Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to U.S. Navy Pier Construction Activities at Naval Submarine Base New London, 16027-16043 [2018-07728]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
state law. For this reason, these
proposed actions:
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Are not Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
actions because SIP approvals and
redesignations are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Do not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Will not have disproportionate
human health or environmental effects
under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the proposed actions do not
have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), nor will it impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 2, 2018.
Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2018–07654 Filed 4–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63
[EPA–R06–OAR–2016–0091; FRL–9975–92–
Region 6]
New Source Performance Standards
and National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants; Delegation
of Authority to New Mexico
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The New Mexico
Environment Department (NMED has
submitted updated regulations for
receiving delegation and approval of a
program for the implementation and
enforcement of certain New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) and
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
all sources (both Title V and non-Title
V sources). These updated regulations
apply to certain NSPS promulgated by
the EPA at part 60, as amended between
September 24, 2013 and January 15,
2017; certain NESHAP promulgated by
the EPA at part 61, as amended between
January 1, 2011 and January 15, 2017;
and other NESHAP promulgated by the
EPA at part 63, as amended between
August 30, 2013 and January 15, 2017,
as adopted by the NMED. The
delegation of authority under this action
does not apply to sources located in
Bernalillo County, New Mexico or to
sources located in Indian Country. The
EPA is providing notice that it is
updating the delegation of certain NSPS
to NMED and proposing to approve the
delegation of certain NESHAP to NMED.
DATES: Written comments should be
received on or before May 14, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2016–0091, at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
barrett.richard@epa.gov. For additional
information on how to submit
comments see the detailed instructions
in the ADDRESSES section of the direct
final rule located in the rules section of
this issue of the Federal Register.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16027
Mr.
Rick Barrett (6MM–AP), (214) 665–7227;
email: barrett.richard@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
final rules section of this issue of the
Federal Register, the EPA is approving
NMED’s request for delegation of
authority to implement and enforce
certain NSPS and NESHAP for all
sources (both Title V and non-Title V
sources). NMED has adopted certain
NSPS and NESHAP by reference into
New Mexico’s state regulations. In
addition, the EPA is waiving certain
notification requirements required by
the delegated standards so that sources
will only need to notify and report to
NMED, thereby avoiding duplicative
notification and reporting to the EPA.
The EPA is taking direct final action
without prior proposal because the EPA
views this as a noncontroversial action
and anticipates no relevant adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no relevant adverse comments
are received in response to this action,
no further activity is contemplated. If
the EPA receives relevant adverse
comments, the direct final rule will be
withdrawn, and all public comments
received will be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Any
parties interested in commenting should
do so at this time.
For additional information, see the
direct final rule which is located in the
rules section of this issue of the Federal
Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dated: March 22, 2018.
Wren Stenger,
Director, Multimedia Division, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2018–07326 Filed 4–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 217
[Docket No. 170908887–8328–01]
RIN 0648–BH24
Taking and Importing Marine
Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals
Incidental to U.S. Navy Pier
Construction Activities at Naval
Submarine Base New London
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
16028
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Proposed rule; request for
comments and information.
ACTION:
NMFS has received a request
from the U.S. Navy (Navy) for
authorization to take marine mammals
incidental to the pier construction
activities conducted at the Naval
Submarine Base New London in Groton,
Connecticut, over the course of five
years (2018–2023). As required by the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA), NMFS is proposing
regulations to govern that take, and
requests comments on the proposed
regulations. NMFS will consider public
comments prior to making any final
decision on the issuance of the
requested MMPA authorization and
agency responses will be summarized in
the final notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than May 14, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by NOAA–NMFS–2018–0047,
by any of the following methods:
• Electronic submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal, Go to
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20180047, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
• Mail: Submit comments to Jolie
Harrison, Chief, Permits and
Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910–
3225.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender may
be publicly accessible. Do not submit
Confidential Business Information or
otherwise sensitive or protected
information. NMFS will accept
anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/A’’ in
the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous). Attachments to electronic
comments will be accepted in Microsoft
Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats
only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS; phone: (301) 427–
8401. Electronic copies of the
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
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:
Purpose and Need for Regulatory
Action
This proposed rule would establish a
framework under the authority of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) to allow
for the authorization of take of marine
mammals incidental to the Navy’s
construction activities related to marine
structure maintenance and pile
replacement at a facility in Groton,
Connecticut.
We received an application from the
Navy requesting five-year regulations
and authorization to take multiple
species of marine mammals. Take
would occur by Level A and Level B
harassment incidental to impact and
vibratory pile driving. Please see
‘‘Background’’ below for definitions of
harassment.
Legal Authority for the Proposed Action
Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA (16
U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(A)) directs the
Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon
request, the incidental, but not
intentional taking of small numbers of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region for up to five years
if, after notice and public comment, the
agency makes certain findings and
issues regulations that set forth
permissible methods of taking pursuant
to that activity and other means of
effecting the ‘‘least practicable adverse
impact’’ on the affected species or
stocks and their habitat (see the
discussion below in the ‘‘Proposed
Mitigation’’ section), as well as
monitoring and reporting requirements.
Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA and
the implementing regulations at 50 CFR
part 216, subpart I provide the legal
basis for issuing this proposed rule
containing five-year regulations, and for
any subsequent letters of authorization
(LOAs). As directed by this legal
authority, this proposed rule contains
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements.
Summary of Major Provisions Within
the Proposed Rule
Following is a summary of the major
provisions of this proposed rule
regarding Navy construction activities.
These measures include:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Required monitoring of the
construction areas to detect the presence
of marine mammals before beginning
construction activities.
• Shutdown of construction activities
under certain circumstances to avoid
injury of marine mammals.
• Soft start for impact pile driving to
allow marine mammals the opportunity
to leave the area prior to beginning
impact pile driving at full power.
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972,
as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et
seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce
(Secretary) to allow, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional taking of
marine mammals by U.S. citizens who
engage in a specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) if certain findings
are made and regulations are issued or,
if the taking is limited to harassment,
notice of a proposed authorization is
provided to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings
shall be granted if NMFS finds that the
taking will have a negligible impact on
the species or stock(s), will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
subsistence uses (where relevant), and if
the permissible methods of taking and
requirements pertaining to the
mitigation, monitoring and reporting of
such taking are set forth.
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact
resulting from the specified activity that
cannot be reasonably expected to, and is
not reasonably likely to, adversely affect
the species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
The MMPA states that the term ‘‘take’’
means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or
attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill
any marine mammal. Except with
respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, the MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’
as any act of pursuit, torment, or
annoyance which (i) has the potential to
injure a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild (Level A
harassment); or (ii) has the potential to
disturb a marine mammal or marine
mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration,
breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering (Level B harassment).
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
Issuance of an MMPA authorization
requires compliance with NEPA.
In accordance with NEPA (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative
Order (NAO) 216–6A, we have
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
preliminarily determined that issuance
of this rule and subsequent LOAs
qualifies to be categorically excluded
from further NEPA review. Issuance of
the rule is consistent with categories of
activities identified in CE B4 of the
Companion Manual and we have not
identified any extraordinary
circumstances listed in Chapter 4 of the
Companion Manual that would
preclude use of this categorical
exclusion. We will consider all public
comments prior to making a final
decision regarding application of CE B4.
We will review all comments
submitted in response to this notice as
we complete the NEPA process, prior to
making a final decision on the
incidental take authorization request.
Summary of Request
On March 22, 2017, NMFS received
an application from the Navy requesting
authorization to incidentally take harbor
and gray seals, by Level A and Level B
harassment, incidental to noise
exposure resulting from conducting pier
construction activities at the Navy
Submarine Base New London in Groton,
Connecticut, from October 2018 to
March 2022. These regulations would be
valid for a period of five years. On
August 31, 2017, NMFS deemed the
application adequate and complete.
The use of sound sources such as
those described in the application (e.g.,
piledriving) may result in the take of
marine mammals through disruption of
behavioral patterns or may cause
auditory injury of marine mammals.
Therefore, incidental take authorization
under the MMPA is warranted.
Description of the Specified Activity
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Overview
The Navy is planning to demolish
Pier 32 and Pier 10 and construct a new
Pier 32 at Naval Submarine Base New
London (SUBASE), Groton, Connecticut.
Recent Global Shore Infrastructure
Plans and Regional Shore Infrastructure
Plans identified a requirement for 11
adequate submarine berths at SUBASE.
There are currently six adequate berths
available via Piers 6, 17, and 31, leaving
a shortfall of five adequate berths. The
remaining submarine berthing piers (8,
10, 12, 32, and 33) are classified as
inadequate because of their narrow
width and short length compared to
current SSN (hull classification)
berthing design standards (Unified
Facilities Criteria 4–152–01, Design
Standards for Piers and Wharves).
The Proposed Action is to demolish
Pier 32 and Pier 10, and replace them
with a new Pier 32 that meets all current
Navy SSN pier standards to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
accommodate Virginia Class
submarines. The Proposed Action
includes:
• Construction of a new, larger Pier
32 to be located approximately 150 feet
(ft) north of the current location;
• Upgrade of the quaywall, north of
Pier 32, may be required to
accommodate a crane weight test area;
• Demolition of existing Pier 32 and
Pier 10;
• Dredging of the sediment mounds
beneath the existing Pier 32
(approximately 9,400 cubic yards [cy])
and the existing Pier 10 (approximately
10,000 cy) to a depth of 36 ft below
mean lower low water (¥36 ft MLLW)
plus 2 ft of over dredge (additional
dredge depth that allows for varying
degrees of accuracy of different types of
dredging equipment). Any remaining
timber piles beneath the existing piers
would be pulled with a strap;
• Dredging of the berthing areas
alongside the proposed new Pier 32
(approximately 74,000 sq ft) to a depth
of ¥38 feet MLLW plus 2 feet of over
dredge; and
• Dredging of two additional areas
(approximately 10,200 cy and 31,100 cy)
in the Thames River navigation channel
to a depth of ¥36 ft MLLW plus 2 ft of
over dredge.
Two species of marine mammals are
expected to potentially be present in the
Thames River near SUBASE: Harbor
seal (Phoca vitulina) and gray seal
(Halichoeris grypus). Harbor seals and
gray seals are more likely to occur at
SUBASE from September to May.
Dates and Duration
Pile installation for the new Pier 32
and pile removal associated with the
demolition of the existing Piers 32 and
10 is expected to take a total of
approximately 3.5 years. Construction
and demolition activities are expected
to begin in October 2018 and proceed to
completion in March 2022.
In-water activities expected to result
in incidental takes of marine mammals
would occur during approximately 35
non-consecutive months of the project
beginning in October 2018. The
estimated duration of pile installation
and removal, including duration of the
vibratory and impact hammer activities,
is provided in Table 1 below for each
year of construction and demolition.
Also included in the Table are the
durations for wood piles and steel
fender piles to be pulled by a crane
using a sling or strap attached to the
pile. The durations of proposed pile
driving/removal activities are primarily
derived from information provided by
Naval Facilities Engineering Command
(NAVFAC) Mid-Atlantic Public Works
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16029
Department, Facilities Engineering and
Acquisition Department (FEAD) Design
Manager and the record of pile driving
activities documented during the
construction of SUBASE Pier 31
(American Bridge 2010–2011). The
proposed new Pier 32 would be
comparable to Pier 31 in design and
location and would have similar subsurface geological conditions along this
reach of the Thames River.
Specified Geographical Region
SUBASE is located in the towns of
Groton and Ledyard in New London
County, Connecticut. SUBASE occupies
approximately 687 acres along the east
bank of the Thames River, 6 mi north of
the river’s mouth at Long Island Sound
(Figure 1–1 in LOA application). The
Thames River is the easternmost of
Connecticut’s three major rivers and is
formed by the confluence of the
Shetucket and Yantic rivers in Norwich,
from which it flows south for 12 mi to
New London Harbor. The Thames River
discharges freshwater and sediment
from the interior of eastern Connecticut
into Long Island Sound. It is the main
drainage of the Thames River Major
Drainage Basin, which encompasses
approximately 3,900 square mi of
eastern Connecticut and central
Massachusetts (USACE 2015). The
lower Thames River and New London
Harbor sustains a variety of military,
commercial, and recreational vessel
usage. New London Harbor provides
protection to a number of these.
Detailed Description of Specified
Activity
1. Construction of New Pier 32
Pile driving would most likely be
conducted using a barge and crane.
However, the contractor may choose to
use a temporary pile-supported work
trestle that would be constructed by
driving approximately 60 steel 14-inch
diameter H-piles.
Structural support piles for Pier 32
would consist of approximately 120
concrete-filled steel pipe piles
measuring 36 inches in diameter. The
piles would be driven between 40 ft
below the mudline near the shore and
150 ft below the mudline at the end of
the pier. Fender piles would also be
installed and would consist of
approximately 194 fiberglass-reinforced
plastic piles measuring 16 inches in
diameter.
Special construction features would
include drilling rock sockets into
bedrock in an estimated 60 places to
hold the piles. A rotary drill using a
rock core barrel and rock muck bucket
would be used inside of the steel pipe
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
16030
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
piles to drill a minimum of 2 ft down
into bedrock to create the rock socket
that would be filled with concrete.
Sediment would be lifted out and redeposited within 10 ft of the pipe pile
during rock socket drilling. Underwater
noise from the rock drill as it is operated
inside a steel pipe would be much less
than that produced by vibratory and
impact pile driving of the steel pipes
(Martin et al., 2012).
Impact and vibratory hammers would
be used for installing piles where rock
sockets are not required. Based on
previous construction projects at
SUBASE, it is estimated that an average
of one 36-inch pile per week (with
driving on multiple days) and two
plastic piles per day would be installed.
The per-pile drive time for each pile
type and method will vary based on
environmental conditions (including
substrate) where each pile is driven.
Impact or vibratory pile driving may
result in harassment of marine
mammals.
Construction of Pier 32 may also
require upgrade of the quaywall north of
Pier 32 to provide the reinforcement
needed to support a crane weight test
area. Because there is potential that a
work trestle would be used and the
requirement for the upgrade will not be
determined until final design, the pile
driving is included in the analyzed
activities. The quaywall upgrade would
include up to approximately eighteen
30-inch diameter concrete-filled steel
pipe piles that would be installed into
rock sockets driven into bedrock
adjacent and parallel to the existing
steel sheet pile wall. Pile caps and a
concrete deck would be installed above
the piles. A fender system composed of
approximately nine 16-inch diameter
plastic piles would also be installed into
rock sockets approximately 2 ft in front
of the new deck.
2. Demolition and Removal of Pier 32
and Pier 10
When the new Pier 32 is operational,
the existing Pier 32 would be
demolished using a floating crane and a
series of barges. Pier 10 would be
demolished after the demolition of
existing Pier 32. The concrete decks of
the piers would be cut into pieces and
placed on the barges. Demolition debris
would be sorted and removed by barge
and recycled to the maximum extent
practicable. Any residual waste would
be disposed of offsite in accordance
with applicable federal, state, and local
regulations. Once the decks are
removed, the steel H piles and pipe
piles that support the existing pier
would be pulled using a vibratory
extraction method (hammer). The
vibratory hammer would be attached to
the pile head with a clamp. Once
attached, vibration would be applied to
the pile that would liquefy the adjacent
sediment allowing the pile to be
removed.
Demolition of existing Pier 32 would
include the removal by vibratory driverextractor (hammer) of approximately 60
steel piles from the temporary work
trestle, 120 concrete-encased steel Hpiles, and 70 steel H-piles. Fifty-six
wood piles would be pulled with a
sling. Demolition of Pier 10 would
include the removal by vibratory
hammer of 24 concrete-encased, steel Hpiles and 166 cast-in-place, reinforced
concrete piles. Eighty-four steel fender
piles and 41 wood piles would be
pulled with a sling. A total of 440 piles
would be removed by vibratory hammer
for both piers and the work trestle.
3. Dredging of Pier Areas and
Navigation Channel
The Proposed Action would also
include dredging of approximately
60,000 cy of sediment in two areas of
the Thames River navigation channel
near Pier 32, the berthing areas
alongside the new Pier 32, and
underneath existing Pier 32 and Pier 10
after demolition. All dredging for the
Proposed Action would support safe
maneuvering for entry and departure of
submarines at the proposed new Pier 32
and existing Piers 8, 12, 17, and 31. The
proposed design dredge depth in all
areas to be dredged is ¥36 ft relative to
MLLW plus 2 ft of over dredge.
Dredging would be conducted in two
phases. Dredging of the new Pier 32 area
and the northern portion of the channel
dredge areas would be conducted in the
first construction year. The footprints of
the demolished Pier 32 and Pier 10 and
the southern portions of the channel
dredge areas would be dredged after
demolition of the existing piers in the
fourth year of construction. Dredging
would occur only during the period
between October 1 and January 31 to
avoid potential impacts on shellfish and
fisheries resources in the area. Each
dredging and disposal phase would take
approximately 2 weeks to complete.
After the demolition of Pier 32, any
remnant timber piles present
underneath existing Pier 32 would be
pulled with a strap. The sediment
mound that has formed beneath the pier
would be dredged (approximately 9,400
cy) to the design depth. Dredging would
also be required immediately west of
Piers 31 and 32 (approximately 10,200
cy) and along the eastern edge
(approximately 31,100 cy) of the
navigation channel to achieve the
required minimum depths to maneuver
the submarines. Once the existing Pier
10 and any remnant timber piles are
removed, the sediment mound beneath
the old pier would be dredged
(approximately 10,000 cy). Since
dredging and disposal activities would
be slow moving and conspicuous to
marine mammals, they pose negligible
risks of physical injury. An
environmental bucket would be used for
dredging to minimize turbidity
compared with the turbidity generated
by hydraulic dredging. Noise emitted by
dredging equipment is broadband, with
most energy below 1 kilohertz (kHz),
and would be similar to that generated
by vessels and maritime industrial
activities that regularly operate within
the action area (Clarke et al., 2002; Todd
et al., 2015). Due to the low noise output
and slow and steady transiting nature of
the dredging activity, NMFS does not
consider it would result to the level of
harassment under the MMPA.
Therefore, dredging is not considered
further in this document.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FOR THE NAVY SUBMARINE BASE NEW LONDON
Pile
number
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Activity
Pile type
Method
Piles/day
Total
driving
days
Strike
number
(impact) or
duration(s)
per pile
Duration
Year 1
Pier 32 construction
60
60
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14″ steel H-pile temp. work trestle.
36″ x 100′ concrete-filled steel
pipe piles.
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Impact ..........................................
4
15
Vibratory hammer & rock socket
drilling.
0.5
120
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
1,000 strikes ....
3 weeks.
1,200 seconds
6 months.
16031
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FOR THE NAVY SUBMARINE BASE NEW LONDON—Continued
Pile
number
Activity
20
20
Quaywall upgrade ..
18
9
Piles/day
Strike
number
(impact) or
duration(s)
per pile
Total
driving
days
Pile type
Method
36″ x 180′ concrete-filled steel
piles.
36″ x 180′ concrete-filled steel
piles.
30″ x 100′ concrete-filled steel
pipe piles.
16″ fiberglass reinforced plastic
piles.
Vibratory hammer ........................
0.2
100
Impact hammer to last 20–40 ft ..
2.5
Rock socket drilling .....................
Rock socket drilling .....................
Duration
1,800 seconds
5 months.
8
1,000 strikes ....
2 weeks.
0.5
36
15,000 seconds
Concurrent with
Pier 32.
0.5
18
7,500 seconds.
Vibratory hammer ........................
0.2
200
1,800 seconds
10 months.
Impact hammer to drive last 20–
40 ft.
2.5
16
1,000 strikes ....
3.5 weeks.
Vibratory hammer ........................
2
97
1,200 seconds
5 months.
Impact hammer to drive last 20–
40 ft.
2.5
26
1,000 strikes ....
1.5 months.
Vibratory hammer (removal) .......
5
14
1,200 seconds
3 weeks.
Vibratory hammer (removal) .......
2
12
1,200 seconds
3.5 months.
Vibratory hammer (removal) .......
2
48
1,200 seconds.
Vibratory hammer (removal) .......
Vibratory hammer (removal) .......
5
9.5
14
2.5
1,200 seconds.
1,200 seconds
0.5 month.
Vibratory hammer (removal) .......
9.5
17.5
1,200 seconds
0.5 month.
Year 2
Pier 32 construction
40
40
36″ x 180′ concrete-filled steel
piles.
36″ x 180′ concrete-filled steel
piles.
Year 3
Pier 32 construction
194
64
16″ fiberglass reinforced plastic
piles.
16″ fiberglass reinforced plastic
piles.
Year 4
Pier 32 demolition ..
60
24
96
Pier 10 demolition ..
70
24
166
14″ steel H-piles temp. work trestle.
33″ concrete-encased steel H
piles.
24″ concrete-encased steel H
piles.
14″ steel H piles ..........................
24″ concrete-encased steel H
piles.
24″ cast-in-place reinforced concrete piles.
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures are described in
detail later in this document (please see
‘‘Proposed Mitigation’’ and ‘‘Proposed
Monitoring and Reporting’’).
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of the Specified Activities
Marine mammal species that could be
present in the Study Area and their
associated stocks are presented in Table
2 along with an abundance estimate, an
associated coefficient of variation value,
and best/minimum abundance
estimates. There are other species of
marine mammals, including a number
of cetaceans, that are known to be
present in nearby Long Island Sound.
However, since received noise levels
from the project are not expected to
reach the mouth of the Thames River
due to geographical boundaries, these
species are excluded from further
discussion. The Navy proposes to take
individuals of harbor seal and gray seal
by Level A and B harassment incidental
to pier construction activities. Neither of
these marine mammal species is listed
as endangered or threatened under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Information on the status,
distribution, and abundance of these
seal species in the Study Area may be
viewed in the Navy’s LOA application.
Additional information on the general
biology and ecology of marine mammals
are included in the application. In
addition, NMFS annually publishes
Stock Assessment Reports (SARs) for all
marine mammals in U.S. EEZ waters,
including stocks that occur within the
Study Area—U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of
Mexico Marine Mammal Stock
Assessment Reports (Hayes et al., 2017).
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY OCCUR WITHIN NAVY SUBMARINE BASE NEW LONDON AREA
Common name
Scientific name
ESA/MMPA
status
Stock
Stock abundance best/
minimum population
Occurrence in study
area
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Order Carnivora
Suborder Pinnipedia
Family Phocidae (true seals)
Gray seal ......................
Harbor seal ...................
Halichoerus grypus .....
Phoca vitulina ..............
Western North Atlantic
Western North Atlantic
........................
........................
505,000 * .....................
75,834 (0.15)/66,884 ...
Thames River.
Thames River.
* There are an estimated 27,131 seals in U.S. waters; however, gray seals form one population not distinguished on the basis of the U.S./Canada boundary.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
16032
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory
modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to
anthropogenic sound can have
deleterious effects. To appropriately
assess the potential effects of exposure
to sound, it is necessary to understand
the frequency ranges marine mammals
are able to hear. Current data indicate
that not all marine mammal species
have equal hearing capabilities (e.g.,
Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and
Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008).
To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007)
recommended that marine mammals be
divided into functional hearing groups
based on directly measured or estimated
hearing ranges on the basis of available
behavioral response data, audiograms
derived using auditory evoked potential
techniques, anatomical modeling, and
other data. Note that no direct
measurements of hearing ability have
been successfully completed for
mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency
cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2016)
described generalized hearing ranges for
these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen
based on the approximately 65 dB
threshold from the normalized
composite audiograms, with the
exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower
bound was deemed to be biologically
implausible and the lower bound from
Southall et al. (2007) retained. The
functional groups and the associated
frequencies are indicated below (note
that these frequency ranges correspond
to the range for the composite group,
with the entire range not necessarily
reflecting the capabilities of every
species within that group):
• Low-frequency cetaceans
(mysticetes): Generalized hearing is
estimated to occur between
approximately 7 Hz and 35 kHz;
• Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger
toothed whales, beaked whales, and
most delphinids): Generalized hearing is
estimated to occur between
approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;
• High-frequency cetaceans
(porpoises, river dolphins, and members
of the genera Kogia and
Cephalorhynchus; including two
members of the genus Lagenorhynchus,
on the basis of recent echolocation data
and genetic data): Generalized hearing is
estimated to occur between
approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz;
• Phocidae (true seals): Generalized
hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 50 Hz to 86 kHz;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
• Otariidae (eared seals): Generalized
hearing is estimated to occur between
60 Hz and 39 kHz.
The pinniped functional hearing
group was modified from Southall et al.
(2007) on the basis of data indicating
that phocid species have consistently
demonstrated an extended frequency
range of hearing compared to otariids,
especially in the higher frequency range
¨
(Hemila et al., 2006; Kastelein et al.,
2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013).
For more detail concerning these
groups and associated frequency ranges,
please see NMFS (2016) for a review of
available information. Only two marine
mammal species (both are phocid
species) have the reasonable potential to
co-occur with the proposed construction
activities. Please refer to Table 2.
Potential Impacts to Marine Mammals
The Navy’s Submarine Base New
London pier construction using in-water
pile driving and pile removal could
adversely affect marine mammal species
and stocks by exposing them to elevated
noise levels in the vicinity of the
activity area.
Exposure to high intensity sound for
a sufficient duration may result in
auditory effects such as a noise-induced
threshold shift (TS)—an increase in the
auditory threshold after exposure to
noise (Finneran et al., 2005). Factors
that influence the amount of threshold
shift include the amplitude, duration,
frequency content, temporal pattern,
and energy distribution of noise
exposure. The magnitude of hearing
threshold shift normally decreases over
time following cessation of the noise
exposure. The amount of TS just after
exposure is the initial TS. If the TS
eventually returns to zero (i.e., the
threshold returns to the pre-exposure
value), it is a temporary threshold shift
(TTS) (Southall et al., 2007).
Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of
hearing)—When animals exhibit
reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds
must be louder for an animal to detect
them) following exposure to an intense
sound or sound for long duration, it is
referred to as a noise-induced TS. An
animal can experience TTS or
permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS
can last from minutes or hours to days
(i.e., there is complete recovery), can
occur in specific frequency ranges (i.e.,
an animal might only have a temporary
loss of hearing sensitivity between the
frequencies of 1 and 10 kHz), and can
be of varying amounts (for example, an
animal’s hearing sensitivity might be
reduced initially by only 6 dB or
reduced by 30 dB). PTS is permanent,
but some recovery is possible. PTS can
also occur in a specific frequency range
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and amount as mentioned above for
TTS.
For marine mammals, published data
are limited to the captive bottlenose
dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and
Yangtze finless porpoise (Finneran et
al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a,
2010b; Finneran and Schlundt, 2010;
Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a,
2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b;
Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et al.,
2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For
pinnipeds in water, data are limited to
measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an
elephant seal, and California sea lions
(Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et
al., 2012b).
Lucke et al. (2009) found a TS of a
harbor porpoise after exposing it to
airgun noise with a received sound
pressure level (SPL) at 200.2 dB (peakto-peak) re: 1 micropascal (mPa), which
corresponds to a sound exposure level
of 164.5 dB re: 1 mPa2 s after integrating
exposure. Because the airgun noise is a
broadband impulse, one cannot directly
determine the equivalent of root mean
square (rms) SPL from the reported
peak-to-peak SPLs. However, applying a
conservative conversion factor of 16 dB
for broadband signals from seismic
surveys (McCauley, et al., 2000) to
correct for the difference between peakto-peak levels reported in Lucke et al.
(2009) and rms SPLs, the rms SPL for
TTS would be approximately 184 dB re:
1 mPa, and the received levels associated
with PTS (Level A harassment) would
be higher. Therefore, based on these
studies, NMFS recognizes that TTS of
harbor porpoises is lower than other
cetacean species empirically tested
(Finneran & Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et
al., 2002; Kastelein and Jennings, 2012).
Marine mammal hearing plays a
critical role in communication with
conspecifics, and interpretation of
environmental cues for purposes such
as predator avoidance and prey capture.
Depending on the degree (elevation of
threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery
time), and frequency range of TTS, and
the context in which it is experienced,
TTS can have effects on marine
mammals ranging from discountable to
serious (similar to those discussed in
auditory masking, below). For example,
a marine mammal may be able to readily
compensate for a brief, relatively small
amount of TTS in a non-critical
frequency range that occurs during a
time where ambient noise is lower and
there are not as many competing sounds
present. Alternatively, a larger amount
and longer duration of TTS sustained
during time when communication is
critical for successful mother/calf
interactions could have more serious
impacts. Also, depending on the degree
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
and frequency range, the effects of PTS
on an animal could range in severity,
although it is considered generally more
serious because it is a permanent
condition. Of note, reduced hearing
sensitivity as a simple function of aging
has been observed in marine mammals,
as well as humans and other taxa
(Southall et al., 2007), so one can infer
that strategies exist for coping with this
condition to some degree, though likely
not without cost.
In addition, chronic exposure to
excessive, though not high-intensity,
noise could cause masking at particular
frequencies for marine mammals, which
utilize sound for vital biological
functions (Clark et al., 2009). Acoustic
masking is when other noises such as
from human sources interfere with
animal detection of acoustic signals
such as communication calls,
echolocation sounds, and
environmental sounds important to
marine mammals. Therefore, under
certain circumstances, marine mammals
whose acoustical sensors or
environment are being severely masked
could also be impaired from maximizing
their performance fitness in survival
and reproduction.
Masking occurs at the frequency band
that the animals utilize. Therefore, since
noise generated from vibratory pile
driving is mostly concentrated at low
frequency ranges, it may have less effect
on high frequency echolocation sounds
by odontocetes (toothed whales).
However, lower frequency man-made
noises are more likely to affect detection
of communication calls and other
potentially important natural sounds
such as surf and prey noise. It may also
affect communication signals when they
occur near the noise band and thus
reduce the communication space of
animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and
cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote
et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009).
Unlike TS, masking, which can occur
over large temporal and spatial scales,
can potentially affect the species at
population, community, or even
ecosystem levels, as well as individual
levels. Masking affects both senders and
receivers of the signals and could have
long-term chronic effects on marine
mammal species and populations.
Recent science suggests that low
frequency ambient sound levels have
increased by as much as 20 dB (more
than three times in terms of sound
pressure level) in the world’s ocean
from pre-industrial periods, and most of
these increases are from distant
shipping (Hildebrand, 2009). For the
Navy’s Submarine Base New London
pier construction, noises from vibratory
pile driving and pile removal contribute
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
to the elevated ambient noise levels in
the project area, thus increasing
potential for or severity of masking.
Baseline ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of project area are high due to
ongoing shipping, construction and
other activities in the Thames River.
Finally, marine mammals’ exposure to
certain sounds could lead to behavioral
disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995),
such as: Changing durations of surfacing
and dives, number of blows per
surfacing, or moving direction and/or
speed; reduced/increased vocal
activities; changing/cessation of certain
behavioral activities (such as socializing
or feeding); visible startle response or
aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke
slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located;
and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds
flushing into water from haulouts or
rookeries).
The onset of behavioral disturbance
from anthropogenic noise depends on
both external factors (characteristics of
noise sources and their paths) and the
receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography) and is also
difficult to predict (Southall et al.,
2007). Currently NMFS uses a received
level of 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) to predict
the onset of behavioral harassment from
impulse noises (such as impact pile
driving), and 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for
continuous noises (such as vibratory
pile driving). For the Navy’s Submarine
Base New London pier construction,
both 160- and 120-dB levels are
considered for effects analysis because
the Navy plans to use both impact pile
driving and vibratory pile driving and
pile removal.
The biological significance of many of
these behavioral disturbances is difficult
to predict, especially if the detected
disturbances appear minor. However,
the consequences of behavioral
modification could be biologically
significant if the change affects growth,
survival, and/or reproduction, which
depends on the severity, duration, and
context of the effects.
Potential Effects on Marine Mammal
Habitat
The primary potential impacts to
marine mammal habitat are associated
with elevated sound levels produced by
vibratory pile removal and pile driving
in the area. However, other potential
impacts to the surrounding habitat from
physical disturbance are also possible.
With regard to fish as a prey source
for cetaceans and pinnipeds, fish are
known to hear and react to sounds and
to use sound to communicate (Tavolga
et al., 1981) and possibly avoid
predators (Wilson and Dill, 2002).
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16033
Experiments have shown that fish can
sense both the strength and direction of
sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors
determining whether a fish can sense a
sound signal, and potentially react to it,
are the frequency of the signal and the
strength of the signal in relation to the
natural background noise level.
The level of sound at which a fish
will react or alter its behavior is usually
well above the detection level. Fish
have been found to react to sounds
when the sound level increased to about
20 dB above the detection level of 120
dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response
threshold can depend on the time of
year and the fish’s physiological
condition (Engas et al., 1993). In
general, fish react more strongly to
pulses of sound (such as noise from
impact pile driving) rather than
continuous signals (such as noise from
vibratory pile driving) (Blaxter et al.,
1981), and a quicker alarm response is
elicited when the sound signal intensity
rises rapidly compared to sound rising
more slowly to the same level.
During in-water pile driving only a
small fraction of the available habitat
would be ensonified at any given time.
Disturbance to fish species would be
short-term and fish would return to
their pre-disturbance behavior once the
pile driving activity ceases. Thus, the
proposed construction would have
little, if any, impact on marine
mammals’ prey availability in the area
where construction work is planned.
Disposal of dredged material in the
confined aquatic disposal (CAD) cell
would have a direct impact to the
benthos as a result of burial and
suffocation. Most, if not all, sessile
marine invertebrates are not expected to
survive burial. Some motile marine
organisms would be buried and unable
to survive, while others such as
burrowing specialists, may survive.
Survival rates would depend primarily
on burial depth. From 2010 through
2012, biannual benthic sampling of the
CAD cell area was conducted to assess
the timeframe for recovery of benthic
populations of the CAD cells, in
accordance with Water Quality
Certificate conditions for the 2010
waterfront maintenance dredging
project at the submarine base. The
sampling results of the CAD cell were
compared to sampling results of an
undisturbed reference site located
upriver. The degree of similarity of
population and community structures
was assessed. The results of the three
year survey program indicated that a
progressive recovery to a stable benthic
population was occurring at the CAD
cell. As demonstrated by the biannual
benthic survey, benthic assemblages are
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
16034
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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 harassments, in the form of
mild permanent hearing threshold shift
(Level A) and disruption of behavioral
patterns (Level B) for individual marine
mammals resulting from exposure to
noise generated from impact pile
driving and vibratory pile driving and
removal. Based on the nature of the
activity and the anticipated
effectiveness of the mitigation measures
(e.g., shutdown measures—discussed in
detail below in Mitigation section),
serious injury or mortality is neither
anticipated nor authorized.
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 take estimate.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of
the number of incidental takes proposed
to be authorized through this rule,
which will inform both NMFS’
consideration of whether the number of
takes is ‘‘small’’ and the negligible
impact determination.
Harassment is the only type of take
expected to result from these activities.
Except with respect to certain activities
not pertinent here, 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);
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
anticipated to recover within three to
five years after the completion of the
project, and disposal impacts would not
be significant (CardnoTEC 2015).
Project activities would temporarily
disturb benthic and water column
habitats and change bottom topography
to a minor degree, but effects on prey
availability and foraging conditions for
marine mammals would be temporary
and limited to the immediate area of
pier demolition/construction, dredging,
and disposal. The new surfaces of piles
and exposed concrete on the new pier
would likely result in establishment of
fouling communities on the new
structures, and may attract fish and
benthic organisms resulting in small
scale shifts in prey distribution.
There are no known haulouts within
the vicinity of the Proposed Action.
The project activities would not
permanently modify existing marine
mammal habitat. The activities may kill
some fish and cause other fish to leave
the area temporarily, thus impacting
marine mammals’ foraging
opportunities in a limited portion of the
foraging range; but, because of the short
duration of the activities and the
relatively small area of the habitat that
may be affected, the impacts to marine
mammal habitat are not expected to
cause significant or long-term negative
consequences. Therefore, given the
consideration of potential impacts to
marine mammal prey species and their
physical environment, the Navy’s
proposed construction activity at the
submarine base would not adversely
affect marine mammal habitat.
Acoustic Thresholds
Using the best available science,
NMFS has developed acoustic
thresholds that identify the received
level of underwater sound above which
exposed marine mammals would be
reasonably expected to be behaviorally
harassed (equated to Level B
harassment) or to incur PTS of some
degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment for non-explosive
sources—Though significantly driven by
received level, the onset of behavioral
disturbance from anthropogenic noise
exposure is also informed to varying
degrees by other factors related to the
source (e.g., frequency, predictability,
duty cycle), the environment (e.g.,
bathymetry), and the receiving animals
(hearing, motivation, experience,
demography, behavioral context) and
can be difficult to predict (Southall et
al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2011). Based on
what the available science indicates and
the practical need to use a threshold
based on a factor that is both predictable
and measurable for most activities,
NMFS uses a generalized acoustic
threshold based on received level to
estimate the onset of behavioral
harassment. NMFS predicts that marine
mammals are likely to be behaviorally
harassed in a manner we consider Level
B harassment when exposed to
underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms)
for continuous (e.g., vibratory piledriving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1
mPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive
(e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent
(e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
Applicant’s proposed activity
includes the use of continuous
(vibratory pile driving and removal) and
impulsive (impact pile driving) sources,
and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1
mPa (rms) levels 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). Applicant’s proposed
activity includes the use of nonimpulsive (vibratory pile driving and
pile removal) sources.
These thresholds were developed by
compiling and synthesizing the best
available science and soliciting input
multiple times from both the public and
peer reviewers to inform the final
product, and are provided in the table
below. The references, analysis, and
methodology used in the development
of the thresholds are described in
NMFS’ 2016 Technical Guidance, which
may be accessed at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/
guidelines.htm.
TABLE 3—CURRENT ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA FOR NON-EXPLOSIVE SOUND UNDERWATER
PTS onset thresholds
Behavioral thresholds
Hearing group
Impulsive
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Non-impulsive
Impulsive
Lpk,flat: 219 dB; LE,LF,24h: 183 dB
Lpk,flat: 230 dB; LE,MF,24h: 185
dB.
LE,LF,24h: 199 dB ........................
LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
Lrms,flat: 160 dB ...
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Non-impulsive
Lrms,flat: 120 dB.
16035
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3—CURRENT ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA FOR NON-EXPLOSIVE SOUND UNDERWATER—Continued
PTS onset thresholds
Behavioral thresholds
Hearing group
Impulsive
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater).
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater).
Non-impulsive
Lpk,flat: 202 dB; LE,HF,24h: 155
dB.
Lpk,flat: 218 dB; LE,PW,24h: 185
dB.
Lpk,flat: 232 dB; LE,OW,24h: 203
dB.
Impulsive
Non-impulsive
LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should
also be considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa2s.
In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure
is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being
included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated
with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF
cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level
thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for
action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and
environmental parameters of the activity
that will feed into identifying the area
ensonified above the acoustic
thresholds.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Source Levels
The project includes impact pile
driving and vibratory pile driving and
removal of various piles. Source levels
of pile driving and removal activities are
based on reviews of measurements of
the same or similar types and
dimensions of piles available in the
literature (Caltrans, 2015; Martin et al.,
2012; Dazey et al., 2012; WSDOT, 2007,
2012; NAVFAC Southwest, 2014). Based
on this review, the following source
levels are assumed for the underwater
noise produced by construction
activities:
• Impact driving of 14-inch steel Hpiles for the temporary trestle is
assumed to generate a peak SPL of 208
dB re 1mPa, and a root-mean-squared
(rms) SPL of 187 dB re 1 mPa, based on
adding 10 dB to a single-strike SEL of
177 dB re 1 mPa2-sec at 10 m (33 ft)
reported by Caltrans (2015). This
assumption is based on differences
between SEL and rms values of other
piles reported by Caltrans (2015).
• Impact driving of 36-inch steel piles
would be assumed to generate an
instantaneous peak SPL of 209 dB, an
rms SPL of 198 dB, and a SEL of 183
dB at the 10 m (33 ft) distance, based on
the weighted average of similar pile
driving at the Bangor Naval Base, Naval
Base Point Loma, Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
Anacortes Ferry Terminal, and WSDOT
Mukilteo Ferry Terminal.
• Vibratory driving of 36-inch steel
piles would be assumed to generate a
168 dB SPLrms and a 168 dB SEL at 10
m (33 ft), based on the weighted average
of similar pile driving measured at
Bangor Naval Base, Naval Base Point
Loma, and WSDOT Anacortes Ferry
Terminal.
• Impact driving of the 16-inch
plastic piles, for which no data specific
to that size and composition are
available, are assumed to be similar to
available data on13-inch plastic piles:
177 dB peak SPL and 153 dB rms SPL.
No SEL measurements were made, but
the SEL at 10 m (33 ft) can be assumed
to be 9 dB less than the rms value (based
on differences of rms and SEL values of
in-water impact pile-driving data of
other piles summarized by Caltrans
2015), which would put the SEL value
for the plastic piles at 144 dB. For
vibratory pile driving of the same plastic
piles, the SPL rms of impact driving is
used as a proxy due to lack of
measurement.
• Vibratory removal of 14-inch steel
H-piles is conservatively assumed to
have rms and SEL values of 158 dB
based on a relatively large set of
measurements from the vibratory
installation of 14-inch H-piles.
• Drilling the rock sockets is assumed
to be an intermittent, non-impulsive,
broadband noise source, similar to
vibratory pile driving, but using a rotary
drill inside a pipe or casing, which is
expected to reduce sound levels below
those of typical pile driving (Martin et
al. 2012). Measurements made during a
pile drilling project in 1–5 m (3–16 ft)
depths at Santa Rosa Island, CA, by
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Dazey et al., (2012) appear to provide
reasonable proxy source levels for the
proposed activities. Dazey et al. (2012)
reported average rms source levels
ranging from 151 to 157 dB re 1mPa,
normalized to a distance of 1 m (3 ft)
from the pile, during activities that
included casing removal and
installation as well as drilling, with an
average of 154 dB re 1mPa during 62
days that spanned all related drilling
activities during a single season.
• Since no source level data are
available for vibratory extraction of
concrete or concrete encased 24-inch
and 33-inch steel H-piles, conservative
proxy source levels were based on the
summary values reported for vibratory
driving of 24-inch steel sheet piles by
Caltrans (2015). There are two reasons
for using 24-in steel sheet pile driving
source level as a proxy: (1) In general,
pile extraction generates less noise in
comparison to pile driving, and (2)
piling of concrete or concrete encased
piles generated less noise in comparison
to steel piles. Since there are no source
levels available for extraction of the 24in concrete or concrete encased piles
and 33-in steel H-piles, we defer to the
pile driving source level of 24-in steel
sheet pile reported by Caltrans (2015).
The Caltrans (2015) typical source level
of 160 dB rms and SEL was used for
vibratory removal of 24-inch concrete
piles and 24-inch concrete encased steel
H-piles, whereas the loudest source
level of 165 dB rms and SEL was used
for vibratory removal of 33-inch
concrete encased steel piles.
A summary of source levels from
different pile driving and pile removal
activities is provided in Table 4.
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
16036
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF IN-WATER PILE DRIVING SOURCE LEVELS
[At 10 m from source]
SPLpk
(dB re 1 μPa)
Method
Pile type/size
Impact driving ......................
Impact driving ......................
Vibratory driving ...................
SPLrms
(dB re 1 μPa)
208
209
NA
187
198
168
177
183
168
177
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
153
153
154
158
160
165
144
153
154
158
160
165
14-in steel H pile ...............................................................
36-in concrete-filled steel pile ............................................
30- and 36-in concrete-filled steel pipe pile; 16-in fiberglass plastic pile.
16-in fiberglass plastic pile ................................................
16-in fiberglass plastic pile ................................................
30-in steel pile & 16-in plastic pile ....................................
14-in steel H pile ...............................................................
24-in concrete-encased steel H pile ..................................
33-in concrete-encased steel H pile ..................................
Impact driving ......................
Vibratory driving ...................
Rock socket drilling ..............
Vibratory removal ................
Vibratory removal ................
Vibratory removal ................
These source levels are used to
compute the Level A injury zones and
to estimate the Level B harassment
zones. For Level A harassment zones,
since the peak source levels for both
pile driving methods are below the
injury thresholds, cumulative SEL were
used to do the calculations using the
NMFS acoustic guidance (NMFS 2016).
Estimating Injury Zones
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, we
developed a User Spreadsheet 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 cumulative SEL (LE), distances to
marine mammal injury thresholds were
estimated using NMFS’ Optional User
Spreadsheet based on the noise
exposure guidance. For impact pile
driving, the single strike SEL/pulse
equivalent was used, and for vibratory
pile driving, the rms SPL source level
was used. Per the NMFS Spreadsheet,
default Weighting Factor Adjustments
(WFA) were used for calculating PTS
from both vibratory and impact pile
driving, using 2.5 kHz and 2.0 KHz,
respectively. These WFAs are
acknowledged by NMFS as
conservative. A transmission loss
SEL
(dB re 1 μPa2-s)
coefficient of 15 is used with reported
source levels measured at 10m.
Isopleths to Level B behavioral zones
are based on rms SPL (SPLrms) that are
specific for non-impulse (vibratory pile
driving) sources. Distances to marine
mammal behavior thresholds were
calculated using practical spreading.
A summary of the measured and
modeled harassment zones is provided
in Table 5. In modeling transmission
loss from the project area, the
conventional assumption would be
made that acoustic propagation from the
source is impeded by natural and
manmade features that extend into the
water, resulting in acoustic shadows
behind such features. While not solid
structures, given the density of
structural pilings under the many pilesupported piers located south of Piers
32 and 10, coupled with the docking of
submarines at these piers, the piers are
presumed to disrupt sound propagation
southward in the river.
TABLE 5—CALCULATED AREAS OF ZONE OF INFLUENCE AND MAXIMUM DISTANCES
Source level
@10m, dB
(rms/SEL)
Year
Activity description
1 .............
Impact driving 14″ steel H-pile ...............................................................................
Vibratory & rock socket drilling installation of 36″ concrete-filled steel piles .........
Impact driving 36″ concrete-filled steel piles ..........................................................
187/177
168
198/183
Rocket socket drilling of 30″ concrete-filled steel piles and 16″ fiberglass reinforced plastic piles.
154
Vibratory installation of 36″ concrete-filled steel piles ............................................
Impact pile driving 36″ concrete-filled steel piles ...................................................
Vibratory installation of 16″ fiberglass plastic piles ................................................
Impact installation of 16″ fiberglass plastic piles ....................................................
Vibratory removal of 14″ steel H-piles ....................................................................
Vibratory removal of 24″ concrete-filled steel piles (Pier 32) .................................
Vibratory removal of 30″ concrete-filled steel piles (Pier 32) .................................
Vibratory removal of 24″ concrete-filled steel piles (Pier 10) .................................
168
198/183
153
153/144
158
160
165
160
2 .............
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
3 .............
4 .............
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Level A
distance
(m)/area
(km2)
536/0.4468 .....
<4/<0.0001 .....
984/0.886 .......
Level B
distance
(m)/area
(km2)
631/0.5468.
4,642/2.2002.
3,415/2.037.
Activity will occur concurrently
with above activities that have
much bigger zones.
<4/<0.0001 .....
984/0.886 .......
0.9/<0.0001 ....
2.5/<0.0001 ....
<4/<0.0001 .....
2.7/<0.0001 ....
5.9/<0.0001 ....
7.7/<0.0001 ....
4,642/2.2002.
3,415/2.037.
1,584/1.1584.
1/<0.000.
2,415/1.8372.
4,334/2.029.
4,334/2.029.
4,642/3.317.
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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.
The Navy’s Marine Species Density
Database (NMSDD) has density
estimates for harbor and gray seals that
occur in Long Island Sound. The
NMSDD density estimates for harbor
seals and gray seals are the same,
0.0703/km2 during fall, winter, and
spring, and 0.0174/km2 during summer
months. These estimates, however, are
based on broad-scale oceanic surveys,
which have not extended up the
Thames River.
Marine mammal surveys were
conducted in fall 2014 and winter,
spring, and summer of 2015 as part of
a nearshore biological survey at
Submarine Base New London. No
marine mammals were observed (Tetra
Tech 2016). Harbor seals have been
sighted in the Thames River near the
submarine base by Navy personnel.
Both gray and harbor seals have
rookeries in Long Island Sound. A twoyear detailed, systematic survey of
marine mammals in the Thames River
began in January 2017. During the first
nine months of the survey through
September, one pinniped (gray seal) was
observed approximately 23⁄4 miles
downstream of SUBASE at a fishing
dock near the ferry terminal,
approximately 3,000 feet south of the
Gold Star Memorial Bridge (I–95).
Based on the repeated sightings at the
Submarine Base New London, the
average presence of seals (harbor or
gray) is estimated to be 4 per week or
0.6 per day from September through
May. The majority (75 percent) of these
are likely to be harbor seals. There are
no areas (haulouts) where seals are
known to be concentrated nor have
there been contemporary sightings of
larger numbers of seals along this
stretch of the river, and the animals seen
at the submarine base are likely to move
up and down as well as across the river.
Given that the Thames River is about
500 m (1,640 ft) wide at the Submarine
Base New London, and similarly
developed areas extend about 1 km
(3,280 ft) up and down the river, the
Navy believes it is reasonable to
extrapolate the observations at the
Submarine Base New London to an area
of about 1 km2 for the purpose of
estimating density. This would result in
an average density of 0.45 harbor and
0.15 gray seals per km2 within the
project ZOIs from September through
May. Very few animals were sighted
outside the September through May
time frame. Therefore, the September
through May data is used for density
estimates to be conservative.
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information
provided above is brought together to
produce a quantitative take estimate.
For both harbor and gray seals,
estimated takes are calculated based on
ensonified area for a specific pile
driving activity multiplied by the
marine mammal density in the action
area, multiplied by the number of pile
driving (or removal) days. Distances to
and areas of different harassment zones
are listed in Table 4.
For both Level A and Level B
harassment, take calculations and
assumptions are as follows:
• Number of takes per activity =
density (average number of seals per
km2) * area of ZOI (km2) * number of
days, rounded to the nearest whole
number;
• Seal density in the project area is
estimated as 0.6/km2 from September
through May (zero from June through
August), consisting of 75 percent harbor
seals (0.45/km2) and 25 percent gray
seals (0.15/km2);
• Assumes as a worst case that
activities will occur up to a maximum
16037
of 180 workdays (5 days per week)
when seals are present (September
through May) during each full
construction year;
• Assumes vibratory and impact
hammer pile driving would not occur
on the same days;
• Level A and Level B takes are
calculated separately based on the
respective ZOIs for each type of activity,
providing a maximum estimate for each
type of take which corresponds to the
authorization requested under the
MMPA; and
• Assumes that the effective
implementation of a 10 m shutdown
zone will prevent non-acoustic injuries
and will prevent animals from entering
acoustic harassment ZOIs that extend
less than 10 m from the source.
The maximum extent of the potential
injury zone (for impact pile driving of
steel piles) is 984 m (3,228 ft) from the
source for 36-inch concrete-filled steel
piles and 536 m (1,758 ft) for 14-inch
steel H-piles; other potential acoustic
injury ZOIs for vibratory pile extraction
and installation are only 1 to 7.7 m (3
to 25 ft) from the source (Table 4). Seals
within about 10 m (33 ft) of in-water
construction or demolition may also be
at risk of injury from interaction with
construction equipment. These potential
injury zones and the 10 m (33 ft)
exclusion distance would be monitored
during all in-water construction/
demolition activities, and the activities
would be halted if a marine mammal
were to approach within these
distances.
The estimated numbers of instances of
acoustic harassment (takes) by year,
species and severity (Level A or Level
B) are shown in Table 6. Total Level A
takes are estimated as 12 harbor seals
and 4 gray seals (total 16), and Level B
takes are estimated as 504 harbor seals
and 168 gray seals (total 672).
TABLE 6—ESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY BE EXPOSED TO RECEIVED NOISE LEVELS THAT CAUSE
LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT
Estimated
level A take
Year
Species
1 .............
Harbor seal ......................................................
Gray seal .........................................................
Harbor seal ......................................................
Gray seal .........................................................
Harbor seal ......................................................
Gray seal .........................................................
Harbor seal ......................................................
Gray seal .........................................................
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2 .............
3 .............
4 .............
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Estimated
level B take
6
2
6
2
0
0
0
0
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Estimated
total take
166
55
177
59
51
17
110
37
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
172
57
183
61
51
17
110
37
13APP1
Abundance
75,834
27,131
75,834
505,000
75,834
27,131
75,834
27,131
Percentage
0.23
0.21
0.24
0.01
0.07
0.06
0.15
0.14
16038
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an LOA under
section 101(a)(5)(A) 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
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
1. Time Restriction
Work would occur only during
daylight hours, when visual monitoring
of marine mammals can be conducted.
2. Establishing and Monitoring Level A
and Level B Harassment Zones, and
Exclusion Zones
Before the commencement of in-water
construction activities, which include
impact pile driving and vibratory pile
driving and pile removal, the Navy shall
establish Level A harassment zones
where received underwater SELcum
could cause PTS (see Table 5 above).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
The Navy shall also establish Level B
harassment zones where received
underwater SPLs are higher than 160
dBrms re 1 mPa for impulsive noise
sources (impact pile driving) and 120
dBrms re 1 mPa for non-impulsive noise
sources (vibratory pile driving and pile
removal).
The Navy shall establish a 10-m (33ft) exclusion zone for all in-water
construction and demolition work.
If marine mammals are found within
the exclusion zone, pile driving of the
segment would be delayed until they
move out of the area. If a marine
mammal is seen above water and then
dives below, the contractor would wait
15 minutes. If no marine mammals are
seen by the observer in that time it can
be assumed that the animal has moved
beyond the exclusion zone.
If pile driving of a segment ceases for
30 minutes or more and a marine
mammal is sighted within the
designated exclusion zone prior to
commencement of pile driving, the
observer(s) must notify the pile driving
operator (or other authorized
individual) immediately and continue
to monitor the exclusion zone.
Operations may not resume until the
marine mammal has exited the
exclusion zone or 15 minutes have
elapsed since the last sighting.
3. Shutdown Measures
The Navy shall implement shutdown
measures if a marine mammal is
detected moving towards or entered the
10-m (33-ft) exclusion zone.
Further, the Navy shall implement
shutdown measures if the number of
authorized takes for any particular
species reaches the limit under the LOA
(if issued) and such marine mammals
are sighted within the vicinity of the
project area and are approaching the
Level B harassment zone during inwater construction activities.
4. Soft Start
The Navy shall implement soft start
techniques for impact pile driving. The
Navy shall conduct an initial set of three
strikes from the impact hammer at 40
percent energy, followed by a 1-minute
waiting period, then two subsequent
three strike sets. Soft start shall be
required for any impact driving,
including at the beginning of the day,
and at any time following a cessation of
impact pile driving of thirty minutes or
longer.
Whenever there has been downtime of
30 minutes or more without impact
driving, the contractor shall initiate
impact driving with soft-start
procedures described above.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Based on our evaluation of the
required measures, NMFS has
preliminarily determined that the
prescribed mitigation measures provide
the means effecting the least practicable
adverse impact on the affected species
or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating
grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an LOA for an
activity, section 101(a)(5)(A) 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)
state that requests for authorizations
must include the suggested means of
accomplishing the necessary monitoring
and reporting that will result in
increased knowledge of the species and
of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are
expected to be present in the proposed
action area. Effective reporting is critical
both to compliance as well as ensuring
that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting
requirements prescribed by NMFS
should contribute to improved
understanding of one or more of the
following:
• 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
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
• Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
The Navy shall employ trained
protected species observers (PSOs) to
conduct marine mammal monitoring for
its Submarine Base New London pier
construction project. The purposes of
marine mammal monitoring are to
implement mitigation measures and
learn more about impacts to marine
mammals from the Navy’s construction
activities. The PSOs will observe and
collect data on marine mammals in and
around the project area for 15 minutes
before, during, and for 30 minutes after
all pile removal and pile installation
work.
Protected Species Observer
Qualifications
NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet the
following requirements:
1. Independent observers (i.e., not
construction personnel) are required;
2. At least one observer must have
prior experience working as an observer;
3. Other observers may substitute
education (undergraduate degree in
biological science or related field) or
training for experience;
4. Where a team of three or more
observers are required, one observer
should be designated as lead observer or
monitoring coordinator. The lead
observer must have prior experience
working as an observer; and
5. NMFS will require submission and
approval of observer CVs.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Marine Mammal Monitoring Protocols
The Navy shall conduct briefings
between construction supervisors and
crews and the PSO team prior to the
start of all pile driving activities, and
when new personnel join the work, in
order to explain responsibilities,
communication procedures, marine
mammal monitoring protocol, and
operational procedures. All personnel
working in the project area shall watch
the Navy’s Marine Species Awareness
Training video. An informal guide shall
be included with the monitoring plan to
aid in identifying species if they are
observed in the vicinity of the project
area.
The Navy will monitor the Level A
and Level B harassment zones before,
during, and after pile driving activities.
The Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan
would include the following
procedures:
• PSOs will be primarily located on
boats, docks, and piers at the best
vantage point(s) in order to properly see
the entire shutdown zone(s);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
• PSOs will be located at the best
vantage point(s) to observe the zone
associated with behavioral impact
thresholds;
• During all observation periods,
PSOs will use high-magnification (25X),
as well as standard handheld (7X)
binoculars, and the naked eye to search
continuously for marine mammals;
• Monitoring distances will be
measured with range finders. Distances
to animals will be based on the best
estimate of the PSO, relative to known
distances to objects in the vicinity of the
PSO;
• Bearings to animals will be
determined using a compass;
• Pile driving shall only take place
when the exclusion and Level A zones
are visible and can be adequately
monitored. If conditions (e.g., fog)
prevent the visual detection of marine
mammals, activities with the potential
to result in Level A harassment shall not
be initiated. If such conditions arise
after the activity has begun, impact pile
driving would be halted but vibratory
pile driving or extraction would be
allowed to continue;
• Three (3) PSOs shall be posted to
monitor marine mammals during inwater pile driving and pile removal.
One PSO will be located on land and
two will be located in a boat to monitor
the farther locations;
• Pre-Activity Monitoring
The exclusion zone will be monitored
for 15 minutes prior to in-water
construction/demolition activities. If a
marine mammal is present within the
10-m exclusion zone, the activity will be
delayed until the animal(s) leave the
exclusion zone. Activity will resume
only after the PSO has determined that,
through sighting or by waiting 15
minutes, the animal(s) has moved
outside the exclusion zone. If a marine
mammal is observed approaching the
exclusion zone, the PSO who sighted
that animal will notify all other PSOs of
its presence.
• During Activity Monitoring
If a marine mammal is observed
entering the Level A or Level B zones
outside the 10-m exclusion zone, the
pile segment being worked on will be
completed without cessation, unless the
animal enters or approaches the
exclusion zone, at which point all pile
driving activities will be halted. If an
animal is observed within the exclusion
zone during pile driving, then pile
driving will be stopped as soon as it is
safe to do so. Pile driving can only
resume once the animal has left the
exclusion zone of its own volition or has
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
16039
not been re-sighted for a period of 15
minutes.
• Post-Activity Monitoring
Monitoring of all zones will continue
for 30 minutes following the completion
of the activity.
Reporting Measures
The Navy is required to submit an
annual report within 90 days after each
activity year, starting from the date
when the LOA is issued (for the first
annual report) or from the date when
the previous annual report ended. These
reports would detail the monitoring
protocol, summarize the data recorded
during monitoring, and estimate the
number of marine mammals that may
have been harassed during the period of
the report. NMFS would provide
comments within 30 days after receiving
these reports, and the Navy should
address the comments and submit
revisions within 30 days after receiving
NMFS comments. If no comment is
received from NMFS within 30 days, the
annual report is considered completed.
The Navy is also required to submit
a draft monitoring report within 90 days
after completion of the construction
work or the expiration of the final LOA
(if issued), whichever comes earlier.
This report would synthesize all data
recorded during marine mammal
monitoring, and estimate the number of
marine mammals that may have been
harassed through the entire project.
NMFS would provide comments within
30 days after receiving this report, and
the Navy should address the comments
and submit revisions within 30 days
after receiving NMFS comments. If no
comment is received from NMFS within
30 days, the monitoring report is
considered as final.
In addition, NMFS would require the
Navy to notify NMFS’ Office of
Protected Resources and NMFS’ Greater
Atlantic Stranding Coordinator within
48 hours of sighting an injured or dead
marine mammal in the construction site.
The Navy shall provide NMFS and the
Stranding Network with the species or
description of the animal(s), the
condition of the animal(s) (including
carcass condition, if the animal is dead),
location, time of first discovery,
observed behaviors (if alive), and photo
or video (if available).
In the event that the Navy finds an
injured or dead marine mammal that is
not in the construction area, the Navy
would report the same information as
listed above to NMFS as soon as
operationally feasible.
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
16040
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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
location, migration), as well as effects
on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the
number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this
information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989
preamble for NMFS’s implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29,
1989), the impacts from other past and
ongoing anthropogenic activities are
incorporated into this analysis via their
impacts on the environmental baseline
(e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status
of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing
sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, this introductory
discussion of our analyses applies to
both of the species listed in Table 2,
given that the anticipated effects of the
Navy’s Submarine Base New London
pier construction project activities
involving pile driving and pile removal
on marine mammals are expected to be
relatively similar in nature. There is no
information about the nature or severity
of the impacts, or the size, status, or
structure of any species or stock that
would lead to a different analysis by
species for this activity, or else speciesspecific factors would be identified and
analyzed.
Although a few individual seals (6
harbor seals and 2 gray seals each in
year 1 and year 2) are estimated to
experience Level A harassment in the
form of PTS if they stay within the Level
A harassment zone during the entire
pile driving for the day, the degree of
injury is expected to be mild and is not
likely to affect the reproduction or
survival of the individual animals. It is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
expected that, if hearing impairments
occurs, most likely the affected animal
would lose a few dB in its hearing
sensitivity, which in most cases is not
likely to affect its survival and
recruitment. Hearing impairment that
might occur for these individual
animals would be limited to the
dominant frequency of the noise
sources, i.e., in the low-frequency region
below 2 kHz. Nevertheless, as for all
marine mammal species, it is known
that in general these pinnipeds will
avoid areas where sound levels could
cause hearing impairment. Therefore it
is not likely that an animal would stay
in an area with intense noise that could
cause severe levels of hearing damage.
Under the majority of the
circumstances, anticipated takes are
expected to be limited to short-term
Level B harassment. Marine mammals
present in the vicinity of the action area
and taken by Level B harassment would
most likely show overt brief disturbance
(startle reaction) and avoidance of the
area from elevated noise levels during
pile driving and pile removal. Given the
limited estimated number of incidents
of Level A and Level B harassment and
the limited, short-term nature of the
responses by the individuals, the
impacts of the estimated take cannot be
reasonably expected to, and are not
reasonably likely to, rise to the level that
they would adversely affect either
species at the population level, through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival.
There are no known important
habitats, such as rookeries or haulouts,
in the vicinity of the Navy’s proposed
Submarine Base New London pier
construction project. The project also is
not expected to have significant adverse
effects on affected marine mammals’
habitat, including prey, as analyzed in
detail in the ‘‘Anticipated Effects on
Marine Mammal Habitat’’ section.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
proposed monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS preliminarily finds
that the total take from the proposed
activity will have a negligible impact on
all affected marine mammal species or
stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers
of incidental take may be authorized
under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA
for specified activities other than
military readiness activities. The MMPA
does not define small numbers and so,
in practice, NMFS compares the number
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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.
The estimated takes are below one
percent of the population for all marine
mammals (Table 6).
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the proposed activity
(including the prescribed mitigation and
monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals,
NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals will be
taken relative to the population size of
the affected species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact
Subsistence Analysis and
Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses
of the affected marine mammal stocks or
species implicated by this action.
Therefore, NMFS has determined that
the total taking of affected species or
stocks would not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of
such species or stocks for taking for
subsistence purposes.
Adaptive Management
The regulations governing the take of
marine mammals incidental to Navy
maintenance construction activities
would contain an adaptive management
component.
The reporting requirements associated
with this proposed rule are designed to
provide NMFS with monitoring data
from the previous year to allow
consideration of whether any changes
are appropriate. The use of adaptive
management allows NMFS to consider
new information from different sources
to determine (with input from the Navy
regarding practicability) on an annual or
biennial basis if mitigation or
monitoring measures should be
modified (including additions or
deletions). Mitigation measures could be
modified if new data suggests that such
modifications would have a reasonable
likelihood of reducing adverse effects to
marine mammals and if the measures
are practicable.
The following are some of the
possible sources of applicable data to be
considered through the adaptive
management process: (1) Results from
monitoring reports, as required by
MMPA authorizations; (2) results from
general marine mammal and sound
research; and (3) any information which
reveals that marine mammals may have
been taken in a manner, extent, or
number not authorized by these
regulations or subsequent LOAs.
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
16041
and recordkeeping requirements,
Seafood, Sonar, Transportation.
RULE] through [DATE 5 YEARS AFTER
EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE].
Dated: April 10, 2018.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
§ 217.92
Request for Information
NMFS requests interested persons to
submit comments, information, and
suggestions concerning the Navy request
and the proposed regulations (see
ADDRESSES). All comments will be
reviewed and evaluated as we prepare a
final rule and make final determinations
on whether to issue the requested
authorization. This notice and
referenced documents provide all
environmental information relating to
our proposed action for public review.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No incidental take of ESA-listed
species is proposed for authorization or
expected to result from this activity.
Therefore, NMFS has determined that
formal consultation under section 7 of
the ESA is not required for this action.
For reasons set forth in the preamble,
50 CFR part 217 is proposed to be
amended as follows:
Classification
Pursuant to the procedures
established to implement Executive
Order 12866, the Office of Management
and Budget has determined that this
proposed rule is not significant.
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the
Chief Counsel for Regulation of the
Department of Commerce has certified
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration that this
proposed rule, if adopted, would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The U.S. Navy is the sole entity that
would be subject to the requirements in
these proposed regulations, and the
Navy is not a small governmental
jurisdiction, small organization, or small
business, as defined by the RFA.
Because of this certification, a
regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required and none has been prepared.
This proposed rule does not contain
a collection-of-information requirement
subject to the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
because the applicant is a federal
agency. Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, no person is required
to respond to nor shall a person be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA unless
that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
These requirements have been approved
by OMB under control number 0648–
0151 and include applications for
regulations, subsequent LOAs, and
reports.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 218
Exports, Fish, Imports, Incidental
take, Indians, Labeling, Marine
mammals, Navy, Penalties, Reporting
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
PART 218—REGULATIONS
GOVERNING THE TAKING AND
IMPORTING OF MARINE MAMMALS
1. The authority citation for part 217
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
2. Add subpart J to part 217 to read
as follows:
■
Subpart J—Taking and Importing Marine
Mammals; U.S. Navy’s Submarine Base
New London Pier Construction
Sec.
217.90 Specified activity and specified
geographical region.
217.91 Effective dates.
217.92 Permissible methods of taking.
217.93 Prohibitions.
217.94 Mitigation requirements.
217.95 Requirements for monitoring and
reporting.
217.96 Letters of Authorization.
217.97 Renewals and modifications of
Letters of Authorization.
217.98 [Reserved]
217.99 [Reserved]
Subpart J—Taking and Importing
Marine Mammals; U.S. Navy’s
Submarine Base New London Pier
Construction
§ 217.90 Specified activity and specified
geographical region.
(a) Regulations in this subpart apply
only to the U.S. Navy (Navy) and those
persons it authorizes or funds to
conduct activities on its behalf for the
taking of marine mammals that occurs
in the area outlined in paragraph (b) of
this section and that occurs incidental
to the activities described in paragraph
(c) of this section.
(b) The taking of marine mammals by
the Navy may be authorized in Letters
of Authorization (LOAs) only if it occurs
within the Navy Submarine Base New
London Study Area, which is located in
the towns of Groton and Ledyard in
New London County, Connecticut.
(c) The taking of marine mammals by
the Navy is only authorized if it occurs
incidental to the Navy’s conducting inwater pier construction or demolition
activities.
§ 217.91
Effective dates and definitions.
Regulations in this subpart are
effective [EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Permissible methods of taking.
Under LOAs issued pursuant to
§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 217.96,
the Holder of the LOAs (hereinafter
‘‘Navy’’) may incidentally, but not
intentionally, take marine mammals
within the area described in § 217.90(b)
by Level A harassment and Level B
harassment associated with in-water
pile driving and pile removal activities,
provided the activity is in compliance
with all terms, conditions, and
requirements of the regulations in this
subpart and the applicable LOAs.
§ 217.93
Prohibitions.
Notwithstanding takings
contemplated in § 217.92 and
authorized by LOAs issued under
§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 217.96,
no person in connection with the
activities described in § 217.90 of this
chapter may:
(a) Violate, or fail to comply with, the
terms, conditions, and requirements of
this subpart or a LOA issued under
§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 217.96;
(b) Take any marine mammal not
specified in such LOAs;
(c) Take any marine mammal
specified in such LOAs in any manner
other than as specified;
(d) Take a marine mammal specified
in such LOAs if NMFS determines such
taking results in more than a negligible
impact on the species or stocks of such
marine mammal; or
(d) Take a marine mammal specified
in such LOAs if NMFS determines such
taking results in an unmitigable adverse
impact on the availability of such
species or stock of marine mammal for
taking for subsistence uses.
§ 217.94
Mitigation requirements.
When conducting the activities
identified in § 217.90(c), the mitigation
measures contained in any LOAs issued
under § 216.106 of this chapter and
§ 217.96 must be implemented. These
mitigation measures shall include but
are not limited to:
(a) Time Restriction. In-water
construction and demolition work shall
occur only during daylight hours;
(b) Establishment of monitoring and
exclusion zones:
(1) For all relevant in-water
construction and demolition activity,
the Navy shall implement shutdown
zones with radial distances as identified
in any LOA issued under § 216.106 of
this chapter and § 217.96. If a marine
mammal comes within or approaches
the shutdown zone, such operations
shall cease;
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
16042
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
(2) For all relevant in-water
construction and demolition activity,
the Navy shall designate monitoring
zones with radial distances as identified
in any LOA issued under § 216.106 of
this chapter and § 217.96; and
(3) For all in-water construction and
demolition activity, the Navy shall
implement a minimum shutdown zone
of a 10 meter (m) radius around the pile.
If a marine mammal comes within or
approaches the shutdown zone, such
operations shall cease;
(c) Shutdown Measures. (1) The Navy
shall deploy three protected species
observers (PSO) to monitor marine
mammals during in-water pile driving
and pile removal. One PSO will be
located on land and two will be located
in a boat to monitor the farther
locations.
(2) Monitoring shall take place from
15 minutes prior to initiation of pile
driving or removal activity through 30
minutes post-completion of pile driving
or removal activity. Pre-activity
monitoring shall be conducted for 15
minutes to ensure that the shutdown
zone is clear of marine mammals, and
pile driving or removal may commence
when observers have declared the
shutdown zone clear of marine
mammals. In the event of a delay or
shutdown of activity resulting from
marine mammals in the shutdown zone,
animals shall be allowed to remain in
the shutdown zone (i.e., must leave of
their own volition) and their behavior
shall be monitored and documented.
Monitoring shall occur throughout the
time required to drive or remove a pile.
A determination that the shutdown zone
is clear must be made during a period
of good visibility (i.e., the entire
shutdown zone and surrounding waters
must be visible to the naked eye).
(3) If a marine mammal approaches or
enters the shutdown zone, all pile
driving or removal activities at that
location shall be halted. If pile driving
or removal is halted or delayed due to
the presence of a marine mammal, the
activity may not commence or resume
until either the animal has voluntarily
left and been visually confirmed beyond
the shutdown zone or fifteen minutes
have passed without re-detection of the
animal.
(4) Monitoring shall be conducted by
trained observers, who shall have no
other assigned tasks during monitoring
periods. Trained observers shall be
placed at the best vantage point(s)
practicable to monitor for marine
mammals and implement shutdown or
delay procedures when applicable
through communication with the
equipment operator. The Navy shall
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
adhere to the following additional
observer qualifications:
(i) Independent observers (i.e., not
construction personnel) are required;
(ii) At least one observer must have
prior experience working as an observer;
(iii) Other observers may substitute
education (degree in biological science
or related field) or training for
experience;
(iv) Where a team of three or more
observers are required, one observer
shall be designated as lead observer or
monitoring coordinator. The lead
observer must have prior experience
working as an observer; and
(v) The Navy shall submit observer
CVs for approval by NMFS;
(5) The Navy shall implement
shutdown measures if the number of
authorized takes for any particular
species reaches the limit under the
applicable LOA and if such marine
mammals are sighted within the vicinity
of the project area and are approaching
the Level B harassment zone during inwater construction or demolition
activities.
(c) Soft Start. (1) The Navy shall
implement soft start techniques for
impact pile driving. The Navy shall
conduct an initial set of three strikes
from the impact hammer at 40 percent
energy, followed by a 1-minute waiting
period, then two subsequent three strike
sets.
(2) Soft start shall be required for any
impact driving, including at the
beginning of the day, and at any time
following a cessation of impact pile
driving of 30 minutes or longer.
§ 217.95 Requirements for monitoring and
reporting.
(a) Marine Mammal Monitoring
Protocols. The Navy shall conduct
briefings between construction
supervisors and crews and the observer
team prior to the start of all pile driving
and removal activities, and when new
personnel join the work. Trained
observers shall receive a general
environmental awareness briefing
conducted by Navy staff. At minimum,
training shall include identification of
marine mammals that may occur in the
project vicinity and relevant mitigation
and monitoring requirements. All
observers shall have no other
construction-related tasks while
conducting monitoring.
(b) Pile driving or removal shall only
take place when the exclusion and Level
A zones are visible and can be
adequately monitored. If conditions
(e.g., fog) prevent the visual detection of
marine mammals, activities shall not be
initiated. If such conditions arise after
the activity has begun, impact pile
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
driving would be halted but vibratory
pile driving or removal would be
allowed to continue.
(c) Reporting Measures.—(1) Annual
Reports. (i) The Navy shall submit an
annual report within 90 days after each
activity year, starting from the date
when the LOA is issued (for the first
annual report) or from the date when
the previous annual report ended.
(ii) Annual reports would detail the
monitoring protocol, summarize the
data recorded during monitoring, and
estimate the number of marine
mammals that may have been harassed
during the period of the report.
(iii) NMFS would provide comments
within 30 days after receiving annual
reports, and the Navy shall address the
comments and submit revisions within
30 days after receiving NMFS
comments. If no comment is received
from the NMFS within 30 days, the
annual report is considered completed.
(2) Final Report. (i) The Navy shall
submit a comprehensive summary
report to NMFS not later than 90 days
following the conclusion of marine
mammal monitoring efforts described in
this subpart.
(ii) The final report shall synthesize
all data recorded during marine
mammal monitoring, and estimate the
number of marine mammals that may
have been harassed through the entire
project.
(iii) NMFS would provide comments
within 30 days after receiving this
report, and the Navy shall address the
comments and submit revisions within
30 days after receiving NMFS
comments. If no comment is received
from the NMFS within 30 days, the final
report is considered as final.
(3) Reporting of injured or dead
marine mammals:
(i) In the unanticipated event that the
construction or demolition activities
clearly cause the take of a marine
mammal in a prohibited manner, such
as an injury, serious injury, or mortality,
the Navy shall immediately cease all
operations and immediately report the
incident to the NMFS Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the
Greater Atlantic Region Stranding
Coordinators. The report must include
the following information:
(A) Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the incident;
(B) Description of the incident;
(C) Status of all sound source use in
the 24 hours preceding the incident;
(D) Environmental conditions (e.g.,
wind speed and direction, sea state,
cloud cover, visibility, and water
depth);
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 72 / Friday, April 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
(E) Description of marine mammal
observations in the 24 hours preceding
the incident;
(F) Species identification or
description of the animal(s) involved;
(G) The fate of the animal(s); and
(H) Photographs or video footage of
the animal (if equipment is available).
(ii) Activities shall not resume until
NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take.
NMFS shall work with the Navy to
determine what is necessary to
minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA
compliance. The Navy may not resume
their activities until notified by NMFS
via letter, email, or telephone.
(iii) In the event that the Navy
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead PSO determines
that the cause of the injury or death is
unknown and the death is relatively
recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state
of decomposition as described in the
next paragraph), the Navy will
immediately report the incident to the
NMFS Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, and the Greater Atlantic
Regional Stranding Coordinators. The
report must include the same
information identified in paragraph
(c)(3)(i) of this section. Activities may
continue while NMFS reviews the
circumstances of the incident. NMFS
will work with the Navy to determine
whether modifications in the activities
are appropriate.
(iv) In the event that the Navy
discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead protected species
observer 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 shall report the incident to the
NMFS Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, and the Greater Atlantic
Regional Stranding Coordinators, within
24 hours of the discovery. The Navy
shall provide photographs or video
footage (if available) or other
documentation of the stranded animal
sighting to NMFS and the Marine
Mammal Stranding Network. The Navy
can continue its operations under such
a case.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 217.96
Letters of Authorization.
(a) To incidentally take marine
mammals pursuant to these regulations,
the Navy must apply for and obtain
LOAs in accordance with § 216.106 of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Apr 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
this chapter for conducting the activity
identified in § 217.90(c) of this subpart.
(b) LOAs, unless suspended or
revoked, may be effective for a period of
time not to extend beyond the
expiration date of these regulations.
(c) If an LOA(s) expires prior to the
expiration date of these regulations, the
Navy may apply for and obtain a
renewal of the LOA(s).
(d) In the event of projected changes
to the activity or to mitigation,
monitoring, reporting (excluding
changes made pursuant to the adaptive
management provision of § 217.97(c)(1))
required by an LOA, the Navy must
apply for and obtain a modification of
LOAs as described in § 217.97.
(e) Each LOA shall set forth:
(1) Permissible methods of incidental
taking;
(2) Means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact (i.e.,
mitigation) on the species, their habitat,
and the availability of the species for
subsistence uses; and
(3) Requirements for monitoring and
reporting.
(f) Issuance of the LOA(s) shall be
based on a determination that the level
of taking shall be consistent with the
findings made for the total taking
allowable under these regulations.
(g) Notice of issuance or denial of the
LOA(s) shall be published in the
Federal Register within 30 days of a
determination.
§ 217.97 Renewals and modifications of
Letters of Authorization.
(a) An LOA issued under § 216.106 of
this subchapter and § 217.96 for the
activity identified in § 217.90(c) shall be
renewed or modified upon request by
the applicant, provided that:
(1) The proposed specified activity
and mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures, as well as the
anticipated impacts, are the same as
those described and analyzed for these
regulations (excluding changes made
pursuant to the adaptive management
provision in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section), and
(2) NMFS determines that the
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
measures required by the previous
LOA(s) under these regulations were
implemented.
(b) For LOA modification or renewal
requests by the applicant that include
changes to the activity or the mitigation,
monitoring, or reporting measures
(excluding changes made pursuant to
the adaptive management provision in
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
16043
paragraph (c)(1) of this section) that do
not change the findings made for the
regulations or result in no more than a
minor change in the total estimated
number of takes (or distribution by
species or years), NMFS may publish a
notice of proposed LOA in the Federal
Register, including the associated
analysis of the change, and solicit
public comment before issuing the LOA.
(c) An LOA issued under § 216.106 of
this chapter and § 217.96 for the activity
identified in § 217.90 (c) may be
modified by NMFS under the following
circumstances:
(1) Adaptive Management—After
consulting with the Navy regarding the
practicability of the modifications,
NMFS may modify (including by adding
or removing measures) the existing
mitigation, monitoring, or reporting
measures if doing so creates a
reasonable likelihood of more
effectively accomplishing the goals of
the mitigation and monitoring set forth
in the preamble for these regulations.
(i) Possible sources of data that could
contribute to the decision to modify the
mitigation, monitoring, or reporting
measures in an LOA:
(A) Results from the Navy’s
monitoring from the previous year(s).
(B) Results from other marine
mammal and/or sound research or
studies; or
(C) Any information that reveals
marine mammals may have been taken
in a manner, extent or number not
authorized by these regulations or
subsequent LOAs.
(ii) If, through adaptive management,
the modifications to the mitigation,
monitoring, or reporting measures are
substantial, NMFS shall publish a notice
of proposed LOA in the Federal
Register and solicit public comment.
(2) Emergencies—If NMFS determines
that an emergency exists that poses a
significant risk to the well-being of the
species or stocks of marine mammals
specified in LOAs issued pursuant to
§ 216.106 of this chapter and § 217.96,
an LOA may be modified without prior
notice or opportunity for public
comment. Notice would be published in
the Federal Register within thirty days
of the action.
§ 217.98
[Reserved]
§ 217.99
[Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2018–07728 Filed 4–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 72 (Friday, April 13, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16027-16043]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-07728]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 217
[Docket No. 170908887-8328-01]
RIN 0648-BH24
Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals
Incidental to U.S. Navy Pier Construction Activities at Naval Submarine
Base New London
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
[[Page 16028]]
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments and information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the U.S. Navy (Navy) for
authorization to take marine mammals incidental to the pier
construction activities conducted at the Naval Submarine Base New
London in Groton, Connecticut, over the course of five years (2018-
2023). As required by the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is
proposing regulations to govern that take, and requests comments on the
proposed regulations. NMFS will consider public comments prior to
making any final decision on the issuance of the requested MMPA
authorization and agency responses will be summarized in the final
notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than May 14,
2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2018-0047,
by any of the following methods:
Electronic submissions: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal, Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0047, click the ``Comment Now!'' icon,
complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
Mail: Submit comments to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits
and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910-3225.
Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period,
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business
information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily
by the sender may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential
Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required
fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic
comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file
formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS; phone: (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:
Purpose and Need for Regulatory Action
This proposed rule would establish a framework under the authority
of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) to allow for the authorization of
take of marine mammals incidental to the Navy's construction activities
related to marine structure maintenance and pile replacement at a
facility in Groton, Connecticut.
We received an application from the Navy requesting five-year
regulations and authorization to take multiple species of marine
mammals. Take would occur by Level A and Level B harassment incidental
to impact and vibratory pile driving. Please see ``Background'' below
for definitions of harassment.
Legal Authority for the Proposed Action
Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)(A)) directs
the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but
not intentional taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S.
citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial
fishing) within a specified geographical region for up to five years
if, after notice and public comment, the agency makes certain findings
and issues regulations that set forth permissible methods of taking
pursuant to that activity and other means of effecting the ``least
practicable adverse impact'' on the affected species or stocks and
their habitat (see the discussion below in the ``Proposed Mitigation''
section), as well as monitoring and reporting requirements. Section
101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA and the implementing regulations at 50 CFR
part 216, subpart I provide the legal basis for issuing this proposed
rule containing five-year regulations, and for any subsequent letters
of authorization (LOAs). As directed by this legal authority, this
proposed rule contains mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements.
Summary of Major Provisions Within the Proposed Rule
Following is a summary of the major provisions of this proposed
rule regarding Navy construction activities. These measures include:
Required monitoring of the construction areas to detect
the presence of marine mammals before beginning construction
activities.
Shutdown of construction activities under certain
circumstances to avoid injury of marine mammals.
Soft start for impact pile driving to allow marine mammals
the opportunity to leave the area prior to beginning impact pile
driving at full power.
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act
of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary
of Commerce (Secretary) to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional taking of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a
specified activity (other than commercial fishing) if certain findings
are made and regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the
public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking
are set forth.
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as an
impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably
expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or
survival.
The MMPA states that the term ``take'' means to harass, hunt,
capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine
mammal. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here,
the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of pursuit, torment, or
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the
potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild
by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering (Level B harassment).
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Issuance of an MMPA authorization requires compliance with NEPA.
In accordance with NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA
Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, we have
[[Page 16029]]
preliminarily determined that issuance of this rule and subsequent LOAs
qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.
Issuance of the rule is consistent with categories of activities
identified in CE B4 of the Companion Manual and we have not identified
any extraordinary circumstances listed in Chapter 4 of the Companion
Manual that would preclude use of this categorical exclusion. We will
consider all public comments prior to making a final decision regarding
application of CE B4.
We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice as
we complete the NEPA process, prior to making a final decision on the
incidental take authorization request.
Summary of Request
On March 22, 2017, NMFS received an application from the Navy
requesting authorization to incidentally take harbor and gray seals, by
Level A and Level B harassment, incidental to noise exposure resulting
from conducting pier construction activities at the Navy Submarine Base
New London in Groton, Connecticut, from October 2018 to March 2022.
These regulations would be valid for a period of five years. On August
31, 2017, NMFS deemed the application adequate and complete.
The use of sound sources such as those described in the application
(e.g., piledriving) may result in the take of marine mammals through
disruption of behavioral patterns or may cause auditory injury of
marine mammals. Therefore, incidental take authorization under the MMPA
is warranted.
Description of the Specified Activity
Overview
The Navy is planning to demolish Pier 32 and Pier 10 and construct
a new Pier 32 at Naval Submarine Base New London (SUBASE), Groton,
Connecticut.
Recent Global Shore Infrastructure Plans and Regional Shore
Infrastructure Plans identified a requirement for 11 adequate submarine
berths at SUBASE. There are currently six adequate berths available via
Piers 6, 17, and 31, leaving a shortfall of five adequate berths. The
remaining submarine berthing piers (8, 10, 12, 32, and 33) are
classified as inadequate because of their narrow width and short length
compared to current SSN (hull classification) berthing design standards
(Unified Facilities Criteria 4-152-01, Design Standards for Piers and
Wharves).
The Proposed Action is to demolish Pier 32 and Pier 10, and replace
them with a new Pier 32 that meets all current Navy SSN pier standards
to accommodate Virginia Class submarines. The Proposed Action includes:
Construction of a new, larger Pier 32 to be located
approximately 150 feet (ft) north of the current location;
Upgrade of the quaywall, north of Pier 32, may be required
to accommodate a crane weight test area;
Demolition of existing Pier 32 and Pier 10;
Dredging of the sediment mounds beneath the existing Pier
32 (approximately 9,400 cubic yards [cy]) and the existing Pier 10
(approximately 10,000 cy) to a depth of 36 ft below mean lower low
water (-36 ft MLLW) plus 2 ft of over dredge (additional dredge depth
that allows for varying degrees of accuracy of different types of
dredging equipment). Any remaining timber piles beneath the existing
piers would be pulled with a strap;
Dredging of the berthing areas alongside the proposed new
Pier 32 (approximately 74,000 sq ft) to a depth of -38 feet MLLW plus 2
feet of over dredge; and
Dredging of two additional areas (approximately 10,200 cy
and 31,100 cy) in the Thames River navigation channel to a depth of -36
ft MLLW plus 2 ft of over dredge.
Two species of marine mammals are expected to potentially be
present in the Thames River near SUBASE: Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina)
and gray seal (Halichoeris grypus). Harbor seals and gray seals are
more likely to occur at SUBASE from September to May.
Dates and Duration
Pile installation for the new Pier 32 and pile removal associated
with the demolition of the existing Piers 32 and 10 is expected to take
a total of approximately 3.5 years. Construction and demolition
activities are expected to begin in October 2018 and proceed to
completion in March 2022.
In-water activities expected to result in incidental takes of
marine mammals would occur during approximately 35 non-consecutive
months of the project beginning in October 2018. The estimated duration
of pile installation and removal, including duration of the vibratory
and impact hammer activities, is provided in Table 1 below for each
year of construction and demolition. Also included in the Table are the
durations for wood piles and steel fender piles to be pulled by a crane
using a sling or strap attached to the pile. The durations of proposed
pile driving/removal activities are primarily derived from information
provided by Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Mid-Atlantic
Public Works Department, Facilities Engineering and Acquisition
Department (FEAD) Design Manager and the record of pile driving
activities documented during the construction of SUBASE Pier 31
(American Bridge 2010-2011). The proposed new Pier 32 would be
comparable to Pier 31 in design and location and would have similar
sub-surface geological conditions along this reach of the Thames River.
Specified Geographical Region
SUBASE is located in the towns of Groton and Ledyard in New London
County, Connecticut. SUBASE occupies approximately 687 acres along the
east bank of the Thames River, 6 mi north of the river's mouth at Long
Island Sound (Figure 1-1 in LOA application). The Thames River is the
easternmost of Connecticut's three major rivers and is formed by the
confluence of the Shetucket and Yantic rivers in Norwich, from which it
flows south for 12 mi to New London Harbor. The Thames River discharges
freshwater and sediment from the interior of eastern Connecticut into
Long Island Sound. It is the main drainage of the Thames River Major
Drainage Basin, which encompasses approximately 3,900 square mi of
eastern Connecticut and central Massachusetts (USACE 2015). The lower
Thames River and New London Harbor sustains a variety of military,
commercial, and recreational vessel usage. New London Harbor provides
protection to a number of these.
Detailed Description of Specified Activity
1. Construction of New Pier 32
Pile driving would most likely be conducted using a barge and
crane. However, the contractor may choose to use a temporary pile-
supported work trestle that would be constructed by driving
approximately 60 steel 14-inch diameter H-piles.
Structural support piles for Pier 32 would consist of approximately
120 concrete-filled steel pipe piles measuring 36 inches in diameter.
The piles would be driven between 40 ft below the mudline near the
shore and 150 ft below the mudline at the end of the pier. Fender piles
would also be installed and would consist of approximately 194
fiberglass-reinforced plastic piles measuring 16 inches in diameter.
Special construction features would include drilling rock sockets
into bedrock in an estimated 60 places to hold the piles. A rotary
drill using a rock core barrel and rock muck bucket would be used
inside of the steel pipe
[[Page 16030]]
piles to drill a minimum of 2 ft down into bedrock to create the rock
socket that would be filled with concrete. Sediment would be lifted out
and re-deposited within 10 ft of the pipe pile during rock socket
drilling. Underwater noise from the rock drill as it is operated inside
a steel pipe would be much less than that produced by vibratory and
impact pile driving of the steel pipes (Martin et al., 2012).
Impact and vibratory hammers would be used for installing piles
where rock sockets are not required. Based on previous construction
projects at SUBASE, it is estimated that an average of one 36-inch pile
per week (with driving on multiple days) and two plastic piles per day
would be installed. The per-pile drive time for each pile type and
method will vary based on environmental conditions (including
substrate) where each pile is driven. Impact or vibratory pile driving
may result in harassment of marine mammals.
Construction of Pier 32 may also require upgrade of the quaywall
north of Pier 32 to provide the reinforcement needed to support a crane
weight test area. Because there is potential that a work trestle would
be used and the requirement for the upgrade will not be determined
until final design, the pile driving is included in the analyzed
activities. The quaywall upgrade would include up to approximately
eighteen 30-inch diameter concrete-filled steel pipe piles that would
be installed into rock sockets driven into bedrock adjacent and
parallel to the existing steel sheet pile wall. Pile caps and a
concrete deck would be installed above the piles. A fender system
composed of approximately nine 16-inch diameter plastic piles would
also be installed into rock sockets approximately 2 ft in front of the
new deck.
2. Demolition and Removal of Pier 32 and Pier 10
When the new Pier 32 is operational, the existing Pier 32 would be
demolished using a floating crane and a series of barges. Pier 10 would
be demolished after the demolition of existing Pier 32. The concrete
decks of the piers would be cut into pieces and placed on the barges.
Demolition debris would be sorted and removed by barge and recycled to
the maximum extent practicable. Any residual waste would be disposed of
offsite in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local
regulations. Once the decks are removed, the steel H piles and pipe
piles that support the existing pier would be pulled using a vibratory
extraction method (hammer). The vibratory hammer would be attached to
the pile head with a clamp. Once attached, vibration would be applied
to the pile that would liquefy the adjacent sediment allowing the pile
to be removed.
Demolition of existing Pier 32 would include the removal by
vibratory driver-extractor (hammer) of approximately 60 steel piles
from the temporary work trestle, 120 concrete-encased steel H-piles,
and 70 steel H-piles. Fifty-six wood piles would be pulled with a
sling. Demolition of Pier 10 would include the removal by vibratory
hammer of 24 concrete-encased, steel H-piles and 166 cast-in-place,
reinforced concrete piles. Eighty-four steel fender piles and 41 wood
piles would be pulled with a sling. A total of 440 piles would be
removed by vibratory hammer for both piers and the work trestle.
3. Dredging of Pier Areas and Navigation Channel
The Proposed Action would also include dredging of approximately
60,000 cy of sediment in two areas of the Thames River navigation
channel near Pier 32, the berthing areas alongside the new Pier 32, and
underneath existing Pier 32 and Pier 10 after demolition. All dredging
for the Proposed Action would support safe maneuvering for entry and
departure of submarines at the proposed new Pier 32 and existing Piers
8, 12, 17, and 31. The proposed design dredge depth in all areas to be
dredged is -36 ft relative to MLLW plus 2 ft of over dredge.
Dredging would be conducted in two phases. Dredging of the new Pier
32 area and the northern portion of the channel dredge areas would be
conducted in the first construction year. The footprints of the
demolished Pier 32 and Pier 10 and the southern portions of the channel
dredge areas would be dredged after demolition of the existing piers in
the fourth year of construction. Dredging would occur only during the
period between October 1 and January 31 to avoid potential impacts on
shellfish and fisheries resources in the area. Each dredging and
disposal phase would take approximately 2 weeks to complete.
After the demolition of Pier 32, any remnant timber piles present
underneath existing Pier 32 would be pulled with a strap. The sediment
mound that has formed beneath the pier would be dredged (approximately
9,400 cy) to the design depth. Dredging would also be required
immediately west of Piers 31 and 32 (approximately 10,200 cy) and along
the eastern edge (approximately 31,100 cy) of the navigation channel to
achieve the required minimum depths to maneuver the submarines. Once
the existing Pier 10 and any remnant timber piles are removed, the
sediment mound beneath the old pier would be dredged (approximately
10,000 cy). Since dredging and disposal activities would be slow moving
and conspicuous to marine mammals, they pose negligible risks of
physical injury. An environmental bucket would be used for dredging to
minimize turbidity compared with the turbidity generated by hydraulic
dredging. Noise emitted by dredging equipment is broadband, with most
energy below 1 kilohertz (kHz), and would be similar to that generated
by vessels and maritime industrial activities that regularly operate
within the action area (Clarke et al., 2002; Todd et al., 2015). Due to
the low noise output and slow and steady transiting nature of the
dredging activity, NMFS does not consider it would result to the level
of harassment under the MMPA. Therefore, dredging is not considered
further in this document.
Table 1--Summary of Construction Activities for the Navy Submarine Base New London
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Strike number
Activity Pile Pile type Method Piles/day driving (impact) or Duration
number days duration(s) per pile
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pier 32 construction............. 60 14'' steel H-pile Impact............. 4 15 1,000 strikes....... 3 weeks.
temp. work trestle.
60 36'' x 100' Vibratory hammer & 0.5 120 1,200 seconds....... 6 months.
concrete-filled rock socket
steel pipe piles. drilling.
[[Page 16031]]
20 36'' x 180' Vibratory hammer... 0.2 100 1,800 seconds....... 5 months.
concrete-filled
steel piles.
20 36'' x 180' Impact hammer to 2.5 8 1,000 strikes....... 2 weeks.
concrete-filled last 20-40 ft.
steel piles.
Quaywall upgrade................. 18 30'' x 100' Rock socket 0.5 36 15,000 seconds...... Concurrent with Pier
concrete-filled drilling. 32.
steel pipe piles.
9 16'' fiberglass Rock socket 0.5 18 7,500 seconds.......
reinforced plastic drilling.
piles.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pier 32 construction............. 40 36'' x 180' Vibratory hammer... 0.2 200 1,800 seconds....... 10 months.
concrete-filled
steel piles.
40 36'' x 180' Impact hammer to 2.5 16 1,000 strikes....... 3.5 weeks.
concrete-filled drive last 20-40
steel piles. ft.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pier 32 construction............. 194 16'' fiberglass Vibratory hammer... 2 97 1,200 seconds....... 5 months.
reinforced plastic
piles.
64 16'' fiberglass Impact hammer to 2.5 26 1,000 strikes....... 1.5 months.
reinforced plastic drive last 20-40
piles. ft.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pier 32 demolition............... 60 14'' steel H-piles Vibratory hammer 5 14 1,200 seconds....... 3 weeks.
temp. work trestle. (removal).
24 33'' concrete- Vibratory hammer 2 12 1,200 seconds....... 3.5 months.
encased steel H (removal).
piles.
96 24'' concrete- Vibratory hammer 2 48 1,200 seconds.......
encased steel H (removal).
piles.
70 14'' steel H piles. Vibratory hammer 5 14 1,200 seconds.......
(removal).
Pier 10 demolition............... 24 24'' concrete- Vibratory hammer 9.5 2.5 1,200 seconds....... 0.5 month.
encased steel H (removal).
piles.
166 24'' cast-in-place Vibratory hammer 9.5 17.5 1,200 seconds....... 0.5 month.
reinforced (removal).
concrete piles.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are
described in detail later in this document (please see ``Proposed
Mitigation'' and ``Proposed Monitoring and Reporting'').
Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activities
Marine mammal species that could be present in the Study Area and
their associated stocks are presented in Table 2 along with an
abundance estimate, an associated coefficient of variation value, and
best/minimum abundance estimates. There are other species of marine
mammals, including a number of cetaceans, that are known to be present
in nearby Long Island Sound. However, since received noise levels from
the project are not expected to reach the mouth of the Thames River due
to geographical boundaries, these species are excluded from further
discussion. The Navy proposes to take individuals of harbor seal and
gray seal by Level A and B harassment incidental to pier construction
activities. Neither of these marine mammal species is listed as
endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Information on the status, distribution, and abundance of these
seal species in the Study Area may be viewed in the Navy's LOA
application. Additional information on the general biology and ecology
of marine mammals are included in the application. In addition, NMFS
annually publishes Stock Assessment Reports (SARs) for all marine
mammals in U.S. EEZ waters, including stocks that occur within the
Study Area--U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine Mammal Stock
Assessment Reports (Hayes et al., 2017).
Table 2--Marine Mammals That May Occur Within Navy Submarine Base New London Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock abundance
Common name Scientific name Stock ESA/MMPA best/ minimum Occurrence in
status population study area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suborder Pinnipedia
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (true seals)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray seal................... Halichoerus Western North .............. 505,000 *...... Thames River.
grypus. Atlantic.
Harbor seal................. Phoca vitulina. Western North .............. 75,834 (0.15)/ Thames River.
Atlantic. 66,884.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* There are an estimated 27,131 seals in U.S. waters; however, gray seals form one population not distinguished
on the basis of the U.S./Canada boundary.
[[Page 16032]]
Marine Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine
mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine
mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et
al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect
this, Southall et al. (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided
into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or estimated
hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response data,
audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques,
anatomical modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements
of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes
(i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2016) described
generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 dB
threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception
for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was
deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall
et al. (2007) retained. The functional groups and the associated
frequencies are indicated below (note that these frequency ranges
correspond to the range for the composite group, with the entire range
not necessarily reflecting the capabilities of every species within
that group):
Low-frequency cetaceans (mysticetes): Generalized hearing
is estimated to occur between approximately 7 Hz and 35 kHz;
Mid-frequency cetaceans (larger toothed whales, beaked
whales, and most delphinids): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur
between approximately 150 Hz and 160 kHz;
High-frequency cetaceans (porpoises, river dolphins, and
members of the genera Kogia and Cephalorhynchus; including two members
of the genus Lagenorhynchus, on the basis of recent echolocation data
and genetic data): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between
approximately 275 Hz and 160 kHz;
Phocidae (true seals): Generalized hearing is estimated to
occur between approximately 50 Hz to 86 kHz;
Otariidae (eared seals): Generalized hearing is estimated
to occur between 60 Hz and 39 kHz.
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt,
2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2016) for a review of available information.
Only two marine mammal species (both are phocid species) have the
reasonable potential to co-occur with the proposed construction
activities. Please refer to Table 2.
Potential Impacts to Marine Mammals
The Navy's Submarine Base New London pier construction using in-
water pile driving and pile removal could adversely affect marine
mammal species and stocks by exposing them to elevated noise levels in
the vicinity of the activity area.
Exposure to high intensity sound for a sufficient duration may
result in auditory effects such as a noise-induced threshold shift
(TS)--an increase in the auditory threshold after exposure to noise
(Finneran et al., 2005). Factors that influence the amount of threshold
shift include the amplitude, duration, frequency content, temporal
pattern, and energy distribution of noise exposure. The magnitude of
hearing threshold shift normally decreases over time following
cessation of the noise exposure. The amount of TS just after exposure
is the initial TS. If the TS eventually returns to zero (i.e., the
threshold returns to the pre-exposure value), it is a temporary
threshold shift (TTS) (Southall et al., 2007).
Threshold Shift (noise-induced loss of hearing)--When animals
exhibit reduced hearing sensitivity (i.e., sounds must be louder for an
animal to detect them) following exposure to an intense sound or sound
for long duration, it is referred to as a noise-induced TS. An animal
can experience TTS or permanent threshold shift (PTS). TTS can last
from minutes or hours to days (i.e., there is complete recovery), can
occur in specific frequency ranges (i.e., an animal might only have a
temporary loss of hearing sensitivity between the frequencies of 1 and
10 kHz), and can be of varying amounts (for example, an animal's
hearing sensitivity might be reduced initially by only 6 dB or reduced
by 30 dB). PTS is permanent, but some recovery is possible. PTS can
also occur in a specific frequency range and amount as mentioned above
for TTS.
For marine mammals, published data are limited to the captive
bottlenose dolphin, beluga, harbor porpoise, and Yangtze finless
porpoise (Finneran et al., 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2010a, 2010b;
Finneran and Schlundt, 2010; Lucke et al., 2009; Mooney et al., 2009a,
2009b; Popov et al., 2011a, 2011b; Kastelein et al., 2012a; Schlundt et
al., 2000; Nachtigall et al., 2003, 2004). For pinnipeds in water, data
are limited to measurements of TTS in harbor seals, an elephant seal,
and California sea lions (Kastak et al., 1999, 2005; Kastelein et al.,
2012b).
Lucke et al. (2009) found a TS of a harbor porpoise after exposing
it to airgun noise with a received sound pressure level (SPL) at 200.2
dB (peak-to-peak) re: 1 micropascal ([mu]Pa), which corresponds to a
sound exposure level of 164.5 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa\2\ s after integrating
exposure. Because the airgun noise is a broadband impulse, one cannot
directly determine the equivalent of root mean square (rms) SPL from
the reported peak-to-peak SPLs. However, applying a conservative
conversion factor of 16 dB for broadband signals from seismic surveys
(McCauley, et al., 2000) to correct for the difference between peak-to-
peak levels reported in Lucke et al. (2009) and rms SPLs, the rms SPL
for TTS would be approximately 184 dB re: 1 [mu]Pa, and the received
levels associated with PTS (Level A harassment) would be higher.
Therefore, based on these studies, NMFS recognizes that TTS of harbor
porpoises is lower than other cetacean species empirically tested
(Finneran & Schlundt, 2010; Finneran et al., 2002; Kastelein and
Jennings, 2012).
Marine mammal hearing plays a critical role in communication with
conspecifics, and interpretation of environmental cues for purposes
such as predator avoidance and prey capture. Depending on the degree
(elevation of threshold in dB), duration (i.e., recovery time), and
frequency range of TTS, and the context in which it is experienced, TTS
can have effects on marine mammals ranging from discountable to serious
(similar to those discussed in auditory masking, below). For example, a
marine mammal may be able to readily compensate for a brief, relatively
small amount of TTS in a non-critical frequency range that occurs
during a time where ambient noise is lower and there are not as many
competing sounds present. Alternatively, a larger amount and longer
duration of TTS sustained during time when communication is critical
for successful mother/calf interactions could have more serious
impacts. Also, depending on the degree
[[Page 16033]]
and frequency range, the effects of PTS on an animal could range in
severity, although it is considered generally more serious because it
is a permanent condition. Of note, reduced hearing sensitivity as a
simple function of aging has been observed in marine mammals, as well
as humans and other taxa (Southall et al., 2007), so one can infer that
strategies exist for coping with this condition to some degree, though
likely not without cost.
In addition, chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-
intensity, noise could cause masking at particular frequencies for
marine mammals, which utilize sound for vital biological functions
(Clark et al., 2009). Acoustic masking is when other noises such as
from human sources interfere with animal detection of acoustic signals
such as communication calls, echolocation sounds, and environmental
sounds important to marine mammals. Therefore, under certain
circumstances, marine mammals whose acoustical sensors or environment
are being severely masked could also be impaired from maximizing their
performance fitness in survival and reproduction.
Masking occurs at the frequency band that the animals utilize.
Therefore, since noise generated from vibratory pile driving is mostly
concentrated at low frequency ranges, it may have less effect on high
frequency echolocation sounds by odontocetes (toothed whales). However,
lower frequency man-made noises are more likely to affect detection of
communication calls and other potentially important natural sounds such
as surf and prey noise. It may also affect communication signals when
they occur near the noise band and thus reduce the communication space
of animals (e.g., Clark et al., 2009) and cause increased stress levels
(e.g., Foote et al., 2004; Holt et al., 2009).
Unlike TS, masking, which can occur over large temporal and spatial
scales, can potentially affect the species at population, community, or
even ecosystem levels, as well as individual levels. Masking affects
both senders and receivers of the signals and could have long-term
chronic effects on marine mammal species and populations. Recent
science suggests that low frequency ambient sound levels have increased
by as much as 20 dB (more than three times in terms of sound pressure
level) in the world's ocean from pre-industrial periods, and most of
these increases are from distant shipping (Hildebrand, 2009). For the
Navy's Submarine Base New London pier construction, noises from
vibratory pile driving and pile removal contribute to the elevated
ambient noise levels in the project area, thus increasing potential for
or severity of masking. Baseline ambient noise levels in the vicinity
of project area are high due to ongoing shipping, construction and
other activities in the Thames River.
Finally, marine mammals' exposure to certain sounds could lead to
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), such as: Changing
durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or
moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities;
changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as
socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive
behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of
areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g.,
pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).
The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise
depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and
their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et
al., 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received level of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa
(rms) to predict the onset of behavioral harassment from impulse noises
(such as impact pile driving), and 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for
continuous noises (such as vibratory pile driving). For the Navy's
Submarine Base New London pier construction, both 160- and 120-dB
levels are considered for effects analysis because the Navy plans to
use both impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving and pile
removal.
The biological significance of many of these behavioral
disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected
disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral
modification could be biologically significant if the change affects
growth, survival, and/or reproduction, which depends on the severity,
duration, and context of the effects.
Potential Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
The primary potential impacts to marine mammal habitat are
associated with elevated sound levels produced by vibratory pile
removal and pile driving in the area. However, other potential impacts
to the surrounding habitat from physical disturbance are also possible.
With regard to fish as a prey source for cetaceans and pinnipeds,
fish are known to hear and react to sounds and to use sound to
communicate (Tavolga et al., 1981) and possibly avoid predators (Wilson
and Dill, 2002). Experiments have shown that fish can sense both the
strength and direction of sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors
determining whether a fish can sense a sound signal, and potentially
react to it, are the frequency of the signal and the strength of the
signal in relation to the natural background noise level.
The level of sound at which a fish will react or alter its behavior
is usually well above the detection level. Fish have been found to
react to sounds when the sound level increased to about 20 dB above the
detection level of 120 dB (Ona, 1988); however, the response threshold
can depend on the time of year and the fish's physiological condition
(Engas et al., 1993). In general, fish react more strongly to pulses of
sound (such as noise from impact pile driving) rather than continuous
signals (such as noise from vibratory pile driving) (Blaxter et al.,
1981), and a quicker alarm response is elicited when the sound signal
intensity rises rapidly compared to sound rising more slowly to the
same level.
During in-water pile driving only a small fraction of the available
habitat would be ensonified at any given time. Disturbance to fish
species would be short-term and fish would return to their pre-
disturbance behavior once the pile driving activity ceases. Thus, the
proposed construction would have little, if any, impact on marine
mammals' prey availability in the area where construction work is
planned.
Disposal of dredged material in the confined aquatic disposal (CAD)
cell would have a direct impact to the benthos as a result of burial
and suffocation. Most, if not all, sessile marine invertebrates are not
expected to survive burial. Some motile marine organisms would be
buried and unable to survive, while others such as burrowing
specialists, may survive. Survival rates would depend primarily on
burial depth. From 2010 through 2012, biannual benthic sampling of the
CAD cell area was conducted to assess the timeframe for recovery of
benthic populations of the CAD cells, in accordance with Water Quality
Certificate conditions for the 2010 waterfront maintenance dredging
project at the submarine base. The sampling results of the CAD cell
were compared to sampling results of an undisturbed reference site
located upriver. The degree of similarity of population and community
structures was assessed. The results of the three year survey program
indicated that a progressive recovery to a stable benthic population
was occurring at the CAD cell. As demonstrated by the biannual benthic
survey, benthic assemblages are
[[Page 16034]]
anticipated to recover within three to five years after the completion
of the project, and disposal impacts would not be significant
(CardnoTEC 2015).
Project activities would temporarily disturb benthic and water
column habitats and change bottom topography to a minor degree, but
effects on prey availability and foraging conditions for marine mammals
would be temporary and limited to the immediate area of pier
demolition/construction, dredging, and disposal. The new surfaces of
piles and exposed concrete on the new pier would likely result in
establishment of fouling communities on the new structures, and may
attract fish and benthic organisms resulting in small scale shifts in
prey distribution.
There are no known haulouts within the vicinity of the Proposed
Action.
The project activities would not permanently modify existing marine
mammal habitat. The activities may kill some fish and cause other fish
to leave the area temporarily, thus impacting marine mammals' foraging
opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging range; but, because
of the short duration of the activities and the relatively small area
of the habitat that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal
habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term negative
consequences. Therefore, given the consideration of potential impacts
to marine mammal prey species and their physical environment, the
Navy's proposed construction activity at the submarine base would not
adversely affect marine mammal habitat.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
proposed to be authorized through this rule, which will inform both
NMFS' consideration of whether the number of takes is ``small'' and the
negligible impact determination.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, 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 harassments, in
the form of mild permanent hearing threshold shift (Level A) and
disruption of behavioral patterns (Level B) for individual marine
mammals resulting from exposure to noise generated from impact pile
driving and vibratory pile driving and removal. Based on the nature of
the activity and the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation
measures (e.g., shutdown measures--discussed in detail below in
Mitigation section), serious injury or mortality is neither anticipated
nor authorized.
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 take estimate.
Acoustic Thresholds
Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic
thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above
which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be
behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS
of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources--Though significantly
driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from
anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by
other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability,
duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving
animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral
context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007,
Ellison et al., 2011). Based on what the available science indicates
and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is
both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a
generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the
onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals are
likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider Level B
harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for continuous (e.g.,
vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)
for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent
(e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
Applicant's proposed activity includes the use of continuous
(vibratory pile driving and removal) and impulsive (impact pile
driving) sources, and therefore the 120 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)
levels 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).
Applicant's proposed activity includes the use of non-impulsive
(vibratory pile driving and pile removal) sources.
These thresholds were developed by compiling and synthesizing the
best available science and soliciting input multiple times from both
the public and peer reviewers to inform the final product, and are
provided in the table below. The references, analysis, and methodology
used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS' 2016
Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.
Table 3--Current Acoustic Exposure Criteria for Non-explosive Sound Underwater
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset thresholds Behavioral thresholds
Hearing group ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans. Lpk,flat: 219 LE,LF,24h: 199 Lrms,flat: 160 dB..... Lrms,flat: 120 dB.
dB; LE,LF,24h: dB.
183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans. Lpk,flat: 230 LE,MF,24h: 198
dB; LE,MF,24h: dB.
185 dB.
[[Page 16035]]
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans Lpk,flat: 202 LE,HF,24h: 173
dB; LE,HF,24h: dB.
155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) Lpk,flat: 218 LE,PW,24h: 201
(Underwater). dB; LE,PW,24h: dB.
185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) Lpk,flat: 232 LE,OW,24h: 219
(Underwater). dB; LE,OW,24h: dB.
203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for
calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level
thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [mu]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has
a reference value of 1[mu]Pa2s. In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National
Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by ANSI as incorporating
frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ``flat'' is
being included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized
hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the
designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and
that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be
exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it
is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be
exceeded.
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds.
Source Levels
The project includes impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving
and removal of various piles. Source levels of pile driving and removal
activities are based on reviews of measurements of the same or similar
types and dimensions of piles available in the literature (Caltrans,
2015; Martin et al., 2012; Dazey et al., 2012; WSDOT, 2007, 2012;
NAVFAC Southwest, 2014). Based on this review, the following source
levels are assumed for the underwater noise produced by construction
activities:
Impact driving of 14-inch steel H-piles for the temporary
trestle is assumed to generate a peak SPL of 208 dB re 1[mu]Pa, and a
root-mean-squared (rms) SPL of 187 dB re 1 [mu]Pa, based on adding 10
dB to a single-strike SEL of 177 dB re 1 [mu]Pa\2\-sec at 10 m (33 ft)
reported by Caltrans (2015). This assumption is based on differences
between SEL and rms values of other piles reported by Caltrans (2015).
Impact driving of 36-inch steel piles would be assumed to
generate an instantaneous peak SPL of 209 dB, an rms SPL of 198 dB, and
a SEL of 183 dB at the 10 m (33 ft) distance, based on the weighted
average of similar pile driving at the Bangor Naval Base, Naval Base
Point Loma, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)
Anacortes Ferry Terminal, and WSDOT Mukilteo Ferry Terminal.
Vibratory driving of 36-inch steel piles would be assumed
to generate a 168 dB SPLrms and a 168 dB SEL at 10 m (33 ft), based on
the weighted average of similar pile driving measured at Bangor Naval
Base, Naval Base Point Loma, and WSDOT Anacortes Ferry Terminal.
Impact driving of the 16-inch plastic piles, for which no
data specific to that size and composition are available, are assumed
to be similar to available data on13-inch plastic piles: 177 dB peak
SPL and 153 dB rms SPL. No SEL measurements were made, but the SEL at
10 m (33 ft) can be assumed to be 9 dB less than the rms value (based
on differences of rms and SEL values of in-water impact pile-driving
data of other piles summarized by Caltrans 2015), which would put the
SEL value for the plastic piles at 144 dB. For vibratory pile driving
of the same plastic piles, the SPL rms of impact driving is used as a
proxy due to lack of measurement.
Vibratory removal of 14-inch steel H-piles is
conservatively assumed to have rms and SEL values of 158 dB based on a
relatively large set of measurements from the vibratory installation of
14-inch H-piles.
Drilling the rock sockets is assumed to be an
intermittent, non-impulsive, broadband noise source, similar to
vibratory pile driving, but using a rotary drill inside a pipe or
casing, which is expected to reduce sound levels below those of typical
pile driving (Martin et al. 2012). Measurements made during a pile
drilling project in 1-5 m (3-16 ft) depths at Santa Rosa Island, CA, by
Dazey et al., (2012) appear to provide reasonable proxy source levels
for the proposed activities. Dazey et al. (2012) reported average rms
source levels ranging from 151 to 157 dB re 1[micro]Pa, normalized to a
distance of 1 m (3 ft) from the pile, during activities that included
casing removal and installation as well as drilling, with an average of
154 dB re 1[micro]Pa during 62 days that spanned all related drilling
activities during a single season.
Since no source level data are available for vibratory
extraction of concrete or concrete encased 24-inch and 33-inch steel H-
piles, conservative proxy source levels were based on the summary
values reported for vibratory driving of 24-inch steel sheet piles by
Caltrans (2015). There are two reasons for using 24-in steel sheet pile
driving source level as a proxy: (1) In general, pile extraction
generates less noise in comparison to pile driving, and (2) piling of
concrete or concrete encased piles generated less noise in comparison
to steel piles. Since there are no source levels available for
extraction of the 24-in concrete or concrete encased piles and 33-in
steel H-piles, we defer to the pile driving source level of 24-in steel
sheet pile reported by Caltrans (2015). The Caltrans (2015) typical
source level of 160 dB rms and SEL was used for vibratory removal of
24-inch concrete piles and 24-inch concrete encased steel H-piles,
whereas the loudest source level of 165 dB rms and SEL was used for
vibratory removal of 33-inch concrete encased steel piles.
A summary of source levels from different pile driving and pile
removal activities is provided in Table 4.
[[Page 16036]]
Table 4--Summary of In-Water Pile Driving Source Levels
[At 10 m from source]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPLpk (dB re 1 SPLrms (dB re
Method Pile type/size [micro]Pa) 1 [micro]Pa) SEL (dB re 1
[micro]Pa2-s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact driving...................... 14-in steel H pile.... 208 187 177
Impact driving...................... 36-in concrete-filled 209 198 183
steel pile.
Vibratory driving................... 30- and 36-in concrete- NA 168 168
filled steel pipe
pile; 16-in
fiberglass plastic
pile.
Impact driving...................... 16-in fiberglass 177 153 144
plastic pile.
Vibratory driving................... 16-in fiberglass NA 153 153
plastic pile.
Rock socket drilling................ 30-in steel pile & 16- NA 154 154
in plastic pile.
Vibratory removal................... 14-in steel H pile.... NA 158 158
Vibratory removal................... 24-in concrete-encased NA 160 160
steel H pile.
Vibratory removal................... 33-in concrete-encased NA 165 165
steel H pile.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These source levels are used to compute the Level A injury zones
and to estimate the Level B harassment zones. For Level A harassment
zones, since the peak source levels for both pile driving methods are
below the injury thresholds, cumulative SEL were used to do the
calculations using the NMFS acoustic guidance (NMFS 2016).
Estimating Injury Zones
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, we developed a User Spreadsheet 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 cumulative SEL (LE), distances to marine mammal injury
thresholds were estimated using NMFS' Optional User Spreadsheet based
on the noise exposure guidance. For impact pile driving, the single
strike SEL/pulse equivalent was used, and for vibratory pile driving,
the rms SPL source level was used. Per the NMFS Spreadsheet, default
Weighting Factor Adjustments (WFA) were used for calculating PTS from
both vibratory and impact pile driving, using 2.5 kHz and 2.0 KHz,
respectively. These WFAs are acknowledged by NMFS as conservative. A
transmission loss coefficient of 15 is used with reported source levels
measured at 10m.
Isopleths to Level B behavioral zones are based on rms SPL
(SPLrms) that are specific for non-impulse (vibratory pile
driving) sources. Distances to marine mammal behavior thresholds were
calculated using practical spreading.
A summary of the measured and modeled harassment zones is provided
in Table 5. In modeling transmission loss from the project area, the
conventional assumption would be made that acoustic propagation from
the source is impeded by natural and manmade features that extend into
the water, resulting in acoustic shadows behind such features. While
not solid structures, given the density of structural pilings under the
many pile-supported piers located south of Piers 32 and 10, coupled
with the docking of submarines at these piers, the piers are presumed
to disrupt sound propagation southward in the river.
Table 5--Calculated Areas of Zone of Influence and Maximum Distances
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source level
Year Activity description @10m, dB (rms/ Level A distance (m)/ Level B distance (m)/
SEL) area (km\2\) area (km\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1................. Impact driving 14'' steel 187/177 536/0.4468............. 631/0.5468.
H-pile.
Vibratory & rock socket 168 <4/<0.0001............. 4,642/2.2002.
drilling installation of
36'' concrete-filled
steel piles.
Impact driving 36'' 198/183 984/0.886.............. 3,415/2.037.
concrete-filled steel
piles.
-------------------------------------------------
Rocket socket drilling of 154 Activity will occur concurrently with above
30'' concrete-filled activities that have much bigger zones.
steel piles and 16''
fiberglass reinforced
plastic piles.
-------------------------------------------------
2................. Vibratory installation of 168 <4/<0.0001............. 4,642/2.2002.
36'' concrete-filled
steel piles.
Impact pile driving 36'' 198/183 984/0.886.............. 3,415/2.037.
concrete-filled steel
piles.
3................. Vibratory installation of 153 0.9/<0.0001............ 1,584/1.1584.
16'' fiberglass plastic
piles.
Impact installation of 153/144 2.5/<0.0001............ 1/<0.000.
16'' fiberglass plastic
piles.
4................. Vibratory removal of 14'' 158 <4/<0.0001............. 2,415/1.8372.
steel H-piles.
Vibratory removal of 24'' 160 2.7/<0.0001............ 4,334/2.029.
concrete-filled steel
piles (Pier 32).
Vibratory removal of 30'' 165 5.9/<0.0001............ 4,334/2.029.
concrete-filled steel
piles (Pier 32).
Vibratory removal of 24'' 160 7.7/<0.0001............ 4,642/3.317.
concrete-filled steel
piles (Pier 10).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 16037]]
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.
The Navy's Marine Species Density Database (NMSDD) has density
estimates for harbor and gray seals that occur in Long Island Sound.
The NMSDD density estimates for harbor seals and gray seals are the
same, 0.0703/km\2\ during fall, winter, and spring, and 0.0174/km\2\
during summer months. These estimates, however, are based on broad-
scale oceanic surveys, which have not extended up the Thames River.
Marine mammal surveys were conducted in fall 2014 and winter,
spring, and summer of 2015 as part of a nearshore biological survey at
Submarine Base New London. No marine mammals were observed (Tetra Tech
2016). Harbor seals have been sighted in the Thames River near the
submarine base by Navy personnel. Both gray and harbor seals have
rookeries in Long Island Sound. A two-year detailed, systematic survey
of marine mammals in the Thames River began in January 2017. During the
first nine months of the survey through September, one pinniped (gray
seal) was observed approximately 2\3/4\ miles downstream of SUBASE at a
fishing dock near the ferry terminal, approximately 3,000 feet south of
the Gold Star Memorial Bridge (I-95).
Based on the repeated sightings at the Submarine Base New London,
the average presence of seals (harbor or gray) is estimated to be 4 per
week or 0.6 per day from September through May. The majority (75
percent) of these are likely to be harbor seals. There are no areas
(haulouts) where seals are known to be concentrated nor have there been
contemporary sightings of larger numbers of seals along this stretch of
the river, and the animals seen at the submarine base are likely to
move up and down as well as across the river. Given that the Thames
River is about 500 m (1,640 ft) wide at the Submarine Base New London,
and similarly developed areas extend about 1 km (3,280 ft) up and down
the river, the Navy believes it is reasonable to extrapolate the
observations at the Submarine Base New London to an area of about 1
km\2\ for the purpose of estimating density. This would result in an
average density of 0.45 harbor and 0.15 gray seals per km\2\ within the
project ZOIs from September through May. Very few animals were sighted
outside the September through May time frame. Therefore, the September
through May data is used for density estimates to be conservative.
Take Calculation and Estimation
Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate. For both harbor and
gray seals, estimated takes are calculated based on ensonified area for
a specific pile driving activity multiplied by the marine mammal
density in the action area, multiplied by the number of pile driving
(or removal) days. Distances to and areas of different harassment zones
are listed in Table 4.
For both Level A and Level B harassment, take calculations and
assumptions are as follows:
Number of takes per activity = density (average number of
seals per km\2\) * area of ZOI (km\2\) * number of days, rounded to the
nearest whole number;
Seal density in the project area is estimated as 0.6/km\2\
from September through May (zero from June through August), consisting
of 75 percent harbor seals (0.45/km\2\) and 25 percent gray seals
(0.15/km\2\);
Assumes as a worst case that activities will occur up to a
maximum of 180 workdays (5 days per week) when seals are present
(September through May) during each full construction year;
Assumes vibratory and impact hammer pile driving would not
occur on the same days;
Level A and Level B takes are calculated separately based
on the respective ZOIs for each type of activity, providing a maximum
estimate for each type of take which corresponds to the authorization
requested under the MMPA; and
Assumes that the effective implementation of a 10 m
shutdown zone will prevent non-acoustic injuries and will prevent
animals from entering acoustic harassment ZOIs that extend less than 10
m from the source.
The maximum extent of the potential injury zone (for impact pile
driving of steel piles) is 984 m (3,228 ft) from the source for 36-inch
concrete-filled steel piles and 536 m (1,758 ft) for 14-inch steel H-
piles; other potential acoustic injury ZOIs for vibratory pile
extraction and installation are only 1 to 7.7 m (3 to 25 ft) from the
source (Table 4). Seals within about 10 m (33 ft) of in-water
construction or demolition may also be at risk of injury from
interaction with construction equipment. These potential injury zones
and the 10 m (33 ft) exclusion distance would be monitored during all
in-water construction/demolition activities, and the activities would
be halted if a marine mammal were to approach within these distances.
The estimated numbers of instances of acoustic harassment (takes)
by year, species and severity (Level A or Level B) are shown in Table
6. Total Level A takes are estimated as 12 harbor seals and 4 gray
seals (total 16), and Level B takes are estimated as 504 harbor seals
and 168 gray seals (total 672).
Table 6--Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals That May Be Exposed to Received Noise Levels That Cause Level A and
Level B Harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated Estimated
Year Species level A take level B take total take Abundance Percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............. Harbor seal..... 6 166 172 75,834 0.23
Gray seal....... 2 55 57 27,131 0.21
2............. Harbor seal..... 6 177 183 75,834 0.24
Gray seal....... 2 59 61 505,000 0.01
3............. Harbor seal..... 0 51 51 75,834 0.07
Gray seal....... 0 17 17 27,131 0.06
4............. Harbor seal..... 0 110 110 75,834 0.15
Gray seal....... 0 37 37 27,131 0.14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 16038]]
Proposed Mitigation
In order to issue an LOA under section 101(a)(5)(A) 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
1. Time Restriction
Work would occur only during daylight hours, when visual monitoring
of marine mammals can be conducted.
2. Establishing and Monitoring Level A and Level B Harassment Zones,
and Exclusion Zones
Before the commencement of in-water construction activities, which
include impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving and pile
removal, the Navy shall establish Level A harassment zones where
received underwater SELcum could cause PTS (see Table 5
above).
The Navy shall also establish Level B harassment zones where
received underwater SPLs are higher than 160 dBrms re 1
[mu]Pa for impulsive noise sources (impact pile driving) and 120
dBrms re 1 [mu]Pa for non-impulsive noise sources (vibratory
pile driving and pile removal).
The Navy shall establish a 10-m (33-ft) exclusion zone for all in-
water construction and demolition work.
If marine mammals are found within the exclusion zone, pile driving
of the segment would be delayed until they move out of the area. If a
marine mammal is seen above water and then dives below, the contractor
would wait 15 minutes. If no marine mammals are seen by the observer in
that time it can be assumed that the animal has moved beyond the
exclusion zone.
If pile driving of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or more and a
marine mammal is sighted within the designated exclusion zone prior to
commencement of pile driving, the observer(s) must notify the pile
driving operator (or other authorized individual) immediately and
continue to monitor the exclusion zone. Operations may not resume until
the marine mammal has exited the exclusion zone or 15 minutes have
elapsed since the last sighting.
3. Shutdown Measures
The Navy shall implement shutdown measures if a marine mammal is
detected moving towards or entered the 10-m (33-ft) exclusion zone.
Further, the Navy shall implement shutdown measures if the number
of authorized takes for any particular species reaches the limit under
the LOA (if issued) and such marine mammals are sighted within the
vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment
zone during in-water construction activities.
4. Soft Start
The Navy shall implement soft start techniques for impact pile
driving. The Navy shall conduct an initial set of three strikes from
the impact hammer at 40 percent energy, followed by a 1-minute waiting
period, then two subsequent three strike sets. Soft start shall be
required for any impact driving, including at the beginning of the day,
and at any time following a cessation of impact pile driving of thirty
minutes or longer.
Whenever there has been downtime of 30 minutes or more without
impact driving, the contractor shall initiate impact driving with soft-
start procedures described above.
Based on our evaluation of the required measures, NMFS has
preliminarily determined that the prescribed mitigation measures
provide the means effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the
affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
Proposed Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an LOA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(A) 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) state that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
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
[[Page 16039]]
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Proposed Monitoring Measures
The Navy shall employ trained protected species observers (PSOs) to
conduct marine mammal monitoring for its Submarine Base New London pier
construction project. The purposes of marine mammal monitoring are to
implement mitigation measures and learn more about impacts to marine
mammals from the Navy's construction activities. The PSOs will observe
and collect data on marine mammals in and around the project area for
15 minutes before, during, and for 30 minutes after all pile removal
and pile installation work.
Protected Species Observer Qualifications
NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet the following requirements:
1. Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are
required;
2. At least one observer must have prior experience working as an
observer;
3. Other observers may substitute education (undergraduate degree
in biological science or related field) or training for experience;
4. Where a team of three or more observers are required, one
observer should be designated as lead observer or monitoring
coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an
observer; and
5. NMFS will require submission and approval of observer CVs.
Marine Mammal Monitoring Protocols
The Navy shall conduct briefings between construction supervisors
and crews and the PSO team prior to the start of all pile driving
activities, and when new personnel join the work, in order to explain
responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring
protocol, and operational procedures. All personnel working in the
project area shall watch the Navy's Marine Species Awareness Training
video. An informal guide shall be included with the monitoring plan to
aid in identifying species if they are observed in the vicinity of the
project area.
The Navy will monitor the Level A and Level B harassment zones
before, during, and after pile driving activities. The Marine Mammal
Monitoring Plan would include the following procedures:
PSOs will be primarily located on boats, docks, and piers
at the best vantage point(s) in order to properly see the entire
shutdown zone(s);
PSOs will be located at the best vantage point(s) to
observe the zone associated with behavioral impact thresholds;
During all observation periods, PSOs will use high-
magnification (25X), as well as standard handheld (7X) binoculars, and
the naked eye to search continuously for marine mammals;
Monitoring distances will be measured with range finders.
Distances to animals will be based on the best estimate of the PSO,
relative to known distances to objects in the vicinity of the PSO;
Bearings to animals will be determined using a compass;
Pile driving shall only take place when the exclusion and
Level A zones are visible and can be adequately monitored. If
conditions (e.g., fog) prevent the visual detection of marine mammals,
activities with the potential to result in Level A harassment shall not
be initiated. If such conditions arise after the activity has begun,
impact pile driving would be halted but vibratory pile driving or
extraction would be allowed to continue;
Three (3) PSOs shall be posted to monitor marine mammals
during in-water pile driving and pile removal. One PSO will be located
on land and two will be located in a boat to monitor the farther
locations;
Pre-Activity Monitoring
The exclusion zone will be monitored for 15 minutes prior to in-
water construction/demolition activities. If a marine mammal is present
within the 10-m exclusion zone, the activity will be delayed until the
animal(s) leave the exclusion zone. Activity will resume only after the
PSO has determined that, through sighting or by waiting 15 minutes, the
animal(s) has moved outside the exclusion zone. If a marine mammal is
observed approaching the exclusion zone, the PSO who sighted that
animal will notify all other PSOs of its presence.
During Activity Monitoring
If a marine mammal is observed entering the Level A or Level B
zones outside the 10-m exclusion zone, the pile segment being worked on
will be completed without cessation, unless the animal enters or
approaches the exclusion zone, at which point all pile driving
activities will be halted. If an animal is observed within the
exclusion zone during pile driving, then pile driving will be stopped
as soon as it is safe to do so. Pile driving can only resume once the
animal has left the exclusion zone of its own volition or has not been
re-sighted for a period of 15 minutes.
Post-Activity Monitoring
Monitoring of all zones will continue for 30 minutes following the
completion of the activity.
Reporting Measures
The Navy is required to submit an annual report within 90 days
after each activity year, starting from the date when the LOA is issued
(for the first annual report) or from the date when the previous annual
report ended. These reports would detail the monitoring protocol,
summarize the data recorded during monitoring, and estimate the number
of marine mammals that may have been harassed during the period of the
report. NMFS would provide comments within 30 days after receiving
these reports, and the Navy should address the comments and submit
revisions within 30 days after receiving NMFS comments. If no comment
is received from NMFS within 30 days, the annual report is considered
completed.
The Navy is also required to submit a draft monitoring report
within 90 days after completion of the construction work or the
expiration of the final LOA (if issued), whichever comes earlier. This
report would synthesize all data recorded during marine mammal
monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have
been harassed through the entire project. NMFS would provide comments
within 30 days after receiving this report, and the Navy should address
the comments and submit revisions within 30 days after receiving NMFS
comments. If no comment is received from NMFS within 30 days, the
monitoring report is considered as final.
In addition, NMFS would require the Navy to notify NMFS' Office of
Protected Resources and NMFS' Greater Atlantic Stranding Coordinator
within 48 hours of sighting an injured or dead marine mammal in the
construction site. The Navy shall provide NMFS and the Stranding
Network with the species or description of the animal(s), the condition
of the animal(s) (including carcass condition, if the animal is dead),
location, time of first discovery, observed behaviors (if alive), and
photo or video (if available).
In the event that the Navy finds an injured or dead marine mammal
that is not in the construction area, the Navy would report the same
information as listed above to NMFS as soon as operationally feasible.
[[Page 16040]]
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).
To avoid repetition, this introductory discussion of our analyses
applies to both of the species listed in Table 2, given that the
anticipated effects of the Navy's Submarine Base New London pier
construction project activities involving pile driving and pile removal
on marine mammals are expected to be relatively similar in nature.
There is no information about the nature or severity of the impacts, or
the size, status, or structure of any species or stock that would lead
to a different analysis by species for this activity, or else species-
specific factors would be identified and analyzed.
Although a few individual seals (6 harbor seals and 2 gray seals
each in year 1 and year 2) are estimated to experience Level A
harassment in the form of PTS if they stay within the Level A
harassment zone during the entire pile driving for the day, the degree
of injury is expected to be mild and is not likely to affect the
reproduction or survival of the individual animals. It is expected
that, if hearing impairments occurs, most likely the affected animal
would lose a few dB in its hearing sensitivity, which in most cases is
not likely to affect its survival and recruitment. Hearing impairment
that might occur for these individual animals would be limited to the
dominant frequency of the noise sources, i.e., in the low-frequency
region below 2 kHz. Nevertheless, as for all marine mammal species, it
is known that in general these pinnipeds will avoid areas where sound
levels could cause hearing impairment. Therefore it is not likely that
an animal would stay in an area with intense noise that could cause
severe levels of hearing damage.
Under the majority of the circumstances, anticipated takes are
expected to be limited to short-term Level B harassment. Marine mammals
present in the vicinity of the action area and taken by Level B
harassment would most likely show overt brief disturbance (startle
reaction) and avoidance of the area from elevated noise levels during
pile driving and pile removal. Given the limited estimated number of
incidents of Level A and Level B harassment and the limited, short-term
nature of the responses by the individuals, the impacts of the
estimated take cannot be reasonably expected to, and are not reasonably
likely to, rise to the level that they would adversely affect either
species at the population level, through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.
There are no known important habitats, such as rookeries or
haulouts, in the vicinity of the Navy's proposed Submarine Base New
London pier construction project. The project also is not expected to
have significant adverse effects on affected marine mammals' habitat,
including prey, as analyzed in detail in the ``Anticipated Effects on
Marine Mammal Habitat'' section.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total take from
the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected
marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA for specified
activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not
define small numbers and so, in practice, NMFS compares the number of
individuals 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.
The estimated takes are below one percent of the population for all
marine mammals (Table 6).
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the prescribed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size
of the affected species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Subsistence Analysis and Determination
There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.
Adaptive Management
The regulations governing the take of marine mammals incidental to
Navy maintenance construction activities would contain an adaptive
management component.
The reporting requirements associated with this proposed rule are
designed to provide NMFS with monitoring data from the previous year to
allow consideration of whether any changes are appropriate. The use of
adaptive management allows NMFS to consider new information from
different sources to determine (with input from the Navy regarding
practicability) on an annual or biennial basis if mitigation or
monitoring measures should be modified (including additions or
deletions). Mitigation measures could be modified if new data suggests
that such modifications would have a reasonable likelihood of reducing
adverse effects to marine mammals and if the measures are practicable.
The following are some of the possible sources of applicable data
to be considered through the adaptive management process: (1) Results
from monitoring reports, as required by MMPA authorizations; (2)
results from general marine mammal and sound research; and (3) any
information which reveals that marine mammals may have been taken in a
manner, extent, or number not authorized by these regulations or
subsequent LOAs.
[[Page 16041]]
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
No incidental take of ESA-listed species is proposed for
authorization or expected to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS
has determined that formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is
not required for this action.
Request for Information
NMFS requests interested persons to submit comments, information,
and suggestions concerning the Navy request and the proposed
regulations (see ADDRESSES). All comments will be reviewed and
evaluated as we prepare a final rule and make final determinations on
whether to issue the requested authorization. This notice and
referenced documents provide all environmental information relating to
our proposed action for public review.
Classification
Pursuant to the procedures established to implement Executive Order
12866, the Office of Management and Budget has determined that this
proposed rule is not significant.
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
the Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce has
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The U.S. Navy is the sole entity that would be subject to the
requirements in these proposed regulations, and the Navy is not a small
governmental jurisdiction, small organization, or small business, as
defined by the RFA. Because of this certification, a regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.
This proposed rule does not contain a collection-of-information
requirement subject to the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) because the applicant is a federal agency. Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, no person is required to respond to nor shall a
person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection
of information subject to the requirements of the PRA unless that
collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control
number. These requirements have been approved by OMB under control
number 0648-0151 and include applications for regulations, subsequent
LOAs, and reports.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 218
Exports, Fish, Imports, Incidental take, Indians, Labeling, Marine
mammals, Navy, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Seafood, Sonar, Transportation.
Dated: April 10, 2018.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For reasons set forth in the preamble, 50 CFR part 217 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 218--REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE TAKING AND IMPORTING OF MARINE
MAMMALS
0
1. The authority citation for part 217 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
0
2. Add subpart J to part 217 to read as follows:
Subpart J--Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; U.S. Navy's Submarine
Base New London Pier Construction
Sec.
217.90 Specified activity and specified geographical region.
217.91 Effective dates.
217.92 Permissible methods of taking.
217.93 Prohibitions.
217.94 Mitigation requirements.
217.95 Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
217.96 Letters of Authorization.
217.97 Renewals and modifications of Letters of Authorization.
217.98 [Reserved]
217.99 [Reserved]
Subpart J--Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; U.S. Navy's
Submarine Base New London Pier Construction
Sec. 217.90 Specified activity and specified geographical region.
(a) Regulations in this subpart apply only to the U.S. Navy (Navy)
and those persons it authorizes or funds to conduct activities on its
behalf for the taking of marine mammals that occurs in the area
outlined in paragraph (b) of this section and that occurs incidental to
the activities described in paragraph (c) of this section.
(b) The taking of marine mammals by the Navy may be authorized in
Letters of Authorization (LOAs) only if it occurs within the Navy
Submarine Base New London Study Area, which is located in the towns of
Groton and Ledyard in New London County, Connecticut.
(c) The taking of marine mammals by the Navy is only authorized if
it occurs incidental to the Navy's conducting in-water pier
construction or demolition activities.
Sec. 217.91 Effective dates and definitions.
Regulations in this subpart are effective [EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL
RULE] through [DATE 5 YEARS AFTER EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE].
Sec. 217.92 Permissible methods of taking.
Under LOAs issued pursuant to Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and
Sec. 217.96, the Holder of the LOAs (hereinafter ``Navy'') may
incidentally, but not intentionally, take marine mammals within the
area described in Sec. 217.90(b) by Level A harassment and Level B
harassment associated with in-water pile driving and pile removal
activities, provided the activity is in compliance with all terms,
conditions, and requirements of the regulations in this subpart and the
applicable LOAs.
Sec. 217.93 Prohibitions.
Notwithstanding takings contemplated in Sec. 217.92 and authorized
by LOAs issued under Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and Sec. 217.96, no
person in connection with the activities described in Sec. 217.90 of
this chapter may:
(a) Violate, or fail to comply with, the terms, conditions, and
requirements of this subpart or a LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of
this chapter and Sec. 217.96;
(b) Take any marine mammal not specified in such LOAs;
(c) Take any marine mammal specified in such LOAs in any manner
other than as specified;
(d) Take a marine mammal specified in such LOAs if NMFS determines
such taking results in more than a negligible impact on the species or
stocks of such marine mammal; or
(d) Take a marine mammal specified in such LOAs if NMFS determines
such taking results in an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of such species or stock of marine mammal for taking for
subsistence uses.
Sec. 217.94 Mitigation requirements.
When conducting the activities identified in Sec. 217.90(c), the
mitigation measures contained in any LOAs issued under Sec. 216.106 of
this chapter and Sec. 217.96 must be implemented. These mitigation
measures shall include but are not limited to:
(a) Time Restriction. In-water construction and demolition work
shall occur only during daylight hours;
(b) Establishment of monitoring and exclusion zones:
(1) For all relevant in-water construction and demolition activity,
the Navy shall implement shutdown zones with radial distances as
identified in any LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and
Sec. 217.96. If a marine mammal comes within or approaches the
shutdown zone, such operations shall cease;
[[Page 16042]]
(2) For all relevant in-water construction and demolition activity,
the Navy shall designate monitoring zones with radial distances as
identified in any LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and
Sec. 217.96; and
(3) For all in-water construction and demolition activity, the Navy
shall implement a minimum shutdown zone of a 10 meter (m) radius around
the pile. If a marine mammal comes within or approaches the shutdown
zone, such operations shall cease;
(c) Shutdown Measures. (1) The Navy shall deploy three protected
species observers (PSO) to monitor marine mammals during in-water pile
driving and pile removal. One PSO will be located on land and two will
be located in a boat to monitor the farther locations.
(2) Monitoring shall take place from 15 minutes prior to initiation
of pile driving or removal activity through 30 minutes post-completion
of pile driving or removal activity. Pre-activity monitoring shall be
conducted for 15 minutes to ensure that the shutdown zone is clear of
marine mammals, and pile driving or removal may commence when observers
have declared the shutdown zone clear of marine mammals. In the event
of a delay or shutdown of activity resulting from marine mammals in the
shutdown zone, animals shall be allowed to remain in the shutdown zone
(i.e., must leave of their own volition) and their behavior shall be
monitored and documented. Monitoring shall occur throughout the time
required to drive or remove a pile. A determination that the shutdown
zone is clear must be made during a period of good visibility (i.e.,
the entire shutdown zone and surrounding waters must be visible to the
naked eye).
(3) If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone, all
pile driving or removal activities at that location shall be halted. If
pile driving or removal is halted or delayed due to the presence of a
marine mammal, the activity may not commence or resume until either the
animal has voluntarily left and been visually confirmed beyond the
shutdown zone or fifteen minutes have passed without re-detection of
the animal.
(4) Monitoring shall be conducted by trained observers, who shall
have no other assigned tasks during monitoring periods. Trained
observers shall be placed at the best vantage point(s) practicable to
monitor for marine mammals and implement shutdown or delay procedures
when applicable through communication with the equipment operator. The
Navy shall adhere to the following additional observer qualifications:
(i) Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are
required;
(ii) At least one observer must have prior experience working as an
observer;
(iii) Other observers may substitute education (degree in
biological science or related field) or training for experience;
(iv) Where a team of three or more observers are required, one
observer shall be designated as lead observer or monitoring
coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an
observer; and
(v) The Navy shall submit observer CVs for approval by NMFS;
(5) The Navy shall implement shutdown measures if the number of
authorized takes for any particular species reaches the limit under the
applicable LOA and if such marine mammals are sighted within the
vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment
zone during in-water construction or demolition activities.
(c) Soft Start. (1) The Navy shall implement soft start techniques
for impact pile driving. The Navy shall conduct an initial set of three
strikes from the impact hammer at 40 percent energy, followed by a 1-
minute waiting period, then two subsequent three strike sets.
(2) Soft start shall be required for any impact driving, including
at the beginning of the day, and at any time following a cessation of
impact pile driving of 30 minutes or longer.
Sec. 217.95 Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
(a) Marine Mammal Monitoring Protocols. The Navy shall conduct
briefings between construction supervisors and crews and the observer
team prior to the start of all pile driving and removal activities, and
when new personnel join the work. Trained observers shall receive a
general environmental awareness briefing conducted by Navy staff. At
minimum, training shall include identification of marine mammals that
may occur in the project vicinity and relevant mitigation and
monitoring requirements. All observers shall have no other
construction-related tasks while conducting monitoring.
(b) Pile driving or removal shall only take place when the
exclusion and Level A zones are visible and can be adequately
monitored. If conditions (e.g., fog) prevent the visual detection of
marine mammals, activities shall not be initiated. If such conditions
arise after the activity has begun, impact pile driving would be halted
but vibratory pile driving or removal would be allowed to continue.
(c) Reporting Measures.--(1) Annual Reports. (i) The Navy shall
submit an annual report within 90 days after each activity year,
starting from the date when the LOA is issued (for the first annual
report) or from the date when the previous annual report ended.
(ii) Annual reports would detail the monitoring protocol, summarize
the data recorded during monitoring, and estimate the number of marine
mammals that may have been harassed during the period of the report.
(iii) NMFS would provide comments within 30 days after receiving
annual reports, and the Navy shall address the comments and submit
revisions within 30 days after receiving NMFS comments. If no comment
is received from the NMFS within 30 days, the annual report is
considered completed.
(2) Final Report. (i) The Navy shall submit a comprehensive summary
report to NMFS not later than 90 days following the conclusion of
marine mammal monitoring efforts described in this subpart.
(ii) The final report shall synthesize all data recorded during
marine mammal monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals
that may have been harassed through the entire project.
(iii) NMFS would provide comments within 30 days after receiving
this report, and the Navy shall address the comments and submit
revisions within 30 days after receiving NMFS comments. If no comment
is received from the NMFS within 30 days, the final report is
considered as final.
(3) Reporting of injured or dead marine mammals:
(i) In the unanticipated event that the construction or demolition
activities clearly cause the take of a marine mammal in a prohibited
manner, such as an injury, serious injury, or mortality, the Navy shall
immediately cease all operations and immediately report the incident to
the NMFS Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Greater Atlantic
Region Stranding Coordinators. The report must include the following
information:
(A) Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;
(B) Description of the incident;
(C) Status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding the
incident;
(D) Environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, sea
state, cloud cover, visibility, and water depth);
[[Page 16043]]
(E) Description of marine mammal observations in the 24 hours
preceding the incident;
(F) Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
(G) The fate of the animal(s); and
(H) Photographs or video footage of the animal (if equipment is
available).
(ii) Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS shall work with the Navy to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. The Navy may not resume
their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or
telephone.
(iii) In the event that the Navy discovers an injured or dead
marine mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury
or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less
than a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next
paragraph), the Navy will immediately report the incident to the NMFS
Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the Greater Atlantic Regional
Stranding Coordinators. The report must include the same information
identified in paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section. Activities may
continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS
will work with the Navy to determine whether modifications in the
activities are appropriate.
(iv) In the event that the Navy discovers an injured or dead marine
mammal, and the lead protected species observer 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
shall report the incident to the NMFS Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, and the Greater Atlantic Regional Stranding Coordinators, within
24 hours of the discovery. The Navy shall provide photographs or video
footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal
sighting to NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. The Navy can
continue its operations under such a case.
Sec. 217.96 Letters of Authorization.
(a) To incidentally take marine mammals pursuant to these
regulations, the Navy must apply for and obtain LOAs in accordance with
Sec. 216.106 of this chapter for conducting the activity identified in
Sec. 217.90(c) of this subpart.
(b) LOAs, unless suspended or revoked, may be effective for a
period of time not to extend beyond the expiration date of these
regulations.
(c) If an LOA(s) expires prior to the expiration date of these
regulations, the Navy may apply for and obtain a renewal of the LOA(s).
(d) In the event of projected changes to the activity or to
mitigation, monitoring, reporting (excluding changes made pursuant to
the adaptive management provision of Sec. 217.97(c)(1)) required by an
LOA, the Navy must apply for and obtain a modification of LOAs as
described in Sec. 217.97.
(e) Each LOA shall set forth:
(1) Permissible methods of incidental taking;
(2) Means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact (i.e.,
mitigation) on the species, their habitat, and the availability of the
species for subsistence uses; and
(3) Requirements for monitoring and reporting.
(f) Issuance of the LOA(s) shall be based on a determination that
the level of taking shall be consistent with the findings made for the
total taking allowable under these regulations.
(g) Notice of issuance or denial of the LOA(s) shall be published
in the Federal Register within 30 days of a determination.
Sec. 217.97 Renewals and modifications of Letters of Authorization.
(a) An LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of this subchapter and Sec.
217.96 for the activity identified in Sec. 217.90(c) shall be renewed
or modified upon request by the applicant, provided that:
(1) The proposed specified activity and mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting measures, as well as the anticipated impacts, are the same as
those described and analyzed for these regulations (excluding changes
made pursuant to the adaptive management provision in paragraph (c)(1)
of this section), and
(2) NMFS determines that the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
measures required by the previous LOA(s) under these regulations were
implemented.
(b) For LOA modification or renewal requests by the applicant that
include changes to the activity or the mitigation, monitoring, or
reporting measures (excluding changes made pursuant to the adaptive
management provision in paragraph (c)(1) of this section) that do not
change the findings made for the regulations or result in no more than
a minor change in the total estimated number of takes (or distribution
by species or years), NMFS may publish a notice of proposed LOA in the
Federal Register, including the associated analysis of the change, and
solicit public comment before issuing the LOA.
(c) An LOA issued under Sec. 216.106 of this chapter and Sec.
217.96 for the activity identified in Sec. 217.90 (c) may be modified
by NMFS under the following circumstances:
(1) Adaptive Management--After consulting with the Navy regarding
the practicability of the modifications, NMFS may modify (including by
adding or removing measures) the existing mitigation, monitoring, or
reporting measures if doing so creates a reasonable likelihood of more
effectively accomplishing the goals of the mitigation and monitoring
set forth in the preamble for these regulations.
(i) Possible sources of data that could contribute to the decision
to modify the mitigation, monitoring, or reporting measures in an LOA:
(A) Results from the Navy's monitoring from the previous year(s).
(B) Results from other marine mammal and/or sound research or
studies; or
(C) Any information that reveals marine mammals may have been taken
in a manner, extent or number not authorized by these regulations or
subsequent LOAs.
(ii) If, through adaptive management, the modifications to the
mitigation, monitoring, or reporting measures are substantial, NMFS
shall publish a notice of proposed LOA in the Federal Register and
solicit public comment.
(2) Emergencies--If NMFS determines that an emergency exists that
poses a significant risk to the well-being of the species or stocks of
marine mammals specified in LOAs issued pursuant to Sec. 216.106 of
this chapter and Sec. 217.96, an LOA may be modified without prior
notice or opportunity for public comment. Notice would be published in
the Federal Register within thirty days of the action.
Sec. 217.98 [Reserved]
Sec. 217.99 [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 2018-07728 Filed 4-12-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P