Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Waterfront Improvement Projects at Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, 3318-3333 [2018-01306]
Download as PDF
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
3318
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
pinnipeds, or of tag-bearing carcasses, to
NMFS Southwest Fisheries Science
Center (SWFSC).
b. Submit a draft monitoring report to
NMFS Office of Protected Resources
within 60 days after the conclusion of
the 2018 field season or 60 days prior
to the start of the next field season if a
new IHA shall be requested. A final
report shall be prepared and submitted
within 30 days following resolution of
any comments on the draft report from
NMFS. This report must contain the
informational elements described above,
at minimum.
c. Reporting injured or dead marine
mammals:
i. In the event that the specified
activity clearly causes the take of a
marine mammal in a manner prohibited
by this IHA, such as an injury (Level A
harassment), serious injury, or
mortality, PISCO shall immediately
cease the specified activities and report
the incident to the Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast
Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS.
The report must include the following
information:
(1) Time and date of the incident;
(2) Description of the incident;
(3) Environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea
state, cloud cover, and visibility);
(4) Description of all marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
(5) Species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
(6) Fate of the animal(s); and
(7) Photographs or video footage of
the animal(s).
Activities shall not resume until
NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take.
NMFS shall work with PISCO to
determine what measures are necessary
to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA
compliance. PISCO may not resume the
activities until notified by NMFS.
ii. In the event that an injured or dead
marine mammal is discovered and it is
determined that the cause of the injury
or death is unknown and the death is
relatively recent (e.g., in less than a
moderate state of decomposition),
PISCO shall immediately report the
incident to the Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast
Regional Stranding Coordinator, NMFS.
The report must include the same
information identified in 6(c)(i) of this
IHA. Activities may continue while
NMFS reviews the circumstances of the
incident. NMFS shall work with PISCO
to determine whether additional
mitigation measures or modifications to
the activities are appropriate.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
iii. In the event that an injured or
dead marine mammal is discovered and
it is determined that the injury or death
is not associated with or related to the
activities authorized in the IHA (e.g.,
previously wounded animal, carcass
with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage),
PISCO shall report the incident to the
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinator, NMFS, within 24 hours of
the discovery. PISCO shall provide
photographs, video footage or other
documentation of the stranded animal
sighting to NMFS. Activities may
continue while NMFS reviews the
circumstances of the incident.
7. This IHA may be modified,
suspended or withdrawn if the holder
fails to abide by the conditions
prescribed herein or if NMFS
determines the authorized taking is
having more than a negligible impact on
the species or stock of affected marine
mammals.
Request for Public Comments
We request comment on our analyses,
the draft authorization, and any other
aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA
for the proposed rocky intertidal
monitoring program. Please include
with your comments any supporting
data or literature citations to help
inform our final decision on the request
for MMPA authorization.
On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may
issue a one-year renewal IHA without
additional notice when (1) another year
of identical or nearly identical activities
as described in the Specified Activities
section is planned, or (2) the activities
would not be completed by the time the
IHA expires and renewal would allow
completion of the activities beyond that
described in the Dates and Duration
section, provided all of the following
conditions are met:
• A request for renewal is received no
later than 60 days prior to expiration of
the current IHA.
• The request for renewal must
include the following:
(1) An explanation that the activities
to be conducted beyond the initial dates
either are identical to the previously
analyzed activities or include changes
so minor (e.g., reduction in pile size)
that the changes do not affect the
previous analyses, take estimates, or
mitigation and monitoring
requirements.
(2) A preliminary monitoring report
showing the results of the required
monitoring to date and an explanation
showing that the monitoring results do
not indicate impacts of a scale or nature
not previously analyzed or authorized.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Upon review of the request for
renewal, the status of the affected
species or stocks, and any other
pertinent information, NMFS
determines that there are no more than
minor changes in the activities, the
mitigation and monitoring measures
remain the same and appropriate, and
the original findings remain valid.
Dated: January 17, 2018.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2018–01214 Filed 1–23–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–XF611
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Waterfront
Improvement Projects at Portsmouth
Naval Shipyard
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 U.S.
Department of the Navy (Navy) to
incidentally harass, by Level A and
Level B harassment, marine mammals
during construction activities associated
with waterfront improvement projects at
the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard (the
Shipyard) in Kittery, Maine.
DATES: This Authorization is effective
from January 8, 2018, through January 7,
2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob
Pauline, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, (301) 427–8401. Electronic
copies of the application 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:
SUMMARY:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3319
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
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 authorization for incidental
takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible
impact on the species or stock(s), will
not have an unmitigable adverse impact
on the availability of the species or
stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible
methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of such takings are set
forth.
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as 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).
Summary of Request
On July 14, 2017, NMFS received a
request from the Navy for an IHA to take
marine mammals incidental to impact
pile driving, vibratory pile driving,
vibratory pile extraction, and drilling
associated with an ongoing waterfront
improvement project at the Shipyard.
The application was considered
adequate and complete on August 25,
2017. The Navy’s request is for take of
harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena),
gray seal (Halichoerus grypus), harbor
seal (Phoca vitulina), harp seal
(Pagophilus groenlandicus) and hooded
seal (Cystophora cristata), by Level A
and Level B harassment (authorization
of Level A harassment is not proposed
for the harp seal or hooded seal).
Neither the Navy nor NMFS expects
serious injury or mortality to result from
this activity and, therefore, an IHA is
appropriate.
This IHA will cover the second year
of a five-year project for which the Navy
had previously obtained an IHA. The
Navy intends to request take
authorization for subsequent years of
the project. NMFS previously issued the
first IHA to the Navy for this project
effective from January 8, 2018 through
January 7, 2019. The larger 5-year
project involves restoring and
modernizing infrastructure at the
Shipyard. The Navy complied with all
the requirements (e.g., mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting) of the
previous IHA and information regarding
their monitoring results may be found in
the Monitoring and Reporting section.
Description of Specified Activity
Overview
The purpose of the proposed action is
to modernize and maximize dry dock
capabilities for performing current and
future missions efficiently and with
maximum flexibility. The need for the
proposed action is to correct
deficiencies associated with the pier
structure at Berths 11, 12, and 13 and
the Dry Dock 3 caisson and concrete
seats to ensure that the Shipyard can
continue to support its primary mission
to service, maintain, and overhaul
submarines. The proposed action covers
the second year of activities (January 3,
2018 through January 2, 2019)
associated with the waterfront
improvement projects at the Shipyard in
Kittery, Maine. The project includes
impact and vibratory pile driving,
vibratory pile removal, and drilling.
Construction activities may occur at any
time during the calendar year. A
detailed description of the planned
waterfront improvement project was
provided in the Federal Register notice
for the proposed IHA (82 FR 56791;
November 30, 2017). Since that time, no
changes have been made to the planned
waterfront improvement 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 shows a summary of the
anticipated work effort (e.g., days) and
numbers planned for installation/
extraction of each pile type while Table
2 shows estimated hours for each type
of pile driving and drilling activity.
TABLE 1—YEAR 2 (2018) PLANNED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
Activity/
method
Timing
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Extract Timber Piles/Vi- January–December
bratory Hammer.
2018.
Install Casing & Drill
January–December
Sockets/Auger Drilling.
2018.
Install Sheet Pile (SKZ–
20) SOE Piles/Vibro.
Remove Sheet
Pile(SKZ–20) SOE
Piles/Vibro.
Install Road Plate/H-Pile
Support of Excav.
Vibro.
Remove Road Plate/HPile Support of
Excav. Vibro.
Install Sheet Pile(AZ50)
Sheet wall Bulkhead
at DD1- Vibro.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Pile type
Number of
piles
installed
15″ Timber Piles ...
....................
Number of
days
Overlap days
Production estimates
18
...............................
56
36″ W-Section
Steel.
35
....................
...............................
January–December
2018.
January–December
2018.
12
25″ Sheet Piles
Steel.
25″ Sheet Piles
Steel.
144
....................
....................
144
9/during rock sockets.
4/during rock sockets.
Estimated 6 piles per
day.
Estimated less than one
pile completed per
day. This includes
setting the casing and
rock socket drilling.
Estimated 12 sheets
per day.
Estimated 24 sheets
per day.
January–December
2018.
3
14″ H-Pile Steel ....
12
....................
2/during rock sockets.
Estimated 4 ea. road
plates per day.
January–December
2018.
2
14″ H-Pile Steel ....
....................
12
1/during rock sockets.
Estimated 8 ea. Road
plates per day.
January–December
2018.
6
25″ Sheet Piles
Steel.
74
....................
...............................
Estimated 13 sheets
per day.
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
3
Number of
piles
extracted
6
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3320
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
TABLE 1—YEAR 2 (2018) PLANNED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY—Continued
Activity/
method
Number of
days
Timing
Install H-Pile (AZ50)
Bulkhead Return @
West End of 11CVibro.
Install Sheet Pile (AZ50)
Bulkhead Return @
West End of 11CVibro.
Install Support/Sister
Pile/Vibro & Impact
Hammer.
Number of
piles
installed
Pile type
Number of
piles
extracted
Overlap days
Production estimates
January–December
2018.
2
14″ H-Pile Steel ....
4
....................
...............................
Estimated 2 piles per
day.
January–December
2018.
9
25″ Sheet Piles
Steel.
2
....................
...............................
Estimated 2 piles per
day.
January–December
2018.
....................
22
....................
...............................
Estimated 2.6 piles per
day. The vibro would
be used to stick the
pile and the impact
would drive the pile to
refusal.*
293
174
16 ..........................
Totals .....................
14″ H-Pile Steel ....
Expected total work days
(including up to16 days of
concurrent activities) = 84–100
days
* Depending on when these piles are driven in the tide cycle there is potential to install all 22 of the support piles in the dry which would further reduce the number
of vibratory and impact hammer days. This pile quantity includes all the Support Pile in Berth 11C as well as 8 Support Pile remaining from Berth 11A.
TABLE 2—YEAR 2 (2018) HOURS ESTIMATED FOR EACH PILE DRIVING ACTIVITY
Driving type
Pile type
Number of piles
Days
Hours
Impact ........................
Vibratory .....................
Drilling ........................
14″ H-Pile (Sister Pile) ...................................
25″ sheet pile, 15″ timber pile, 14″ H-pile .....
36″ Installation/Rock Sockets ........................
22 piles ......................
236 piles/sheet ...........
35 casings ..................
9 .................................
27 install 8 remove ....
56 ...............................
1.5.
216 install 64 remove.
448.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Comment and Responses
A notice of NMFS’s proposal to issue
an IHA to the Navy was published in
the Federal Register on November 30,
2017 (82 FR 56791). That notice
described, in detail, the Navy’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 listed
four issues that need to be resolved
prior to issuance of the final IHA
including:
• Increasing the estimated Level A
harassment takes for harbor porpoises
from one to two to account for group
size;
• increasing the estimated Level B
harassment takes for harp seals from one
to five to account for the potential that
harp seals could be present on multiple
days during the five months when they
are most likely to occur in the project
area;
• authorizing Level B harassment
takes of five hooded seals to account for
the potential that hooded seals could be
present on multiple days during the five
months when they are most likely to
occur in the project area; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
• clarifying or specifying various
mitigation and monitoring measure
requirements.
Response: NMFS has agreed to make
the changes described above. These
changes are included in the issued IHA.
Comment 2: 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
in the near future and looks forward to
working with them to resolve this issue.
Comment 3: The Commission stated
that monitoring during all pile-driving
and removal activities is necessary for
NMFS and the Navy to be confident that
mitigation measures are implemented as
intended, the numbers of marine
mammals taken are within the limits
authorized, and the least practicable
impact occurs. The Commission
recommended that NMFS require the
Navy to implement full-time monitoring
of the full extents of various Level A
and B harassment zones using two
protected species observers (PSOs)
during all pile-driving (including
drilling rock sockets) and removal
activities.
Response: NMFS has authorized the
employment of a single PSO on onethird of driving days to monitor the
shutdown and Level A zones Two PSOs
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
will be employed on two-thirds of
driving days to monitor shutdown,
Level A and Level B zones. NMFS is
confident that a single qualified PSO
can effectively monitor shutdown and
Level A zones during all pile driving
and removal activities. A single observer
will have a complete, unobstructed view
of the entirety of shutdown and Level A
zones and will be able to document
takes and call for shutdown or delay as
appropriate. Adding a second PSO on
two-thirds of driving days for Level B
zone monitoring provides the capability
to ensure successful implementation of
mitigation measures and document that
authorized take limits are not exceeded.
Note that under previously issued IHAs,
NMFS has not required 100 percent
monitoring of Level B zones. In these
instances, NMFS found that mitigation
measures were effectively employed and
marine mammal takes were under
authorized limits.
Comment 4: The Commission
reviewed the marine mammal and
hydroacoustic monitoring plan and
provided extensive comments to NMFS
during the public comment period. The
Commission’s submitted comment letter
features an Addendum listing all of the
issues that were raised. The
Commission recommends that NMFS
ensure that all issues summarized in the
Addendum are addressed and
incorporated either into the final marine
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3321
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
mammal and hydroacoustic monitoring
plan or the incidental harassment
authorization itself.
Response: NMFS will address and
incorporate resolutions to issues
identified in the Addendum into the
final marine mammal and hydroacoustic
monitoring plan.
Comment 5: The Commission
expressed concern about the lack of
adequate time to provide public
comments as well as the abbreviated
timeframes during which NMFS is able
to address public comments. The
Commission recommended that NMFS
ensure that it publishes and finalizes
proposed incidental harassment
authorizations sufficiently before the
planned start date of the proposed
activities to ensure full consideration is
given to all comments received.
Response: NMFS will work to provide
adequate time for public comment and
response. NMFS will also seek to
process IHA applications in a more
expeditious manner.
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of Specified Activities
Five marine mammal species,
including one cetacean and four
pinnipeds, may inhabit or transit the
waters near the Shipyard in the lower
Piscataqua River during the specified
activity. These include the harbor
porpoise, gray seal, harbor seal, hooded
seal, and harp seal. None of the marine
mammals that may be found in the
Piscataqua River are listed under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). Table 3
lists the marine mammal species that
could occur near the Shipyard and their
estimated densities within the project
area. As there are no specific density
data for any of the species in the
Piscataqua River, density data from the
nearshore zone outside the mouth the
Piscataqua River in the Atlantic Ocean
have been used instead. Therefore, it
can be assumed that the density
estimates presented here for each
species are conservative and higher than
densities that would typically be
expected in an industrialized, estuarine
environment such as the lower
Piscataqua River in the vicinity of the
Shipyard.
Detailed descriptions of the of the
species likely to be affected by the
Navy’s 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 (November 30, 2017;82 FR 56791);
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’ website
(www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/
mammals/) for generalized species
accounts.
TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE PISCATAQUA RIVER NEAR THE SHIPYARD
Common name
Scientific name
ESA/
MMPA
status;
Strategic
(Y/N) 1
Stock
Stock abundance
(CV, Nmin, most
recent abundance
survey) 2
PBR
Annual M/
SI 3
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises)
Harbor Porpoise ...................
Phocoena phocoena ............
Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy
stock.
-;N
79,883 (0.32; 61,415; 2011)
706 ................
437
unknown 505,000 (best estimate 2014 Canadian population DFO 2014).
75,834 (0.15; 66,884; 2012)
592,100(-;512,000, 2005) ....
7,100,000 (2012) .................
unknown .......
4,959
2,006 .............
unknown .......
unknown .......
389
5,199
306,082
Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
Gray Seal .............................
Halichoerus grypus ..............
Western North Atlantic stock
-;N
Harbor Seal ..........................
Hooded Seal 4 ......................
Harp Seal .............................
Phoca vitulina ......................
Cystophora cristata ..............
Pagophilus groenlandicus ...
Western North Atlantic stock
Western North Atlantic stock
Western North Atlantic stock
-;N
-;N
-;N
1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/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 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 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock
abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
3 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.
4 Abundance estimates for these stocks are greater than eight years old and are, therefore, not considered current. PBR is considered undetermined for these
stocks, as there is no current minimum abundance estimate for use in calculation. We nevertheless present the most recent abundance estimates and PBR values,
as these represent the best available information for use in this document.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Potential Effects of Specified Activities
on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
The effects of underwater noise from
the Navy’s construction activities for the
waterfront improvement project have
the potential to result in Level B
harassment (behavioral disturbance) for
marine mammal species authorized for
take. Level A (injury) harassment in the
form of permanent threshold shift (PTS)
may also occur in limited numbers of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
animals. The project would not result in
permanent impacts to habitats used
directly by marine mammals, such as
haulout sites, but may have potential
short-term impacts to food sources such
as forage fish and minor impacts to the
immediate substrate during installation
and removal of piles. The potential
effects to marine mammals and their
associated habitat are discussed in
detail in the Federal Register notice for
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the proposed IHA (November 30, 2017;
82 FR 56791), therefore that information
is not repeated here; please refer to that
Federal Register notice for that
information.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of
the number of incidental takes that
NMFS has authorized through this IHA,
which informed NMFS’ consideration of
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3322
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
both ‘‘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, as impact and
vibratory pile driving as well as drilling
have the potential to result in auditory
injury and disruption of behavioral
patterns for individual marine
mammals. The required mitigation and
monitoring measures are expected to
minimize the severity of such taking to
the extent practicable.
As described previously, no mortality
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
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 authorized take
estimate.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS recommends 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
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
harassed in a manner we consider Level
B harassment when exposed to
underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms)
for continuous non-impulsive (e.g.
vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and
above 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for nonexplosive impulsive (e.g., impact pile
driving, seismic airguns) or intermittent
(e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
The Navy’s planned activity includes
the use of continuous (vibratory pile
driving, 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 (Technical Guidance,
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). As noted above, the Navy’s
planned activity includes both
impulsive and non-impulsive sources.
These thresholds are provided in
Table 4. 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.
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
BILLING CODE 3510–22–C
The general formula for underwater TL
is:
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with 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 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
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-
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3323
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]). Although
cylindrical spreading loss was applied
to driving of 14-inch H-piles in the
previous IHA, in an effort to maintain
consistency NMFS utilized practical
spreading loss (4.5 dB reduction in
sound level for each doubling of
distance) for all driving and drilling
activities for this IHA. A practical
spreading value of 15 is often used
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
EN24JA18.004
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
3324
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
under conditions, such as at the
Shipyard dock, where water increases
with depth as the receiver moves away
from the shoreline, resulting in an
expected propagation environment that
would lie between spherical and
cylindrical spreading loss conditions.
Underwater Sound—The intensity of
pile driving 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 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.
Source Levels
Source levels were collected for the
four types of piles that would be
installed and two pile-driving methods
planned for the project:
1. 14-inch steel H-type piles—Used as
sister piles and for SOE system
installation; installed/extracted via
vibratory hammer and seated as needed
with impact hammer.
2. 15-inch timber piles—Used for reinstallation of dolphins at Berths 11, 12,
and 13 and extracted via vibratory
hammer.
3. 25-inch steel sheet piles—Used for
the bulkhead at Berth 11 and for SOE
installed/extracted via vibratory
hammer.
Reference source levels for the project
were determined using data for piles of
similar sizes, the same pile-driving
method as that planned for the project,
and at similar water depths. While the
pile sizes and water depths chosen as
proxies do not exactly match those for
the project, they are the closest matches
available, and it is assumed that the
source levels shown in Tables 5, 6, and
7 are the most representative for each
pile type and associated pile-driving
method.
The intensity of pile driving or
sounds is greatly influenced by factors
such as the type of piles, hammers, and
the physical environment in which the
activity takes place. Reference source
levels for the planned project were
determined using data for piles of
similar sizes, the same pile driving
method as that planned for the project,
and at similar water depths. While the
pile sizes and water depths chosen as
proxies do not exactly match those for
the project, they are the closest matches
available, and it is assumed that the
source levels shown in Tables 5, 6, and
7 and are the most representative for
each pile type and associated pile
driving method.
The Navy analyzed source level
values associated with a number of
projects involving impact driving of
steel H-piles to approximate
environmental conditions and driving
parameters at the Shipyard (Caltrans
2015). Data from pertinent projects were
used to obtain average SEL and rms
values for H pile impact installation. To
be sure all values were relevant to the
site, the Navy eliminated all piles in
waters greater than 5 m, as well as all
readings measured at ranges greater than
10 m. The Navy used all H piles for
which the diameter was not specified as
well as the 14 to 15-inch H piles,
converted the dB measurements to a
linear scale before averaging, and reconverted the average measurements to
the appropriate dB units. Piles driven at
this project site will be driven in 0–11
feet of water (0–3.4 m). During low tide,
piles will essentially be driven in the
dry. This varies drastically from other
Navy projects on the east coast, such as
at the Naval Submarine Base New
London, where 14-inch H piles will be
driven in water depths of 25 feet (7.62
m). Results are shown in Table 5.
TABLE 5—SOURCE LEVELS FOR IN-WATER IMPACT HAMMER 14-INCH STEEL H-TYPE (SISTER) PILES
Water depth
(m)
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Pile size and type
15-inch steel H pile
15-inch steel H pile
15-inch steel H pile
Unspecified steel H
14-inch steel H pile
14-inch steel H pile
14-inch steel H pile
14-inch steel H pile
14-inch steel H pile
14-inch steel H pile
14-inch steel H pile
14-inch steel H pile
14-inch steel H pile
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
Unspecified steel H
..............................................................
..............................................................
..............................................................
pile .......................................................
..............................................................
..............................................................
..............................................................
..............................................................
..............................................................
..............................................................
..............................................................
..............................................................
..............................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
pile .......................................................
Distance
measured
(m)
Peak
2–3
2–3
2–3
0.5–2
1–5
1–5
1–5
1–5
1–5
1–5
1–5
1–5
1–5
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
0–0.9
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
187
180
194
172
205
206
206
210
212
210
212
205
207
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
164
165
177
160
184
182
184
190
192
189
190
190
187
151
154
170
147
147
150
153
151
156
172
161
155
163
178
165
154
155
170
147
174
172
174
180
182
179
180
180
177
142
144
159
136
136
143
142
142
146
162
150
145
152
145
154
200.4
181.4
171.3
........................
Source: Caltrans 2015
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
SEL
(dB)
........................
Averages
VerDate Sep<11>2014
RMS
(dB)
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3325
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
While the average rms value is 181.4,
the Navy rounded up to 182 dB rms to
be conservative. Navy rounded up to
182 from 181.4 to be conservative since
not all proxy projects listed had RMS
values in the source documents.
However, SEL values were available for
each proxy project so these calculations
are expected to be more accurate,
eliminating the need to conservatively
For Year 1 work at the Shipyard Berth
11 the contractor has obtained initial
acoustic readings associated with
vibratory driving of 14″ H-Pile of 148 dB
rms at 10 m. Additional details are
found in Appendix A in the application.
NMFS will use 148 dB at 10 m as the
source level since it is site-specific and
more conservative than the 145 dB
value depicted in Caltrans 2015.
round up the 171.3 dB SEL resulting in
a value of 171 dB SEL using standard
rounding.
Table 6 shows the source levels that
were utilized to calculate isopleths for
vibratory driving of 25-inch steel sheet
piles, and 15-inch timber piles. An
average value of 163 dB rms at 10 m was
used for 24-inch AZ steel sheet and 150
dB rms at 16 m for 15-inch timber pile.
TABLE 6—SOURCE LEVELS FOR IN-WATER VIBRATORY HAMMER 24-INCH STEEL SHEET PILES, AND 15-INCH TIMBER
PILES
Water depth
(m)
Pile size and pile type
24-inch
24-inch
24-inch
24-inch
24-inch
24-inch
15-inch
14-inch
AZ Steel Sheet 1 ...............................
AZ Steel Sheet 1 ...............................
AZ Steel Sheet 1 ...............................
AZ Steel Sheet—Typical 1 ................
AZ Steel Sheet—Loudest 1 ...............
AZ Steel Sheet (Average) 1 ..............
Timber Pile 2 .....................................
H-type Pile 3 ......................................
Distance
measured
(m)
15
15
15
15
15
15
10
6
Peak
(dB)
10
10
10
10
10
10
16
10
RMS
(dB)
177
175
177
175
182
178
164
155
SEL
(dB)
163
162
163
160
165
163
150
148
162
162
163
160
165
163
....................
145
Location
Berth 23, Port of Oakland, CA.
Berth 30, Port of Oakland, CA.
Berth 35/37 Port of Oakland, CA.
CA (Specific location unknown).
CA (Specific location unknown).
CA (Specific location unknown).
WSF Port Townsend Ferry Terminal, WA.
CA (Specific location unknown).
Source:
1 ICF Jones & Stokes and Illingsworth & Rodkin 2012.
2 WSDOT 2010.
3 CALTRANS 2015.
Using the data presented in Table 6
and Table 7, underwater sound levels
were estimated using the practical
spreading model to determine over what
distance the thresholds would be
exceeded.
Drilling is considered a continuous,
non-impulsive noise source, similar to
vibratory pile driving. Very little
information is available regarding
source levels of in-water drilling
activities associated with nearshore pile
installation such as that planned for the
Berths 11, 12, and 13 structural repairs
project. Dazey et al. (2012) attempted to
characterize the source levels of several
marine pile-drilling activities. One such
activity was auger drilling (including
installation and removal of the
associated steel casing). Auger drilling
will be employed as part of the
Shipyard Project. The average sound
pressure levels re 1 mPa rms were
displayed for casing installation, auger
drilling (inside the casing), and casing
removal. For the purposes of this plan,
it is assumed that the casing installation
and removal activities would be
conducted in a manner similar to that
described in Dazey et al. (2012),
primarily via oscillation. These average
source levels are reported in Table 7.
TABLE 7—AVERAGE SOURCE LEVELS FOR AUGER DRILLING ACTIVITIES DURING PILE INSTALLATION
Water depth
(m)
Drilling activity
Casing Installation ...................................................
Auger Drilling ...........................................................
Casing Removal ......................................................
Average Drilling Activity ..........................................
Distance
measured
(m)
1–5
1–5
1–5
1–5
RMS
(dB)
1
1
1
1
Location
157
151
152
154
Bechers Bay Santa Rosa Island, CA.
Bechers Bay Santa Rosa Island, CA.
Bechers Bay Santa Rosa Island, CA.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Source: Dazey et al., 2012.
Note: All source levels are referenced to 1 microPascal (re 1 μPa).
IHA applications for other
construction projects have reported that,
due to a lack of information regarding
pile drilling source levels, it is generally
assumed that pile drilling would
produce less in-water noise than both
impact and vibratory pile driving. Based
on the general lack of information about
these activities and the assumption that
in-water noise from pile drilling would
be less than either impact or vibratory
pile driving, it is assumed that the
source levels presented in Table 7 are
the most applicable for acoustic impact
analysis at Berths 11, 12, and 13. For the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
purposes of this IHA, however, we will
conservatively assume that drilling has
identical source levels to vibratory
driving when calculating zones of
influence. This includes instances
where drilling is underway in the
absence of any concurrent driving.
As part of Year 2 activities,
concurrent work utilizing a vibratory
hammer during drilling operations is
possible. This potential concurrent
activity could occur during installation
of the rock sockets for approximately 16
days. The vibratory hammer may be
working to install SOE sheets or H-Pile
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
as the drilling work is being conducted.
Under concurrent driving conditions,
the Navy will use the larger of the two
source level values to calculate size of
entire ensonified area. Since the
vibratory source level is greater than the
level associated with drilling, it will be
utilized.
With limited source level data
available for vibratory pile extraction of
25-inch steel sheet piles, NMFS used
the same values for both vibratory
installation and extraction assuming
that the two activities would produce
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3326
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
similar source levels if water depth, pile
size, and equipment remain constant.
When NMFS Technical Guidance
(2016) was published, in recognition of
the fact that ensonified area/volume
could be more technically challenging
to predict because of the duration
component in the new thresholds, an
User Spreadsheet was developed that
includes tools to help predict a simple
isopleth that can be used in conjunction
with marine mammal density or
occurrence to help predict takes. We
note that because of some of the
assumptions included in the methods
used for these tools, we anticipate that
isopleths produced are typically going
to be overestimates of some degree,
which will result in some degree of
overestimate of Level A take. However,
these tools offer the best way to predict
appropriate isopleths when more
sophisticated 3D modeling methods are
not available, and NMFS continues to
develop ways to quantitatively refine
these tools, and will qualitatively
address the output where appropriate.
For stationary sources pile driving,
NMFS User Spreadsheet predicts the
closest distance at which, if a marine
mammal remained at that distance the
whole duration of the activity, it would
not incur PTS. Inputs used in the User
Spreadsheet and the resulting isopleths
are reported below in Table 8 and
Table 9.
TABLE 8—USER SPREADSHEET INPUT FOR LEVEL A ISOPLETH PTS CALCULATIONS
User Spreadsheet Input
14″ Steel vibro
14″ Steel H impact
15″ Timber vibro
25″ Steel Sheet
vibro
Drilling
A) Non-Impulsive,
Stationary, Continuous.
150 rms ................
2.5 ........................
NA ........................
4 hours .................
A) Non-Impulsive,
Stationary, Continuous.
163 .......................
2.5 ........................
NA ........................
4 hours .................
A) Non-Impulsive,
Stationary, Continuous.
154 rms.
2.5.
NA.
8 hours.
15LogR ................
16 .........................
15LogR ................
10 .........................
15LogR.
10.
Spreadsheet Tab Used .......................
E.1) Impact pile
driving.
Source Level (Single Strike/shot SEL)
Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) ....
Number of strikes per pile ..................
Activity duration within 24-h period
OR number of piles per day.
Propagation (xLogR) ...........................
Distance of source level measurement (meters)+.
171 SEL ...............
2 ...........................
160 .......................
4 piles ..................
A) Non-Impulsive,
Stationary, Continuous.
148 rms ................
2.5 ........................
NA ........................
4 hours .................
15LogR ................
10 .........................
15LogR ................
10 .........................
TABLE 9—USER SPREADSHEET OUTPUT FOR LEVEL A ISOPLETH AND ENSONIFIED AREA PTS CALCULATIONS
PTS Isopleth
Source Type
HighFrequency
Cetaceans
14″ Steel H Impact .....................................................................................................................................................
14″ Steel Vibro ............................................................................................................................................................
15″ Timber Vibro .........................................................................................................................................................
25″ Steel Sheet Vibro .................................................................................................................................................
Drilling (8 hours/day) within Shutdown Zone * utilizing 163 dB rms value ................................................................
140 m ...........
3.5 m ............
7.5 m ............
34.6 m ..........
54.9 m ..........
63 m.
1.4 m.
1.9 m.
14.2 m.
22.6 m.
0.0615 km2 ..
38.46 m2 ......
179.9 m2 ......
0.0038 km2 ..
0.0095 km2 ..
0.0125 km2.
6.15 m2.
11.33 m2.
0.00062 km2.
0.0016 km2.
Phocid
Pinnipeds
Daily Ensonified Area
14″ Steel H Impact .....................................................................................................................................................
14″ Steel H Vibro ........................................................................................................................................................
15″ Timber Vibro .........................................................................................................................................................
25″ Steel Sheet Vibro .................................................................................................................................................
Drilling (8 hours/day) within Shutdown Zone * utilizing 163 dB rms value ................................................................
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
* While 154 dB rms is shown for drilling activity source level, take estimates and calculation of the ensonified area have been based on 163 dB
rms (vibratory drilling) as these activities may run concurrently.
Using the same source level and
transmission loss inputs discussed in
the Level A isopleths section above, the
Level B distance was calculated for both
impact and vibratory driving (Table 10).
The attenuation distance for impact
hammer use associated with the
installation of the sister pile/support
pile with a source level of 182 dB rms
resulted in an isopleth of 293 meters
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
(m). The attenuation distance for
vibratory hammer use with a source
level of 163 dB rms resulted in an
isopleth of 7.35 kilometers (km). The
Level B area associated with the 120 dB
re 1 mPa (rms) isopleth for vibratory
driving and which is used in the take
calculations is 0.9445 square kilometers
(km2). Note that these attenuation
distances are based on sound
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
characteristics in open water. The
project area is located in a river
surrounded by topographic features.
Therefore, the actual attenuation
distances are constrained by numerous
land features and islands. As such, the
maximum distance for the Level B
isopleth during vibratory driving and
drilling is approximately 1.4 km.
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3327
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
TABLE 10—PILE-DRIVING SOUND EXPOSURE DISTANCES (IN-WATER) LEVEL B ZONE OF INFLUENCE
Drilling activity
Behavioral thresholds for cetaceans
and pinnipeds
Propagation model
Attenuation
distance to
threshold
Vibratory Hammer .................................
Impact Hammer (rms) ...........................
120 dB rms ............................................
160 dB rms ............................................
Practical Spreading Loss ......................
Practical Spreading Loss ......................
7.35 km (4.57 mi).
293 m (961 ft).
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.
For all species, the best scientific
information available was considered
for use in the marine mammal take
assessment calculations. Density
information was taken from the Navy
Marine Mammal Density Database as
shown in Table 11. (Craine 2015; Krause
2015). These data are generally used for
broad-scale offshore activities; however,
due to a lack of any other data within
the general project area, these data are
presented as the best available data for
the Piscataqua River.
TABLE 11—MARINE MAMMAL SPECIES POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE PISCATAQUA RIVER NEAR THE SHIPYARD
Relative
occurrence in
Piscataqua River
Species
Season(s) of occurrence
Approximate density in the vicinity of the
project area
(individuals per km2) 1
Winter
Harbor Porpoise Gulf of Maine/Bay
of Fundy stock.
Gray Seal Western North Atlantic
stock.
Harbor Seal Western North Atlantic stock.
Harp Seal Western North Atlantic
stock.
Hooded Seal Western North Atlantic stock.
Occasional use ........
Spring
Summer
Fall
1.2122
1.1705
0.7903
0.9125
Common ..................
Spring to Fall (April to December) 2.
Year-round ....................................
0.2202
0.2202
0.2202
0.2202
Common ..................
Year-round ....................................
0.1998
0.1998
0.1998
0.1998
Rare .........................
Winter to Spring (January–May) ...
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
0.0125
Rare .........................
Winter to Spring (January–May) ...
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Notes:
1 Density data are taken from the Navy Marine Species Density Database (Crain 2015; Krause 2015).
2 Densities shown for all seasons, even when species are unlikely to occur in the river.
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information
provided above is brought together to
produce a quantitative take estimate.
The following assumptions are made
when estimating potential incidences of
take:
• 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-h period;
• While up to 16 days of concurrent
driving/drilling could occur, NMFS will
conservatively assume that there are
zero (0) days resulting in a total of 100
pile driving/drilling days; and
• Exposures to sound levels at or
above the relevant thresholds equate to
take, as defined by the MMPA.
In this case, the estimation of marine
mammal takes uses the following
calculation:
Exposure estimate = n * ZOI * days of
total activity
Where:
n = density estimate used for each species/
season.
ZOI = sound threshold ZOI area; the area
encompassed by all locations where the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
SPLs equal or exceed the threshold being
evaluated.
The ZOI impact area is estimated
using the relevant distances in Table 9
and Table 10, assuming that sound
radiates from a central point in the
water column at project site and taking
into consideration the possible affected
area due to topographical constraints of
the action area (i.e., radial distances to
thresholds are not always reached) as
shown in Figure 6–1 in the application.
There are a several reasons why
estimates of potential incidents of take
may be conservative, assuming that
available density and estimated ZOI
areas are accurate. We assume, in the
absence of information supporting a
more refined conclusion, that the output
of the calculation represents the number
of individuals that may be taken by the
specified activity. In fact, in the context
of stationary activities such as pile
driving and in areas where resident
animals may be present, this number
more realistically represents the number
of incidents of take that may accrue to
a smaller number of individuals. While
pile driving can occur any day
throughout the period of validity, and
the analysis is conducted on a per day
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
basis, only a fraction of that time
(typically a matter of hours on any given
day) is actually spent pile driving. 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.
Harbor Porpoise
Harbor porpoises may be present in
the project area year-round. Based on
density data from the Navy Marine
Species Density Database, their presence
is highest in winter and spring,
decreases in summer, and slightly
increases in fall. However, in general,
porpoises are known to occasionally
occur in the river. Average density for
the predicted seasons of occurrence was
used to determine abundance of animals
that could be present in the area for
exposure, using the equation abundance
= n * ZOI. Estimated abundance
estimate for harbor porpoises was 0.96
animals generated from the equation
(0.9445 km2 Level B ensonified area
*1.02 animals/km2). The number of
Level B harbor porpoise exposures
within the ZOIs is (100 days * 0.96
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3328
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
animals/day) is 96. Therefore, NMFS
authorizes 96 Level B takes of harbor
porpoise.
The injury zone for harbor porpoise
was calculated to extend to a radius of
140 m from impact driven piles and a
maximum of 55 m from vibratory or
drilling activity. A 75 m shutdown zone
is planned (see ‘‘Mitigation’’); therefore,
the area between the 75 m and 140 m
isopleths is where Level A take may
occur during impact hammer use. The
area of the 75 m shutdown zone was
subtracted from the full Level A injury
zone to obtain the Level A take zone of
0.0132 km2. The density of harbor
porpoises is estimated at 1.02 harbor
porpoises/km2. Using the density of
harbor porpoises potentially present
(1.02 animal/km2) and the area of the
Level A take zone, less than one (0.1218
mammals) harbor porpoise a day was
estimated to be exposed to injury over
the nine days of impact pile driving. In
the Federal Register notice for the
proposed IHA (82 FR 56791; November
30, 2017), NMFS had proposed to
authorize a single Level A take of harbor
porpoise. However, as part of the
monitoring requirements under the
existing IHA, the Navy observed two
harbor porpoises traveling together in
August 2017. In order to avoid
shutdown and delay associated with
exceeding take limits, NMFS will
authorize the Level A take of two harbor
porpoises.
Harbor Seal
Harbor seals may be present yearround in the project vicinity, with
constant densities throughout the year.
Based on local anecdotal data, harbor
seals are the most common pinniped in
the Piscataqua River near the Shipyard.
Average density for the predicted
seasons of occurrence was used to
determine abundance of animals that
could be present in the area for
exposure, using the equation abundance
= n * ZOI. Abundance for harbor seals
were 0.19/day. (Average year-round
density = 0.1998). Therefore, Level B
harbor seal exposures within the ZOI is
(100 days * 0.19 animals/day) would be
up to 19 Level B exposures of harbor
seals within the ZOI. As described
above in the gray seal section, however,
the modeling of estimated takes may be
underestimated. The data from the
preliminary monitoring report indicated
120 re 1 mPa (rms) Level B exposures of
harbor seals over 73 work days resulting
in 1.64 takes per day (120 takes/73
days). Therefore, NMFS is proposing to
authorize 164 Level B harbor seal takes
(1.64 takes/day * 100 days).
The injury zone for harbor seals was
calculated to extend a radius of 63 m
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
from impact driven piles and 14m for
vibratory hammer use. The injury zone
for drilling activity is estimated at 23 m.
The Level A injury zone is within the
shutdown zone, therefore no injurious
takes of harbor seals are estimated to
occur. However, as stated above for the
gray seal take request, this may be an
underestimate. The Navy has requested
four Level A takes of harbor seal to
coincide with the same number of Level
A takes requested in Year 1. Preliminary
monitoring report results support
authorization of Level A take as one
harbor seal was detected within 50 m of
drilling activity. Therefore, NMFS is
conservatively proposing four Level A
takes of harbor seals so that operations
will not have to be suspended due to
exceeding authorized Level A takes.
Gray Seal
Gray seals are less common in the
Piscataqua River than the harbor seal.
Average density for the predicted
seasons of occurrence was used to
determine abundance of animals that
could be present in the area for
exposure, using the equation abundance
= n * ZOI. The estimated abundance for
gray seals is 0.21/day (average yearround density = 0.2202). Therefore, the
number of Level B gray seal exposures
within the ZOI is (100 days * 0.21
animals/day) resulting in up to 21 Level
B exposures of gray seals within the
ZOI.
However, current monitoring data
indicate that this could be an
underestimate. While there could be 21
Level B and 0 Level A takes for gray seal
during construction activity monitoring
of the zones, observations of gray seals
have shown 18 Level B exposures over
73 days of activity through October 27,
2017. This comes out to 0.246 exposures
per day (18/73 = 0.246). Therefore, the
Navy has requested and NMFS is
proposing to authorize 25 gray seal takes
(0.246 takes/day * 100 days) under the
IHA.
The injury zone for gray seals was
calculated to extend to a radius of 63m
for impact driven piles and 14m for
vibratory hammer use. The injury zone
for drilling is estimated at 23m from the
activity. The injury zone for impact,
vibratory and drilling activity remains
within the shutdown zone of 75m for
impact hammer use and 55 m for
vibratory driving and drilling (see
‘‘Mitigation’’). These zones were
utilized during Year 1. Based on these
calculations and continued
implementation of the shutdown zones,
no injurious takes of gray seals are
estimated to occur. The Navy, however,
requests authorization of two Level A
takes of gray seal to coincide with the
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
same number of Level A takes requested
in Year 1. This is partially supported by
data collected in the preliminary Year 1
IHA monitoring report in which
observers recorded one gray seal within
50 m of drilling activity. Because
animals were observed within the
shutdown zone during Year 1, NMFS is
conservatively proposing authorization
of two Level A gray seal takes, so that
operations will not have to be
suspended if animals unexpectedly
occur in the Level A zones.
Harp Seal
Harp seals may be present in the
project vicinity during the winter and
spring, from January through February.
In general, harp seals are much rarer
than the harbor seal and gray seal in the
Piscataqua River. These animals are
conservatively assumed to be present
within the underwater Level B ZOI
during each day of in-water pile driving.
Average density for the predicted
seasons of occurrence was used to
determine abundance of animals that
could be present in the area for
exposure, using the equation abundance
= n * ZOI. Abundance for harp seals
was 0.014/day (average year-round
density = 0.0125). The number of Level
B harp seal exposures within the ZOI is
(100 days * 0.0125 animals/day)
resulting in approximately 1 Level B
exposure. In the Federal Register notice
for the proposed IHA (82 FR 56791;
November 30, 2017), NMFS had
proposed to authorize a single Level B
take of harp seal. Although rare, harp
seals have been known to occur in this
area. Therefore, in order to avoid
shutdown and delay associated with
exceeding take limits, NMFS will
authorize the Level B take of five harp
seals. This conservatively assumes that
one harp seal could be taken during
each of the five months that
construction activities would take place.
The injury zone for harp seals was
calculated to extend a radius of 63 m
from impact driven piles and 14 m for
vibratory hammer use. The injury zone
for drilling is estimated at 23 m from the
activity. These isopleths are within the
shutdown zones and NMFS. Therefore,
no Level A take is authorized as shown
in Table 13.
Hooded Seal
In the Federal Register notice for the
proposed IHA (82 FR 56791; November
30, 2017), NMFS did not propose to
authorize take of any hooded seals. This
was based on the fact that hooded seals
are rare in this area and none were
recorded under the 2017 IHA
monitoring requirements. In general,
hooded seals are much rarer than the
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
harbor seal and gray seal in the
Piscataqua River. Anecdotal sighting
information indicates that two hooded
seals were observed from the Shipyard
in August 2009, but no other
observations have been recorded.
Information on the average density for
hooded seals was not available. In order
to guard against unauthorized take of
hooded seals, NMFS will authorize the
Level B take of five hooded seals. This
conservatively assumes that during each
of the five months of construction one
hooded seal could be taken by Level B
harassment.
The injury zone for hooded seals was
calculated to extend a radius of 63m
from impact driven piles and 14m for
vibratory hammer use. The injury zone
for drilling is estimated at 23 m from the
activity. As shown in Table 13, these
isopleths are within the shutdown zones
and, therefore, no Level A take is
authorized.
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must
set forth the permissible methods of
taking pursuant to such activity and
other means of effecting the least
practicable impact on such species or
stock and its habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds,
and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock
for taking for certain subsistence uses
(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 consider 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. This considers
the nature of the potential adverse
impact being mitigated (likelihood,
scope, range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be
effective if implemented (probability of
accomplishing the mitigating result if
implemented as planned); the
likelihood of effective implementation
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
(probability implemented as planned);
and
(2) the practicability of the measures
for applicant implementation, which
may consider such things as cost and
impact on operations.
Mitigation for Marine Mammals and
Their Habitat
The mitigation strategies described
below are similar to those required and
implemented under the first IHA
associated with this project. In addition
to the measures described later in this
section, the Navy would conduct
briefings between construction
supervisors and crews, marine mammal
monitoring team, and Navy 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.
The following measures would apply
to the Navy’s mitigation through
shutdown and disturbance zones:
Time Restrictions—Pile driving/
removal (vibratory as well as impact)
will only be conducted during daylight
hours so that marine mammals can be
adequately monitored to determine if
mitigation measures are to be
implemented.
Establishment of Shutdown zone—
During pile driving and removal,
shutdown zones shall be established to
prevent injury to marine mammals as
determined under acoustic injury
thresholds. During all pile driving and
removal activities, regardless of
predicted sound pressure levels (SPLs),
the entire shutdown zone will be
monitored to prevent injury to marine
mammals from their physical
interaction with construction equipment
during in-water activities. The
shutdown zone during impact driving
will extend to 75 m for all authorized
species. The shutdown during vibratory
driving and drilling will extend to 55 m
for all authorized species. Pile driving
and removal operations will cease if a
marine mammal approaches the
shutdown zone. Pile driving and
removal operations will restart once the
marine mammal is visibly seen leaving
the zone or after 15 minutes have passed
with no sightings.
Establishment of Level A Harassment
Zone—The Level A harassment zone is
an area where animals may be exposed
to sound levels that could result in PTS
injury. The primary purpose of the
Level A zone is monitoring for
documenting incidents of Level A
harassment. The Level A zones will
extend from the 75 m shutdown zone
out to 140 m for harbor porpoises.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3329
Animals observed in the Level A
harassment zone will be recorded as
potential Level A takes.
Establishment of Disturbance/Level B
Harassment Zone—During pile driving
and removal, the Level B zone shall
include areas where the underwater
SPLs are anticipated to equal or exceed
the Level B harassment criteria for
marine mammals (160 dB rms isopleths
for impact pile driving, 120 re 1 mPa
(rms) isopleth for vibratory pile-driving
and drilling). The Level B zone will
extend out to 293 m for impact driving
and 7.35 km during vibratory driving
and drilling and will include all waters
in the sight line of the driving or drilling
operation not constrained by land.
Shutdown Zone During Other Inwater Construction or Demolition
Activities—During all in-water
construction or demolition activities
having the potential to affect marine
mammals, in order to prevent injury
from physical interaction with
construction equipment, a shutdown
zone 10 m will be implemented to
ensure marine mammals are not present
within this zone. These activities could
include, but are not limited to: (1) The
movement of a barge to the construction
site, or (2) the removal of a pile from the
water column/substrate via a crane (i.e.,
a ‘‘dead pull’’).
Soft Start for Impact Pile Driving—
The use of a soft-start procedure is
believed to provide additional
protection to marine mammals by
providing a warning and/or giving
marine mammals a chance to leave the
area prior to the hammer operating at
full capacity. The project will use softstart techniques recommended by
NMFS for impact pile driving. Soft start
must be conducted at beginning of day’s
activity and at any time impact pile
driving has ceased for more than 30
minutes. If an impact hammer is used,
contractors are required to provide an
initial set of three strikes from the
impact hammer at 40 percent energy,
followed by a 1-minute waiting period,
then two subsequent 3-strike sets.
Monitoring Protocols—Monitoring
would be conducted before, during, and
after pile driving activities. In addition,
observers shall record all incidents of
marine mammal occurrence, regardless
of distance from activity, and shall
document any behavioral reactions in
concert with distance from piles being
driven. Observations made outside the
shutdown zone will not result in
shutdown; 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 15
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3330
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
minutes prior to initiation through 30
minutes post-completion of pile driving
activities.
Monitoring will be conducted by one
marine mammal observer (MMO) on
one-third of driving days who will
monitor the Level A harassment and
shutdown zone during all pile-driving
operations. Two MMOs shall monitor
the Level A, Level B, and shutdown
zones during two-thirds of pile-driving
days. The Navy will extrapolate data
collected by two MMOs during twothirds of monitoring days and calculate
total Level B take for all pile-driving
days.
Prior to the start of pile driving
activity, the shutdown zone will be
monitored for 15 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 when the entire shutdown zone is
visible (i.e., when not obscured by dark,
rain, fog, etc.).
Drilling/pile driving activity shall not
be conducted when weather/observer
conditions do not allow for adequate
sighting of marine mammals. In the
unlikely event of conditions that
prevent the visual detection of marine
mammals, such as heavy fog, activities
with the potential to result in Level A
or Level B harassment will not be
initiated. Impact pile driving already
underway would be curtailed, but
vibratory driving may continue if
driving has already been initiated on a
given pile. Driving of additional piles by
any means will not be allowed until all
zones are visible. However, in the event
of an unsafe work environment if
conditions prevent detection of marine
mammals during impact pile driving
and the pile currently being driven is
not stable enough for activities to cease,
impact pile driving would continue to
get the single pile to stability.
better understanding of: (1) Action or
environment (e.g., source
characterization, propagation, ambient
noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life
history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the
action; or (4) biological or behavioral
context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or
feeding areas);
• Individual marine mammal
responses (behavioral or physiological)
to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or
cumulative), other stressors, or
cumulative impacts from multiple
stressors;
• How anticipated responses to
stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
fitness and survival of individual
marine mammals; or (2) populations,
species, or stocks;
• Effects on marine mammal habitat
(e.g., marine mammal prey species,
acoustic habitat, or other important
physical components of marine
mammal habitat); and
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
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 the animal has voluntarily left
and been visually confirmed beyond the
shutdown zone or 15 minutes have
passed. Monitoring will be conducted
throughout the time required to drive a
pile and for 30 minutes following the
conclusion of pile driving.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s proposed measures NMFS
has determined that the required
mitigation measures provide the means
effecting the least practicable impact on
the affected species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth
requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking.
The MMPA implementing regulations at
50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that
requests for authorizations must include
the suggested means of accomplishing
the necessary monitoring and reporting
that will result in increased knowledge
of the species and of the level of taking
or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be
present in the action area. Effective
reporting is critical both to compliance
as well as ensuring that the most value
is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting
requirements prescribed by NMFS
should contribute to improved
understanding of one or more of the
following:
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species or stocks in the area in which
take is anticipated (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
Previous Monitoring Report
The Navy submitted a preliminary
monitoring report covering the period
between April 18, 2017 and October 27,
2017. This period does not cover all pile
driving activities. Therefore, the Navy
will submit a final report after the
authorization period ends. During this
period, piles were installed using
vibratory hammer, the impact hammer,
and drilling. Work was conducted over
73 days. Drilling has accounted for
98.8% of the total noise-generating time
spent on installation/extraction
activities at the Shipyard; vibratory
activity occurred during 1% of the total
time; and impact driving took place
<1% of the total time. During this time,
observers noted 142 occurrences of
marine mammals within designated
zones, with all but one occurring within
the Level B harassment zone as shown
in Table 12. Monitoring of all zones
occurred on every drilling day.
TABLE 12—SUMMARY OF 2017 TAKES THROUGH OCTOBER 28, 2018
Level A
Level B
Species
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Actual
Harbor porpoise ...............................................................................................
Harbor seal ......................................................................................................
Gray seal .........................................................................................................
Harp seal .........................................................................................................
Hooded seal .....................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Authorized
0
1
0
0
0
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
10
4
2
0
0
24JAN1
Actual
Authorized
3
120
18
0
0
160
312
156
5
5
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Visual Monitoring
The Navy will be required to conduct
visual marine mammal monitoring
during pile driving activities. Observers
shall record all incidents of marine
mammal occurrence, regardless of
distance from activity, and shall
document any behavioral reactions in
concert with distance from piles being
driven or removed. 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.
A minimum of two MMOs will be on
location during all pile driving
activities. They will be placed at the
best vantage point(s) practicable. MMOs
may be stationed on an elevated
platform. MMOs will monitor for
marine mammals and implement
shutdown/delay procedures when
applicable by calling for the shutdown
to equipment operators. MMOs will
scan the waters within each monitoring
zone activity using big-eye binoculars,
hand held binoculars, spotting scopes
and visual observation. Monitoring
distances will be measured with range
finders and bearing to animals shall be
determined using a compass.
The observers will be trained on the
observation zones, potential species,
how to observe, and how to fill out the
data sheets by the Navy Natural
Resources Manager prior to any piledriving activities. The supervisory
observer will be a trained biologist;
additional observers will be trained by
that supervisor as needed.
Shutdown and Level A zones must be
monitored at all times by one MMO
with no other duties or responsibilities.
A second MMO will be required to
monitor Level B zones on two-thirds of
driving days. The following additional
measures apply to visual monitoring
during all pile driving activities
• Independent observers (i.e., not
construction personnel) are required;
• At least one observer must have
prior experience working as an observer;
• Other observers (that do not have
prior experience) may substitute
education (undergraduate degree in
biological science or related field) or
training for experience;
• NMFS will require submission and
approval of observer resumes.
Qualified observers are trained
biologists with the following minimum
qualifications:
• 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
binoculars may be necessary to correctly
identify the target;
• Sufficient training, orientation, or
experience with the construction
operation to provide for personal safety
during observations;
• 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
• 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.
A draft marine mammal monitoring
report will be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of
pile driving and removal activities or 60
days prior to the issuance of any
subsequent IHA for this project,
whichever comes first. It will include an
overall description of work completed,
a narrative regarding marine mammal
sightings, and associated marine
mammal observation data sheets, and
extrapolated Level B take counts.
Specifically, the report must include:
• Date and time that monitored
activity begins or ends;
• Sediment characteristics/type;
• Construction activities occurring
during each observation period;
• Weather parameters (e.g., percent
cover, visibility);
• Water conditions (e.g., sea state,
tide state);
• Species, numbers, and, if possible,
sex and age class of marine mammals;
• Description of any observable
marine mammal behavior patterns,
including bearing and direction of travel
and distance from pile driving activity;
• Distance from pile driving activities
to marine mammals and distance from
the marine mammals to the observation
point;
• Locations of all marine mammal
observations; and
• Other human activity in the area.
If no comments are received from
NMFS within 30 days, the draft final
report will constitute the final report. If
comments are received, a final report
addressing NMFS comments must be
submitted within 30 days after receipt of
comments.
In the unanticipated event that the
specified activity clearly causes the take
of a marine mammal in a manner
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3331
prohibited by the IHA (if issued), such
as serious injury or mortality, the Navy
will immediately cease the specified
activities and report the incident to the
Chief of the Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, and the Northeast/Greater
Atlantic Regional Stranding
Coordinator. The report would include
the following information:
• Description of the incident;
• Environmental conditions (e.g.,
Beaufort sea state, visibility);
• Description of all marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
• Species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
• Fate of the animal(s); and
• Photographs or video footage of the
animal(s) (if equipment is available).
Activities would not resume until
NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take.
NMFS would work with the Navy to
determine what is necessary to
minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA
compliance. The Navy would not be
able to resume their activities until
notified by NMFS via letter, email, or
telephone.
In the event that the Navy discovers
an injured or dead marine mammal, and
the lead MMO determines that the cause
of the injury or death is unknown and
the death is relatively recent (e.g., in
less than a moderate state of
decomposition as described in the next
paragraph), the Navy would
immediately report the incident to the
Chief of the Permits and Conservation
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, and the Northeast/Greater
Atlantic Regional Stranding
Coordinator. The report would include
the same information identified in the
paragraph above. Activities would be
able to continue while NMFS reviews
the circumstances of the incident.
NMFS would work with the Navy to
determine whether modifications in the
activities are appropriate.
In the event that the Navy discovers
an injured or dead marine mammal and
the lead MMO determines that the
injury or death is not associated with or
related to the activities authorized in the
IHA (e.g., previously wounded animal,
carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage),
the Navy would report the incident to
the Chief of the Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the
Northeast/Greater Atlantic Regional
Stranding Coordinator within 24 hours
of the discovery. The Navy would
provide photographs, video footage (if
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3332
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
available) or other documentation of the
stranded animal sighting to NMFS and
the Marine Mammal Stranding Network.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Hydroacoustic Monitoring
The Navy will continue to implement
its in situ acoustic monitoring efforts in
2018. Specifically, data would be
collected during vibratory installation of
20 sheet piles and impact installation of
4 H-piles, during drilling activities on
one day, and during one day of drilling
with concurrent vibratory driving.
However, concurrent activity is so
infrequent it is not likely to occur for a
full day. Navy shall measure sound
intensity at 10 m from the source pile,
at the modeled limits of the Level A and
Level B zones, and at intermediate
points between 10m and the 160 dB and
120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) isopleths. For all
piles required to be monitored, 100
percent of the data from each pile will
be analyzed and included in the
reported results, including ‘‘soft starts’’
of impact hammers. For each
combination of pile type and hammer,
the monitoring locations will be chosen
to maximize coverage of the ZOI based
on the number of piles scheduled for
monitoring for a given timeframe. See
the Navy’s Acoustic Monitoring Plan for
additional information. A final report
shall be submitted to NMFS within 30
days of completing the verification
monitoring. Results from the 2017
Hydroacoustic Monitoring Report may
be found in Appendix A of the
application. Data from the 2017 and
2018 hydroacoustic monitoring reports
may be used to revise isopleths
delineating harassment zones. Any
revisions would be subject to NMFS’
review and approval.
Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact
as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival
(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact
finding is based on the lack of likely
adverse effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of takes alone is not enough information
on which to base an impact
determination. In addition to
considering 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
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).
Pile driving, pile extraction and
drilling activities associated with the
Navy project have the potential to
injure, disturb or displace marine
mammals. Specifically, the planned
activities may result in Level B
harassment (behavioral disturbance) for
all species authorized for take from
underwater sound generated during pile
driving. Level A harassment in the form
of PTS may also occur to limited
numbers of three marine mammal
species. Potential takes could occur if
individuals of these species are present
in the ensonified zone when pile
driving and removal occurs.
No 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 driving and drilling will be the
primary methods of installation (impact
driving will occur for only 1.5 hours
over 84–100 days). During impact
driving, 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. Conditions at the Shipyard
offer MMOs clear views of the
shutdown zones, enabling a high rate of
success in implementation of
shutdowns to avoid injury.
The Navy’s planned activities are
highly localized. A small portion of the
Piscataqua River may be affected which
is only a subset of the ranges of species
for which take is authorized. The project
is not expected to have significant
adverse effects on marine mammal
habitat. No important feeding and/or
reproductive areas for marine mammals
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
are known to be near the project area.
Project-related 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, since the area
of the habitat range utilized by each
species that may be affected is relatively
small, the impacts to marine mammal
habitat are not expected to cause
significant or long-term negative
consequences.
Exposures to elevated sound levels
produced during pile driving activities
may cause behavioral responses by an
animal, but they are expected to be mild
and temporary. 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). Most likely,
individuals will simply move away
from the sound source and be
temporarily displaced from the areas of
pile driving, although even this reaction
has been observed primarily only in
association with impact pile driving.
These reactions and behavioral changes
are expected to subside quickly when
the exposures cease. The pile driving
activities analyzed here are similar to, or
less impactful than, numerous
construction activities conducted in
other similar locations, which have
taken place with no reported injuries or
mortality to marine mammals, and no
known long-term adverse consequences
from behavioral harassment. Repeated
exposures of individuals to levels of
sound that may cause Level B
harassment are unlikely to result in
permanent hearing impairment or to
significantly disrupt foraging behavior.
Level B harassment will be reduced
through use of mitigation measures
described herein.
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 stock through effects on annual rates
of recruitment or survival:
• No mortality or serious injury is
anticipated or authorized;
• The area of potential impacts is
highly localized;
• No adverse impacts to marine
mammal habitat;
• The absence of any significant
habitat within the project area,
including rookeries, or known areas or
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
3333
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 16 / Wednesday, January 24, 2018 / Notices
features of special significance for
foraging or reproduction;
• Anticipated incidences of Level A
harassment would be in the form of a
small degree of PTS to a limited number
of animals;
• Anticipated incidents of Level B
harassment consist of, at worst,
temporary modifications in behavior;
• Very few individuals are likely to
be affected by project activities (<0.01
percent of population for all authorized
species); and
• The anticipated efficacy of the
required mitigation measures in
reducing the effects of the specified
activity.
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
required monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS finds that the total
marine mammal take from the
construction activity will have a
negligible impact on all affected marine
mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers
of incidental take may be authorized
under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
for specified activities other than
military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so,
in practice, 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 13—ESTIMATED NUMBER OF EXPOSURES AND PERCENTAGE OF STOCKS THAT MAY BE SUBJECTED TO LEVEL A
AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT
Authorized take
Total Level A
and Level B
takes
Species
Level B
Harbor porpoise Gulf of Maine/Bay of Fundy stock ..........................................
Gray Seal Western North Atlantic stock ............................................................
Harbor Seal Western North Atlantic stock .........................................................
Harp Seal Western North Atlantic stock ............................................................
Hooded Seal Western North Atlantic stock .......................................................
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Table 13 illustrates the number of
animals that could be exposed to Level
A and Level B harassment from work
associated with the waterfront
improvement project. The analysis
provided indicates that authorized takes
account for <0.01 percent of the
populations of the stocks that could be
affected. These are small numbers of
marine mammals relative to the sizes of
the affected species and population
stocks under consideration.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the planned activity (including
the required 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.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis
and Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of the affected marine mammal stocks or
species implicated by this action.
Therefore, NMFS has determined that
the total taking of affected species or
stocks would not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of
such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:25 Jan 23, 2018
Jkt 244001
Level A
96
25
164
5
5
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.
No incidental take of ESA-listed
species is authorized or expected to
result from this activity. Therefore,
NMFS has determined that consultation
under section 7 of the ESA is not
required for this action.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National
Environmental Policy Act 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 potential impacts 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 signed a
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2
2
4
0
0
98
27
168
5
5
Population
(%)
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Categorical Exclusion memo in January
2018.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to the Navy
for the potential harassment of small
numbers of five marine mammal species
incidental to the Waterfront
Improvement Project at the Portsmouth
Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine,
provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring and reporting
requirements are incorporated.
Dated: January 19, 2018.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected
Resources,National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2018–01306 Filed 1–23–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND
COMMUNITY SERVICE
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to the Office of
Management and Budget for Review
and Approval; Comment Request;
Concept Paper, Application and
Budget Instructions, Project Progress
Report and Progress Report
Supplement (OMB Control Number
3045–0038); Proposed Information
Collection; Comment Request
Corporation for National and
Community Service.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM
24JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3318-3333]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01306]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-XF611
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Waterfront Improvement Projects at
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard
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
U.S. Department of the Navy (Navy) to incidentally harass, by Level A
and Level B harassment, marine mammals during construction activities
associated with waterfront improvement projects at the Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard (the Shipyard) in Kittery, Maine.
DATES: This Authorization is effective from January 8, 2018, through
January 7, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob Pauline, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
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
[[Page 3319]]
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 authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings
are set forth.
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as 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).
Summary of Request
On July 14, 2017, NMFS received a request from the Navy for an IHA
to take marine mammals incidental to impact pile driving, vibratory
pile driving, vibratory pile extraction, and drilling associated with
an ongoing waterfront improvement project at the Shipyard. The
application was considered adequate and complete on August 25, 2017.
The Navy's request is for take of harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena),
gray seal (Halichoerus grypus), harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), harp seal
(Pagophilus groenlandicus) and hooded seal (Cystophora cristata), by
Level A and Level B harassment (authorization of Level A harassment is
not proposed for the harp seal or hooded seal). Neither the Navy nor
NMFS expects serious injury or mortality to result from this activity
and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
This IHA will cover the second year of a five-year project for
which the Navy had previously obtained an IHA. The Navy intends to
request take authorization for subsequent years of the project. NMFS
previously issued the first IHA to the Navy for this project effective
from January 8, 2018 through January 7, 2019. The larger 5-year project
involves restoring and modernizing infrastructure at the Shipyard. The
Navy complied with all the requirements (e.g., mitigation, monitoring,
and reporting) of the previous IHA and information regarding their
monitoring results may be found in the Monitoring and Reporting
section.
Description of Specified Activity
Overview
The purpose of the proposed action is to modernize and maximize dry
dock capabilities for performing current and future missions
efficiently and with maximum flexibility. The need for the proposed
action is to correct deficiencies associated with the pier structure at
Berths 11, 12, and 13 and the Dry Dock 3 caisson and concrete seats to
ensure that the Shipyard can continue to support its primary mission to
service, maintain, and overhaul submarines. The proposed action covers
the second year of activities (January 3, 2018 through January 2, 2019)
associated with the waterfront improvement projects at the Shipyard in
Kittery, Maine. The project includes impact and vibratory pile driving,
vibratory pile removal, and drilling. Construction activities may occur
at any time during the calendar year. A detailed description of the
planned waterfront improvement project was provided in the Federal
Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 56791; November 30, 2017).
Since that time, no changes have been made to the planned waterfront
improvement 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 shows a summary of the anticipated work effort (e.g., days)
and numbers planned for installation/extraction of each pile type while
Table 2 shows estimated hours for each type of pile driving and
drilling activity.
Table 1--Year 2 (2018) Planned Construction Activity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of
Activity/ method Timing Number of Pile type piles piles Overlap days Production
days installed extracted estimates
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extract Timber Piles/Vibratory January-December 3 15'' Timber Piles. ........... 18 .................. Estimated 6 piles
Hammer. 2018. per day.
Install Casing & Drill Sockets/ January-December 56 36'' W-Section 35 ........... .................. Estimated less
Auger Drilling. 2018. Steel. than one pile
completed per
day. This
includes setting
the casing and
rock socket
drilling.
Install Sheet Pile (SKZ-20) SOE January-December 12 25'' Sheet Piles 144 ........... 9/during rock Estimated 12
Piles/Vibro. 2018. Steel. sockets. sheets per day.
Remove Sheet Pile(SKZ-20) SOE January-December 6 25'' Sheet Piles ........... 144 4/during rock Estimated 24
Piles/Vibro. 2018. Steel. sockets. sheets per day.
Install Road Plate/H-Pile January-December 3 14'' H-Pile Steel. 12 ........... 2/during rock Estimated 4 ea.
Support of Excav. Vibro. 2018. sockets. road plates per
day.
Remove Road Plate/H-Pile Support January-December 2 14'' H-Pile Steel. ........... 12 1/during rock Estimated 8 ea.
of Excav. Vibro. 2018. sockets. Road plates per
day.
Install Sheet Pile(AZ50) Sheet January-December 6 25'' Sheet Piles 74 ........... .................. Estimated 13
wall Bulkhead at DD1- Vibro. 2018. Steel. sheets per day.
[[Page 3320]]
Install H-Pile (AZ50) Bulkhead January-December 2 14'' H-Pile Steel. 4 ........... .................. Estimated 2 piles
Return @West End of 11C- Vibro. 2018. per day.
Install Sheet Pile (AZ50) January-December 9 25'' Sheet Piles 2 ........... .................. Estimated 2 piles
Bulkhead Return @West End of 2018. Steel. per day.
11C- Vibro.
Install Support/Sister Pile/ January-December ........... 14'' H-Pile Steel. 22 ........... .................. Estimated 2.6
Vibro & Impact Hammer. 2018. piles per day.
The vibro would
be used to stick
the pile and the
impact would
drive the pile to
refusal.*
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals...................... Expected total work days 293 174 16................ ..................
(including up to16 days of
concurrent activities) = 84-100
days
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Depending on when these piles are driven in the tide cycle there is potential to install all 22 of the support piles in the dry which would further
reduce the number of vibratory and impact hammer days. This pile quantity includes all the Support Pile in Berth 11C as well as 8 Support Pile
remaining from Berth 11A.
Table 2--Year 2 (2018) Hours Estimated for Each Pile Driving Activity
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Driving type Pile type Number of piles Days Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact.......................... 14'' H-Pile 22 piles.......... 9................. 1.5.
(Sister Pile).
Vibratory....................... 25'' sheet pile, 236 piles/sheet... 27 install 8 216 install 64
15'' timber pile, remove. remove.
14'' H-pile.
Drilling........................ 36'' Installation/ 35 casings........ 56................ 448.
Rock Sockets.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment and Responses
A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to the Navy was
published in the Federal Register on November 30, 2017 (82 FR 56791).
That notice described, in detail, the Navy'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 listed four issues that need to be
resolved prior to issuance of the final IHA including:
Increasing the estimated Level A harassment takes for
harbor porpoises from one to two to account for group size;
increasing the estimated Level B harassment takes for harp
seals from one to five to account for the potential that harp seals
could be present on multiple days during the five months when they are
most likely to occur in the project area;
authorizing Level B harassment takes of five hooded seals
to account for the potential that hooded seals could be present on
multiple days during the five months when they are most likely to occur
in the project area; and
clarifying or specifying various mitigation and monitoring
measure requirements.
Response: NMFS has agreed to make the changes described above.
These changes are included in the issued IHA.
Comment 2: 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
in the near future and looks forward to working with them to resolve
this issue.
Comment 3: The Commission stated that monitoring during all pile-
driving and removal activities is necessary for NMFS and the Navy to be
confident that mitigation measures are implemented as intended, the
numbers of marine mammals taken are within the limits authorized, and
the least practicable impact occurs. The Commission recommended that
NMFS require the Navy to implement full-time monitoring of the full
extents of various Level A and B harassment zones using two protected
species observers (PSOs) during all pile-driving (including drilling
rock sockets) and removal activities.
Response: NMFS has authorized the employment of a single PSO on
one-third of driving days to monitor the shutdown and Level A zones Two
PSOs will be employed on two-thirds of driving days to monitor
shutdown, Level A and Level B zones. NMFS is confident that a single
qualified PSO can effectively monitor shutdown and Level A zones during
all pile driving and removal activities. A single observer will have a
complete, unobstructed view of the entirety of shutdown and Level A
zones and will be able to document takes and call for shutdown or delay
as appropriate. Adding a second PSO on two-thirds of driving days for
Level B zone monitoring provides the capability to ensure successful
implementation of mitigation measures and document that authorized take
limits are not exceeded. Note that under previously issued IHAs, NMFS
has not required 100 percent monitoring of Level B zones. In these
instances, NMFS found that mitigation measures were effectively
employed and marine mammal takes were under authorized limits.
Comment 4: The Commission reviewed the marine mammal and
hydroacoustic monitoring plan and provided extensive comments to NMFS
during the public comment period. The Commission's submitted comment
letter features an Addendum listing all of the issues that were raised.
The Commission recommends that NMFS ensure that all issues summarized
in the Addendum are addressed and incorporated either into the final
marine
[[Page 3321]]
mammal and hydroacoustic monitoring plan or the incidental harassment
authorization itself.
Response: NMFS will address and incorporate resolutions to issues
identified in the Addendum into the final marine mammal and
hydroacoustic monitoring plan.
Comment 5: The Commission expressed concern about the lack of
adequate time to provide public comments as well as the abbreviated
timeframes during which NMFS is able to address public comments. The
Commission recommended that NMFS ensure that it publishes and finalizes
proposed incidental harassment authorizations sufficiently before the
planned start date of the proposed activities to ensure full
consideration is given to all comments received.
Response: NMFS will work to provide adequate time for public
comment and response. NMFS will also seek to process IHA applications
in a more expeditious manner.
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities
Five marine mammal species, including one cetacean and four
pinnipeds, may inhabit or transit the waters near the Shipyard in the
lower Piscataqua River during the specified activity. These include the
harbor porpoise, gray seal, harbor seal, hooded seal, and harp seal.
None of the marine mammals that may be found in the Piscataqua River
are listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Table 3 lists the
marine mammal species that could occur near the Shipyard and their
estimated densities within the project area. As there are no specific
density data for any of the species in the Piscataqua River, density
data from the nearshore zone outside the mouth the Piscataqua River in
the Atlantic Ocean have been used instead. Therefore, it can be assumed
that the density estimates presented here for each species are
conservative and higher than densities that would typically be expected
in an industrialized, estuarine environment such as the lower
Piscataqua River in the vicinity of the Shipyard.
Detailed descriptions of the of the species likely to be affected
by the Navy's 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 (November
30, 2017;82 FR 56791); 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'
website (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/) for generalized species
accounts.
Table 3--Marine Mammal Species Potentially Present in the Piscataqua River near the Shipyard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/ MMPA Stock abundance (CV,
status; Nmin, most recent Annual M/SI
Common name Scientific name Stock Strategic (Y/N) abundance survey) PBR \3\
\1\ \2\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor Porpoise................... Phocoena phocoena... Gulf of Maine/Bay of -;N 79,883 (0.32; 706................. 437
Fundy stock. 61,415; 2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray Seal......................... Halichoerus grypus.. Western North -;N unknown 505,000 unknown............. 4,959
Atlantic stock. (best estimate 2014
Canadian population
DFO 2014).
Harbor Seal....................... Phoca vitulina...... Western North -;N 75,834 (0.15; 2,006............... 389
Atlantic stock. 66,884; 2012).
Hooded Seal \4\................... Cystophora cristata. Western North -;N 592,100(-;512,000, unknown............. 5,199
Atlantic stock. 2005).
Harp Seal......................... Pagophilus Western North -;N 7,100,000 (2012).... unknown............. 306,082
groenlandicus. Atlantic stock.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/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 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\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of
stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable.
\3\ 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.
\4\ Abundance estimates for these stocks are greater than eight years old and are, therefore, not considered current. PBR is considered undetermined for
these stocks, as there is no current minimum abundance estimate for use in calculation. We nevertheless present the most recent abundance estimates
and PBR values, as these represent the best available information for use in this document.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
The effects of underwater noise from the Navy's construction
activities for the waterfront improvement project have the potential to
result in Level B harassment (behavioral disturbance) for marine mammal
species authorized for take. Level A (injury) harassment in the form of
permanent threshold shift (PTS) may also occur in limited numbers of
animals. The project would not result in permanent impacts to habitats
used directly by marine mammals, such as haulout sites, but may have
potential short-term impacts to food sources such as forage fish and
minor impacts to the immediate substrate during installation and
removal of piles. The potential effects to marine mammals and their
associated habitat are discussed in detail in the Federal Register
notice for the proposed IHA (November 30, 2017; 82 FR 56791), therefore
that information is not repeated here; please refer to that Federal
Register notice for that information.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
that NMFS has authorized through this IHA, which informed NMFS'
consideration of
[[Page 3322]]
both ``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, as
impact and vibratory pile driving as well as drilling have the
potential to result in auditory injury and disruption of behavioral
patterns for individual marine mammals. The required mitigation and
monitoring measures are expected to minimize the severity of such
taking to the extent practicable.
As described previously, no mortality 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 authorized take estimate.
Acoustic Thresholds
NMFS recommends 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 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for continuous non-
impulsive (e.g. vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1
[mu]Pa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., impact pile driving,
seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
The Navy's planned activity includes the use of continuous
(vibratory pile driving, 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 (Technical Guidance, 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).
As noted above, the Navy's planned activity includes both impulsive and
non-impulsive sources.
These thresholds are provided in Table 4. 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.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 3323]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN24JA18.004
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
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 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]).
Although cylindrical spreading loss was applied to driving of 14-inch
H-piles in the previous IHA, in an effort to maintain consistency NMFS
utilized practical spreading loss (4.5 dB reduction in sound level for
each doubling of distance) for all driving and drilling activities for
this IHA. A practical spreading value of 15 is often used
[[Page 3324]]
under conditions, such as at the Shipyard dock, where water increases
with depth as the receiver moves away from the shoreline, resulting in
an expected propagation environment that would lie between spherical
and cylindrical spreading loss conditions.
Underwater Sound--The intensity of pile driving 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 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.
Source Levels
Source levels were collected for the four types of piles that would
be installed and two pile-driving methods planned for the project:
1. 14-inch steel H-type piles--Used as sister piles and for SOE
system installation; installed/extracted via vibratory hammer and
seated as needed with impact hammer.
2. 15-inch timber piles--Used for re-installation of dolphins at
Berths 11, 12, and 13 and extracted via vibratory hammer.
3. 25-inch steel sheet piles--Used for the bulkhead at Berth 11 and
for SOE installed/extracted via vibratory hammer.
Reference source levels for the project were determined using data
for piles of similar sizes, the same pile-driving method as that
planned for the project, and at similar water depths. While the pile
sizes and water depths chosen as proxies do not exactly match those for
the project, they are the closest matches available, and it is assumed
that the source levels shown in Tables 5, 6, and 7 are the most
representative for each pile type and associated pile-driving method.
The intensity of pile driving or sounds is greatly influenced by
factors such as the type of piles, hammers, and the physical
environment in which the activity takes place. Reference source levels
for the planned project were determined using data for piles of similar
sizes, the same pile driving method as that planned for the project,
and at similar water depths. While the pile sizes and water depths
chosen as proxies do not exactly match those for the project, they are
the closest matches available, and it is assumed that the source levels
shown in Tables 5, 6, and 7 and are the most representative for each
pile type and associated pile driving method.
The Navy analyzed source level values associated with a number of
projects involving impact driving of steel H-piles to approximate
environmental conditions and driving parameters at the Shipyard
(Caltrans 2015). Data from pertinent projects were used to obtain
average SEL and rms values for H pile impact installation. To be sure
all values were relevant to the site, the Navy eliminated all piles in
waters greater than 5 m, as well as all readings measured at ranges
greater than 10 m. The Navy used all H piles for which the diameter was
not specified as well as the 14 to 15-inch H piles, converted the dB
measurements to a linear scale before averaging, and re-converted the
average measurements to the appropriate dB units. Piles driven at this
project site will be driven in 0-11 feet of water (0-3.4 m). During low
tide, piles will essentially be driven in the dry. This varies
drastically from other Navy projects on the east coast, such as at the
Naval Submarine Base New London, where 14-inch H piles will be driven
in water depths of 25 feet (7.62 m). Results are shown in Table 5.
Table 5--Source Levels for In-Water Impact Hammer 14-inch Steel H-Type (Sister) Piles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water depth Distance
Pile size and type (m) measured (m) Peak RMS (dB) SEL (dB)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15-inch steel H pile............ 2-3 10 187 164 154
15-inch steel H pile............ 2-3 10 180 165 155
15-inch steel H pile............ 2-3 10 194 177 170
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0.5-2 10 172 160 147
14-inch steel H pile............ 1-5 10 205 184 174
14-inch steel H pile............ 1-5 10 206 182 172
14-inch steel H pile............ 1-5 10 206 184 174
14-inch steel H pile............ 1-5 10 210 190 180
14-inch steel H pile............ 1-5 10 212 192 182
14-inch steel H pile............ 1-5 10 210 189 179
14-inch steel H pile............ 1-5 10 212 190 180
14-inch steel H pile............ 1-5 10 205 190 180
14-inch steel H pile............ 1-5 10 207 187 177
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 151 142
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 154 144
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 170 159
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 147 136
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 147 136
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 150 143
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 153 142
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 151 142
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 156 146
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 172 162
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 161 150
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 155 145
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 163 152
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 178 145
Unspecified steel H pile........ 0-0.9 10 .............. 165 154
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Averages .............. 200.4 181.4 171.3 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Caltrans 2015
[[Page 3325]]
While the average rms value is 181.4, the Navy rounded up to 182 dB
rms to be conservative. Navy rounded up to 182 from 181.4 to be
conservative since not all proxy projects listed had RMS values in the
source documents. However, SEL values were available for each proxy
project so these calculations are expected to be more accurate,
eliminating the need to conservatively round up the 171.3 dB SEL
resulting in a value of 171 dB SEL using standard rounding.
Table 6 shows the source levels that were utilized to calculate
isopleths for vibratory driving of 25-inch steel sheet piles, and 15-
inch timber piles. An average value of 163 dB rms at 10 m was used for
24-inch AZ steel sheet and 150 dB rms at 16 m for 15-inch timber pile.
For Year 1 work at the Shipyard Berth 11 the contractor has obtained
initial acoustic readings associated with vibratory driving of 14'' H-
Pile of 148 dB rms at 10 m. Additional details are found in Appendix A
in the application. NMFS will use 148 dB at 10 m as the source level
since it is site-specific and more conservative than the 145 dB value
depicted in Caltrans 2015.
Table 6--Source Levels for In-Water Vibratory Hammer 24-Inch Steel Sheet Piles, and 15-Inch Timber Piles
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance
Pile size and pile type Water depth measured Peak (dB) RMS (dB) SEL (dB) Location
(m) (m)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-inch AZ Steel Sheet \1\... 15 10 177 163 162 Berth 23, Port
of Oakland, CA.
24-inch AZ Steel Sheet \1\... 15 10 175 162 162 Berth 30, Port
of Oakland, CA.
24-inch AZ Steel Sheet \1\... 15 10 177 163 163 Berth 35/37 Port
of Oakland, CA.
24-inch AZ Steel Sheet-- 15 10 175 160 160 CA (Specific
Typical \1\. location
unknown).
24-inch AZ Steel Sheet-- 15 10 182 165 165 CA (Specific
Loudest \1\. location
unknown).
24-inch AZ Steel Sheet 15 10 178 163 163 CA (Specific
(Average) \1\. location
unknown).
15-inch Timber Pile \2\...... 10 16 164 150 ........... WSF Port
Townsend Ferry
Terminal, WA.
14-inch H-type Pile \3\...... 6 10 155 148 145 CA (Specific
location
unknown).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source:
\1\ ICF Jones & Stokes and Illingsworth & Rodkin 2012.
\2\ WSDOT 2010.
\3\ CALTRANS 2015.
Using the data presented in Table 6 and Table 7, underwater sound
levels were estimated using the practical spreading model to determine
over what distance the thresholds would be exceeded.
Drilling is considered a continuous, non-impulsive noise source,
similar to vibratory pile driving. Very little information is available
regarding source levels of in-water drilling activities associated with
nearshore pile installation such as that planned for the Berths 11, 12,
and 13 structural repairs project. Dazey et al. (2012) attempted to
characterize the source levels of several marine pile-drilling
activities. One such activity was auger drilling (including
installation and removal of the associated steel casing). Auger
drilling will be employed as part of the Shipyard Project. The average
sound pressure levels re 1 [mu]Pa rms were displayed for casing
installation, auger drilling (inside the casing), and casing removal.
For the purposes of this plan, it is assumed that the casing
installation and removal activities would be conducted in a manner
similar to that described in Dazey et al. (2012), primarily via
oscillation. These average source levels are reported in Table 7.
Table 7--Average Source Levels for Auger Drilling Activities During Pile Installation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water depth Distance
Drilling activity (m) measured (m) RMS (dB) Location
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Casing Installation...................... 1-5 1 157 Bechers Bay Santa Rosa Island, CA.
Auger Drilling........................... 1-5 1 151 Bechers Bay Santa Rosa Island, CA.
Casing Removal........................... 1-5 1 152 Bechers Bay Santa Rosa Island, CA.
Average Drilling Activity................ 1-5 1 154 .............................................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Dazey et al., 2012.
Note: All source levels are referenced to 1 microPascal (re 1 [mu]Pa).
IHA applications for other construction projects have reported
that, due to a lack of information regarding pile drilling source
levels, it is generally assumed that pile drilling would produce less
in-water noise than both impact and vibratory pile driving. Based on
the general lack of information about these activities and the
assumption that in-water noise from pile drilling would be less than
either impact or vibratory pile driving, it is assumed that the source
levels presented in Table 7 are the most applicable for acoustic impact
analysis at Berths 11, 12, and 13. For the purposes of this IHA,
however, we will conservatively assume that drilling has identical
source levels to vibratory driving when calculating zones of influence.
This includes instances where drilling is underway in the absence of
any concurrent driving.
As part of Year 2 activities, concurrent work utilizing a vibratory
hammer during drilling operations is possible. This potential
concurrent activity could occur during installation of the rock sockets
for approximately 16 days. The vibratory hammer may be working to
install SOE sheets or H-Pile as the drilling work is being conducted.
Under concurrent driving conditions, the Navy will use the larger of
the two source level values to calculate size of entire ensonified
area. Since the vibratory source level is greater than the level
associated with drilling, it will be utilized.
With limited source level data available for vibratory pile
extraction of 25-inch steel sheet piles, NMFS used the same values for
both vibratory installation and extraction assuming that the two
activities would produce
[[Page 3326]]
similar source levels if water depth, pile size, and equipment remain
constant.
When NMFS Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in recognition
of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more technically
challenging to predict because of the duration component in the new
thresholds, an User Spreadsheet was developed that includes tools to
help predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with
marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that
because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for
these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going
to be overestimates of some degree, which will result in some degree of
overestimate of Level A take. However, these tools offer the best way
to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D modeling
methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways to
quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address the
output where appropriate. For stationary sources pile driving, NMFS
User Spreadsheet predicts the closest distance at which, if a marine
mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the activity, it
would not incur PTS. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet and the
resulting isopleths are reported below in Table 8 and Table 9.
Table 8--User Spreadsheet Input for Level A Isopleth PTS Calculations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25'' Steel Sheet
User Spreadsheet Input 14'' Steel H impact 14'' Steel vibro 15'' Timber vibro vibro Drilling
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spreadsheet Tab Used............... E.1) Impact pile A) Non-Impulsive, A) Non-Impulsive, A) Non-Impulsive, A) Non-Impulsive,
driving. Stationary, Stationary, Stationary, Stationary,
Continuous. Continuous. Continuous. Continuous.
Source Level (Single Strike/shot 171 SEL............... 148 rms............... 150 rms.............. 163.................. 154 rms.
SEL).
Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz).. 2..................... 2.5................... 2.5.................. 2.5.................. 2.5.
Number of strikes per pile......... 160................... NA.................... NA................... NA................... NA.
Activity duration within 24-h 4 piles............... 4 hours............... 4 hours.............. 4 hours.............. 8 hours.
period OR number of piles per day.
Propagation (xLogR)................ 15LogR................ 15LogR................ 15LogR............... 15LogR............... 15LogR.
Distance of source level 10.................... 10.................... 16................... 10................... 10.
measurement (meters)+.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 9--User Spreadsheet Output for Level A Isopleth and Ensonified
Area PTS Calculations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS Isopleth
----------------------------------------
Source Type High- Frequency
Cetaceans Phocid Pinnipeds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14'' Steel H Impact............ 140 m.............. 63 m.
14'' Steel Vibro............... 3.5 m.............. 1.4 m.
15'' Timber Vibro.............. 7.5 m.............. 1.9 m.
25'' Steel Sheet Vibro......... 34.6 m............. 14.2 m.
Drilling (8 hours/day) within 54.9 m............. 22.6 m.
Shutdown Zone * utilizing 163
dB rms value.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daily Ensonified Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14'' Steel H Impact............ 0.0615 km\2\....... 0.0125 km\2\.
14'' Steel H Vibro............. 38.46 m\2\......... 6.15 m\2\.
15'' Timber Vibro.............. 179.9 m\2\......... 11.33 m\2\.
25'' Steel Sheet Vibro......... 0.0038 km\2\....... 0.00062 km\2\.
Drilling (8 hours/day) within 0.0095 km\2\....... 0.0016 km\2\.
Shutdown Zone * utilizing 163
dB rms value.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* While 154 dB rms is shown for drilling activity source level, take
estimates and calculation of the ensonified area have been based on
163 dB rms (vibratory drilling) as these activities may run
concurrently.
Using the same source level and transmission loss inputs discussed
in the Level A isopleths section above, the Level B distance was
calculated for both impact and vibratory driving (Table 10). The
attenuation distance for impact hammer use associated with the
installation of the sister pile/support pile with a source level of 182
dB rms resulted in an isopleth of 293 meters (m). The attenuation
distance for vibratory hammer use with a source level of 163 dB rms
resulted in an isopleth of 7.35 kilometers (km). The Level B area
associated with the 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) isopleth for vibratory
driving and which is used in the take calculations is 0.9445 square
kilometers (km\2\). Note that these attenuation distances are based on
sound characteristics in open water. The project area is located in a
river surrounded by topographic features. Therefore, the actual
attenuation distances are constrained by numerous land features and
islands. As such, the maximum distance for the Level B isopleth during
vibratory driving and drilling is approximately 1.4 km.
[[Page 3327]]
Table 10--Pile-Driving Sound Exposure Distances (In-Water) Level B Zone of Influence
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Behavioral thresholds
Drilling activity for cetaceans and Propagation model Attenuation distance to
pinnipeds threshold
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Hammer................... 120 dB rms............ Practical Spreading 7.35 km (4.57 mi).
Loss.
Impact Hammer (rms)................ 160 dB rms............ Practical Spreading 293 m (961 ft).
Loss.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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. For all species, the best scientific information
available was considered for use in the marine mammal take assessment
calculations. Density information was taken from the Navy Marine Mammal
Density Database as shown in Table 11. (Craine 2015; Krause 2015).
These data are generally used for broad-scale offshore activities;
however, due to a lack of any other data within the general project
area, these data are presented as the best available data for the
Piscataqua River.
Table 11--Marine Mammal Species Potentially Present in the Piscataqua River Near the Shipyard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approximate density in the vicinity of the
Relative Season(s) of project area (individuals per km\2\) \1\
Species occurrence in occurrence -------------------------------------------
Piscataqua River Winter Spring Summer Fall
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor Porpoise Gulf of Maine/ Occasional use... Spring to Fall 1.2122 1.1705 0.7903 0.9125
Bay of Fundy stock. (April to
December) \2\.
Gray Seal Western North Common........... Year-round....... 0.2202 0.2202 0.2202 0.2202
Atlantic stock.
Harbor Seal Western North Common........... Year-round....... 0.1998 0.1998 0.1998 0.1998
Atlantic stock.
Harp Seal Western North Rare............. Winter to Spring 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125
Atlantic stock. (January-May).
Hooded Seal Western North Rare............. Winter to Spring N/A N/A N/A N/A
Atlantic stock. (January-May).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\1\ Density data are taken from the Navy Marine Species Density Database (Crain 2015; Krause 2015).
\2\ Densities shown for all seasons, even when species are unlikely to occur in the river.
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate.
The following assumptions are made when estimating potential
incidences of take:
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-h period;
While up to 16 days of concurrent driving/drilling could
occur, NMFS will conservatively assume that there are zero (0) days
resulting in a total of 100 pile driving/drilling days; and
Exposures to sound levels at or above the relevant
thresholds equate to take, as defined by the MMPA.
In this case, the estimation of marine mammal takes uses the
following calculation:
Exposure estimate = n * ZOI * days of total activity
Where:
n = density estimate used for each species/season.
ZOI = sound threshold ZOI area; the area encompassed by all
locations where the SPLs equal or exceed the threshold being
evaluated.
The ZOI impact area is estimated using the relevant distances in
Table 9 and Table 10, assuming that sound radiates from a central point
in the water column at project site and taking into consideration the
possible affected area due to topographical constraints of the action
area (i.e., radial distances to thresholds are not always reached) as
shown in Figure 6-1 in the application.
There are a several reasons why estimates of potential incidents of
take may be conservative, assuming that available density and estimated
ZOI areas are accurate. We assume, in the absence of information
supporting a more refined conclusion, that the output of the
calculation represents the number of individuals that may be taken by
the specified activity. In fact, in the context of stationary
activities such as pile driving and in areas where resident animals may
be present, this number more realistically represents the number of
incidents of take that may accrue to a smaller number of individuals.
While pile driving can occur any day throughout the period of validity,
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. 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.
Harbor Porpoise
Harbor porpoises may be present in the project area year-round.
Based on density data from the Navy Marine Species Density Database,
their presence is highest in winter and spring, decreases in summer,
and slightly increases in fall. However, in general, porpoises are
known to occasionally occur in the river. Average density for the
predicted seasons of occurrence was used to determine abundance of
animals that could be present in the area for exposure, using the
equation abundance = n * ZOI. Estimated abundance estimate for harbor
porpoises was 0.96 animals generated from the equation (0.9445 km\2\
Level B ensonified area *1.02 animals/km\2\). The number of Level B
harbor porpoise exposures within the ZOIs is (100 days * 0.96
[[Page 3328]]
animals/day) is 96. Therefore, NMFS authorizes 96 Level B takes of
harbor porpoise.
The injury zone for harbor porpoise was calculated to extend to a
radius of 140 m from impact driven piles and a maximum of 55 m from
vibratory or drilling activity. A 75 m shutdown zone is planned (see
``Mitigation''); therefore, the area between the 75 m and 140 m
isopleths is where Level A take may occur during impact hammer use. The
area of the 75 m shutdown zone was subtracted from the full Level A
injury zone to obtain the Level A take zone of 0.0132 km\2\. The
density of harbor porpoises is estimated at 1.02 harbor porpoises/
km\2\. Using the density of harbor porpoises potentially present (1.02
animal/km\2\) and the area of the Level A take zone, less than one
(0.1218 mammals) harbor porpoise a day was estimated to be exposed to
injury over the nine days of impact pile driving. In the Federal
Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 56791; November 30, 2017),
NMFS had proposed to authorize a single Level A take of harbor
porpoise. However, as part of the monitoring requirements under the
existing IHA, the Navy observed two harbor porpoises traveling together
in August 2017. In order to avoid shutdown and delay associated with
exceeding take limits, NMFS will authorize the Level A take of two
harbor porpoises.
Harbor Seal
Harbor seals may be present year-round in the project vicinity,
with constant densities throughout the year. Based on local anecdotal
data, harbor seals are the most common pinniped in the Piscataqua River
near the Shipyard. Average density for the predicted seasons of
occurrence was used to determine abundance of animals that could be
present in the area for exposure, using the equation abundance = n *
ZOI. Abundance for harbor seals were 0.19/day. (Average year-round
density = 0.1998). Therefore, Level B harbor seal exposures within the
ZOI is (100 days * 0.19 animals/day) would be up to 19 Level B
exposures of harbor seals within the ZOI. As described above in the
gray seal section, however, the modeling of estimated takes may be
underestimated. The data from the preliminary monitoring report
indicated 120 re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) Level B exposures of harbor seals over
73 work days resulting in 1.64 takes per day (120 takes/73 days).
Therefore, NMFS is proposing to authorize 164 Level B harbor seal takes
(1.64 takes/day * 100 days).
The injury zone for harbor seals was calculated to extend a radius
of 63 m from impact driven piles and 14m for vibratory hammer use. The
injury zone for drilling activity is estimated at 23 m. The Level A
injury zone is within the shutdown zone, therefore no injurious takes
of harbor seals are estimated to occur. However, as stated above for
the gray seal take request, this may be an underestimate. The Navy has
requested four Level A takes of harbor seal to coincide with the same
number of Level A takes requested in Year 1. Preliminary monitoring
report results support authorization of Level A take as one harbor seal
was detected within 50 m of drilling activity. Therefore, NMFS is
conservatively proposing four Level A takes of harbor seals so that
operations will not have to be suspended due to exceeding authorized
Level A takes.
Gray Seal
Gray seals are less common in the Piscataqua River than the harbor
seal. Average density for the predicted seasons of occurrence was used
to determine abundance of animals that could be present in the area for
exposure, using the equation abundance = n * ZOI. The estimated
abundance for gray seals is 0.21/day (average year-round density =
0.2202). Therefore, the number of Level B gray seal exposures within
the ZOI is (100 days * 0.21 animals/day) resulting in up to 21 Level B
exposures of gray seals within the ZOI.
However, current monitoring data indicate that this could be an
underestimate. While there could be 21 Level B and 0 Level A takes for
gray seal during construction activity monitoring of the zones,
observations of gray seals have shown 18 Level B exposures over 73 days
of activity through October 27, 2017. This comes out to 0.246 exposures
per day (18/73 = 0.246). Therefore, the Navy has requested and NMFS is
proposing to authorize 25 gray seal takes (0.246 takes/day * 100 days)
under the IHA.
The injury zone for gray seals was calculated to extend to a radius
of 63m for impact driven piles and 14m for vibratory hammer use. The
injury zone for drilling is estimated at 23m from the activity. The
injury zone for impact, vibratory and drilling activity remains within
the shutdown zone of 75m for impact hammer use and 55 m for vibratory
driving and drilling (see ``Mitigation''). These zones were utilized
during Year 1. Based on these calculations and continued implementation
of the shutdown zones, no injurious takes of gray seals are estimated
to occur. The Navy, however, requests authorization of two Level A
takes of gray seal to coincide with the same number of Level A takes
requested in Year 1. This is partially supported by data collected in
the preliminary Year 1 IHA monitoring report in which observers
recorded one gray seal within 50 m of drilling activity. Because
animals were observed within the shutdown zone during Year 1, NMFS is
conservatively proposing authorization of two Level A gray seal takes,
so that operations will not have to be suspended if animals
unexpectedly occur in the Level A zones.
Harp Seal
Harp seals may be present in the project vicinity during the winter
and spring, from January through February. In general, harp seals are
much rarer than the harbor seal and gray seal in the Piscataqua River.
These animals are conservatively assumed to be present within the
underwater Level B ZOI during each day of in-water pile driving.
Average density for the predicted seasons of occurrence was used to
determine abundance of animals that could be present in the area for
exposure, using the equation abundance = n * ZOI. Abundance for harp
seals was 0.014/day (average year-round density = 0.0125). The number
of Level B harp seal exposures within the ZOI is (100 days * 0.0125
animals/day) resulting in approximately 1 Level B exposure. In the
Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 56791; November 30,
2017), NMFS had proposed to authorize a single Level B take of harp
seal. Although rare, harp seals have been known to occur in this area.
Therefore, in order to avoid shutdown and delay associated with
exceeding take limits, NMFS will authorize the Level B take of five
harp seals. This conservatively assumes that one harp seal could be
taken during each of the five months that construction activities would
take place.
The injury zone for harp seals was calculated to extend a radius of
63 m from impact driven piles and 14 m for vibratory hammer use. The
injury zone for drilling is estimated at 23 m from the activity. These
isopleths are within the shutdown zones and NMFS. Therefore, no Level A
take is authorized as shown in Table 13.
Hooded Seal
In the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (82 FR 56791;
November 30, 2017), NMFS did not propose to authorize take of any
hooded seals. This was based on the fact that hooded seals are rare in
this area and none were recorded under the 2017 IHA monitoring
requirements. In general, hooded seals are much rarer than the
[[Page 3329]]
harbor seal and gray seal in the Piscataqua River. Anecdotal sighting
information indicates that two hooded seals were observed from the
Shipyard in August 2009, but no other observations have been recorded.
Information on the average density for hooded seals was not available.
In order to guard against unauthorized take of hooded seals, NMFS will
authorize the Level B take of five hooded seals. This conservatively
assumes that during each of the five months of construction one hooded
seal could be taken by Level B harassment.
The injury zone for hooded seals was calculated to extend a radius
of 63m from impact driven piles and 14m for vibratory hammer use. The
injury zone for drilling is estimated at 23 m from the activity. As
shown in Table 13, these isopleths are within the shutdown zones and,
therefore, no Level A take is authorized.
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses (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 consider 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.
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as
planned); the likelihood of effective implementation (probability
implemented as planned); and
(2) the practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost and impact on
operations.
Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
The mitigation strategies described below are similar to those
required and implemented under the first IHA associated with this
project. In addition to the measures described later in this section,
the Navy would conduct briefings between construction supervisors and
crews, marine mammal monitoring team, and Navy 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.
The following measures would apply to the Navy's mitigation through
shutdown and disturbance zones:
Time Restrictions--Pile driving/removal (vibratory as well as
impact) will only be conducted during daylight hours so that marine
mammals can be adequately monitored to determine if mitigation measures
are to be implemented.
Establishment of Shutdown zone--During pile driving and removal,
shutdown zones shall be established to prevent injury to marine mammals
as determined under acoustic injury thresholds. During all pile driving
and removal activities, regardless of predicted sound pressure levels
(SPLs), the entire shutdown zone will be monitored to prevent injury to
marine mammals from their physical interaction with construction
equipment during in-water activities. The shutdown zone during impact
driving will extend to 75 m for all authorized species. The shutdown
during vibratory driving and drilling will extend to 55 m for all
authorized species. Pile driving and removal operations will cease if a
marine mammal approaches the shutdown zone. Pile driving and removal
operations will restart once the marine mammal is visibly seen leaving
the zone or after 15 minutes have passed with no sightings.
Establishment of Level A Harassment Zone--The Level A harassment
zone is an area where animals may be exposed to sound levels that could
result in PTS injury. The primary purpose of the Level A zone is
monitoring for documenting incidents of Level A harassment. The Level A
zones will extend from the 75 m shutdown zone out to 140 m for harbor
porpoises. Animals observed in the Level A harassment zone will be
recorded as potential Level A takes.
Establishment of Disturbance/Level B Harassment Zone--During pile
driving and removal, the Level B zone shall include areas where the
underwater SPLs are anticipated to equal or exceed the Level B
harassment criteria for marine mammals (160 dB rms isopleths for impact
pile driving, 120 re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) isopleth for vibratory pile-driving
and drilling). The Level B zone will extend out to 293 m for impact
driving and 7.35 km during vibratory driving and drilling and will
include all waters in the sight line of the driving or drilling
operation not constrained by land.
Shutdown Zone During Other In-water Construction or Demolition
Activities--During all in-water construction or demolition activities
having the potential to affect marine mammals, in order to prevent
injury from physical interaction with construction equipment, a
shutdown zone 10 m will be implemented to ensure marine mammals are not
present within this zone. These activities could include, but are not
limited to: (1) The movement of a barge to the construction site, or
(2) the removal of a pile from the water column/substrate via a crane
(i.e., a ``dead pull'').
Soft Start for Impact Pile Driving--The use of a soft-start
procedure is believed to provide additional protection to marine
mammals by providing a warning and/or giving marine mammals a chance to
leave the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity. The
project will use soft-start techniques recommended by NMFS for impact
pile driving. Soft start must be conducted at beginning of day's
activity and at any time impact pile driving has ceased for more than
30 minutes. If an impact hammer is used, contractors are required to
provide an initial set of three strikes from the impact hammer at 40
percent energy, followed by a 1-minute waiting period, then two
subsequent 3-strike sets.
Monitoring Protocols--Monitoring would be conducted before, during,
and after pile driving activities. In addition, observers shall record
all incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from
activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with
distance from piles being driven. Observations made outside the
shutdown zone will not result in shutdown; 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 15
[[Page 3330]]
minutes prior to initiation through 30 minutes post-completion of pile
driving activities.
Monitoring will be conducted by one marine mammal observer (MMO) on
one-third of driving days who will monitor the Level A harassment and
shutdown zone during all pile-driving operations. Two MMOs shall
monitor the Level A, Level B, and shutdown zones during two-thirds of
pile-driving days. The Navy will extrapolate data collected by two MMOs
during two-thirds of monitoring days and calculate total Level B take
for all pile-driving days.
Prior to the start of pile driving activity, the shutdown zone will
be monitored for 15 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 when the entire shutdown zone is visible
(i.e., when not obscured by dark, rain, fog, etc.).
Drilling/pile driving activity shall not be conducted when weather/
observer conditions do not allow for adequate sighting of marine
mammals. In the unlikely event of conditions that prevent the visual
detection of marine mammals, such as heavy fog, activities with the
potential to result in Level A or Level B harassment will not be
initiated. Impact pile driving already underway would be curtailed, but
vibratory driving may continue if driving has already been initiated on
a given pile. Driving of additional piles by any means will not be
allowed until all zones are visible. However, in the event of an unsafe
work environment if conditions prevent detection of marine mammals
during impact pile driving and the pile currently being driven is not
stable enough for activities to cease, impact pile driving would
continue to get the single pile to stability.
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 the animal has voluntarily left and been visually
confirmed beyond the shutdown zone or 15 minutes have passed.
Monitoring will be conducted throughout the time required to drive a
pile and for 30 minutes following the conclusion of pile driving.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures NMFS
has determined that the required mitigation measures provide the means
effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well
as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density);
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks;
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat); and
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Previous Monitoring Report
The Navy submitted a preliminary monitoring report covering the
period between April 18, 2017 and October 27, 2017. This period does
not cover all pile driving activities. Therefore, the Navy will submit
a final report after the authorization period ends. During this period,
piles were installed using vibratory hammer, the impact hammer, and
drilling. Work was conducted over 73 days. Drilling has accounted for
98.8% of the total noise-generating time spent on installation/
extraction activities at the Shipyard; vibratory activity occurred
during 1% of the total time; and impact driving took place <1% of the
total time. During this time, observers noted 142 occurrences of marine
mammals within designated zones, with all but one occurring within the
Level B harassment zone as shown in Table 12. Monitoring of all zones
occurred on every drilling day.
Table 12--Summary of 2017 Takes Through October 28, 2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A Level B
Species ---------------------------------------------------------------
Actual Authorized Actual Authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor porpoise................................. 0 10 3 160
Harbor seal..................................... 1 4 120 312
Gray seal....................................... 0 2 18 156
Harp seal....................................... 0 0 0 5
Hooded seal..................................... 0 0 0 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 3331]]
Visual Monitoring
The Navy will be required to conduct visual marine mammal
monitoring during pile driving activities. Observers shall record all
incidents of marine mammal occurrence, regardless of distance from
activity, and shall document any behavioral reactions in concert with
distance from piles being driven or removed. 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.
A minimum of two MMOs will be on location during all pile driving
activities. They will be placed at the best vantage point(s)
practicable. MMOs may be stationed on an elevated platform. MMOs will
monitor for marine mammals and implement shutdown/delay procedures when
applicable by calling for the shutdown to equipment operators. MMOs
will scan the waters within each monitoring zone activity using big-eye
binoculars, hand held binoculars, spotting scopes and visual
observation. Monitoring distances will be measured with range finders
and bearing to animals shall be determined using a compass.
The observers will be trained on the observation zones, potential
species, how to observe, and how to fill out the data sheets by the
Navy Natural Resources Manager prior to any pile-driving activities.
The supervisory observer will be a trained biologist; additional
observers will be trained by that supervisor as needed.
Shutdown and Level A zones must be monitored at all times by one
MMO with no other duties or responsibilities. A second MMO will be
required to monitor Level B zones on two-thirds of driving days. The
following additional measures apply to visual monitoring during all
pile driving activities
Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel)
are required;
At least one observer must have prior experience working
as an observer;
Other observers (that do not have prior experience) may
substitute education (undergraduate degree in biological science or
related field) or training for experience;
NMFS will require submission and approval of observer
resumes.
Qualified observers are trained biologists with the following
minimum qualifications:
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;
Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
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
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.
A draft marine mammal monitoring report will be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal
activities or 60 days prior to the issuance of any subsequent IHA for
this project, whichever comes first. It will include an overall
description of work completed, a narrative regarding marine mammal
sightings, and associated marine mammal observation data sheets, and
extrapolated Level B take counts. Specifically, the report must
include:
Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;
Sediment characteristics/type;
Construction activities occurring during each observation
period;
Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);
Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);
Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of
marine mammals;
Description of any observable marine mammal behavior
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from
pile driving activity;
Distance from pile driving activities to marine mammals
and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
Locations of all marine mammal observations; and
Other human activity in the area.
If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft
final report will constitute the final report. If comments are
received, a final report addressing NMFS comments must be submitted
within 30 days after receipt of comments.
In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the IHA
(if issued), such as serious injury or mortality, the Navy will
immediately cease the specified activities and report the incident to
the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, and the Northeast/Greater Atlantic Regional Stranding
Coordinator. The report would include the following information:
Description of the incident;
Environmental conditions (e.g., Beaufort sea state,
visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS would work with the Navy to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. The Navy would not be able
to resume their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or
telephone.
In the event that the Navy discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead MMO determines that the cause of the injury or
death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (e.g., in less than
a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph),
the Navy would immediately report the incident to the Chief of the
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the Northeast/Greater Atlantic Regional Stranding Coordinator. The
report would include the same information identified in the paragraph
above. Activities would be able to continue while NMFS reviews the
circumstances of the incident. NMFS would work with the Navy to
determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.
In the event that the Navy discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal and the lead MMO determines that the injury or death is not
associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA
(e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced
decomposition, or scavenger damage), the Navy would report the incident
to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Northeast/Greater Atlantic Regional
Stranding Coordinator within 24 hours of the discovery. The Navy would
provide photographs, video footage (if
[[Page 3332]]
available) or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to
NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network.
Hydroacoustic Monitoring
The Navy will continue to implement its in situ acoustic monitoring
efforts in 2018. Specifically, data would be collected during vibratory
installation of 20 sheet piles and impact installation of 4 H-piles,
during drilling activities on one day, and during one day of drilling
with concurrent vibratory driving. However, concurrent activity is so
infrequent it is not likely to occur for a full day. Navy shall measure
sound intensity at 10 m from the source pile, at the modeled limits of
the Level A and Level B zones, and at intermediate points between 10m
and the 160 dB and 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) isopleths. For all piles
required to be monitored, 100 percent of the data from each pile will
be analyzed and included in the reported results, including ``soft
starts'' of impact hammers. For each combination of pile type and
hammer, the monitoring locations will be chosen to maximize coverage of
the ZOI based on the number of piles scheduled for monitoring for a
given timeframe. See the Navy's Acoustic Monitoring Plan for additional
information. A final report shall be submitted to NMFS within 30 days
of completing the verification monitoring. Results from the 2017
Hydroacoustic Monitoring Report may be found in Appendix A of the
application. Data from the 2017 and 2018 hydroacoustic monitoring
reports may be used to revise isopleths delineating harassment zones.
Any revisions would be subject to NMFS' review and approval.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering 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).
Pile driving, pile extraction and drilling activities associated
with the Navy project have the potential to injure, disturb or displace
marine mammals. Specifically, the planned activities may result in
Level B harassment (behavioral disturbance) for all species authorized
for take from underwater sound generated during pile driving. Level A
harassment in the form of PTS may also occur to limited numbers of
three marine mammal species. Potential takes could occur if individuals
of these species are present in the ensonified zone when pile driving
and removal occurs.
No 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 driving and drilling will
be the primary methods of installation (impact driving will occur for
only 1.5 hours over 84-100 days). During impact driving, 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.
Conditions at the Shipyard offer MMOs clear views of the shutdown
zones, enabling a high rate of success in implementation of shutdowns
to avoid injury.
The Navy's planned activities are highly localized. A small portion
of the Piscataqua River may be affected which is only a subset of the
ranges of species for which take is authorized. The project is not
expected to have significant adverse effects on marine mammal habitat.
No important feeding and/or reproductive areas for marine mammals are
known to be near the project area. Project-related 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, since the area of the habitat range utilized
by each species that may be affected is relatively small, the impacts
to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-
term negative consequences.
Exposures to elevated sound levels produced during pile driving
activities may cause behavioral responses by an animal, but they are
expected to be mild and temporary. 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). Most likely, individuals
will simply move away from the sound source and be temporarily
displaced from the areas of pile driving, although even this reaction
has been observed primarily only in association with impact pile
driving. These reactions and behavioral changes are expected to subside
quickly when the exposures cease. The pile driving activities analyzed
here are similar to, or less impactful than, numerous construction
activities conducted in other similar locations, which have taken place
with no reported injuries or mortality to marine mammals, and no known
long-term adverse consequences from behavioral harassment. Repeated
exposures of individuals to levels of sound that may cause Level B
harassment are unlikely to result in permanent hearing impairment or to
significantly disrupt foraging behavior. Level B harassment will be
reduced through use of mitigation measures described herein.
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 stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No mortality or serious injury is anticipated or
authorized;
The area of potential impacts is highly localized;
No adverse impacts to marine mammal habitat;
The absence of any significant habitat within the project
area, including rookeries, or known areas or
[[Page 3333]]
features of special significance for foraging or reproduction;
Anticipated incidences of Level A harassment would be in
the form of a small degree of PTS to a limited number of animals;
Anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist of, at
worst, temporary modifications in behavior;
Very few individuals are likely to be affected by project
activities (<0.01 percent of population for all authorized species);
and
The anticipated efficacy of the required mitigation
measures in reducing the effects of the specified activity.
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 required monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from
the construction activity will have a negligible impact on all affected
marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified
activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not
define small numbers and so, in practice, 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 13--Estimated Number of Exposures and Percentage of Stocks That May Be Subjected to Level A and Level B
Harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorized take Total Level A
Species -------------------------------- and Level B Population (%)
Level B Level A takes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor porpoise Gulf of Maine/Bay of 96 2 98 <0.01
Fundy stock.
Gray Seal Western North Atlantic 25 2 27 <0.01
stock.
Harbor Seal Western North Atlantic 164 4 168 <0.01
stock.
Harp Seal Western North Atlantic 5 0 5 <0.01
stock.
Hooded Seal Western North Atlantic 5 0 5 <0.01
stock.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 13 illustrates the number of animals that could be exposed to
Level A and Level B harassment from work associated with the waterfront
improvement project. The analysis provided indicates that authorized
takes account for <0.01 percent of the populations of the stocks that
could be affected. These are small numbers of marine mammals relative
to the sizes of the affected species and population stocks under
consideration.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned activity
(including the required 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.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
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.
No incidental take of ESA-listed species is authorized or expected
to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that
consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this
action.
National Environmental Policy Act
To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act 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 potential impacts
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 signed a Categorical Exclusion memo in
January 2018.
Authorization
NMFS has issued an IHA to the Navy for the potential harassment of
small numbers of five marine mammal species incidental to the
Waterfront Improvement Project at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in
Kittery, Maine, provided the previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring and reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: January 19, 2018.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-01306 Filed 1-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P