fishery Management Council, 50 Water
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director,
New England Fishery Management
Council; telephone: (978) 465–0492.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Agenda
The Advisory Panel will review
analyses prepared for Herring
Amendment 8 Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS) specific to the
range of alternatives developed to
address potential localized depletion
and user conflicts in the herring fishery.
The panel may identify preferred
alternatives for the Committee to
consider the following day. The panel is
not scheduled to discuss the other
measures under consideration in
Amendment 8, Acceptable Biological
Catch (ABC) control rule alternatives.
The Council reviewed the ABC control
rule alternatives at the September 2017
meeting and declined to select a
preferred alternative, but approved that
portion of Amendment 8 to proceed for
submission and public comment. They
will discuss recommendations for the
Committee to consider for Herring
Research Set-Aside research priorities
for fishing years 2019–21 and discuss
any challenges the program has had in
recent years. They will discuss other
business, as necessary.
Although non-emergency issues not
contained in this agenda may come
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50397
before this group for discussion, those
issues may not be the subject of formal
action during these meetings. Action
will be restricted to those issues
specifically listed in this notice and any
issues arising after publication of this
notice that require emergency action
under section 305(c) of the MagnusonStevens Act, provided the public has
been notified of the Council’s intent to
take final action to address the
emergency.
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. This meeting
will be recorded. Consistent with 16
U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is
available upon request. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to
Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at
(978) 465–0492, at least 5 days prior to
the meeting date.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: October 25, 2017.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–23592 Filed 10–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XF540
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to the Biorka
Island Dock Replacement Project
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as
amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to the
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
to incidentally harass, by Level A and
Level B harassment, marine mammals
during construction activities associated
with the Biorka dock replacement
project in Symonds Bay, AK.
DATES: This Authorization is applicable
from May 1, 2018, through April 30,
2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shane Guan, Office of Protected
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
50398
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
Electronic copies of the applications
and supporting documents, as well as a
list of the references cited in this
document, may be obtained online at:
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
incidental/construction.htm. In case of
problems accessing these documents,
please call the contact listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated
to NMFS) 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 Incidental Take Authorization
(ITA) 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
the potential to disturb a marine
mammal or marine mammal stock in the
wild by causing disruption of behavioral
patterns, including, but not limited to,
migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B
harassment).
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of
1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
NOAA Administrative Order (NAO)
216–6A, NMFS must review our
proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an
incidental harassment authorization)
with respect to environmental
consequences on the human
environment. This action is consistent
with categories of activities identified in
CE B4 of the Companion Manual for
NOAA Administrative Order 216–6A,
which do not individually or
cumulatively have the potential for
significant impacts on the quality of the
human environment and for which we
have not identified any extraordinary
circumstances that would preclude this
categorical exclusion. Accordingly,
NMFS has determined that the issuance
of the IHA qualifies to be categorically
excluded from further NEPA review and
a Categorical Exclusion memo was
signed in October 2017.
Summary of Request
On March 31, 2017, NMFS received a
request from the FAA for an IHA to take
marine mammals incidental to pile
driving and removal and down the hole
(DTH) drilling in association with the
Biorka Island Dock Replacement Project
(Project) in Symonds Bay, Alaska. The
FAA’s request is for take of five species
by Level A and Level B harassment.
Neither the FAA nor NMFS expect
mortality to result from this activity
and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
In-water work associated with the inwater construction is expected to be
completed within 70 days starting May
1, 2018. We expect the in-water
construction work to occur between
May 1, 2018 through September 30,
2018; however, this IHA is valid for one
year, from May 1, 2018, through April
30, 2019.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
The FAA is constructing a
replacement dock on Biorka Island in
Symonds Bay near Sitka, Alaska. The
purpose of the Project is to improve and
maintain the sole point of access to
Biorka Island and the navigational and
weather facilities located on the island.
The existing dock has deteriorated and
reached the end of its useful life.
Regular and repetitive heavy surging
seas, along with constant use have
destroyed the face of the existing
floating marine dock, and have broken
cleats making it difficult to tie a vessel
to the existing dock. In its present
condition, small vessels cannot use the
dock to provide supplies to facilities on
the island. The existing barge landing
area is reinforced seasonally by adding
fill to the landing at the shoreline,
which is periodically washed away by
storms and wave action. The Project
would reconstruct the deteriorated
existing dock and construct an
improved barge landing area. A detailed
description of the planned dock
replacement project is provided in the
Federal Register notice for the proposed
IHA (82 FR 41229; August 30, 2017).
Since that time, no changes have been
made to the planned activities.
Therefore, a detailed description is not
provided here. Please refer to that
Federal Register notice for the
description of the specific activity.
Table 1 provides a summary of the six
methods of construction (‘‘scenarios’’)
used in the modeling of the zone of
influence (ZOI)s for the Biorka Project.
The ZOIs effectively represent the
mitigation zone that would be
established around each pile to prevent
Level A harassment to marine
mammals, while providing estimates of
the areas within which Level B
harassment might occur.
TABLE 1—PILE DRIVING MODELING SCENARIOS FOR THE BIORKA PROJECT
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Vibratory
Piles
installed
per day
Scenario
Description
S1 ..................
Removal of existing piles
and installation/removal of
temporary piles 1.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
21
Frm 00028
Hrs per
pile
0.33
Fmt 4703
DTH
Total
hours
per
day
6.93
Sfmt 4703
Impact
Total
hours
per day
Hours
per pile
NA 2
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
Total
strikes
per day
Hours
per pile
NA 2
31OCN1
Shift
(hr)
6.93
50399
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
TABLE 1—PILE DRIVING MODELING SCENARIOS FOR THE BIORKA PROJECT—Continued
Vibratory
Scenario
Piles
installed
per day
Description
Hrs per
pile
DTH
Total
hours
per
day
Impact
Total
hours
per day
Hours
per pile
S2 ..................
Installation of 18-inch pipe
piles (dock and dolphin).
3
................
0.99
2
S3 ..................
Installation of 18-inch pipe
piles (barge landing).
4
................
1.32
S4 ..................
Installation of 30-inch pipe
piles (dolphins).
2
................
0.66
2
S5 ..................
Installation of H piles (dock
wave barrier).
8
................
2.64
S6 ..................
Installation of sheet piles
(dock wave barrier and
barge landing).
12
................
3.96
Hours
per pile
6
Total
strikes
per day
Shift
(hr)
0.17
15
7.49
0.33
2720
2.65
0.17
10
4.99
NA 2
0.33
5440
5.31
NA 2
0.25
6120
6.96
NA
4
1 Existing piles to be removed include 3 24-in concrete piles, 14 8-in steel piles, 8 10-in steel piles, 14 12.75-in steel piles, and 7 14- to 8-in
timber piles.
2 NA indicates when a pile driving method was not required in a given scenario.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Comment and Responses
A notice of NMFS’s proposal to issue
an IHA to the FAA was published in the
Federal Register on August 30, 2017 (82
FR 41229). That notice described, in
detail, the FAA’s activity, the marine
mammal species that may be affected by
the activity, and the anticipated effects
on marine mammals. During the 30-day
public comment period, NMFS received
comments from the Marine Mammal
Commission (Commission).
Comment 1: The Commission has
concerns regarding the appropriateness
of the manner in which NMFS has
estimated Level A harassment zones.
The Commission recommends that
NMFS consult with both internal and
external scientists and acousticians to
determine the appropriate accumulation
time that action proponents should use
to determine the extent of the Level A
harassment zones based on the
associated permanent threshold shift
(PTS) cumulative sound exposure level
(SELcum) thresholds for the various types
of sound sources, including stationary
sound sources, when simple area x
density methods are employed.
Estimated swimming speeds of various
species and behavior patterns (including
residency patterns) should be
considered, and multiple scenarios
should be evaluated using animat
modeling.
Response: NMFS will take the
Commission’s recommendation into
consideration and will consult with
internal scientists on this issue in the
future; however it does not change our
isopleths or the number of takes for this
specific action. We also welcome the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
Commission and its Committee of
Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals
to provide guidance on this issue.
Comment 2: The Commission is
unsure why NMFS is not implementing
consistent measures for action
proponents that plan to conduct similar
activities (e.g. shutdowns for vibratory
driving and DTH drilling). The
Commission recommends that NMFS (1)
determine whether action proponents
would be required to implement delay
or shut-down procedures during use of
vibratory and down-the-hole hammers
and (2) require, or refrain from
requiring, those measures consistently
for all authorizations involving those
activities.
Response: NMFS has confirmed that
the FAA will be required to implement
shutdown and delay procedures during
the use of all construction equipment,
including vibratory driving and removal
and DTH drilling. In the future, NMFS
will ensure consistency across all
authorizations in our mitigation
requirements.
Comment 3: The Commission
recommended that NMFS share the
rounding criteria with the Commission
such that the matter of when rounding
should occur in the take calculation can
be resolved in the near future.
Response: NMFS will share the
rounding criteria with the Commission
soon and looks forward to working with
them in the future to resolve this issue.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activity
There are five marine mammal
species that may transit through the
waters nearby the Project area, and are
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
likely to potentially be taken by the
specified activity. These include the
Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus),
harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), harbor
porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), killer
whale (Orcinus orca), and humpback
whale (Megaptera noviaeangliae).
Multiple additional marine mammal
species may occasionally enter Sitka
sound but are not expected to be present
in the shallow nearshore waters of the
action area.
Sections 3 and 4 of the FAA’s
application summarize available
information regarding status and trends,
distribution and habitat preferences,
and behavior and life history of the
potentially affected species. Additional
information regarding population trends
and threats may be found in NMFS’s
Stock Assessment Reports (SAR;
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/) and more
general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral
descriptions) may be found on NMFS’s
Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
species/mammals/).
Table 2 lists all species with expected
occurrence in Symonds Bay and Sitka
Sound and summarizes information
related to the population or stock,
including potential biological removal
(PBR), where known. 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 (as described in NMFS’s
SARs). While no mortality is anticipated
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
50400
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
or authorized here, PBR and annual
serious injury and mortality are
included here as gross indicators of the
status of the species and other threats.
A detailed description of the of the
species likely to be affected by the
Project, including brief introductions to
the species and relevant stocks as well
as available information regarding
population trends and threats, and
information regarding local occurrence,
were provided in the Federal Register
notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR
41229; August 30, 2017); since that
time, we are not aware of any changes
in the status of these species and stocks;
therefore, detailed descriptions are not
provided here. Please refer to that
Federal Register notice for these
descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS’
Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
species/mammals/) for generalized
species accounts.
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE VICINITY OF BIORKA ISLAND
Species
ESA/MMPA
status;
strategic
(Y/N) 1
Stock
Stock abundance (CV,
Nmin, most recent abundance survey) 2
Relative occurrence in
Symonds Bay and Sitka
Sound; season of occurrence
Annual
M/SI 4
PBR 3
Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises)
Harbor porpoise
(Phocoena phocoena).
Southeast Alaska ..........
-; Y
11,146 (0.242; n/a;
1997).
Undet.
34
Common.
Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Family Delphinidae (dolphins)
Killer whale (Orcinus
orca).
Eastern North Pacific
Gulf of Alaska, Aleutian Island, and Bering Sea Transient.
West Coast Transient ...
-; N
587 (n/a; 587; 2012) .....
0
0
-; N
243 (n/a; 243; 2009) .....
2.4
Infrequent.
0
Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
Family Balaenopteridae
Humpback whale 5
(Megaptera
novaeangliae).
Central North Pacific
stock.
-; Y
10,103 (0.300; 7,890;
2006).
83
24
297
236
1,645
108
155
77
Likely.
Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions)
Steller sea lion
(Eumetopias jubatus).
Western .........................
E; Y
Eastern ..........................
-; N
49,497 (n/a; 49,497;
2014).
60,131 (n/a; 36,551;
2013).
Common.
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Harbor seal (Phoca
vitulina).
Sitka/Chatham ..............
-; N
14,855 (n/a; 13,212;
2011).
Common.
1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Yes (Y), No (N), Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a
strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR (see footnote 3) or which is determined to be declining
and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under
the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
2 CV is coefficient of variation; N
min is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For certain stocks,
abundance estimates are actual counts of animals and there is no associated CV. The most recent abundance survey that is reflected in the
abundance estimate is presented; there may be more recent surveys that have not yet been incorporated into the estimate.
3 Potential biological removal, 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 size (OSP).
4 These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g,
commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or
range. A CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
5 The humpback whales considered under the MMPA to be part of this stock could be from any of two different distinct population segment
(DPS)s. In Alaska, it would be expected to primarily be whales from the Hawaii DPS but could also be whales from Mexico DPS.
Potential Effects of the Specified
Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
The effects of underwater noise from
construction activities for the Project
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
have the potential to result in behavioral
harassment of marine mammals in the
vicinity of the action area. The Federal
Register notice for the proposed IHA (82
FR 41229; August 30, 2017) included a
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
discussion of the effects of
anthropogenic noise on marine
mammals, therefore that information is
not repeated here; please refer to that
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
Federal Register notice for that
information.
Estimated Take by Incidental
Harassment
This section provides an estimate of
the number of incidental takes
authorized through this IHA, which
informed NMFS’ consideration of both
the ‘‘small numbers’’ 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, section 3(18) of the
MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as: Any
act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance
which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a
marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption
of behavioral patterns, including, but
not limited to, migration, breathing,
nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering
(Level B harassment).
Authorized takes would be by Level A
and Level B harassment, in the form of
disruption of behavioral patterns for
individual marine mammals resulting
from exposure to vibratory and impact
pile driving and removal and DTH
drilling, and potential PTS for animals
that may transit through the Level A
zones (described below) undetected
(Table 6). Based on the nature of the
activity and the anticipated
effectiveness of the mitigation measures
(i.e., soft start, ramp-up, etc.—discussed
in detail below in Mitigation Measures
section), Level A harassment is not
anticipated; however, a small number of
takes by Level A harassment is
authorized for most species as a
precaution if animals go undetected
before a shutdown is in place.
As described previously, no mortality
or serious injury is anticipated or
authorized for this activity. Below we
describe how the take is estimated.
Described in the most basic way, we
estimate take by considering: (1)
Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS
believes the best available science
indicates marine mammals will be
behaviorally harassed or incur some
degree of permanent hearing
impairment; (2) the area or volume of
water that will be ensonified above
these levels in a day; (3) the density or
occurrence of marine mammals within
these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the
number of days of activities. Below, we
describe these components in more
detail and present the take estimate.
The estimation of marine mammal
takes typically uses the following
calculation since site-specific density is
unavailable:
Level B exposure estimate = N (number
of animals) in the area * Number of
days of noise generating activities.
Acoustic Thresholds
Using the best available science,
NMFS has developed acoustic
thresholds that identify the received
level of underwater sound above which
exposed marine mammals would be
reasonably expected to be behaviorally
harassed (equated to Level B
harassment) or to incur PTS of some
degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment for non-explosive
sources—Though significantly driven by
received level, the onset of behavioral
disturbance from anthropogenic noise
exposure is also informed to varying
degrees by other factors related to the
source (e.g., frequency, predictability,
duty cycle), the environment (e.g.,
bathymetry), and the receiving animals
(hearing, motivation, experience,
demography, behavioral context) and
can be difficult to predict (Southall et
al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2011). Based on
what the available science indicates and
the practical need to use a threshold
based on a factor that is both predictable
and measurable for most activities,
NMFS uses a generalized acoustic
50401
threshold based on received level to
estimate the onset of behavioral
harassment. NMFS predicts that marine
mammals are likely to be behaviorally
harassed in a manner we consider Level
B harassment when exposed to
underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 120 decibels (dB) re
1 micropascal (mPa) root mean square
(rms) for continuous (e.g. vibratory piledriving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1
mPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive
(e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent
(e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
The FAA’s Project activities include
the use of continuous (vibratory pile
driving and DTH drilling) and
impulsive (impact pile driving) sources,
and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1
mPa (rms) are applicable.
Level A harassment for non-explosive
sources—NMFS’ Technical Guidance
for Assessing the Effects of
Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (NMFS 2016)
identifies dual criteria to assess auditory
injury (Level A harassment) to five
different marine mammal groups (based
on hearing sensitivity) as a result of
exposure to noise from two different
types of sources (impulsive or nonimpulsive). The FAA’s Project activity
includes the use of impulsive (impact
pile driving) and non-impulsive
(vibratory pile driving and DTH drilling)
sources.
These thresholds were developed by
compiling and synthesizing the best
available science and soliciting input
multiple times from both the public and
peer reviewers to inform the final
product, and are provided in the table
below. The references, analysis, and
methodology used in the development
of the thresholds are described in NMFS
2016 Technical Guidance, which may
be accessed at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/
guidelines.htm.
TABLE 3—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT
PTS onset acoustic thresholds *
(received level)
Hearing group
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Impulsive
Low-frequency cetaceans ..............................................
Mid-frequency cetaceans ...............................................
High-frequency cetaceans .............................................
Phocid Pinnipeds (underwaters) ....................................
Otariid Pinnipeds (underwater) ......................................
1 NMFS
Cell
Cell
Cell
Cell
Cell
1:
3:
5:
7:
9:
Lpk,
Lpk,
Lpk,
Lpk,
Lpk,
flat:
flat:
flat:
flat:
flat:
219
230
202
218
232
dB;
dB;
dB;
dB;
dB;
LE,
LE,
LE,
LE,
LE,
Non-impulsive
LF, 24h: 183 dB .............
MF, 24h: 185 dB ............
HF, 24h: 155 dB .............
PW, 24h: 185 dB ............
OW, 24h: 203 dB ...........
2016
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
Cell
Cell
Cell
Cell
Cell
2: LE, LF, 24h: 199 dB.
4: LE, MF, 24h: 198 dB.
6: LE, HF, 24h: 173 dB.
8: LE, PW, 24h: 201 dB.
10: LE, OW, 24h: 219 dB.
50402
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and
environmental parameters of the activity
that will feed into identifying the area
ensonified above the acoustic
thresholds.
Pile driving and removal and DTH
drilling generates underwater noise that
can potentially result in disturbance to
marine mammals in the Project area.
Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease
in acoustic intensity as an acoustic
pressure wave propagates out from a
source. TL parameters vary with
frequency, temperature, sea conditions,
current, source and receiver depth,
water depth, water chemistry, and
bottom composition and topography.
The general formula for underwater TL
is:
TL = B * log10(R1/R2),
Where:
R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from
the driven pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the
initial measurement.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
This formula neglects loss due to
scattering and absorption, which is
assumed to be zero here. The degree to
which underwater sound propagates
away from a sound source is dependent
on a variety of factors, most notably the
water bathymetry and presence or
absence of reflective or absorptive
conditions including in-water structures
and sediments. Spherical spreading
occurs in a perfectly unobstructed (freefield) environment not limited by depth
or water surface, resulting in a 6 dB
reduction in sound level for each
doubling of distance from the source
(20*log[range]). Cylindrical spreading
occurs in an environment in which
sound propagation is bounded by the
water surface and sea bottom, resulting
in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level for
each doubling of distance from the
source (10*log[range]).
Underwater Sound—The intensity of
pile driving and removal sounds is
greatly influenced by factors such as the
type of piles, hammers, and the physical
environment in which the activity takes
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
place. A number of studies, primarily on
the west coast, have measured sound
produced during underwater pile
driving projects. These data are largely
for impact driving of steel pipe piles
and concrete piles as well as vibratory
driving of steel pipe piles.
JASCO Applied Sciences (JASCO)
conducted acoustic modeling of pile
installation and removal activities
planned for the Project, which is
included as Appendix A of the FAA’s
application. To assess potential
underwater noise exposure of marine
mammals during construction activities,
Quijano and Austin (2017) determined
source levels for six different
construction scenarios (see Table 1).
The source levels are frequencydependent and suitable for modeling
underwater acoustic propagation using
JASCO’s Marine Operations Noise
Model (MONM). The modeling
predicted the extent of ensonification
and the acoustic footprint from
construction activities, taking into
account the effects of pile driving
equipment, bathymetry, sound speed
profile, and seabed geoacoustic
parameters. Auditory weighting was
applied to the modeled sound fields to
estimate received levels relative to
hearing sensitivities of five marine
mammal hearing groups following
NMFS 2016 guidance.
The results are based on currently
adopted sound level thresholds for
auditory injury (Level A) expressed as
peak pressure level (PK) and 24-hr SEL,
and behavioral disturbance (Level B)
expressed as sound pressure level (SPL).
Using these guidelines, Quijano and
Austin (2017) calculated the maximum
extent (distance and ensonified areas) of
the Level A and Level B exposure zones
for each marine mammal functional
hearing group. This was calculated for
both impact and vibratory pile driving
of 18- and 30-inch (in) piles for each of
the following six Project scenarios.
The model required, as input, source
sound levels in 1⁄3-octave bands between
10 hertz (Hz) and 25 kilohertz (kHz).
Source levels for sheet pile and H pile
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
installation were obtained from
literature, but the available
measurements did not cover the full
frequency spectrum of interest; data for
vibratory installation of sheet and H
piles were available to maximum
frequencies of 4 kHz and 10 kHz,
respectively. Modeling of the six
construction scenarios at the Project site
on Biorka Island followed three steps:
1. Piles driven into the sediment by
impact, vibratory, or downhole drilling
were characterized as sound-radiating
sources. Source levels in 1⁄3-octavebands were obtained by modeling or by
adjusting source levels found in the
literature. The exact method to obtain
the 1⁄3-octave-band levels depends on
the pile geometry and pile driving
equipment, and it is described on a
case-by-case basis (see Appendix A of
the FAA’s application);
2. Underwater sound propagation was
applied to predict how sound
propagates from the pile into the water
column as a function of range, depth,
and azimuthal direction. Propagation
depends on several conditions
including the frequency content of the
sound, the bathymetry, the sound speed
in the water column, and sediment
geoacoustics; and
3. The propagated sound field was
used to compute received levels over a
grid of simulated receivers, from which
distances to criteria thresholds and
maps of ensonified areas were
generated.
Modeled results are presented as
tables of distances at which SPLs or
SELs fell below thresholds defined by
criteria. For marine mammal injury, the
Level A thresholds considered here
follow the NMFS guidelines (NMFS
2016). A detailed description of the
modeling process is provided in
Appendix A of the FAA’s IHA
application. A list of modeling
parameters, including pile driving
duration for computation of SEL, are
provided in Table 1.
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section we provide the
information about the presence, density,
or group dynamics of marine mammals
that will inform the take calculations.
At-sea densities for marine mammal
species have not been determined for
marine mammals in Sitka Sound;
therefore, all estimates here are
determined by using observational data
from biologists, peer-reviewed
literature, and information obtained
from personal communication with
researchers and state and Federal
biologists, and from local charter boat
operators.
Harbor Seals
Harbor seals are expected to be in the
Project area in low numbers (see
Description of Marine Mammals in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
Area of the Specified Activity Section).
We estimate that up to five harbor seals
per day may be present in the Project
area on all days of construction.
Therefore, we authorize 350 takes by
Level B harassment. Because the largest
Level A ZOI for harbor seals is nearly
1 kilometer (km) (Scenario 6), the FAA
requests up to 13 harbor seal takes by
Level A harassment. Level A harassment
may occur if the animals enter the ZOI
undetected on half of all days of
construction in Scenario 6 and one time
for each of the other five scenarios, and
marine mammal observers (MMO) are
not able to request a shutdown prior to
the seals being exposed to potential
Level A harassment.
Steller Sea Lion
availability. Prey species are uncommon
during the Project window; therefore,
sea lion abundance is expected to be
low. The FAA estimates that five sea
lions may be in the Project area every
day (70 days) of construction, therefore,
we estimate that 350 sea lions may be
taken by Level B harassment. We
estimate that these takes would be split
equally between the east distinct
population segment (DPS) and west DPS
(175 each). The Level A zone is less
than 10 m for all but Scenario 6, which
is 80 m; however, to be conservative, the
FAA is requesting a small group of
Steller sea lions may be taken by Level
A harassment. This would equate to six
total animals if split equally by DPS (3
each).
Steller sea lion abundance in the
Project area is dependent on prey
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
EN31OC17.000</GPH>
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
50403
50404
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
Humpback Whale
Humpback whales are found in Sitka
Bay seasonally. During mid-summer,
tour boats generally see four to five
whales per day, in the middle of Sitka
Sound. Therefore, a count of 5
humpback whales per day (70 days) was
used to estimate takes per day on every
day of construction for a total of 350
takes by Level B harassment. All takes
would be from the Central North Pacific
stock under the MMPA. For ESA
purposes, 93.9 percent would be from
the Hawaii DPS (328 animals) and 6.1
percent would be from the Mexico stock
(22 animals) based on Wade et al., 2016.
The maximum distance at which a
humpback whale may be exposed to
noise levels that exceed Level A
thresholds is 1.4 km during Scenario 6.
Even though the ensonified area extends
outside of the entrance to Symonds Bay,
a MMO stationed near the mouth of the
bay at Hanus Point would be able to see
a humpback whale outside Symonds
Bay before it enters the Level A zone
and could shut down the noise
producing activity to avoid Level A
take. In the unlikely event a whale
would go undetected and enter the
Level A zone, the FAA has requested
three takes by Level A harassment for
humpback whales. We estimate that all
three humpback whales would be from
the Hawaii DPS.
Killer Whale
Generally, transient killer whales
follow the movements of Steller sea
lions and harbor seals on which they
prey. Given the low numbers of Steller
sea lions in Sitka Sound during
summer, it is consistent that transient
killer whales would also be rare or
infrequent in the Project area (e.g., killer
whales were only observed on five or
six days by the whale watching
industry). Small groups of 5 to 6
transient killer whales per day could be
observed throughout the summer
months; therefore, we estimate that a
group of 6 animals could enter the
Project area on 6 occasions during the
construction window, for a total of 36
takes by Level B harassment. No Level
A takes of killer whales is authorized for
this species. The maximum linear
distance to the Level A threshold for
killer whales is less than 250 meters (m)
from the source and a MMO would be
able to observe animals at this distance
and shut down activities in time to
avoid Level A take.
Harbor Porpoise
Harbor porpoise are expected to occur
in the Project area in low numbers
during the construction window.
Sightings during this time period are
infrequent; this species is not observed
every day. The mean group size of
harbor porpoise in Southeast Alaska
was estimated to be between 2 to 3
individuals (Dahlheim et al., 2009);
therefore, we conservatively estimate
that a group of three harbor porpoise
may be present every other day of
construction for a total of 105 takes by
Level B harassment. The distances to
Level A thresholds for harbor porpoise
(HFC) are largest during impulse driving
under Scenarios 3, 5, and 6 (see Table
1), and extend beyond the entrance to
Symonds Bay. The duration of
Scenarios 3, 5, and 6 is expected to be
30 days (see Table 1); therefore, we
expect that a small group of three harbor
porpoise may enter the Level A zone on
half of the days of Scenarios 3, 5, and
6 (15 days) for a total of 45 takes by
Level A harassment.
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information
provided above is brought together to
produce a quantitative take estimate.
All estimates are conservative and
include the following assumptions:
• All pilings installed at each site
would have an underwater noise
disturbance equal to the piling that
causes the greatest noise disturbance
(i.e., the piling farthest from shore)
installed with the method that has the
ZOI. The largest underwater disturbance
(Level B) ZOI would be produced by
DTH drilling; therefore take estimates
were calculated using the vibratory piledriving ZOIs. The ZOIs for each
threshold are not spherical and are
truncated by land masses on either side
of the Project area, which would
dissipate sound pressure waves.
• Exposures were based on an
estimated total of 70 work days. Each
activity ranges in number of days
needed to be completed (Table 1).
• All marine mammal individuals
potentially available are assumed to be
present within the relevant area, and
thus incidentally taken;
• An individual can only be taken
once during a 24-hour period; and,
• Exposures to sound levels at or
above the relevant thresholds equate to
take, as defined by the MMPA.
Estimates of potential instances of
take may be overestimates of the
number of individuals taken. In the
context of stationary activities such as
pile driving and in areas where resident
animals may be present, this number
represents the number of total take that
may accrue to a smaller number of
individuals, with some number of
animals being exposed more than once
per individual. While pile driving and
removal can occur any day throughout
the in-water work window, and the
analysis is conducted on a per day basis,
only a fraction of that time (typically a
matter of hours on any given day) is
actually spent pile driving/removal. The
potential effectiveness of mitigation
measures in reducing the number of
takes is typically not quantified in the
take estimation process. For these
reasons, these take estimates may be
conservative.
TABLE 5—CALCULATIONS FOR INCIDENTAL TAKE ESTIMATION
Takes
authorized
by Level A
harassment
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Species
Steller sea lion: Eastern and Western stock ...........................................................................................................
Harbor seal ..............................................................................................................................................................
Humpback whale .....................................................................................................................................................
Killer whale: Eastern North Pacific Gulf of Alaska, Aleutian Island, and Bering Sea Transient stock and West
Coast Transient stock ..........................................................................................................................................
Harbor porpoise .......................................................................................................................................................
Mitigation Measures
In order to issue an IHA under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
set forth the permissible methods of
taking pursuant to such activity, and
other means of effecting the least
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Takes
authorized
by Level B
harassment
6
13
3
350
350
350
0
45
36
105
practicable impact on such species or
stock and its habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds,
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock
for taking for certain subsistence uses
(latter 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 balance 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 the
likelihood of effective implementation,
and;
(2) The practicability of the measures
for applicant implementation, which
may consider such things as cost,
impact on operations, and, in the case
of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of
implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness
activity.
The ZOIs were used to develop
mitigation measures for pile driving and
removal activities at the Project area.
The ZOIs effectively represent the
mitigation zone that would be
established around each pile to prevent
Level A harassment to marine
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
mammals, while providing estimates of
the areas within which Level B
harassment might occur. In addition to
the specific measures described later in
this section, the FAA would conduct
briefings between construction
supervisors and crews, marine mammal
monitoring team, and staff prior to the
start of all pile driving activity, and
when new personnel join the work, in
order to explain responsibilities,
communication procedures, marine
mammal monitoring protocol, and
operational procedures.
Monitoring and Shutdown for
Construction Activities
The following measures would apply
to the FAA’s mitigation through
shutdown and disturbance zones:
Shutdown Zone—For all pile driving
activities, the FAA will establish a
shutdown zone intended to contain the
area in which SPLs equal or exceed the
auditory injury criteria for cetaceans
and pinnipeds. The purpose of a
shutdown zone is to define an area
within which shutdown of activity
would occur upon sighting of a marine
mammal (or in anticipation of an animal
entering the defined area), thus
preventing injury of marine mammals
(as described previously under Potential
Effects of the Specified Activity on
Marine Mammals, serious injury or
death are unlikely outcomes even in the
absence of mitigation measures).
Modeled radial distances for shutdown
zones are shown in Table 6. However,
a minimum shutdown zone of 10 m will
be established during all pile driving
activities, regardless of the estimated
zone; and
Disturbance Zone—Disturbance zones
are the areas in which SPLs equal or
exceed 160 and 120 dB rms (for impulse
and continuous sound, respectively).
Disturbance zones provide utility for
monitoring conducted for mitigation
purposes (i.e., shutdown zone
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50405
monitoring) by establishing monitoring
protocols for areas adjacent to the
shutdown zones. Monitoring of
disturbance zones enables observers to
be aware of and communicate the
presence of marine mammals in the
Project area but outside the shutdown
zone and thus prepare for potential
shutdowns of activity. However, the
primary purpose of disturbance zone
monitoring is for documenting instances
of Level B harassment; disturbance zone
monitoring is discussed in greater detail
later (see Monitoring and Reporting
Measures). Nominal radial distances for
disturbance zones are shown in Table 6.
Given the size of the disturbance zone
for vibratory pile driving and DTH
drilling, it is impossible to guarantee
that all animals would be observed or to
make comprehensive observations of
fine-scale behavioral reactions to sound,
and only a portion of the zone (e.g.,
what may be reasonably observed by
visual observers stationed between
Symonds Bay and Sitka Sound) would
be observed. In order to document
observed instances of harassment,
monitors record all marine mammal
observations, regardless of location. The
observer’s location, as well as the
location of the pile being driven, is
known from a GPS. The location of the
animal is estimated as a distance from
the observer, which is then compared to
the location from the pile. It may then
be estimated whether the animal was
exposed to sound levels constituting
incidental harassment on the basis of
predicted distances to relevant
thresholds in post-processing of
observational and acoustic data, and a
precise accounting of observed
incidences of harassment created. This
information may then be used to
extrapolate observed takes to reach an
approximate understanding of actual
total takes.
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
50406
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
Monitoring Protocols—Monitoring
would be conducted before, during, and
after pile driving and vibratory removal
activities. In addition, observers shall
record all instances of marine mammal
occurrence, regardless of distance from
activity, and shall document any
behavioral reactions in concert with
distance from piles being driven.
Observations made outside the
shutdown zone will not result in
shutdown; that pile segment would be
completed without cessation, unless the
animal approaches or enters the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
shutdown zone, at which point all pile
driving activities would be halted.
Monitoring will take place from 30
minutes prior to initiation through 30
minutes post-completion of pile driving
and removal activities. Pile driving
activities include the time to install or
remove a single pile or series of piles,
as long as the time elapsed between uses
of the pile driving equipment is no more
than 30 minutes. Please see Section 11
of the FAA’s application
(www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
incidental/construction.htm), for the
FAA’s monitoring protocols.
The following additional measures
apply to visual monitoring:
(1) Monitoring will be conducted by
qualified observers, who will be placed
at the best vantage point(s) practicable
to monitor for marine mammals and
implement shutdown/delay procedures
when applicable by calling for the
shutdown to the hammer operator. A
minimum of two observers will be
required for all pile driving/removal
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
EN31OC17.001</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
activities. MMO requirements for
construction actions are as follows:
(a) Independent observers (i.e., not
construction personnel) are required;
(b) At least one observer must have
prior experience working as an observer;
(c) Other observers (that do not have
prior experience) may substitute
education (undergraduate degree in
biological science or related field) or
training for experience;
(d) Where a team of three or more
observers are required, one observer
should be designated as lead observer or
monitoring coordinator. The lead
observer must have prior experience
working as an observer; and
(e) NMFS will require submission and
approval of observer resumes.
(2) Qualified MMOs are trained
biologists, and need the following
additional minimum qualifications:
(a) Visual acuity in both eyes
(correction is permissible) sufficient for
discernment of moving targets at the
water’s surface with ability to estimate
target size and distance; use of
binoculars may be necessary to correctly
identify the target;
(b) Ability to conduct field
observations and collect data according
to assigned protocols;
(c) Experience or training in the field
identification of marine mammals,
including the identification of
behaviors;
(d) Sufficient training, orientation, or
experience with the construction
operation to provide for personal safety
during observations;
(e) Writing skills sufficient to prepare
a report of observations including but
not limited to the number and species
of marine mammals observed; dates and
times when in-water construction
activities were conducted; dates and
times when in-water construction
activities were suspended to avoid
potential incidental injury from
construction sound of marine mammals
observed within a defined shutdown
zone; and marine mammal behavior;
and
(f) Ability to communicate orally, by
radio or in person, with project
personnel to provide real-time
information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
(3) Prior to the start of pile driving
activity, the shutdown zone will be
monitored for 30 minutes to ensure that
it is clear of marine mammals. Pile
driving will only commence once
observers have declared the shutdown
zone clear of marine mammals; animals
will be allowed to remain in the
shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their
own volition) and their behavior will be
monitored and documented. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
shutdown zone may only be declared
clear, and pile driving started, when the
entire shutdown zone is visible (i.e.,
when not obscured by dark, rain, fog,
etc.). In addition, if such conditions
should arise during impact pile driving
that is already underway, the activity
would be halted.
(4) If a marine mammal approaches or
enters the shutdown zone during the
course of pile driving operations,
activity will be halted and delayed until
either (A) the animal has voluntarily left
and been visually confirmed beyond the
shutdown zone, (B) 15 minutes have
passed without re-detection of small
cetaceans and pinnipeds, or (C) 30
minutes have passed without redetection of large cetaceans, whichever
happens sooner. Monitoring will be
conducted throughout the time required
to drive a pile.
(5) If a species for which
authorization has not been granted, or a
species for which authorization has
been granted but the authorized takes
are met, approaches or is observed
within the Level B harassment zone,
activities will shut down immediately
using delay and shut-down procedures.
Activities will not restart until the
animals have been confirmed to have
left the area.
Soft Start
The use of a soft start procedure is
believed to provide additional
protection to marine mammals by
warning or providing a chance to leave
the area prior to the hammer operating
at full capacity, and typically involves
a requirement to initiate sound from the
hammer at reduced energy followed by
a waiting period. This procedure is
repeated two additional times. It is
difficult to specify the reduction in
energy for any given hammer because of
variation across drivers and, for impact
hammers, the actual number of strikes at
reduced energy will vary because
operating the hammer at less than full
power results in ‘‘bouncing’’ of the
hammer as it strikes the pile, resulting
in multiple ‘‘strikes.’’ For impact
driving, we require an initial set of three
strikes from the impact hammer at
reduced energy, followed by a 30second waiting period, then 2
subsequent 3 strike sets. Soft start will
be required at the beginning of each
day’s impact pile driving work and at
any time following a cessation of impact
pile driving of 30 minutes or longer.
Noise Attenuating Devices
The FAA will use cushions during
impact pile driving.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50407
Timing Restrictions
The FAA will only conduct
construction activities during daytime
hours. Construction will also be
restricted to the months of May through
September to avoid overlap with times
when marine mammals have higher
densities in the Project area.
We have carefully evaluated the
FAA’s mitigation measures and
considered their effectiveness in past
implementation to determine whether
they are likely to effect the least
practicable impact on the affected
marine mammal species and stocks and
their habitat.
Any mitigation measure(s) we
prescribe should be able to accomplish,
have a reasonable likelihood of
accomplishing (based on current
science), or contribute to the
accomplishment of one or more of the
general goals listed below:
(1) Avoidance or minimization of
injury or death of marine mammals
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may
contribute to this goal);
(2) A reduction in the number (total
number or number at biologically
important time or location) of
individual marine mammals exposed to
stimuli expected to result in incidental
take (this goal may contribute to 1,
above, or to reducing takes by
behavioral harassment only);
(3) A reduction in the number (total
number or number at biologically
important time or location) of times any
individual marine mammal would be
exposed to stimuli expected to result in
incidental take (this goal may contribute
to 1, above, or to reducing takes by
behavioral harassment only);
(4) A reduction in the intensity of
exposure to stimuli expected to result in
incidental take (this goal may contribute
to 1, above, or to reducing the severity
of behavioral harassment only);
(5) Avoidance or minimization of
adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying particular attention to
the prey base, blockage or limitation of
passage to or from biologically
important areas, permanent destruction
of habitat, or temporary disturbance of
habitat during a biologically important
time; and
(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 FAA’s
measures, as well as any other potential
measures considered by NMFS, NMFS
has determined that the mitigation
measures provide the means of effecting
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
50408
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
the least practicable impact on marine
mammal species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Monitoring and Reporting Measures
In order to issue an IHA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth
requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking.
The MMPA implementing regulations at
50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that
requests for authorizations must include
the suggested means of accomplishing
the necessary monitoring and reporting
that will result in increased knowledge
of the species and of the level of taking
or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be
present in the action area. Effective
reporting is critical to both compliance
and ensuring that the most value is
obtained from the required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting
requirements prescribed by NMFS
should contribute to improved
understanding of one or more of the
following:
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species in action area (e.g., presence,
abundance, distribution, density);
• Nature, scope, or context of likely
marine mammal exposure to potential
stressors/impacts (individual or
cumulative, acute or chronic), through
better understanding of: (1) Action or
environment (e.g., source
characterization, propagation, ambient
noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life
history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the
action; or (4) biological or behavioral
context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or
feeding areas);
• Individual marine mammal
responses (behavioral or physiological)
to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or
cumulative), other stressors, or
cumulative impacts from multiple
stressors;
• How anticipated responses to
stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
fitness and survival of individual
marine mammals; or (2) population,
species, or stock;
• Effects on marine mammal habitat
(e.g., marine mammal prey species,
acoustic habitat, or other important
physical components of marine
mammal habitat); and
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
Visual Marine Mammal Observations
The FAA will collect sighting data
and behavioral responses to
construction for marine mammal
species observed in the region of
activity during the period of activity. All
MMOs will be trained in marine
mammal identification and behaviors
and are required to have no other
construction-related tasks while
conducting monitoring. A minimum of
two MMOs will be required for all pile
driving/removal activities. The FAA
will monitor the shutdown zone and
disturbance zone before, during, and
after pile driving, with observers located
at the best practicable vantage points.
Based on our requirements, the FAA
would implement the following
procedures for pile driving and removal:
• MMOs would be located at the best
vantage point(s) in order to properly see
the entire shutdown zone and as much
of the disturbance zone as possible;
• During all observation periods,
observers will use binoculars and the
naked eye to search continuously for
marine mammals;
• If the shutdown zones are obscured
by fog or poor lighting conditions, pile
driving at that location will not be
initiated until that zone is visible.
Should such conditions arise while
driving, removal, or drilling is
underway, the activity would be halted;
and
• The shutdown and disturbance
zones around the pile will be monitored
for the presence of marine mammals
before, during, and after any pile driving
or removal activity.
Data Collection
We require that observers use
approved data forms. Among other
pieces of information, the FAA will
record detailed information about any
implementation of shutdowns,
including the distance of animals to the
pile and description of specific actions
that ensued and resulting behavior of
the animal, if any. In addition, the FAA
will attempt to distinguish between the
number of individual animals taken and
the number of incidences of take. We
require that, at a minimum, the
following information be collected on
the sighting forms:
• Date and time that monitored
activity begins or ends;
• Construction activities occurring
during each observation period;
• Weather parameters (e.g., percent
cover, visibility);
• Water conditions (e.g., sea state,
tide state);
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Species, numbers, and, if possible,
sex and age class of marine mammals;
• Description of any observable
marine mammal behavior patterns,
including bearing and direction of
travel, and if possible, the correlation to
SPLs;
• Distance from pile driving or
removal activities to marine mammals
and distance from the marine mammals
to the observation point;
• Description of implementation of
mitigation measures (e.g., shutdown or
delay);
• Locations of all marine mammal
observations; and
• Other human activity in the area.
Sound Source Verification
The SSV will establish source levels
for impact pile driving, vibratory pile
driving, and DTH drilling. The FAA will
provide all monitoring data to NMFS.
The reports would include the following
information:
1. Size and type of piles;
2. A detailed description of the noise
attenuation device, including design
specifications;
3. The impact hammer energy rating
used to drive the piles, and the make
and model of the hammer and the
output energy;
4. The physical characteristics of the
bottom substrate into which the piles
were driven;
5. The depth of water into which the
pile was driven;
6. The depth into the substrate into
which the pile was driven;
7. A description of the sound
monitoring equipment;
8. The distance between hydrophones
and pile;
9. The depth of the hydrophones and
depth of water at hydrophone locations;
10. The distance from the pile to the
water’s edge;
11. The total number of strikes to
drive each pile and for all piles driven
during a 24-hour period;
12. The results of the hydroacoustic
monitoring;
13. Source levels for peak and RMS
SPLs and single strike SEL at 10 m from
the pile, and RMS pulse duration that
contains 90 percent of pulse energy.
14. The distance at which peak,
cumulative SEL, and RMS values
exceed the respective threshold values;
15. For vibratory pile driving, SEL
based on 30 second averaging of sound
intensity;
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
16. The spectragraphs for each pile
type; and
17. A description of any observable
marine mammal behavior in the
immediate area and, if possible,
correlation to underwater sound levels
occurring at that time.
A minimum of two piles of the 18-in
and two piles of the 30-in piles for each
construction type (i.e. impact and
vibratory pile driving and DTH drilling)
will be monitored. Piles chosen to be
monitored will be representative of the
different sizes and range of typical water
depths at the project location where
piles will be driven with an impact or
vibratory hammer.
One bottom-mounted hydrophone
will be placed at the nearest distance,
approximately 10 meters, from each pile
being monitored. An additional
hydrophone will be placed at mid-water
depth at a distance of 100 to 200 m from
the pile to provide two sound-level
readings during ambient and pile
driving conditions. A third hydrophone
may be deployed at a greater distance
(e.g., 1–2 km or further) for the purpose
of better defining the long-distance
sound propagation. Underwater sound
levels will be continuously monitored
during the entire duration of each pile
being driven. Sound levels will be
measured in dB re: 1 mPa.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Reporting
A draft report will be submitted to
NMFS within 90 days of the completion
of marine mammal monitoring, or 60
days prior to the requested date of
issuance of any future IHA for projects
at the same location, whichever comes
first. The report will include marine
mammal observations pre-activity,
during-activity, and post-activity during
pile driving and removal days, and will
also provide descriptions of any
behavioral responses to construction
activities by marine mammals and a
complete description of all mitigation
shutdowns and the results of those
actions and an extrapolated total take
estimate based on the number of marine
mammals observed during the course of
construction. A final report must be
submitted within 30 days following
resolution of comments on the draft
report.
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
finding is based on the lack of likely
adverse effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of takes alone is not enough information
on which to base an impact
determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of
marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’
through harassment, NMFS considers
other factors, such as the likely nature
of any responses (e.g., intensity,
duration), the context of any responses
(e.g., critical reproductive time or
location, migration), 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’s 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, because the expected impacts
to marine mammals of the affected
species and stocks are similar (and we
have no information to suggest
otherwise), our discussion here applies
to each of them.
Pile driving and removal activities
associated with the dock replacement
Project, as outlined previously, have the
potential to disturb or displace marine
mammals. Specifically, the specified
activities may result in take, in the form
of Level A and Level B harassment (PTS
and behavioral disturbance), from
underwater sounds generated from pile
driving and removal. Potential takes
could occur if individuals of these
species are present in the ensonified
zone when pile driving and removal
occurs. Most of the Level A takes are
precautionary as marine mammals are
not expected to enter and stay in the
Level A ensonified area for the duration
needed to incur PTS. However, if all
authorized takes be Level A harassment
were to occur, they would be of small
numbers compared to the stock sizes
and would not adversely affect the stock
through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival. Additionally,
the FAA’s mitigation measures,
including a shutdown of construction
activities if animals enter the Level A
zone, further reduces the chance for PTS
in marine mammals. Therefore, the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50409
effects to marine mammals are expected
to be negligible.
No temporary threshold shift (TTS),
serious injury, or mortality is
anticipated given the nature of the
activities and measures designed to
minimize the possibility of injury to
marine mammals. The potential for
these outcomes is minimized through
the construction method and the
implementation of the planned
mitigation measures. Specifically,
vibratory and impact hammers and
drilling will be the primary methods of
installation. Impact pile driving
produces short, sharp pulses with
higher peak levels and much sharper
rise time to reach those peaks. If impact
driving is necessary, implementation of
soft start and shutdown zones
significantly reduces any possibility of
injury. Given sufficient ‘‘notice’’
through use of soft start (for impact
driving), marine mammals are expected
to move away from a sound source that
is annoying prior to it becoming
potentially injurious, however, as noted
previously a small number of potential
takes by PTS are authorized and have
been analyzed. The FAA will use a
minimum of two MMOs stationed
strategically to increase detectability of
marine mammals, enabling a high rate
of success in implementation of
shutdowns to avoid injury.
The FAA’s Project activities are
localized and of relatively short
duration (a maximum of 70 days for pile
driving and removal). The entire Project
area is limited to Symonds Bay and into
Sitka Sound for some scenarios. These
localized and short-term noise
exposures may cause short-term
behavioral modifications in harbor
seals, Steller sea lions, harbor porpoises,
killer whales, and humpback whales.
Moreover, the mitigation and
monitoring measures are expected to
reduce the likelihood of injury.
Additionally, no important feeding and/
or reproductive areas for marine
mammals of any of these species/stocks
are known to be within the ensonified
area during the construction window.
Effects on individuals that are taken
by Level B harassment, on the basis of
reports in the literature as well as
monitoring from other similar activities,
will likely be limited to reactions such
as increased swimming speeds,
increased surfacing time, or decreased
foraging (if such activity were occurring)
(e.g., Thorson and Reyff 2006; Lerma
2014). Significant behavioral
modifications that could potentially
lead to effects on growth, survival, or
reproduction are not expected to occur
given the short duration and small scale
of the project activities. Most likely,
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
50410
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
individuals will simply move away
from the sound source and be
temporarily displaced from the areas of
pile driving and drilling, although even
this reaction has been observed
primarily only in association with
impact pile driving. Thus, even repeated
Level B harassment of some small
subset of the overall stock is unlikely to
result in any significant realized
decrease in fitness for the affected
individuals, and thus would not result
in any adverse impact to the stock as a
whole. Non-auditory physiological
effects and masking are not expected to
occur from the FAA’s Project activities.
The Project also is not expected to
have significant adverse effects on
affected marine mammals’ habitat. The
Project activities would not modify
existing marine mammal habitat for a
significant amount of time. The
activities may cause some fish to leave
the area of disturbance, thus temporarily
impacting marine mammals’ foraging
opportunities in a limited portion of the
foraging range. However, because of the
short duration of the activities and the
relatively small area of the habitat that
may be affected, and the decreased
potential of prey species to be in the
Project area during the construction
work window, the impacts to marine
mammal habitat are not expected to
cause significant or long-term negative
consequences.
In summary and as described above,
the following factors primarily support
our determination that the impacts
resulting from this activity are not
expected to adversely affect the species
or stocks through effects on annual rates
of recruitment or survival:
• No mortality or serious injury is
anticipated or authorized;
• Level B harassment may consist of,
at worst, temporary modifications in
behavior (e.g. temporary avoidance of
habitat or changes in behavior);
• The lack of important feeding,
pupping, or other areas in the action
area during the construction window;
• Mitigation is expected to minimize
the likelihood and severity of the level
of harassment; and
• The small percentage of the species/
stock that may be affected by Project
activities (<15 percent for all species/
stocks).
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
monitoring and mitigation measures,
NMFS finds that the total marine
mammal take from the FAA’s
construction activities will have a
negligible impact on the affected marine
mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers
of incidental take may be authorized
under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
for specified activities other than
military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so,
in practice, where estimated numbers
are available, NMFS compares the
number of individuals taken to the most
appropriate estimation of abundance of
the relevant species or stock in our
determination of whether an
authorization is limited to small
numbers of marine mammals.
Additionally, other qualitative factors
may be considered in the analysis, such
as the temporal or spatial scale of the
activities.
Table 7 details the number of
instances that animals could be exposed
to received noise levels that could cause
Level A and Level B harassment for the
planned work at the Project site relative
to the total stock abundance. The
numbers of animals authorized to be
taken for each species or stock is
considered small relative to the relevant
species or stock size even if each
estimated instance of take occurred to a
new individual. The total percent of the
population (if each instance was a
separate individual) for which take is
requested is less than 15 percent for
each stock (Table 7). For pinnipeds,
especially harbor seals occurring in the
vicinity of the Project area, there will
almost certainly be some overlap in
individuals present day-to-day, and the
number of individuals taken is expected
to be notably lower.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the Project activities
(including the mitigation and
monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals,
NMFS finds that small numbers of
marine mammals will be taken relative
to the population size of the affected
species or stocks.
TABLE 7—ESTIMATED NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGE OF STOCK THAT MAY BE EXPOSED TO LEVEL A AND LEVEL B
HARASSMENT
Authorized
Level A takes
Species
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Harbor Seal (Phoca vitulina):
Sitka/Chatham stock .................................................................................
Steller sea lion (Eumatopias jubatus):
Western U.S. Stock ..................................................................................
Eastern U.S. Stock ...................................................................................
Killer whale (Orcinus orca):
Eastern North Pacific, Gulf of AK, Aleutian Island, and Bering Sea
Transient Stock .....................................................................................
West Coast Transient Stock .....................................................................
Humpback whale (Megaptera noviaengliae):
Central North Pacific Stock ......................................................................
Harbor Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena):
Southeast Alaska Stock ...........................................................................
1 All
Authorized
Level B takes
Stock(s)
abundance
estimate 1
Percentage of
total stock
(percent)
13
350
14,855
2.44
6
........................
350
........................
50,983
41,638
0.698
0.855
0
........................
36
........................
587
243
6.13
14.8
3
350
10,103
3.49
45
105
11,146
1.34
stock abundance estimates presented here are from the 2016 Alaska Stock Assessment Report.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis
and Determination
In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must
find that the specified activity will not
have an ‘‘unmitigable adverse impact’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
on the subsistence uses of the affected
marine mammal species or stocks by
Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined
‘‘unmitigable adverse impact’’ in 50 CFR
216.103 as: an impact resulting from the
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
specified activity: (1) That is likely to
reduce the availability of the species to
a level insufficient for a harvest to meet
subsistence needs by: (i) Causing the
marine mammals to abandon or avoid
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 31, 2017 / Notices
hunting areas; (ii) Directly displacing
subsistence users; or (iii) Placing
physical barriers between the marine
mammals and the subsistence hunters;
and (2) That cannot be sufficiently
mitigated by other measures to increase
the availability of marine mammals to
allow subsistence needs to be met.
Harbor seals and Steller sea lions are
subsistence harvested in Alaska. During
2012, the estimated subsistence take of
harbor seals in southeast Alaska was
595 seals with 49 of these taken near
Sitka (Wolfe et al., 2013). This is the
lowest number of seals taken since 1992
(Wolfe et al., 2013) and is attributed to
the decline in subsistence hunting
pressure over the years as well as a
decrease in efficiency per hunter (Wolf
et al., 2013).
The peak hunting season in southeast
Alaska occurs during the month of
November and again over the March to
April time frame (Wolfe et al., 2013).
This corresponds to times when seals
are aggregated in shoal areas as they
prey on forage species such as herring,
making them easier to find and hunt.
The Project is in an area where
subsistence hunting for harbor seals or
sea lions could occur (Wolfe et al.,
2013), but the location is not preferred
for hunting. There is little to no hunting
documented in the vicinity and there
are no harvest quotas for non-listed
marine mammals. For these reasons and
the fact that Project activities would
occur outside of the primary subsistence
hunting seasons, there would be no
impact on subsistence activities or on
the availability of marine mammals for
subsistence use.
To satisfy requirements under Section
106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, R&M Consultants, Inc.
reached out to the Sitka Tribe of Alaska,
Central Council of the Tlingit and
Haida, and Sealaska regarding cultural
resources in 2016. No issues or concerns
with the Project were raised during this
effort.
Based on the description of the
specified activity, the measures
described to minimize adverse effects
on the availability of marine mammals
for subsistence purposes, and the
mitigation and monitoring measures,
NMFS has determined that there will
not be an unmitigable adverse impact on
subsistence uses from the FAA’s
activities.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal
agency insure that any action it
authorizes, funds, or carries out is not
likely to jeopardize the continued
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Oct 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
existence of any endangered or
threatened species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
designated critical habitat. To ensure
ESA compliance for the issuance of
IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this
case with the Alaska Regional Office,
whenever we propose to authorize take
for endangered or threatened species.
NMFS is authorizing take of two DPSs
(i.e., western DPS of Steller sea lions
and Mexico DPS of humpback whales),
which are listed under the ESA. The
Permit and Conservation Division
requested initiation of Section 7
consultation with the Alaska Region for
the issuance of this IHA. The NMFS
Alaska Regional Office Protected
Resources Division issued a Biological
Opinion in October, 2017 under section
7 of the ESA, on the issuance of an IHA
to the FAA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA by the NMFS Permits and
Conservation Division. The Biological
Opinion concluded that the proposed
action is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of western DPS
Steller sea lions or Mexico DPS of
humpback whales, and is not likely to
destroy or adversely modify western
DPS Steller sea lion critical habitat.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to the FAA
for the potential harassment of small
numbers of five marine mammal species
incidental to the Biorka Island dock
replacement project in Sitka, AK,
provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring and reporting
requirements are incorporated.
Dated: October 25, 2017.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–23563 Filed 10–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XF803
Western Pacific Fishery Management
Council; Public Meetings
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of public meetings.
AGENCY:
The Western Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council) will
hold its 172nd meeting by
teleconference and webinar to discuss
and make recommendations on fishery
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50411
management issues in the Western
Pacific Region.
DATES: The Council will meet on
November 15, 2017, between 2 p.m. and
5 p.m. (Hawaii Standard Time (HST)); 1
and 4 p.m. (American Samoa Standard
Time (ASST)); and November 16, 2017,
between 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. (Marianas
Standard Time (MST)). All times listed
are local island times. For specific time
and agenda, see SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held by
teleconference and webinar. The
teleconference numbers are: U.S. tollfree: 1 (888) 482–3560, International
Access: +1 (647) 723–3959, and Access
Code: 5228220. The webinar can be
accessed at: https://wprfmc.webex.com/
join/info.wpcouncilnoaa.gov.
The following venues will also be
host sites for the teleconference: Council
Conference Room, 1164 Bishop Street,
Suite 1400, Honolulu, Hawaii; Land
Grant Conference Room, American
Samoa Community College, Agriculture,
Community and Natural Resources,
Mapusaga Road, Malaeimi Village,
American Samoa; Guam Hilton Resort
and SPA, 202 Hilton Road, Tumon Bay,
Guam; Department of Land and Natural
Resources Conference Room, Santa
Remedio Drive, Lower Base, Saipan,
MP.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director;
telephone: (808) 522–8220.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public
comment opportunity will be provided
in the agenda. The order in which
agenda items are addressed may change.
The meeting will run as late as
necessary to complete scheduled
business. Written comments must be
received by November 10, 2017.
Background documents will be available
from, and written comments should be
sent to, Kitty M. Simonds, Executive
Director; Western Pacific Fishery
Management Council, 1164 Bishop
Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813;
phone: (808) 522–8220 or fax: (808)
522–8226.
Schedule and Agenda for the 172nd
Council Meeting
2 p.m.–5 p.m., Wednesday, November
15 (HST); 1 p.m.–4 p.m., Wednesday,
November 15, 2016 (ASST); 10 a.m.–
1 p.m., Thursday, November 16, 2016
(MST)
1. Welcome and Introductions
2. Review and Approval of the 172nd
Agenda
3. Modifying the Swordfish Trip Limit
in the American Samoa Longline
Fishery (Final Action)
E:\FR\FM\31OCN1.SGM
31OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 31, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50397-50411]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23563]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XF540
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Biorka Island Dock Replacement
Project
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to incidentally harass, by
Level A and Level B harassment, marine mammals during construction
activities associated with the Biorka dock replacement project in
Symonds Bay, AK.
DATES: This Authorization is applicable from May 1, 2018, through April
30, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected
[[Page 50398]]
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the applications
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in
this document, may be obtained online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these
documents, please call the contact listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) 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 Incidental Take Authorization (ITA) 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 the
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering (Level B harassment).
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-
6A, NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an
incidental harassment authorization) with respect to environmental
consequences on the human environment. This action is consistent with
categories of activities identified in CE B4 of the Companion Manual
for NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or
cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality
of the human environment and for which we have not identified any
extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical
exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined that the issuance of the
IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review and
a Categorical Exclusion memo was signed in October 2017.
Summary of Request
On March 31, 2017, NMFS received a request from the FAA for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving and removal and down
the hole (DTH) drilling in association with the Biorka Island Dock
Replacement Project (Project) in Symonds Bay, Alaska. The FAA's request
is for take of five species by Level A and Level B harassment. Neither
the FAA nor NMFS expect mortality to result from this activity and,
therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
In-water work associated with the in-water construction is expected
to be completed within 70 days starting May 1, 2018. We expect the in-
water construction work to occur between May 1, 2018 through September
30, 2018; however, this IHA is valid for one year, from May 1, 2018,
through April 30, 2019.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
The FAA is constructing a replacement dock on Biorka Island in
Symonds Bay near Sitka, Alaska. The purpose of the Project is to
improve and maintain the sole point of access to Biorka Island and the
navigational and weather facilities located on the island. The existing
dock has deteriorated and reached the end of its useful life. Regular
and repetitive heavy surging seas, along with constant use have
destroyed the face of the existing floating marine dock, and have
broken cleats making it difficult to tie a vessel to the existing dock.
In its present condition, small vessels cannot use the dock to provide
supplies to facilities on the island. The existing barge landing area
is reinforced seasonally by adding fill to the landing at the
shoreline, which is periodically washed away by storms and wave action.
The Project would reconstruct the deteriorated existing dock and
construct an improved barge landing area. A detailed description of the
planned dock replacement project is provided in the Federal Register
notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 41229; August 30, 2017). Since that
time, no changes have been made to the planned activities. Therefore, a
detailed description is not provided here. Please refer to that Federal
Register notice for the description of the specific activity.
Table 1 provides a summary of the six methods of construction
(``scenarios'') used in the modeling of the zone of influence (ZOI)s
for the Biorka Project. The ZOIs effectively represent the mitigation
zone that would be established around each pile to prevent Level A
harassment to marine mammals, while providing estimates of the areas
within which Level B harassment might occur.
Table 1--Pile Driving Modeling Scenarios for the Biorka Project
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory DTH Impact
Piles ------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario Description installed Total Total Total Shift
per day Hrs per hours per Hours per hours per Hours per strikes (hr)
pile day pile day pile per day
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S1.................................... Removal of existing 21 0.33 6.93 NA 2
piles and installation/
removal of temporary
piles 1.
NA 2 6.93
--------------------------------------------
[[Page 50399]]
S2.................................... Installation of 18-inch 3 ......... 0.99 2 6 0.17 15 7.49
pipe piles (dock and
dolphin).
----------------------
S3.................................... Installation of 18-inch 4 ......... 1.32 NA 0.33 2720 2.65
pipe piles (barge
landing).
----------------------
S4.................................... Installation of 30-inch 2 ......... 0.66 2 4 0.17 10 4.99
pipe piles (dolphins).
----------------------
S5.................................... Installation of H piles 8 ......... 2.64 NA 2 0.33 5440 5.31
(dock wave barrier).
----------------------
S6.................................... Installation of sheet 12 ......... 3.96 NA 2 0.25 6120 6.96
piles (dock wave
barrier and barge
landing).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Existing piles to be removed include 3 24-in concrete piles, 14 8-in steel piles, 8 10-in steel piles, 14 12.75-in steel piles, and 7 14- to 8-in
timber piles.
2 NA indicates when a pile driving method was not required in a given scenario.
Comment and Responses
A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to the FAA was
published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2017 (82 FR 41229).
That notice described, in detail, the FAA's activity, the marine mammal
species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated
effects on marine mammals. During the 30-day public comment period,
NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission).
Comment 1: The Commission has concerns regarding the
appropriateness of the manner in which NMFS has estimated Level A
harassment zones. The Commission recommends that NMFS consult with both
internal and external scientists and acousticians to determine the
appropriate accumulation time that action proponents should use to
determine the extent of the Level A harassment zones based on the
associated permanent threshold shift (PTS) cumulative sound exposure
level (SELcum) thresholds for the various types of sound
sources, including stationary sound sources, when simple area x density
methods are employed. Estimated swimming speeds of various species and
behavior patterns (including residency patterns) should be considered,
and multiple scenarios should be evaluated using animat modeling.
Response: NMFS will take the Commission's recommendation into
consideration and will consult with internal scientists on this issue
in the future; however it does not change our isopleths or the number
of takes for this specific action. We also welcome the Commission and
its Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals to provide
guidance on this issue.
Comment 2: The Commission is unsure why NMFS is not implementing
consistent measures for action proponents that plan to conduct similar
activities (e.g. shutdowns for vibratory driving and DTH drilling). The
Commission recommends that NMFS (1) determine whether action proponents
would be required to implement delay or shut-down procedures during use
of vibratory and down-the-hole hammers and (2) require, or refrain from
requiring, those measures consistently for all authorizations involving
those activities.
Response: NMFS has confirmed that the FAA will be required to
implement shutdown and delay procedures during the use of all
construction equipment, including vibratory driving and removal and DTH
drilling. In the future, NMFS will ensure consistency across all
authorizations in our mitigation requirements.
Comment 3: The Commission recommended that NMFS share the rounding
criteria with the Commission such that the matter of when rounding
should occur in the take calculation can be resolved in the near
future.
Response: NMFS will share the rounding criteria with the Commission
soon and looks forward to working with them in the future to resolve
this issue.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity
There are five marine mammal species that may transit through the
waters nearby the Project area, and are likely to potentially be taken
by the specified activity. These include the Steller sea lion
(Eumetopias jubatus), harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), harbor porpoise
(Phocoena phocoena), killer whale (Orcinus orca), and humpback whale
(Megaptera noviaeangliae). Multiple additional marine mammal species
may occasionally enter Sitka sound but are not expected to be present
in the shallow nearshore waters of the action area.
Sections 3 and 4 of the FAA's application summarize available
information regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat
preferences, and behavior and life history of the potentially affected
species. Additional information regarding population trends and threats
may be found in NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SAR;
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/) and more general information about these
species (e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on
NMFS's Web site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/).
Table 2 lists all species with expected occurrence in Symonds Bay
and Sitka Sound and summarizes information related to the population or
stock, including potential biological removal (PBR), where known. 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 (as described in NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is
anticipated
[[Page 50400]]
or authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and mortality are
included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and
other threats.
A detailed description of the of the species likely to be affected
by the Project, including brief introductions to the species and
relevant stocks as well as available information regarding population
trends and threats, and information regarding local occurrence, were
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR
41229; August 30, 2017); since that time, we are not aware of any
changes in the status of these species and stocks; therefore, detailed
descriptions are not provided here. Please refer to that Federal
Register notice for these descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS' Web
site (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/) for generalized species
accounts.
Table 2--Marine Mammals Potentially Present in the Vicinity of Biorka Island
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock abundance (CV, Relative occurrence in
ESA/MMPA status; Nmin, most recent Annual M/ Symonds Bay and Sitka
Species Stock strategic (Y/N) 1 abundance survey) 2 PBR 3 SI 4 Sound; season of
occurrence
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) Southeast Alaska...... -; Y 11,146 (0.242; n/a; Undet. 34 Common.
1997).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae (dolphins)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Killer whale (Orcinus orca)........ Eastern North Pacific -; N 587 (n/a; 587; 2012).. 0 0 Infrequent.
Gulf of Alaska,
Aleutian Island, and
Bering Sea Transient.
West Coast Transient.. -; N 243 (n/a; 243; 2009).. 2.4 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Balaenopteridae
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale 5 (Megaptera Central North Pacific -; Y 10,103 (0.300; 7,890; 83 24 Likely.
novaeangliae). stock. 2006).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steller sea lion (Eumetopias Western............... E; Y 49,497 (n/a; 49,497; 297 236 Common.
jubatus). 2014).
Eastern............... -; N 60,131 (n/a; 36,551; 1,645 108
2013).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina)....... Sitka/Chatham......... -; N 14,855 (n/a; 13,212; 155 77 Common.
2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Yes (Y), No (N), Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) status: Depleted (D). A dash
(-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for
which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR (see footnote 3) or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the
ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic
stock.
2 CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For certain stocks, abundance
estimates are actual counts of animals and there is no associated CV. The most recent abundance survey that is reflected in the abundance estimate is
presented; there may be more recent surveys that have not yet been incorporated into the estimate.
3 Potential biological removal, 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 size (OSP).
4 These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g, commercial
fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated
with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
5 The humpback whales considered under the MMPA to be part of this stock could be from any of two different distinct population segment (DPS)s. In
Alaska, it would be expected to primarily be whales from the Hawaii DPS but could also be whales from Mexico DPS.
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
The effects of underwater noise from construction activities for
the Project have the potential to result in behavioral harassment of
marine mammals in the vicinity of the action area. The Federal Register
notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 41229; August 30, 2017) included a
discussion of the effects of anthropogenic noise on marine mammals,
therefore that information is not repeated here; please refer to that
[[Page 50401]]
Federal Register notice for that information.
Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through this IHA, which informed NMFS' consideration of both
the ``small numbers'' 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, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as: Any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment);
or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal
stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding,
feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).
Authorized takes would be by Level A and Level B harassment, in the
form of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals
resulting from exposure to vibratory and impact pile driving and
removal and DTH drilling, and potential PTS for animals that may
transit through the Level A zones (described below) undetected (Table
6). Based on the nature of the activity and the anticipated
effectiveness of the mitigation measures (i.e., soft start, ramp-up,
etc.--discussed in detail below in Mitigation Measures section), Level
A harassment is not anticipated; however, a small number of takes by
Level A harassment is authorized for most species as a precaution if
animals go undetected before a shutdown is in place.
As described previously, no mortality or serious injury is
anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the
take is estimated.
Described in the most basic way, we estimate take by considering:
(1) Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available
science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur
some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of
water that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the
density or occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas;
and, (4) and the number of days of activities. Below, we describe these
components in more detail and present the take estimate.
The estimation of marine mammal takes typically uses the following
calculation since site-specific density is unavailable:
Level B exposure estimate = N (number of animals) in the area * Number
of days of noise generating activities.
Acoustic Thresholds
Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic
thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above
which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be
behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS
of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources--Though significantly
driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from
anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by
other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability,
duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving
animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral
context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007,
Ellison et al., 2011). Based on what the available science indicates
and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is
both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a
generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the
onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are
likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 120 decibels (dB) re 1 micropascal ([mu]Pa) root
mean square (rms) for continuous (e.g. vibratory pile-driving,
drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for non-explosive
impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific
sonar) sources.
The FAA's Project activities include the use of continuous
(vibratory pile driving and DTH drilling) and impulsive (impact pile
driving) sources, and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)
are applicable.
Level A harassment for non-explosive sources--NMFS' Technical
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (NMFS 2016) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory
injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups
(based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from
two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). The FAA's
Project activity includes the use of impulsive (impact pile driving)
and non-impulsive (vibratory pile driving and DTH drilling) sources.
These thresholds were developed by compiling and synthesizing the
best available science and soliciting input multiple times from both
the public and peer reviewers to inform the final product, and are
provided in the table below. The references, analysis, and methodology
used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS 2016
Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.
Table 3--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset acoustic thresholds * (received level)
Hearing group -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency cetaceans............... Cell 1: Lpk, flat: 219 Cell 2: LE, LF, 24h: 199 dB.
dB; LE, LF, 24h: 183 dB.
Mid-frequency cetaceans............... Cell 3: Lpk, flat: 230 Cell 4: LE, MF, 24h: 198 dB.
dB; LE, MF, 24h: 185 dB.
High-frequency cetaceans.............. Cell 5: Lpk, flat: 202 Cell 6: LE, HF, 24h: 173 dB.
dB; LE, HF, 24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (underwaters)........ Cell 7: Lpk, flat: 218 Cell 8: LE, PW, 24h: 201 dB.
dB; LE, PW, 24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (underwater)........ Cell 9: Lpk, flat: 232 Cell 10: LE, OW, 24h: 219 dB.
dB; LE, OW, 24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 NMFS 2016
[[Page 50402]]
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds.
Pile driving and removal and DTH drilling generates underwater
noise that can potentially result in disturbance to marine mammals in
the Project area. Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease in acoustic
intensity as an acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source. TL
parameters vary with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current,
source and receiver depth, water depth, water chemistry, and bottom
composition and topography. The general formula for underwater TL is:
TL = B * log10(R1/R2),
Where:
R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven
pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the initial
measurement.
This formula neglects loss due to scattering and absorption, which is
assumed to be zero here. The degree to which underwater sound
propagates away from a sound source is dependent on a variety of
factors, most notably the water bathymetry and presence or absence of
reflective or absorptive conditions including in-water structures and
sediments. Spherical spreading occurs in a perfectly unobstructed
(free-field) environment not limited by depth or water surface,
resulting in a 6 dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of
distance from the source (20*log[range]). Cylindrical spreading occurs
in an environment in which sound propagation is bounded by the water
surface and sea bottom, resulting in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level
for each doubling of distance from the source (10*log[range]).
Underwater Sound--The intensity of pile driving and removal sounds
is greatly influenced by factors such as the type of piles, hammers,
and the physical environment in which the activity takes place. A
number of studies, primarily on the west coast, have measured sound
produced during underwater pile driving projects. These data are
largely for impact driving of steel pipe piles and concrete piles as
well as vibratory driving of steel pipe piles.
JASCO Applied Sciences (JASCO) conducted acoustic modeling of pile
installation and removal activities planned for the Project, which is
included as Appendix A of the FAA's application. To assess potential
underwater noise exposure of marine mammals during construction
activities, Quijano and Austin (2017) determined source levels for six
different construction scenarios (see Table 1). The source levels are
frequency-dependent and suitable for modeling underwater acoustic
propagation using JASCO's Marine Operations Noise Model (MONM). The
modeling predicted the extent of ensonification and the acoustic
footprint from construction activities, taking into account the effects
of pile driving equipment, bathymetry, sound speed profile, and seabed
geoacoustic parameters. Auditory weighting was applied to the modeled
sound fields to estimate received levels relative to hearing
sensitivities of five marine mammal hearing groups following NMFS 2016
guidance.
The results are based on currently adopted sound level thresholds
for auditory injury (Level A) expressed as peak pressure level (PK) and
24-hr SEL, and behavioral disturbance (Level B) expressed as sound
pressure level (SPL). Using these guidelines, Quijano and Austin (2017)
calculated the maximum extent (distance and ensonified areas) of the
Level A and Level B exposure zones for each marine mammal functional
hearing group. This was calculated for both impact and vibratory pile
driving of 18- and 30-inch (in) piles for each of the following six
Project scenarios.
The model required, as input, source sound levels in \1/3\-octave
bands between 10 hertz (Hz) and 25 kilohertz (kHz). Source levels for
sheet pile and H pile installation were obtained from literature, but
the available measurements did not cover the full frequency spectrum of
interest; data for vibratory installation of sheet and H piles were
available to maximum frequencies of 4 kHz and 10 kHz, respectively.
Modeling of the six construction scenarios at the Project site on
Biorka Island followed three steps:
1. Piles driven into the sediment by impact, vibratory, or downhole
drilling were characterized as sound-radiating sources. Source levels
in \1/3\-octave-bands were obtained by modeling or by adjusting source
levels found in the literature. The exact method to obtain the \1/3\-
octave-band levels depends on the pile geometry and pile driving
equipment, and it is described on a case-by-case basis (see Appendix A
of the FAA's application);
2. Underwater sound propagation was applied to predict how sound
propagates from the pile into the water column as a function of range,
depth, and azimuthal direction. Propagation depends on several
conditions including the frequency content of the sound, the
bathymetry, the sound speed in the water column, and sediment
geoacoustics; and
3. The propagated sound field was used to compute received levels
over a grid of simulated receivers, from which distances to criteria
thresholds and maps of ensonified areas were generated.
Modeled results are presented as tables of distances at which SPLs
or SELs fell below thresholds defined by criteria. For marine mammal
injury, the Level A thresholds considered here follow the NMFS
guidelines (NMFS 2016). A detailed description of the modeling process
is provided in Appendix A of the FAA's IHA application. A list of
modeling parameters, including pile driving duration for computation of
SEL, are provided in Table 1.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 50403]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN31OC17.000
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Marine Mammal Occurrence
In this section we provide the information about the presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take
calculations.
At-sea densities for marine mammal species have not been determined
for marine mammals in Sitka Sound; therefore, all estimates here are
determined by using observational data from biologists, peer-reviewed
literature, and information obtained from personal communication with
researchers and state and Federal biologists, and from local charter
boat operators.
Harbor Seals
Harbor seals are expected to be in the Project area in low numbers
(see Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified
Activity Section). We estimate that up to five harbor seals per day may
be present in the Project area on all days of construction. Therefore,
we authorize 350 takes by Level B harassment. Because the largest Level
A ZOI for harbor seals is nearly 1 kilometer (km) (Scenario 6), the FAA
requests up to 13 harbor seal takes by Level A harassment. Level A
harassment may occur if the animals enter the ZOI undetected on half of
all days of construction in Scenario 6 and one time for each of the
other five scenarios, and marine mammal observers (MMO) are not able to
request a shutdown prior to the seals being exposed to potential Level
A harassment.
Steller Sea Lion
Steller sea lion abundance in the Project area is dependent on prey
availability. Prey species are uncommon during the Project window;
therefore, sea lion abundance is expected to be low. The FAA estimates
that five sea lions may be in the Project area every day (70 days) of
construction, therefore, we estimate that 350 sea lions may be taken by
Level B harassment. We estimate that these takes would be split equally
between the east distinct population segment (DPS) and west DPS (175
each). The Level A zone is less than 10 m for all but Scenario 6, which
is 80 m; however, to be conservative, the FAA is requesting a small
group of Steller sea lions may be taken by Level A harassment. This
would equate to six total animals if split equally by DPS (3 each).
[[Page 50404]]
Humpback Whale
Humpback whales are found in Sitka Bay seasonally. During mid-
summer, tour boats generally see four to five whales per day, in the
middle of Sitka Sound. Therefore, a count of 5 humpback whales per day
(70 days) was used to estimate takes per day on every day of
construction for a total of 350 takes by Level B harassment. All takes
would be from the Central North Pacific stock under the MMPA. For ESA
purposes, 93.9 percent would be from the Hawaii DPS (328 animals) and
6.1 percent would be from the Mexico stock (22 animals) based on Wade
et al., 2016. The maximum distance at which a humpback whale may be
exposed to noise levels that exceed Level A thresholds is 1.4 km during
Scenario 6. Even though the ensonified area extends outside of the
entrance to Symonds Bay, a MMO stationed near the mouth of the bay at
Hanus Point would be able to see a humpback whale outside Symonds Bay
before it enters the Level A zone and could shut down the noise
producing activity to avoid Level A take. In the unlikely event a whale
would go undetected and enter the Level A zone, the FAA has requested
three takes by Level A harassment for humpback whales. We estimate that
all three humpback whales would be from the Hawaii DPS.
Killer Whale
Generally, transient killer whales follow the movements of Steller
sea lions and harbor seals on which they prey. Given the low numbers of
Steller sea lions in Sitka Sound during summer, it is consistent that
transient killer whales would also be rare or infrequent in the Project
area (e.g., killer whales were only observed on five or six days by the
whale watching industry). Small groups of 5 to 6 transient killer
whales per day could be observed throughout the summer months;
therefore, we estimate that a group of 6 animals could enter the
Project area on 6 occasions during the construction window, for a total
of 36 takes by Level B harassment. No Level A takes of killer whales is
authorized for this species. The maximum linear distance to the Level A
threshold for killer whales is less than 250 meters (m) from the source
and a MMO would be able to observe animals at this distance and shut
down activities in time to avoid Level A take.
Harbor Porpoise
Harbor porpoise are expected to occur in the Project area in low
numbers during the construction window. Sightings during this time
period are infrequent; this species is not observed every day. The mean
group size of harbor porpoise in Southeast Alaska was estimated to be
between 2 to 3 individuals (Dahlheim et al., 2009); therefore, we
conservatively estimate that a group of three harbor porpoise may be
present every other day of construction for a total of 105 takes by
Level B harassment. The distances to Level A thresholds for harbor
porpoise (HFC) are largest during impulse driving under Scenarios 3, 5,
and 6 (see Table 1), and extend beyond the entrance to Symonds Bay. The
duration of Scenarios 3, 5, and 6 is expected to be 30 days (see Table
1); therefore, we expect that a small group of three harbor porpoise
may enter the Level A zone on half of the days of Scenarios 3, 5, and 6
(15 days) for a total of 45 takes by Level A harassment.
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate.
All estimates are conservative and include the following
assumptions:
All pilings installed at each site would have an
underwater noise disturbance equal to the piling that causes the
greatest noise disturbance (i.e., the piling farthest from shore)
installed with the method that has the ZOI. The largest underwater
disturbance (Level B) ZOI would be produced by DTH drilling; therefore
take estimates were calculated using the vibratory pile-driving ZOIs.
The ZOIs for each threshold are not spherical and are truncated by land
masses on either side of the Project area, which would dissipate sound
pressure waves.
Exposures were based on an estimated total of 70 work
days. Each activity ranges in number of days needed to be completed
(Table 1).
All marine mammal individuals potentially available are
assumed to be present within the relevant area, and thus incidentally
taken;
An individual can only be taken once during a 24-hour
period; and,
Exposures to sound levels at or above the relevant
thresholds equate to take, as defined by the MMPA.
Estimates of potential instances of take may be overestimates of
the number of individuals taken. In the context of stationary
activities such as pile driving and in areas where resident animals may
be present, this number represents the number of total take that may
accrue to a smaller number of individuals, with some number of animals
being exposed more than once per individual. While pile driving and
removal can occur any day throughout the in-water work window, and the
analysis is conducted on a per day basis, only a fraction of that time
(typically a matter of hours on any given day) is actually spent pile
driving/removal. The potential effectiveness of mitigation measures in
reducing the number of takes is typically not quantified in the take
estimation process. For these reasons, these take estimates may be
conservative.
Table 5--Calculations for Incidental Take Estimation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Takes Takes
authorized by authorized by
Species Level A Level B
harassment harassment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steller sea lion: Eastern and Western 6 350
stock..................................
Harbor seal............................. 13 350
Humpback whale.......................... 3 350
Killer whale: Eastern North Pacific Gulf 0 36
of Alaska, Aleutian Island, and Bering
Sea Transient stock and West Coast
Transient stock........................
Harbor porpoise......................... 45 105
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitigation Measures
In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds,
[[Page 50405]]
and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such
species or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (latter 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 balance 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 the likelihood of
effective implementation, and;
(2) The practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
The ZOIs were used to develop mitigation measures for pile driving
and removal activities at the Project area. The ZOIs effectively
represent the mitigation zone that would be established around each
pile to prevent Level A harassment to marine mammals, while providing
estimates of the areas within which Level B harassment might occur. In
addition to the specific measures described later in this section, the
FAA would conduct briefings between construction supervisors and crews,
marine mammal monitoring team, and staff prior to the start of all pile
driving activity, and when new personnel join the work, in order to
explain responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal
monitoring protocol, and operational procedures.
Monitoring and Shutdown for Construction Activities
The following measures would apply to the FAA's mitigation through
shutdown and disturbance zones:
Shutdown Zone--For all pile driving activities, the FAA will
establish a shutdown zone intended to contain the area in which SPLs
equal or exceed the auditory injury criteria for cetaceans and
pinnipeds. The purpose of a shutdown zone is to define an area within
which shutdown of activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal
(or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined area), thus
preventing injury of marine mammals (as described previously under
Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals, serious
injury or death are unlikely outcomes even in the absence of mitigation
measures). Modeled radial distances for shutdown zones are shown in
Table 6. However, a minimum shutdown zone of 10 m will be established
during all pile driving activities, regardless of the estimated zone;
and
Disturbance Zone--Disturbance zones are the areas in which SPLs
equal or exceed 160 and 120 dB rms (for impulse and continuous sound,
respectively). Disturbance zones provide utility for monitoring
conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e., shutdown zone monitoring) by
establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown
zones. Monitoring of disturbance zones enables observers to be aware of
and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the Project area but
outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for potential shutdowns of
activity. However, the primary purpose of disturbance zone monitoring
is for documenting instances of Level B harassment; disturbance zone
monitoring is discussed in greater detail later (see Monitoring and
Reporting Measures). Nominal radial distances for disturbance zones are
shown in Table 6.
Given the size of the disturbance zone for vibratory pile driving
and DTH drilling, it is impossible to guarantee that all animals would
be observed or to make comprehensive observations of fine-scale
behavioral reactions to sound, and only a portion of the zone (e.g.,
what may be reasonably observed by visual observers stationed between
Symonds Bay and Sitka Sound) would be observed. In order to document
observed instances of harassment, monitors record all marine mammal
observations, regardless of location. The observer's location, as well
as the location of the pile being driven, is known from a GPS. The
location of the animal is estimated as a distance from the observer,
which is then compared to the location from the pile. It may then be
estimated whether the animal was exposed to sound levels constituting
incidental harassment on the basis of predicted distances to relevant
thresholds in post-processing of observational and acoustic data, and a
precise accounting of observed incidences of harassment created. This
information may then be used to extrapolate observed takes to reach an
approximate understanding of actual total takes.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 50406]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN31OC17.001
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
Monitoring Protocols--Monitoring would be conducted before, during,
and after pile driving and vibratory removal activities. In addition,
observers shall record all instances of marine mammal occurrence,
regardless of distance from activity, and shall document any behavioral
reactions in concert with distance from piles being driven.
Observations made outside the shutdown zone will not result in
shutdown; that pile segment would be completed without cessation,
unless the animal approaches or enters the shutdown zone, at which
point all pile driving activities would be halted. Monitoring will take
place from 30 minutes prior to initiation through 30 minutes post-
completion of pile driving and removal activities. Pile driving
activities include the time to install or remove a single pile or
series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile
driving equipment is no more than 30 minutes. Please see Section 11 of
the FAA's application (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm), for the FAA's monitoring protocols.
The following additional measures apply to visual monitoring:
(1) Monitoring will be conducted by qualified observers, who will
be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to monitor for
marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when applicable
by calling for the shutdown to the hammer operator. A minimum of two
observers will be required for all pile driving/removal
[[Page 50407]]
activities. MMO requirements for construction actions are as follows:
(a) Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are
required;
(b) At least one observer must have prior experience working as an
observer;
(c) Other observers (that do not have prior experience) may
substitute education (undergraduate degree in biological science or
related field) or training for experience;
(d) Where a team of three or more observers are required, one
observer should be designated as lead observer or monitoring
coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an
observer; and
(e) NMFS will require submission and approval of observer resumes.
(2) Qualified MMOs are trained biologists, and need the following
additional minimum qualifications:
(a) Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible)
sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface
with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars
may be necessary to correctly identify the target;
(b) Ability to conduct field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols;
(c) Experience or training in the field identification of marine
mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
(d) Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
(e) Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations
including but not limited to the number and species of marine mammals
observed; dates and times when in-water construction activities were
conducted; dates and times when in-water construction activities were
suspended to avoid potential incidental injury from construction sound
of marine mammals observed within a defined shutdown zone; and marine
mammal behavior; and
(f) Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
(3) Prior to the start of pile driving activity, the shutdown zone
will be monitored for 30 minutes to ensure that it is clear of marine
mammals. Pile driving will only commence once observers have declared
the shutdown zone clear of marine mammals; animals will be allowed to
remain in the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of their own volition)
and their behavior will be monitored and documented. The shutdown zone
may only be declared clear, and pile driving started, when the entire
shutdown zone is visible (i.e., when not obscured by dark, rain, fog,
etc.). In addition, if such conditions should arise during impact pile
driving that is already underway, the activity would be halted.
(4) If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone
during the course of pile driving operations, activity will be halted
and delayed until either (A) the animal has voluntarily left and been
visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone, (B) 15 minutes have passed
without re-detection of small cetaceans and pinnipeds, or (C) 30
minutes have passed without re-detection of large cetaceans, whichever
happens sooner. Monitoring will be conducted throughout the time
required to drive a pile.
(5) If a species for which authorization has not been granted, or a
species for which authorization has been granted but the authorized
takes are met, approaches or is observed within the Level B harassment
zone, activities will shut down immediately using delay and shut-down
procedures. Activities will not restart until the animals have been
confirmed to have left the area.
Soft Start
The use of a soft start procedure is believed to provide additional
protection to marine mammals by warning or providing a chance to leave
the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity, and typically
involves a requirement to initiate sound from the hammer at reduced
energy followed by a waiting period. This procedure is repeated two
additional times. It is difficult to specify the reduction in energy
for any given hammer because of variation across drivers and, for
impact hammers, the actual number of strikes at reduced energy will
vary because operating the hammer at less than full power results in
``bouncing'' of the hammer as it strikes the pile, resulting in
multiple ``strikes.'' For impact driving, we require an initial set of
three strikes from the impact hammer at reduced energy, followed by a
30-second waiting period, then 2 subsequent 3 strike sets. Soft start
will be required at the beginning of each day's impact pile driving
work and at any time following a cessation of impact pile driving of 30
minutes or longer.
Noise Attenuating Devices
The FAA will use cushions during impact pile driving.
Timing Restrictions
The FAA will only conduct construction activities during daytime
hours. Construction will also be restricted to the months of May
through September to avoid overlap with times when marine mammals have
higher densities in the Project area.
We have carefully evaluated the FAA's mitigation measures and
considered their effectiveness in past implementation to determine
whether they are likely to effect the least practicable impact on the
affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat.
Any mitigation measure(s) we prescribe should be able to
accomplish, have a reasonable likelihood of accomplishing (based on
current science), or contribute to the accomplishment of one or more of
the general goals listed below:
(1) Avoidance or minimization of injury or death of marine mammals
wherever possible (goals 2, 3, and 4 may contribute to this goal);
(2) A reduction in the number (total number or number at
biologically important time or location) of individual marine mammals
exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental take (this goal may
contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by behavioral harassment
only);
(3) A reduction in the number (total number or number at
biologically important time or location) of times any individual marine
mammal would be exposed to stimuli expected to result in incidental
take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to reducing takes by
behavioral harassment only);
(4) A reduction in the intensity of exposure to stimuli expected to
result in incidental take (this goal may contribute to 1, above, or to
reducing the severity of behavioral harassment only);
(5) Avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to marine mammal
habitat, paying particular attention to the prey base, blockage or
limitation of passage to or from biologically important areas,
permanent destruction of habitat, or temporary disturbance of habitat
during a biologically important time; and
(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 FAA's measures, as well as any other
potential measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has determined that the
mitigation measures provide the means of effecting
[[Page 50408]]
the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and
their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating
grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting Measures
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
action area. Effective reporting is critical to both compliance and
ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species in action area (e.g.,
presence, abundance, distribution, density);
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
population, species, or stock;
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat); and
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Visual Marine Mammal Observations
The FAA will collect sighting data and behavioral responses to
construction for marine mammal species observed in the region of
activity during the period of activity. All MMOs will be trained in
marine mammal identification and behaviors and are required to have no
other construction-related tasks while conducting monitoring. A minimum
of two MMOs will be required for all pile driving/removal activities.
The FAA will monitor the shutdown zone and disturbance zone before,
during, and after pile driving, with observers located at the best
practicable vantage points. Based on our requirements, the FAA would
implement the following procedures for pile driving and removal:
MMOs would be located at the best vantage point(s) in
order to properly see the entire shutdown zone and as much of the
disturbance zone as possible;
During all observation periods, observers will use
binoculars and the naked eye to search continuously for marine mammals;
If the shutdown zones are obscured by fog or poor lighting
conditions, pile driving at that location will not be initiated until
that zone is visible. Should such conditions arise while driving,
removal, or drilling is underway, the activity would be halted; and
The shutdown and disturbance zones around the pile will be
monitored for the presence of marine mammals before, during, and after
any pile driving or removal activity.
Data Collection
We require that observers use approved data forms. Among other
pieces of information, the FAA will record detailed information about
any implementation of shutdowns, including the distance of animals to
the pile and description of specific actions that ensued and resulting
behavior of the animal, if any. In addition, the FAA will attempt to
distinguish between the number of individual animals taken and the
number of incidences of take. We require that, at a minimum, the
following information be collected on the sighting forms:
Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;
Construction activities occurring during each observation
period;
Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);
Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);
Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of
marine mammals;
Description of any observable marine mammal behavior
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel, and if possible,
the correlation to SPLs;
Distance from pile driving or removal activities to marine
mammals and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
Description of implementation of mitigation measures
(e.g., shutdown or delay);
Locations of all marine mammal observations; and
Other human activity in the area.
Sound Source Verification
The SSV will establish source levels for impact pile driving,
vibratory pile driving, and DTH drilling. The FAA will provide all
monitoring data to NMFS. The reports would include the following
information:
1. Size and type of piles;
2. A detailed description of the noise attenuation device,
including design specifications;
3. The impact hammer energy rating used to drive the piles, and the
make and model of the hammer and the output energy;
4. The physical characteristics of the bottom substrate into which
the piles were driven;
5. The depth of water into which the pile was driven;
6. The depth into the substrate into which the pile was driven;
7. A description of the sound monitoring equipment;
8. The distance between hydrophones and pile;
9. The depth of the hydrophones and depth of water at hydrophone
locations;
10. The distance from the pile to the water's edge;
11. The total number of strikes to drive each pile and for all
piles driven during a 24-hour period;
12. The results of the hydroacoustic monitoring;
13. Source levels for peak and RMS SPLs and single strike SEL at 10
m from the pile, and RMS pulse duration that contains 90 percent of
pulse energy.
14. The distance at which peak, cumulative SEL, and RMS values
exceed the respective threshold values;
15. For vibratory pile driving, SEL based on 30 second averaging of
sound intensity;
[[Page 50409]]
16. The spectragraphs for each pile type; and
17. A description of any observable marine mammal behavior in the
immediate area and, if possible, correlation to underwater sound levels
occurring at that time.
A minimum of two piles of the 18-in and two piles of the 30-in
piles for each construction type (i.e. impact and vibratory pile
driving and DTH drilling) will be monitored. Piles chosen to be
monitored will be representative of the different sizes and range of
typical water depths at the project location where piles will be driven
with an impact or vibratory hammer.
One bottom-mounted hydrophone will be placed at the nearest
distance, approximately 10 meters, from each pile being monitored. An
additional hydrophone will be placed at mid-water depth at a distance
of 100 to 200 m from the pile to provide two sound-level readings
during ambient and pile driving conditions. A third hydrophone may be
deployed at a greater distance (e.g., 1-2 km or further) for the
purpose of better defining the long-distance sound propagation.
Underwater sound levels will be continuously monitored during the
entire duration of each pile being driven. Sound levels will be
measured in dB re: 1 [mu]Pa.
Reporting
A draft report will be submitted to NMFS within 90 days of the
completion of marine mammal monitoring, or 60 days prior to the
requested date of issuance of any future IHA for projects at the same
location, whichever comes first. The report will include marine mammal
observations pre-activity, during-activity, and post-activity during
pile driving and removal days, and will also provide descriptions of
any behavioral responses to construction activities by marine mammals
and a complete description of all mitigation shutdowns and the results
of those actions and an extrapolated total take estimate based on the
number of marine mammals observed during the course of construction. A
final report must be submitted within 30 days following resolution of
comments on the draft report.
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 recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), 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's 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, because the expected
impacts to marine mammals of the affected species and stocks are
similar (and we have no information to suggest otherwise), our
discussion here applies to each of them.
Pile driving and removal activities associated with the dock
replacement Project, as outlined previously, have the potential to
disturb or displace marine mammals. Specifically, the specified
activities may result in take, in the form of Level A and Level B
harassment (PTS and behavioral disturbance), from underwater sounds
generated from pile driving and removal. Potential takes could occur if
individuals of these species are present in the ensonified zone when
pile driving and removal occurs. Most of the Level A takes are
precautionary as marine mammals are not expected to enter and stay in
the Level A ensonified area for the duration needed to incur PTS.
However, if all authorized takes be Level A harassment were to occur,
they would be of small numbers compared to the stock sizes and would
not adversely affect the stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival. Additionally, the FAA's mitigation measures,
including a shutdown of construction activities if animals enter the
Level A zone, further reduces the chance for PTS in marine mammals.
Therefore, the effects to marine mammals are expected to be negligible.
No temporary threshold shift (TTS), serious injury, or mortality is
anticipated given the nature of the activities and measures designed to
minimize the possibility of injury to marine mammals. The potential for
these outcomes is minimized through the construction method and the
implementation of the planned mitigation measures. Specifically,
vibratory and impact hammers and drilling will be the primary methods
of installation. Impact pile driving produces short, sharp pulses with
higher peak levels and much sharper rise time to reach those peaks. If
impact driving is necessary, implementation of soft start and shutdown
zones significantly reduces any possibility of injury. Given sufficient
``notice'' through use of soft start (for impact driving), marine
mammals are expected to move away from a sound source that is annoying
prior to it becoming potentially injurious, however, as noted
previously a small number of potential takes by PTS are authorized and
have been analyzed. The FAA will use a minimum of two MMOs stationed
strategically to increase detectability of marine mammals, enabling a
high rate of success in implementation of shutdowns to avoid injury.
The FAA's Project activities are localized and of relatively short
duration (a maximum of 70 days for pile driving and removal). The
entire Project area is limited to Symonds Bay and into Sitka Sound for
some scenarios. These localized and short-term noise exposures may
cause short-term behavioral modifications in harbor seals, Steller sea
lions, harbor porpoises, killer whales, and humpback whales. Moreover,
the mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to reduce the
likelihood of injury. Additionally, no important feeding and/or
reproductive areas for marine mammals of any of these species/stocks
are known to be within the ensonified area during the construction
window.
Effects on individuals that are taken by Level B harassment, on the
basis of reports in the literature as well as monitoring from other
similar activities, will likely be limited to reactions such as
increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time, or decreased
foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson and Reyff
2006; Lerma 2014). Significant behavioral modifications that could
potentially lead to effects on growth, survival, or reproduction are
not expected to occur given the short duration and small scale of the
project activities. Most likely,
[[Page 50410]]
individuals will simply move away from the sound source and be
temporarily displaced from the areas of pile driving and drilling,
although even this reaction has been observed primarily only in
association with impact pile driving. Thus, even repeated Level B
harassment of some small subset of the overall stock is unlikely to
result in any significant realized decrease in fitness for the affected
individuals, and thus would not result in any adverse impact to the
stock as a whole. Non-auditory physiological effects and masking are
not expected to occur from the FAA's Project activities.
The Project also is not expected to have significant adverse
effects on affected marine mammals' habitat. The Project activities
would not modify existing marine mammal habitat for a significant
amount of time. The activities may cause some fish to leave the area of
disturbance, thus temporarily impacting marine mammals' foraging
opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging range. However,
because of the short duration of the activities and the relatively
small area of the habitat that may be affected, and the decreased
potential of prey species to be in the Project area during the
construction work window, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not
expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity
are not expected to adversely affect the species or stocks through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No mortality or serious injury is anticipated or
authorized;
Level B harassment may consist of, at worst, temporary
modifications in behavior (e.g. temporary avoidance of habitat or
changes in behavior);
The lack of important feeding, pupping, or other areas in
the action area during the construction window;
Mitigation is expected to minimize the likelihood and
severity of the level of harassment; and
The small percentage of the species/stock that may be
affected by Project activities (<15 percent for all species/stocks).
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 monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the FAA's
construction activities will have a negligible impact on the affected
marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified
activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not
define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated numbers are
available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most
appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in
our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small
numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other qualitative factors may
be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of
the activities.
Table 7 details the number of instances that animals could be
exposed to received noise levels that could cause Level A and Level B
harassment for the planned work at the Project site relative to the
total stock abundance. The numbers of animals authorized to be taken
for each species or stock is considered small relative to the relevant
species or stock size even if each estimated instance of take occurred
to a new individual. The total percent of the population (if each
instance was a separate individual) for which take is requested is less
than 15 percent for each stock (Table 7). For pinnipeds, especially
harbor seals occurring in the vicinity of the Project area, there will
almost certainly be some overlap in individuals present day-to-day, and
the number of individuals taken is expected to be notably lower.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the Project activities
(including the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated
take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals
will be taken relative to the population size of the affected species
or stocks.
Table 7--Estimated Numbers and Percentage of Stock That May Be Exposed to Level A and Level B Harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock(s) Percentage of
Species Authorized Authorized abundance total stock
Level A takes Level B takes estimate \1\ (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor Seal (Phoca vitulina):
Sitka/Chatham stock......................... 13 350 14,855 2.44
Steller sea lion (Eumatopias jubatus):
Western U.S. Stock.......................... 6 350 50,983 0.698
Eastern U.S. Stock.......................... .............. .............. 41,638 0.855
Killer whale (Orcinus orca):
Eastern North Pacific, Gulf of AK, Aleutian 0 36 587 6.13
Island, and Bering Sea Transient Stock.....
West Coast Transient Stock.................. .............. .............. 243 14.8
Humpback whale (Megaptera noviaengliae):
Central North Pacific Stock................. 3 350 10,103 3.49
Harbor Porpoise (Phocoena phocoena):
Southeast Alaska Stock...................... 45 105 11,146 1.34
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All stock abundance estimates presented here are from the 2016 Alaska Stock Assessment Report.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must find that the specified
activity will not have an ``unmitigable adverse impact'' on the
subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal species or stocks by
Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined ``unmitigable adverse impact'' in 50
CFR 216.103 as: an impact resulting from the specified activity: (1)
That is likely to reduce the availability of the species to a level
insufficient for a harvest to meet subsistence needs by: (i) Causing
the marine mammals to abandon or avoid
[[Page 50411]]
hunting areas; (ii) Directly displacing subsistence users; or (iii)
Placing physical barriers between the marine mammals and the
subsistence hunters; and (2) That cannot be sufficiently mitigated by
other measures to increase the availability of marine mammals to allow
subsistence needs to be met.
Harbor seals and Steller sea lions are subsistence harvested in
Alaska. During 2012, the estimated subsistence take of harbor seals in
southeast Alaska was 595 seals with 49 of these taken near Sitka (Wolfe
et al., 2013). This is the lowest number of seals taken since 1992
(Wolfe et al., 2013) and is attributed to the decline in subsistence
hunting pressure over the years as well as a decrease in efficiency per
hunter (Wolf et al., 2013).
The peak hunting season in southeast Alaska occurs during the month
of November and again over the March to April time frame (Wolfe et al.,
2013). This corresponds to times when seals are aggregated in shoal
areas as they prey on forage species such as herring, making them
easier to find and hunt.
The Project is in an area where subsistence hunting for harbor
seals or sea lions could occur (Wolfe et al., 2013), but the location
is not preferred for hunting. There is little to no hunting documented
in the vicinity and there are no harvest quotas for non-listed marine
mammals. For these reasons and the fact that Project activities would
occur outside of the primary subsistence hunting seasons, there would
be no impact on subsistence activities or on the availability of marine
mammals for subsistence use.
To satisfy requirements under Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, R&M Consultants, Inc. reached out to the Sitka Tribe
of Alaska, Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida, and Sealaska
regarding cultural resources in 2016. No issues or concerns with the
Project were raised during this effort.
Based on the description of the specified activity, the measures
described to minimize adverse effects on the availability of marine
mammals for subsistence purposes, and the mitigation and monitoring
measures, NMFS has determined that there will not be an unmitigable
adverse impact on subsistence uses from the FAA's activities.
Endangered Species Act
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS consults internally, in this case with the Alaska Regional Office,
whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened
species.
NMFS is authorizing take of two DPSs (i.e., western DPS of Steller
sea lions and Mexico DPS of humpback whales), which are listed under
the ESA. The Permit and Conservation Division requested initiation of
Section 7 consultation with the Alaska Region for the issuance of this
IHA. The NMFS Alaska Regional Office Protected Resources Division
issued a Biological Opinion in October, 2017 under section 7 of the
ESA, on the issuance of an IHA to the FAA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA by the NMFS Permits and Conservation Division. The Biological
Opinion concluded that the proposed action is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of western DPS Steller sea lions or Mexico DPS
of humpback whales, and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify
western DPS Steller sea lion critical habitat.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to the FAA for the potential harassment of
small numbers of five marine mammal species incidental to the Biorka
Island dock replacement project in Sitka, AK, provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring and reporting requirements are
incorporated.
Dated: October 25, 2017.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-23563 Filed 10-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
