Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Bremerton and Edmonds Ferry Terminals Dolphin Relocation Project in Washington State, 16330-16343 [2018-07889]

Download as PDF 16330 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices agency’s estimate of the burden (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record. Dated: April 11, 2018. Sarah Brabson, NOAA PRA Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. 2018–07885 Filed 4–13–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Evaluation of State Coastal Management Programs Office for Coastal Management (OCM), National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (DOC). ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Office for Coastal Management will hold a public meeting to solicit comments on the performance evaluation of the Minnesota Coastal Management Program. SUMMARY: Minnesota Coastal Management Program Evaluation: The public meeting will be held on May 22, 2018, and written comments must be received on or before June 1, 2018. For specific dates, times, and locations of the public meetings, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the program or reserve NOAA intends to evaluate by any of the following methods: Public Meeting and Oral Comments: A public meeting will be held in Duluth, Minnesota. For the specific location, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Written Comments: Please direct written comments to Carrie Hall, Evaluator, Planning and Performance Measurement Program, Office for Coastal Management, NOS/NOAA, 1305 srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES DATES: VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 East-West Highway, 11th Floor, N/ OCM1, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910, or email comments Carrie.Hall@ noaa.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carrie Hall, Evaluator, Planning and Performance Measurement Program, Office for Coastal Management, NOS/ NOAA, 1305 East-West Highway, 11th Floor, N/OCM1, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910, or Carrie.Hall@ noaa.gov. Copies of the previous evaluation findings and 2016–2020 Assessment and Strategy may be viewed and downloaded on the internet at http://coast.noaa.gov/czm/evaluations. A copy of the evaluation notification letter and most recent progress report may be obtained upon request by contacting the person identified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 312 of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) requires NOAA to conduct periodic evaluations of federally approved state and territorial coastal programs. The process includes one or more public meetings, consideration of written public comments and consultations with interested Federal, state, and local agencies and members of the public. During the evaluation, NOAA will consider the extent to which the state has met the national objectives, adhered to the management program approved by the Secretary of Commerce, and adhered to the terms of financial assistance under the CZMA. When the evaluation is completed, NOAA’s Office for Coastal Management will place a notice in the Federal Register announcing the availability of the Final Evaluation Findings. Specific information on the periodic evaluation of the state and territorial coastal program that is the subject of this notice is detailed below as follows: Minnesota Coastal Management Program Evaluation You may participate or submit oral comments at the public meeting scheduled as follows: Date: May 22, 2018. Time: 5:30 p.m., local time. Location: Hartley Nature Center, 3001 Woodland Avenue, Duluth, Minnesota 55803. Written public comments must be received on or before June 1, 2018. Dated: March 15, 2018. Keelin Kuipers Acting Deputy Director, Office for Coastal Management, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog 11.419 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Coastal Zone Management Program Administration [FR Doc. 2018–07891 Filed 4–13–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–08–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648–XG011 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Bremerton and Edmonds Ferry Terminals Dolphin Relocation Project in Washington State National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Proposed incidental harassment authorization (IHA); request for comments. AGENCY: NMFS has received a request from Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to the dolphin (a man-made structure that protects other structures from being struck by boats) relocation project at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals in Washington State. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an IHA to incidentally take marine mammals during the specified activities. DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than May 16, 2018. ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. Physical comments should be sent to 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and electronic comments should be sent to ITP.guan@noaa.gov. Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period. Comments received electronically, including all attachments, must not exceed a 25megabyte file size. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel or Adobe PDF file formats only. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/ 23111 without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. Electronic copies of the applications and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/ 23111. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review. An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival. The MMPA states that the term ‘‘take’’ means to harass, hunt, capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine mammal. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has 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). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 National Environmental Policy Act Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5)(D) authorization requires compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NMFS preliminary determined the issuance of the proposed IHA is consistent with categories of activities identified in CE B4 (issuance of incidental harassment authorizations under section 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for which no serious injury or mortality is anticipated) of NOAA’s Companion Manual for NAO 216–6A, and we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances listed in Chapter 4 of the Companion Manual for NAO 216–6A that would preclude this categorical exclusion under NEPA. We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice prior to making a final decision as to whether application of this CE is appropriate in this circumstance. Summary of Request NMFS received a request from WSDOT for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to the dolphin relocation project (a man-made structure that protects other structures from being struck by boats) at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals in the State of Washington. WSDOT’s request was for harassment only, and NMFS concurs that injury, serious injury, or mortality is not expected to result from this activity. Therefore, an IHA is appropriate. On October 4, 2017, WSDOT submitted a request to NMFS requesting an IHA for the possible harassment of small numbers of marine mammal species incidental to the dolphin relocation project at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals in Washington State, between October 1, 2018, to September 30, 2019. NMFS determined that the IHA application is adequate and complete on December 4, 2017, with a few minor comments and questions. WSDOT subsequently addressed all NMFS comments and submitted a revised IHA application on March 1, 2018. NMFS is proposing to authorize the take by Level B harassment of the following marine mammal species: Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina); northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris); California sea lion (Zalophus californianus); Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus); killer whale (Orcinus orca); gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus); humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae); minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata); harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena); Dall’s PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 16331 porpoise (P. dalli); and long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus capensis). Description of Proposed Activity Overview The WSDOT is proposing to relocate one dolphin to improve safety at each of the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals. The Olympic Class ferries have an atypical shape, which at some terminals causes the vessel to make contact with the inner dolphin prior to the stern reaching the intermediate or outer dolphin. This tends to cause rotation of the vessel away from the wingwalls and presents a safety issue. The project will reduce the risk of landing issues for Olympic Class ferries at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals. Dates and Duration Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water work timing restrictions to protect ESAlisted salmonids, planned WSDOT inwater construction is limited each year to July 16 through February 15. In-water construction at the Bremerton Ferry Terminal will commence after October 1, and is planned during the August 1, 2018, to February 15, 2019 in-water work window. In-water construction at the Edmonds Ferry Terminal will commence October 1, and is planned during the July 15, 2018, to February 15, 2019 in-water work window. Specified Geographic Region The Bremerton Ferry Terminal is located in the city of Bremerton, east of the Navy shipyard. Bremerton is on the shoreline of Sinclair Inlet, south of Bainbridge Island. Located in Kitsap County, Washington, the terminal is located in Section 24, Township 24 North, Range 1 East. The Edmonds Ferry Terminal is located in the city of Edmonds, along the downtown waterfront. Edmonds is in Snohomish County, approximately 15 miles north of Seattle. The terminal is located in Section 23, Township 27 North, Range 3 East (Figure 1–2 in the IHA application). Land use near both ferry terminals is a mix of residential, commercial, industrial, and open space and/or undeveloped lands. Detailed Description of In-Water Pile Driving and Removal Associated With the Dolphin Relocation Project at Bremerton and Edmonds Ferry Terminals The proposed project includes vibratory hammer driving and removal creating elevated in-water and in-air noise that may impact marine mammals. E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 16332 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices The following construction activities (in sequence) are anticipated for the Bremerton Ferry Terminal. • Install one temporary 36-inch diameter steel indicator pile with a vibratory hammer. The temporary indicator pile will be used as a visual landing aid reference for vessel captains during construction. It will be relocated to become a fender pile for the new dolphin. • Remove the existing left outer dolphin that consists of six 36-inch diameter steel pipe piles with a vibratory hammer and/or by direct pull and clamshell removal. • Using a vibratory hammer, install three 30-inch steel pile reaction piles. This is a back group of piles that provide stability to the dolphin. • Install a concrete diaphragm (the diaphragm joins the piles at their tops), then use a vibratory hammer to install the remaining four 30-inch reaction piles. • Using a vibratory hammer, install three 36-inch diameter steel pipe fender piles; install fenders and attach rub panels to the fender piles. Fender piles absorb much of the energy as the ferry vessel makes contact with the dolphin. • Using a vibratory hammer, remove the 36-inch temporary indicator pile and install it as the last remaining fender pile along with the fender and fender panel. The following construction activities (in sequence) are anticipated for the Edmonds Ferry Terminal. • Install one temporary 36-inch diameter steel indicator pile with a vibratory hammer. The temporary indicator pile will be used as a visual landing aid reference for vessel captains during construction. • Using a vibratory hammer, install one 30-inch reaction pile. • Using a vibratory hammer, install the two remaining reaction piles through the diaphragm. • Using a vibratory hammer, remove three 36-inch steel pipe fender piles and reinstall them in their new locations. • Using a vibratory hammer, remove the 36-inch temporary indicator pile (this portion of the project will not reuse the indicator pile). A summary of the piles to be installed and removed, along with pile driving information, is provided in Table 1. TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF IN-WATER PILE DRIVING AND REMOVAL DURATIONS Location Pile element Method Bremerton ............ Indicator pile ............. Indicator pile ............. Existing dolphin ........ Relocate dolphin install. Relocated dolphin install. Vibratory Vibratory Vibratory Vibratory Pile type Duration/pile (min) Number pile/day Duration (days) 36 36 36 36 1 1 6 4 20 15 15 20 1 1 3 3 1 1 2 2 Vibratory install ......... Steel ...... 30 7 20 3 3 ................................... Indicator pile ............. Indicator pile ............. Existing dolphin removal. Relocated dolphin ..... Relocated dolphin ..... ................................... Vibratory install ......... Vibratory removal ..... Vibratory removal ..... ................ Steel ....... Steel ...... Steel ....... ................ 36 36 36 19 1 1 3 345 20 15 15 ................ 1 1 3 9 1 1 1 Vibratory install ......... Vibratory install ......... Steel ...... Steel ...... 36 30 3 3 20 20 3 3 1 1 Subtotal ........ ................................... ................................... ................ ................ 11 200 ................ 5 Total ...... ................................... ................................... ................ ................ 30 545 ................ 14 Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in detail later in this document (please see ‘‘Proposed Mitigation’’ and ‘‘Proposed Monitoring and Reporting’’). srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities We have reviewed the applicant’s species information, which summarizes available information regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, behavior and life history, and auditory capabilities of the potentially affected species—for accuracy and completeness and refer the reader to Sections 3 and 4 of the applications, as well as to NMFS’ Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/), instead of reprinting all of the information here. Additional general information about these species (e.g., physical and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 Steel Steel Steel Steel Pile No. ...... ...... ....... ....... Subtotal ........ Edmond ............... install ......... removal ..... removal ..... install ......... Size (inch) behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS’ website (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ pr/species/mammals/) or in the U.S. Navy’s Marine Resource Assessments (MRA) for relevant operating areas. The MRAs are available online at: www.navfac.navy.mil/products_and_ services/ev/products_and_services/ marine_resources/marine_resource_ assessments.html. Table 2 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminal project area and summarizes information related to the population or stock, including potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR, defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 optimum sustainable population, is considered in concert with known sources of ongoing anthropogenic mortality to assess the population-level effects of the anticipated mortality from a specific project (as described in NMFS’ SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and mortality are included here as gross indicators of the status of the species and other threats. Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or the total number estimated within a particular study area. NMFS’ stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that stock. Five species (with five managed stocks) are considered to have the E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 16333 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices potential to co-occur with the proposed construction activities. All values presented in Table 2 are the most recent available at the time of publication and are available in the 2015 SARs (Carretta et al., 2016) and draft 2016 SARs (available online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/draft.htm). TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS WITH POTENTIAL PRESENCE WITHIN THE PROPOSED PROJECT AREA Common name Scientific name ESA/ MMPA status; strategic (Y/N) 1 Stock Stock abundance (CV, Nmin, most recent abundance survey) 2 PBR Annual M/SI 3 Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) Family Eschrichtiidae: Gray whale ......................... Family Balaenopteridae: Humpback whale ...................... Minke whale ....................... Family Delphinidae: Killer whale ........................ Long-beaked common dolphin. Family Phocoenidae (porpoises): Harbor porpoise ................. Dall’s porpoise ................... Eschrichtius robustus ................ Eastern North Pacific ................ N 20,990 624 132 Megaptera novaneagliae .......... Balaenoptera acutorostrata ...... California/Oregon/Washington .. California/Oregon/Washington .. Y N 1,918 636 11.0 3.5 >6.5 >1.3 Orcinus orca ............................. Y 81 0.14 0 Delphinus capensis ................... Eastern N. Pacific Southern resident. West coast transient ................. California ................................... N N 243 101,305 2.4 657 0 >35.4 Phocoena phocoena ................. P. dali ........................................ Washington inland waters ........ California/Oregon/Washington .. N N 11,233 25,750 66 172 7.2 0.3 Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions): California sea lion .............. Steller sea lion ................... Family Phocidae (earless seals): Harbor seal ........................ Northern elephant seal ...... Zalophus californianus .............. Eumetopias jubatus .................. U.S. ........................................... Eastern U.S. ............................. N N 296,750 71,562 9,200 2,498 389 108 Phoca vitulina ........................... Washington northern inland waters. California breeding .................... N 4 11,036 1,641 43 N 179,000 4,882 8.8 Mirounga angustirostris ............ 1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; N min is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. 3 These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases. 4 Harbor seal estimate is based on data that are 8 years old, but this is the best available information for use here. srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat. The ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment’’ section later in this document will include a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. The ‘‘Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination’’ section will consider the content of this section, the ‘‘Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment’’ section, and the ‘‘Proposed Mitigation’’ section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and how those impacts on individuals are likely to impact marine mammal species or stocks. Potential impacts to marine mammals from the proposed Bremerton and VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 Edmonds ferry terminals dolphin relocation project are from noise generated during in-water pile driving and pile removal activities. Acoustic Effects Here, we first provide background information on marine mammal hearing before discussing the potential effects of the use of active acoustic sources on marine mammals. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 decibel (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 E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES 16334 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices 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 Hertz (Hz) and 35 kilohertz (kHz), with best hearing estimated to be from 100 Hz to 8 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, with best hearing from 10 to less than 100 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. • Pinnipeds in water; Phocidae (true seals): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 50 Hz to 86 kHz, with best hearing between 1– 50 kHz; • Pinnipeds in water; Otariidae (eared seals): Generalized hearing is estimated to occur between 60 Hz and 39 kHz, with best hearing between 2–48 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. Eleven marine mammal species (7 cetacean and 4 pinniped (2 otariid and 2 phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the proposed survey activities. Please refer to Table 2. Of the cetacean species that may be present, one species is classified as lowfrequency cetaceans (i.e., gray whale), and one is classified as high-frequency cetaceans (i.e., harbor porpoise). The WSDOT’s dolphin relocation project at Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 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 (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 peak- PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 to-peak levels reported in Lucke et al. (2009) and rms SPLs, the rms SPL for TTS would be approximately 184 dB re: 1 mPa, and the received levels associated with PTS (Level A harassment) would be higher. 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 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 E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices 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 WSDOT’s dolphin relocation project, noises from vibratory pile driving and pile removal contribute to the elevated ambient noise levels in the project area, thus increasing potential for or severity of masking. Baseline ambient noise levels in the vicinity of project area are high due to ongoing shipping, construction and other activities in the Puget Sound. Finally, marine mammals’ exposure to certain sounds could lead to behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), such as changing durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities; changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g., pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries). The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received level of 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) to predict the onset of behavioral harassment from VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 impulse noises (such as impact pile driving), and 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for continuous noises (such as vibratory pile driving). For the WSDOT’s Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals dolphin relocation project, only 120-dB level is considered for effects analysis because WSDOT plans to use only 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 the coastal construction, 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 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 16335 proposed construction would have little, if any, impact on marine mammals’ prey availability in the area where construction work is planned. Finally, the time of the proposed construction activity would avoid the spawning season of the ESA-listed salmonid species. Estimated Take This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS’ consideration of whether the number of takes is ‘‘small’’ and the negligible impact determination. Harassment is the only 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 B harassment only, in the form of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals resulting from exposure to noise generated from vibratory pile driving and removal. Based on the nature of the activity and the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown measures—discussed in detail below in Proposed Mitigation section), Level A harassment is neither anticipated nor proposed to be 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 E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 16336 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices 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 generation of impulse (impact pile driving) and non-impulse (vibratory pile driving and removal) sources; and, therefore, both 160- and 120-dB re 1 mPa (rms) are used. 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 would generate and nonimpulsive (vibratory pile driving and pile removal) noises. 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: http:// 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 ......... High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans ........ Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) Lpk,flat: Lpk,flat: Lpk,flat: Lpk,flat: Lpk,flat: 219 230 202 218 232 dB; dB; dB; dB; dB; Non-impulsive LE,LF,24h: 183 dB ........ LE,MF,24h: 185 dB ....... LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ....... LE,PW,24h: 185 dB ...... LE,OW,24h: 203 dB ...... Impulsive Non-impulsive LE,LF,24h: 199 dB ... LE,MF,24h: 198 dB. LE,HF,24h: 173 dB. LE,PW,24h: 201 dB. LE,OW,24h: 219 dB. Lrms,flat: 160 dB ..... Lrms,flat: 120 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. Source Levels The project includes vibratory removal and/or driving of 30-inch and 36-inch diameter hollow steel piles. Based on in-water measurements at Edmonds Ferry Terminal in 2017 (WSDOT 2017), vibratory driving of 30inch steel piles generated 174 dB rms re 1 mPa at 10 meters and vibratory pile driving of a 36-inch steel pile generated 177 dB rms re 1 mPa measured at 10 meters. As a conservative estimate, vibratory pile removal source level of 36-in steel pile is based on 36-in pile installation level of 177 dB re 1 mPa SEL. A summary of source levels from different pile driving and pile removal activities is provided in Table 4. TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF IN-WATER PILE DRIVING SOURCE LEVELS srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES [At 10 m from source] SEL (dB re 1 μPa2-s) Method Pile type/size Vibratory driving/removal ...................................... Vibratory driving .................................................... 36-in steel pile ...................................................... 30-in steel pile ...................................................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 177 174 16APN1 SPLrms (dB re 1 μPa) 177 174 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices 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 are below the injury thresholds, cumulative SEL were used to do the calculations using the NMFS acoustic guidance (NMFS 2016). Estimating Harassment Zones srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES For Level B harassment, ensonified areas are based on WSDOT’s source measurements (see above) computed using 15 * log(R) for transmission loss to derive the distances up to 120-dB isopleths. For Level A harassment, calculation is based on duration of installation/ removal per pile and number of piles installed or removed per day, using spectral modeling based on vibratory pile driving recordings made at Edmonds Ferry Terminal for the same piles. One-second sound exposure level (SEL) power spectral densities (PSDs) were calculated and used as representative pile driving sources to assess Level A harassment for marine VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 mammals in different hearing groups. Initial results showed that Level A harassment zones from the 3-in piles were smaller than those from 30-in piles for high-frequency cetaceans, despite the broadband noise level from the 36in pile being 3 dB higher than that of 30in pile. Close examination of the pile driving spectra revealed some unusual high decay rate in the 36-in pile driving sound above 2 kHz. This unusual decay was probably due to the specific sediment in the pile driving location. Therefore, the spectrum for the 30-in pile was used to model the 36-in pile and scaled up to the 177 dB broadband level. Transmission loss due to absorption was also incorporated based using the equation TL(f) = 15log(R) + a(f) * R/1000 where TL(f) is frequency dependent transmission loss, and a(f) is frequency dependent transmission loss coefficient. Distances of ensonified area for different pile driving/removal activities for different marine mammal hearing groups is present in Table 5. PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 16337 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. In most cases, marine mammal density data are from the U.S. Navy Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) except California sea lion and harbor porpoise. California sea lion density at Bremerton area is based on survey data of California sea lions at the Navy Shipyard at Bremerton from 2012– 2016 (Navy 2017). Survey results indicate as many as 144 animals hauled out each day during this time period, with the majority of animals observed August through May and the greatest numbers observed in November. The average of the monthly maximum counts during the in-water work window provides an estimate of 69 sea lions per day. For harbor porpoise, because Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has better local distribution data based on recent survey in the area, local animal abundance are used to calculate the take numbers (Evenson, 2016). E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 16338 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices Take Calculation and Estimation TABLE 6—MARINE MAMMAL DENSITY AND LOCAL OCCURRENCE IN THE WSDOT PROJECT AREA Species srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Gray whale ........................... Humpback whale .................. Minke whale .......................... Killer whale (West coast transient) ........................... Long-beaked common dolphin ................................... Harbor porpoise .................... Dall’s porpoise ...................... California sea lion ................. Steller sea lion ...................... Harbor seal ........................... Northern elephant seal ......... Density (#/km2) 0.0051 0.0007 0.00003 0.002 0.002 0.58 0.048 * 0.03 0.04 1.22 0.00001 * This density is only used for Edmonds Ferry Terminal area. For animals at Bremerton Ferry Terminal, a daily sighting of 69 animals is used for take estimates. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 Here we describe how the information provided above is brought together to produce a quantitative take estimate. For all marine mammals except California sea lion at Bremerton Ferry Terminal area, takes were calculated as: Take = ensonified area × average animal abundance in the area × pile driving days and rounded up to the nearest integer. For California sea lion at Bremerton, take estimate is based on the average daily sighting of 69 animals within the area multiplied by the nine project days, which yield a total of 621 estimated takes. For calculated take number less than 10, such as northern elephant seals, transient killer whales, humpback whales, minke whales, and long-beaked common dolphins, takes numbers were adjusted to account for group encounter and the likelihood of encountering. Specifically, for northern elephant seal, take of 15 animals is estimated based on the likelihood of encountering this species during the project period. For transient killer whale, takes of 30 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 animals is estimated based on the group size and the likelihood of encountering in the area. For humpback and minke whales, takes of eight animals each are estimated based on the likelihood of encountering. For long-beaked common dolphin, take of 50 animals is estimated based on the group size and the likelihood of encountering in the area. No Level A take is calculated using the aforementioned estimation method because of the small injury zones and relatively low average animal density in the area. Since the largest Level A distance is only 35 m from the source for high-frequency cetaceans (harbor porpoise and Dall’s porpoise), NMFS considers that WSDOT can effectively monitor such small zones to implement shutdown measures and avoid Level A takes. Therefore, no Level A take of marine mammal is anticipated for the dolphin replacement project at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals. A summary of estimated takes based on the above analysis is listed in Table 7. E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 EN16AP18.026</GPH> A summary of marine mammal density and local occurrence used for take estimates is provided in Table 6. 16339 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices TABLE 7—ESTIMATED NUMBERS OF MARINE MAMMALS THAT MAY BE EXPOSED TO RECEIVED NOISE LEVELS THAT CAUSE LEVEL B HARASSMENT Estimated Level B take Species Gray whale ................................................................................................................................... Humpback whale ......................................................................................................................... Minke whale ................................................................................................................................. Killer whale (West coast transient) .............................................................................................. Killer whale (Southern resident) .................................................................................................. Long-beaked common dolphin .................................................................................................... Harbor porpoise ........................................................................................................................... Dall’s porpoise ............................................................................................................................. California sea lion ........................................................................................................................ Steller sea lion ............................................................................................................................. Harbor seal .................................................................................................................................. Northern elephant seal ................................................................................................................ Proposed Mitigation In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to include information about the availability and feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)). In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we carefully consider two primary factors: 10 8 8 30 0 50 1,087 90 1,149 75 2,286 15 (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, impact on operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity, personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the effectiveness of the military readiness activity. 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. Abundance Percentage 20,990 1,918 636 243 81 101,305 11,233 25,750 296,750 71,562 11,036 179,000 0.05 0.42 2.17 12.35 0.00 0.05 9.72 0.35 0.39 0.11 20.71 0.02 2. Establishing and Monitoring Level A, Level B Harassment Zones, and Exclusion Zones Before the commencement of in-water construction activities, which include vibratory pile driving and pile removal, WSDOT shall establish Level A harassment zones where received underwater SELcum could cause PTS (see above). WSDOT shall also establish Level B harassment zones where received underwater SPLs are higher than 120 dBrms re 1 mPa for non-impulsive noise sources (vibratory pile driving and pile removal). WSDOT shall establish exclusion zones within which marine mammals could be taken by Level A harassment. For Level A harassment zones that is less than 10 m from the source, a minimum of 10 m distance should be established as an exclusion zone. A summary of exclusion zones is provided in Table 8. TABLE 8—EXCLUSION ZONES FOR VARIOUS PILE DRIVING ACTIVITIES AND MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS Injury zone (m) Pile type, size & pile driving method LF cetacean srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES 36″ 36″ 36″ 36″ 30″ indicate pile install (1 pile/day) ...................................... indicate pile removal (1 pile/day) .................................. steel pile (existing dolphin) removal (3 piles/day) ........ steel pile (relocated dolphin) install (3 piles/day) ......... steel pile (relocated dolphin) install (3 piles/day) ......... NMFS-approved protected species observers (PSO) shall conduct an initial 30-minute survey of the exclusion zones to ensure that no marine mammals are seen within the zones before pile VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 MF cetacean 10 10 25 25 25 10 10 10 10 10 driving and pile removal of a pile segment begins. If marine mammals are found within the exclusion zone, pile driving of the segment would be delayed until they move out of the area. PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 HF cetacean 25 10 35 35 25 Phocid Otariid 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 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 E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 16340 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices animal has moved beyond the exclusion zone. If pile driving of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or more and a marine mammal is sighted within the designated exclusion zone prior to commencement of pile driving, the observer(s) must notify the pile driving operator (or other authorized individual) immediately and continue to monitor the exclusion zone. Operations may not resume until the marine mammal has exited the exclusion zone or 30 minutes have elapsed since the last sighting. 3. Shutdown Measures WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if a marine mammal is detected within an exclusion zone or is about to enter an exclusion zone listed in Table 8. Further, WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if the number of authorized takes for any particular species reaches the limit under the IHA (if issued) and if such marine mammals are sighted within the vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment zone during inwater construction activities. Based on our evaluation of the required measures, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the prescribed mitigation measures provide the means effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance. srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Proposed Monitoring and Reporting In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, density); • Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment (e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas); • Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors; • How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) populations, species, or stocks; • Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of marine mammal habitat); and • Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness. Proposed Monitoring Measures WSDOT shall employ NMFSapproved PSOs to conduct marine mammal monitoring for its dolphin relocation project at Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals. The purposes of marine mammal monitoring are to implement mitigation measures and learn more about impacts to marine mammals from WSDOT’s construction activities. The PSOs will observe and collect data on marine mammals in and around the project area for 30 minutes before, during, and for 30 minutes after all pile removal and pile installation work. NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet the following requirements: 1. Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are required; 2. At least one observer must have prior experience working as an observer; 3. Other observers may substitute education (undergraduate degree 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. Monitoring of marine mammals around the construction site shall be PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 conducted using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power). Due to the different sizes of zones of influence (ZOI) from different pile types, two different ZOIs and different monitoring protocols corresponding to a specific pile type will be established. • For all vibratory driving/removal at the Bremerton Ferry Terminal, two land-based PSOs and one monitoring boat with one PSO and boat operator will monitor the Level A and Level B zones. • For all vibratory driving/removal at the Edmonds Ferry Terminal, five landbased PSOs and two ferry-based PSOs will monitoring the Level A and Level B zones. • If the in-situ measurement showed that the Level B zone at the Edmonds Ferry Terminal is under 15 km from the source, three land-based PSOs and one ferry-based PSO will be monitoring the Level A and Level B zones. Locations of the land-based PSOs and routes of monitoring vessels are shown in WSDOT’s Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan, which is available online at www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/ permits/incidental/construction.htm. To verify the required monitoring distance, the exclusion zones and ZOIs will be determined by using a range finder or hand-held global positioning system device. WSDOT will conduct noise field measurement at the Edmonds Ferry Terminal to determine the actual Level B distance from the source during vibratory pile driving of 36″ piles. Reporting Measures WSDOT is required to submit a draft monitoring report within 90 days after completion of the construction work or the expiration of the IHA (if issued), whichever comes earlier. This report would detail the monitoring protocol, summarize the data recorded during monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have been harassed. NMFS would have an opportunity to provide comments on the report, and if NMFS has comments, WSDOT would address the comments and submit a final report to NMFS within 30 days. In addition, NMFS would require WSDOT to notify NMFS’ Office of Protected Resources and NMFS’ West Coast Stranding Coordinator within 48 hours of sighting an injured or dead marine mammal in the construction site. WSDOT shall provide NMFS and the Stranding Network with the species or description of the animal(s), the condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition, if the animal is dead), location, time of first discovery, E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES observed behaviors (if alive), and photo or video (if available). In the event that WSDOT finds an injured or dead marine mammal that is not in the construction area, WSDOT would report the same information as listed above to NMFS as soon as operationally feasible. Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., 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’ implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels). To avoid repetition, this introductory discussion of our analyses applies to all the species listed in Table 7, given that the anticipated effects of WSDOT’s Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals dolphin relocation project 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. For all marine mammal species, takes that are anticipated and authorized are VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 expected to be limited to short-term Level B harassment, because of the small scale (only a total of 30 piles to be installed and removed) and short durations (maximum nine days pile driving/removal at Bremerton Ferry Terminal and five days pile driving/ removal at Edmonds Ferry Terminal). 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. For these reasons, these behavioral impacts are not expected to affect marine mammals’ growth, survival, and reproduction, especially considering the limited geographic area that would be affected in comparison to the much larger habitat for marine mammals in the Pacific Northwest. Take calculation based on marine mammal densities within the ensonified areas did not predict a Level A take. In addition, the estimated Level A zones are small (less than 35 m from the source) and can be effectively monitored to implement a shutdown measure if a marine mammal is detected to be moving towards that zone. The impacts are not expected to affect survival, and reproduction of the marine mammal population in the project vicinity. The project also is not expected to have significant adverse effects on affected marine mammals’ habitat, as analyzed in detail in the ‘‘Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat’’ section. There is no ESA designated critical area in the vicinity of the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminal areas. The project activities would not permanently modify existing marine mammal habitat. The activities may kill some fish and cause other fish to leave the area temporarily, thus impacting marine mammals’ foraging opportunities in a limited portion of the foraging range; but, because of the short duration of the activities and the relatively small area of the habitat that may be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences. Therefore, given the consideration of potential impacts to marine mammal prey species and their physical environment, WSDOT’s proposed construction activity at Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals would not adversely affect marine mammal habitat. In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity are not expected to adversely affect the species PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 16341 or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival: • No injury, serious injury, or mortality is anticipated or authorized; • All harassment is Level B harassment in the form of short-term behavioral modification; and • No areas of specific importance to affected species are impacted. 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 prescribed monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks. Small Numbers As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be authorized under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not define small numbers and so, in practice, NMFS compares the number of individuals 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 21 percent of the population for all marine mammals. 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 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. Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 16342 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this case with NMFS West Coast Region Protected Resources Division, whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species. NMFS is proposing to authorize take of California/Oregon/Washington stock of humpback whale, which are listed under the ESA. The Permit and Conservation Division has requested initiation of Section 7 consultation with the NMFS West Coast Regional Office for the issuance of this IHA. NMFS will conclude the ESA consultation prior to reaching a determination regarding the proposed issuance of the authorization. Proposed Authorization As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to WSDOT for conducting dolphin relocation activity at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals between October 1, 2018, and September 30, 2019, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. This section contains a draft of the IHA itself. The wording contained in this section is proposed for inclusion in the IHA (if issued). 1. This Authorization is valid from October 1, 2018, through September 30, 2019. 2. This Authorization is valid only for activities associated with in-water construction work at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals in the State of Washington. 3. (a) The species authorized taking by Level B harassment and in the numbers shown in Table 7 are: Gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus), humpback whale (Megaptera novaneagliae), minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), killer whale (Orcinus orca), long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus capensis), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), Dall’s porpoise (P. dali), California sea lion (Zalophus californianus), Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus), Pacific harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), and northern elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris). (b) The authorization for taking by harassment is limited to the following acoustic sources and from the following activities: (1) Vibratory pile driving; and (2) Vibratory pile removal. 4. Prohibitions. (a) The taking, by incidental harassment only, is limited to the species listed under condition 3(a) above and by the numbers listed in VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 Table 7 of this notice. The taking by injury, series injury, or death of these species or the taking by harassment, injury or death of any other species of marine mammal is prohibited unless separately authorized or exempted under the MMPA and may result in the modification, suspension, or revocation of this Authorization. (b) The taking of any marine mammal is prohibited whenever the required protected species observers (PSOs), required by condition 7(a), are not present in conformance with condition 7(a) of this Authorization. 5. Mitigation. (a) Time Restriction. In-water construction work shall occur only during daylight hours. (b) Establishment of Level A and Level B Harassment Zones. (i) Before the commencement of inwater pile driving/removal activities, WSDOT shall establish Level A harassment zones. The modeled Level A zones are summarized in Table 5. (ii) Before the commencement of inwater pile driving/removal activities, WSDOT shall establish Level B harassment zones. The modeled Level B zones are summarized in Table 5. (iii) Before the commencement of inwater pile driving/removal activities, WSDOT shall establish exclusion zones. The proposed exclusion zones are summarized in Table 8. (c) Monitoring of marine mammals shall take place starting 30 minutes before pile driving begins until 30 minutes after pile driving ends. (d) Shutdown Measures. (i) WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if a marine mammal is detected within or to be approaching the exclusion zones provided in Table 8 of this notice. (ii) WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if the number of any allotted marine mammal takes reaches the limit under the IHA, if such marine mammals are sighted within the vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment zone during pile removal activities. 6. Monitoring. (a) Protected Species Observers. WSDOT shall employ NMFSapproved PSOs to conduct marine mammal monitoring for its construction project. NMFS-approved PSOs will meet the following qualifications. (i) Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are required. (ii) At least one observer must have prior experience working as an observer. (iii) Other observers may substitute education (undergraduate degree in biological science or related field) or training for experience. PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 (iv) Where a team of three or more observers are required, one observer should be designated as lead observer or monitoring coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an observer. (v) NMFS will require submission and approval of observer CVs. (b) Monitoring Protocols: PSOs shall be present on site at all times during pile removal and driving. (i) A 30-minute pre-construction marine mammal monitoring will be required before the first pile driving or pile removal of the day. A 30-minute post-construction marine mammal monitoring will be required after the last pile driving or pile removal of the day. If the constructors take a break between subsequent pile driving or pile removal for more than 30 minutes, then additional 30-minute pre-construction marine mammal monitoring will be required before the next start-up of pile driving or pile removal. (ii) Marine mammal visual monitoring will be conducted for different zones of influence (ZOIs) based on different sizes of piles being driven or removed, as shown in maps in WSDOT’s Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan. (A) For all vibratory driving/removal at the Bremerton Ferry Terminal, two land-based PSOs and one monitoring boat with one PSO and boat operator will monitor the Level A and Level B zones. (B) For all vibratory driving/removal at the Edmonds Ferry Terminal, five land-based PSOs and two ferry-based PSOs will monitoring the Level A and Level B zones. (C) If the in-situ measurement showed that the Level B zone at the Edmonds Ferry Terminal is under 15 km from the source, three land-based PSOs and one ferry-based PSO will be monitoring the Level A and Level B zones. (D) Locations of the land-based PSOs and routes of monitoring vessels are shown in WSDOT’s Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan. (iv) If marine mammals are observed, the following information will be documented: (A) Species of observed marine mammals; (B) Number of observed marine mammal individuals; (C) Behavior of observed marine mammals; and (D) Location within the ZOI. 7. Reporting: (a) WSDOT shall provide NMFS with a draft monitoring report within 90 days of the conclusion of the construction work or within 90 days of the expiration of the IHA, whichever comes first. This report shall detail the monitoring E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1 srobinson on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Notices protocol, summarize the data recorded during monitoring, and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have been harassed. (b) If comments are received from NMFS Office of Protected Resources on the draft report, a final report shall be submitted to NMFS within 30 days thereafter. If no comments are received from NMFS, the draft report will be considered to be the final report. (c) In the unanticipated event that the construction activities clearly cause the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by this Authorization (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury, or mortality, WSDOT shall immediately cease all operations and immediately report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinators. The report must include the following information: (i) Time, date, and location (latitude/ longitude) of the incident; (ii) description of the incident; (iii) status of all sound source use in the 24 hours preceding the incident; (iv) environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed and direction, sea state, cloud cover, visibility, and water depth); (v) description of marine mammal observations in the 24 hours preceding the incident; (vi) species identification or description of the animal(s) involved; (vii) the fate of the animal(s); and (viii) photographs or video footage of the animal (if equipment is available). (d) Activities shall not resume until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS shall work with WSDOT to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. WSDOT may not resume their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone. (e) In the event that WSDOT discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the cause of the injury or death is unknown and the death is relatively recent (i.e., in less than a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph), WSDOT will immediately report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinators. The report must include the same information identified above. Activities may continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS will work with WSDOT to determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:42 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 (f) In the event that WSDOT discovers an injured or dead marine mammal, and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not associated with or related to the activities authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced decomposition, or scavenger damage), WSDOT shall report the incident to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinators, within 24 hours of the discovery. WSDOT shall provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. WSDOT can continue its operations under such a case. 8. This Authorization may be modified, suspended or withdrawn if the holder fails to abide by the conditions prescribed herein or if NMFS determines the authorized taking is having more than a negligible impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammals. 9. A copy of this Authorization must be in the possession of each contractor who performs the construction work at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals. Request for Public Comments We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and any other aspect of this Notice of Proposed IHA for the proposed WSDOT dolphin relocation project at Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals. We also request comment on the potential for renewal of this proposed IHA as described in the paragraph below. Please include with your comments any supporting data or literature citations to help inform our final decision on the request for MMPA authorization. On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a second one-year IHA without additional notice when (1) another year of identical or nearly identical activities as described in the Specified Activities section is planned or (2) the activities would not be completed by the time the IHA expires and a second IHA would allow for completion of the activities beyond that described in the Dates and Duration section, provided all of the following conditions are met: • A request for renewal is received no later than 60 days prior to expiration of the current IHA. • The request for renewal must include the following: (1) An explanation that the activities to be conducted beyond the initial dates either are identical to the previously analyzed activities or include changes so minor (e.g., reduction in pile size) PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 16343 that the changes do not affect the previous analyses, take estimates, or mitigation and monitoring requirements. (2) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not previously analyzed or authorized. Upon review of the request for renewal, the status of the affected species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS determines that there are no more than minor changes in the activities, the mitigation and monitoring measures remain the same and appropriate, and the original findings remain valid. Dated: April 11, 2018. Elaine T. Saiz, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2018–07889 Filed 4–13–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648–XF592 Marine Mammals; File No. 21158–02 National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; receipt of application for permit amendment. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that Robert Garrott, Ph.D., Montana State University, 310 Lewis Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717, has applied for an amendment to Scientific Research Permit No. 21158–01. DATES: Written, telefaxed, or email comments must be received on or before May 16, 2018. ADDRESSES: The application and related documents are available for review by selecting ‘‘Records Open for Public Comment’’ from the ‘‘Features’’ box on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species home page, https:// apps.nmfs.noaa.gov, and then selecting File No. 21158 from the list of available applications. These documents are also available upon written request or by appointment in the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301) 427–8401; fax (301) 713–0376. Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM 16APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 73 (Monday, April 16, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16330-16343]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-07889]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XG011


Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Bremerton and Edmonds Ferry 
Terminals Dolphin Relocation Project in Washington State

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed incidental harassment authorization (IHA); request for 
comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from Washington State Department 
of Transportation (WSDOT) for authorization to take marine mammals 
incidental to the dolphin (a man-made structure that protects other 
structures from being struck by boats) relocation project at the 
Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals in Washington State. Pursuant to 
the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on 
its proposal to issue an IHA to incidentally take marine mammals during 
the specified activities.

DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than May 16, 
2018.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, 
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, 
National Marine Fisheries Service. Physical comments should be sent to 
1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 and electronic comments 
should be sent to [email protected].
    Instructions: NMFS is not responsible for comments sent by any 
other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the 
end of the comment period. Comments received electronically, including 
all attachments, must not exceed a 25-megabyte file size. Attachments 
to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word or Excel or 
Adobe PDF file formats only. All comments received are a part of the 
public record and will generally be posted online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111 without change. All personal 
identifying information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by 
the

[[Page 16331]]

commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential 
business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected 
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the applications 
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in 
this document, may be obtained online at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/node/23111. In case of problems accessing these 
documents, please call the contact listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) 
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the 
incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine 
mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than 
commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain 
findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking 
is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is 
provided to the public for review.
    An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS 
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or 
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the 
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where 
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements 
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings 
are set forth.
    NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as an 
impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably 
expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 
species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or 
survival.
    The MMPA states that the term ``take'' means to harass, hunt, 
capture, kill or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill any marine 
mammal.
    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the 
MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of pursuit, torment, or 
annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or 
marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has 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

    Issuance of an MMPA 101(a)(5)(D) authorization requires compliance 
with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
    NMFS preliminary determined the issuance of the proposed IHA is 
consistent with categories of activities identified in CE B4 (issuance 
of incidental harassment authorizations under section 101(a)(5)(A) and 
(D) of the MMPA for which no serious injury or mortality is 
anticipated) of NOAA's Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A, and we have not 
identified any extraordinary circumstances listed in Chapter 4 of the 
Companion Manual for NAO 216-6A that would preclude this categorical 
exclusion under NEPA.
    We will review all comments submitted in response to this notice 
prior to making a final decision as to whether application of this CE 
is appropriate in this circumstance.

Summary of Request

    NMFS received a request from WSDOT for an IHA to take marine 
mammals incidental to the dolphin relocation project (a man-made 
structure that protects other structures from being struck by boats) at 
the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals in the State of Washington. 
WSDOT's request was for harassment only, and NMFS concurs that injury, 
serious injury, or mortality is not expected to result from this 
activity. Therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
    On October 4, 2017, WSDOT submitted a request to NMFS requesting an 
IHA for the possible harassment of small numbers of marine mammal 
species incidental to the dolphin relocation project at the Bremerton 
and Edmonds ferry terminals in Washington State, between October 1, 
2018, to September 30, 2019. NMFS determined that the IHA application 
is adequate and complete on December 4, 2017, with a few minor comments 
and questions. WSDOT subsequently addressed all NMFS comments and 
submitted a revised IHA application on March 1, 2018. NMFS is proposing 
to authorize the take by Level B harassment of the following marine 
mammal species: Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina); northern elephant seal 
(Mirounga angustirostris); California sea lion (Zalophus 
californianus); Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus); killer whale 
(Orcinus orca); gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus); humpback whale 
(Megaptera novaeangliae); minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata); 
harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena); Dall's porpoise (P. dalli); and 
long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus capensis).

Description of Proposed Activity

Overview

    The WSDOT is proposing to relocate one dolphin to improve safety at 
each of the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals. The Olympic Class 
ferries have an atypical shape, which at some terminals causes the 
vessel to make contact with the inner dolphin prior to the stern 
reaching the intermediate or outer dolphin. This tends to cause 
rotation of the vessel away from the wingwalls and presents a safety 
issue. The project will reduce the risk of landing issues for Olympic 
Class ferries at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals.

Dates and Duration

    Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water 
work timing restrictions to protect ESA-listed salmonids, planned WSDOT 
in-water construction is limited each year to July 16 through February 
15.
    In-water construction at the Bremerton Ferry Terminal will commence 
after October 1, and is planned during the August 1, 2018, to February 
15, 2019 in-water work window. In-water construction at the Edmonds 
Ferry Terminal will commence October 1, and is planned during the July 
15, 2018, to February 15, 2019 in-water work window.

Specified Geographic Region

    The Bremerton Ferry Terminal is located in the city of Bremerton, 
east of the Navy shipyard. Bremerton is on the shoreline of Sinclair 
Inlet, south of Bainbridge Island. Located in Kitsap County, 
Washington, the terminal is located in Section 24, Township 24 North, 
Range 1 East. The Edmonds Ferry Terminal is located in the city of 
Edmonds, along the downtown waterfront. Edmonds is in Snohomish County, 
approximately 15 miles north of Seattle. The terminal is located in 
Section 23, Township 27 North, Range 3 East (Figure 1-2 in the IHA 
application). Land use near both ferry terminals is a mix of 
residential, commercial, industrial, and open space and/or undeveloped 
lands.

Detailed Description of In-Water Pile Driving and Removal Associated 
With the Dolphin Relocation Project at Bremerton and Edmonds Ferry 
Terminals

    The proposed project includes vibratory hammer driving and removal 
creating elevated in-water and in-air noise that may impact marine 
mammals.

[[Page 16332]]

    The following construction activities (in sequence) are anticipated 
for the Bremerton Ferry Terminal.
     Install one temporary 36-inch diameter steel indicator 
pile with a vibratory hammer. The temporary indicator pile will be used 
as a visual landing aid reference for vessel captains during 
construction. It will be relocated to become a fender pile for the new 
dolphin.
     Remove the existing left outer dolphin that consists of 
six 36-inch diameter steel pipe piles with a vibratory hammer and/or by 
direct pull and clamshell removal.
     Using a vibratory hammer, install three 30-inch steel pile 
reaction piles. This is a back group of piles that provide stability to 
the dolphin.
     Install a concrete diaphragm (the diaphragm joins the 
piles at their tops), then use a vibratory hammer to install the 
remaining four 30-inch reaction piles.
     Using a vibratory hammer, install three 36-inch diameter 
steel pipe fender piles; install fenders and attach rub panels to the 
fender piles. Fender piles absorb much of the energy as the ferry 
vessel makes contact with the dolphin.
     Using a vibratory hammer, remove the 36-inch temporary 
indicator pile and install it as the last remaining fender pile along 
with the fender and fender panel.
    The following construction activities (in sequence) are anticipated 
for the Edmonds Ferry Terminal.
     Install one temporary 36-inch diameter steel indicator 
pile with a vibratory hammer. The temporary indicator pile will be used 
as a visual landing aid reference for vessel captains during 
construction.
     Using a vibratory hammer, install one 30-inch reaction 
pile.
     Using a vibratory hammer, install the two remaining 
reaction piles through the diaphragm.
     Using a vibratory hammer, remove three 36-inch steel pipe 
fender piles and reinstall them in their new locations.
     Using a vibratory hammer, remove the 36-inch temporary 
indicator pile (this portion of the project will not reuse the 
indicator pile).
    A summary of the piles to be installed and removed, along with pile 
driving information, is provided in Table 1.

                                             Table 1--Summary of In-Water Pile Driving and Removal Durations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Size                 Duration/     Number    Duration
          Location                 Pile element              Method              Pile type        (inch)    Pile No.   pile (min)    pile/day    (days)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bremerton...................  Indicator pile.......  Vibratory install....  Steel.............         36          1            20          1          1
                              Indicator pile.......  Vibratory removal....  Steel.............         36          1            15          1          1
                              Existing dolphin.....  Vibratory removal....  Steel.............         36          6            15          3          2
                              Relocate dolphin       Vibratory install....  Steel.............         36          4            20          3          2
                               install.
                              Relocated dolphin      Vibratory install....  Steel.............         30          7            20          3          3
                               install.
                             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal................  .....................  .....................  ..................  .........         19           345  .........          9
Edmond......................  Indicator pile.......  Vibratory install....  Steel.............         36          1            20          1          1
                              Indicator pile.......  Vibratory removal....  Steel.............         36          1            15          1          1
                              Existing dolphin       Vibratory removal....  Steel.............         36          3            15          3          1
                               removal.
                              Relocated dolphin....  Vibratory install....  Steel.............         36          3            20          3          1
                              Relocated dolphin....  Vibratory install....  Steel.............         30          3            20          3          1
                             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal................  .....................  .....................  ..................  .........         11           200  .........          5
                             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total...............  .....................  .....................  ..................  .........         30           545  .........         14
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 Specified Activities

    We have reviewed the applicant's species information, which 
summarizes available information regarding status and trends, 
distribution and habitat preferences, behavior and life history, and 
auditory capabilities of the potentially affected species--for accuracy 
and completeness and refer the reader to Sections 3 and 4 of the 
applications, as well as to NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; 
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/), instead of reprinting all of the 
information here. Additional general information about these species 
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS' 
website (www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/) or in the U.S. Navy's 
Marine Resource Assessments (MRA) for relevant operating areas. The 
MRAs are available online at: www.navfac.navy.mil/products_and_services/ev/products_and_services/marine_resources/marine_resource_assessments.html. Table 2 lists all species with 
expected potential for occurrence in Bremerton and Edmonds ferry 
terminal project area and summarizes information related to the 
population or stock, including potential biological removal (PBR), 
where known. For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR, 
defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including 
natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock 
while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable 
population, is considered in concert with known sources of ongoing 
anthropogenic mortality to assess the population-level effects of the 
anticipated mortality from a specific project (as described in NMFS' 
SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR and 
annual serious injury and mortality are included here as gross 
indicators of the status of the species and other threats.
    Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document 
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or 
the total number estimated within a particular study area. NMFS' stock 
abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of 
individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that 
stock.
    Five species (with five managed stocks) are considered to have the

[[Page 16333]]

potential to co-occur with the proposed construction activities. All 
values presented in Table 2 are the most recent available at the time 
of publication and are available in the 2015 SARs (Carretta et al., 
2016) and draft 2016 SARs (available online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/draft.htm).

                                    Table 2--Marine Mammals With Potential Presence Within the Proposed Project Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           ESA/ MMPA
                                                                                            status;         Stock abundance (CV,               Annual M/
             Common name                  Scientific name               Stock           strategic  (Y/N)      Nmin, most recent        PBR       SI \3\
                                                                                              \1\           abundance survey) \2\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae:
    Gray whale......................  Eschrichtius robustus..  Eastern North Pacific.  N                                    20,990        624        132
Family Balaenopteridae:
Humpback whale......................  Megaptera novaneagliae.  California/Oregon/      Y                                     1,918       11.0       >6.5
                                                                Washington.
    Minke whale.....................  Balaenoptera             California/Oregon/      N                                       636        3.5       >1.3
                                       acutorostrata.           Washington.
Family Delphinidae:
    Killer whale....................  Orcinus orca...........  Eastern N. Pacific      Y                                        81       0.14          0
                                                                Southern resident.
                                                               West coast transient..  N                                       243        2.4          0
    Long-beaked common dolphin......  Delphinus capensis.....  California............  N                                   101,305        657      >35.4
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
    Harbor porpoise.................  Phocoena phocoena......  Washington inland       N                                    11,233         66        7.2
                                                                waters.
    Dall's porpoise.................  P. dali................  California/Oregon/      N                                    25,750        172        0.3
                                                                Washington.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
 sea lions):
    California sea lion.............  Zalophus californianus.  U.S...................  N                                   296,750      9,200        389
    Steller sea lion................  Eumetopias jubatus.....  Eastern U.S...........  N                                    71,562      2,498        108
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
    Harbor seal.....................  Phoca vitulina.........  Washington northern     N                                \4\ 11,036      1,641         43
                                                                inland waters.
    Northern elephant seal..........  Mirounga angustirostris  California breeding...  N                                   179,000      4,882        8.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed
  under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality
  exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
  under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of
  stock abundance.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g.,
  commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV
  associated with estimated mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
\4\ Harbor seal estimate is based on data that are 8 years old, but this is the best available information for use here.

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their 
Habitat

    This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that 
components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and 
their habitat. The ``Estimated Take by Incidental Harassment'' section 
later in this document will include a quantitative analysis of the 
number of individuals that are expected to be taken by this activity. 
The ``Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination'' section will 
consider the content of this section, the ``Estimated Take by 
Incidental Harassment'' section, and the ``Proposed Mitigation'' 
section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these 
activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals 
and how those impacts on individuals are likely to impact marine mammal 
species or stocks.
    Potential impacts to marine mammals from the proposed Bremerton and 
Edmonds ferry terminals dolphin relocation project are from noise 
generated during in-water pile driving and pile removal activities.

Acoustic Effects

    Here, we first provide background information on marine mammal 
hearing before discussing the potential effects of the use of active 
acoustic sources on marine mammals.
    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 decibel (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

[[Page 16334]]

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 Hertz (Hz) and 35 
kilohertz (kHz), with best hearing estimated to be from 100 Hz to 8 
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, with best hearing from 10 to 
less than 100 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.
     Pinnipeds in water; Phocidae (true seals): Generalized 
hearing is estimated to occur between approximately 50 Hz to 86 kHz, 
with best hearing between 1-50 kHz;
     Pinnipeds in water; Otariidae (eared seals): Generalized 
hearing is estimated to occur between 60 Hz and 39 kHz, with best 
hearing between 2-48 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. 
Eleven marine mammal species (7 cetacean and 4 pinniped (2 otariid and 
2 phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the 
proposed survey activities. Please refer to Table 2. Of the cetacean 
species that may be present, one species is classified as low-frequency 
cetaceans (i.e., gray whale), and one is classified as high-frequency 
cetaceans (i.e., harbor porpoise).
    The WSDOT's dolphin relocation project at Bremerton and Edmonds 
ferry terminals 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 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

[[Page 16335]]

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 
WSDOT's dolphin relocation project, noises from vibratory pile driving 
and pile removal contribute to the elevated ambient noise levels in the 
project area, thus increasing potential for or severity of masking. 
Baseline ambient noise levels in the vicinity of project area are high 
due to ongoing shipping, construction and other activities in the Puget 
Sound.
    Finally, marine mammals' exposure to certain sounds could lead to 
behavioral disturbance (Richardson et al., 1995), such as changing 
durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per surfacing, or 
moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal activities; 
changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such as 
socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive 
behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping); avoidance of 
areas where noise sources are located; and/or flight responses (e.g., 
pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).
    The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise 
depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and 
their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, 
experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et 
al., 2007). Currently NMFS uses a received level of 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa 
(rms) to predict the onset of behavioral harassment from impulse noises 
(such as impact pile driving), and 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for 
continuous noises (such as vibratory pile driving). For the WSDOT's 
Bremerton and Edmonds ferry terminals dolphin relocation project, only 
120-dB level is considered for effects analysis because WSDOT plans to 
use only 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 the coastal construction, 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.
    Finally, the time of the proposed construction activity would avoid 
the spawning season of the ESA-listed salmonid species.

Estimated Take

    This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes 
authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration 
of whether the number of takes is ``small'' and the negligible impact 
determination.
    Harassment is the only 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 B harassment only, in the form 
of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals 
resulting from exposure to noise generated from vibratory pile driving 
and removal. Based on the nature of the activity and the anticipated 
effectiveness of the mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown measures--
discussed in detail below in Proposed Mitigation section), Level A 
harassment is neither anticipated nor proposed to be 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

[[Page 16336]]

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 generation of impulse 
(impact pile driving) and non-impulse (vibratory pile driving and 
removal) sources; and, therefore, both 160- and 120-dB re 1 [mu]Pa 
(rms) are used.
    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 would generate and non-impulsive 
(vibratory pile driving and pile removal) noises.
    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: http://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 dB;       LE,LF,24h: 199 dB............  Lrms,flat: 160 dB............  Lrms,flat: 120 dB.
                                      LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans.......  Lpk,flat: 230 dB;       LE,MF,24h: 198 dB............
                                      LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans......  Lpk,flat: 202 dB;       LE,HF,24h: 173 dB............
                                      LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater).  Lpk,flat: 218 dB;       LE,PW,24h: 201 dB............
                                      LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater)  Lpk,flat: 232 dB;       LE,OW,24h: 219 dB............
                                      LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive
  sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be
  considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [mu]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1[mu]Pa2s. In this
  Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by
  ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ``flat'' is being included to
  indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative
  sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds)
  and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways
  (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which
  these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.

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 vibratory removal and/or driving of 30-inch 
and 36-inch diameter hollow steel piles. Based on in-water measurements 
at Edmonds Ferry Terminal in 2017 (WSDOT 2017), vibratory driving of 
30-inch steel piles generated 174 dB rms re 1 [micro]Pa at 10 meters 
and vibratory pile driving of a 36-inch steel pile generated 177 dB rms 
re 1 [micro]Pa measured at 10 meters. As a conservative estimate, 
vibratory pile removal source level of 36-in steel pile is based on 36-
in pile installation level of 177 dB re 1 [micro]Pa SEL.
    A summary of source levels from different pile driving and pile 
removal activities is provided in Table 4.

                             Table 4--Summary of In-Water Pile Driving Source Levels
                                              [At 10 m from source]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             SEL (dB re 1       SPLrms (dB re 1
                  Method                           Pile type/size           [micro]Pa\2\-s)       [micro]Pa)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory driving/removal.................  36-in steel pile............                 177                 177
Vibratory driving.........................  30-in steel pile............                 174                 174
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 16337]]

    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 are below the 
injury thresholds, cumulative SEL were used to do the calculations 
using the NMFS acoustic guidance (NMFS 2016).

Estimating Harassment Zones

    For Level B harassment, ensonified areas are based on WSDOT's 
source measurements (see above) computed using 15 * log(R) for 
transmission loss to derive the distances up to 120-dB isopleths.
    For Level A harassment, calculation is based on duration of 
installation/removal per pile and number of piles installed or removed 
per day, using spectral modeling based on vibratory pile driving 
recordings made at Edmonds Ferry Terminal for the same piles. One-
second sound exposure level (SEL) power spectral densities (PSDs) were 
calculated and used as representative pile driving sources to assess 
Level A harassment for marine mammals in different hearing groups. 
Initial results showed that Level A harassment zones from the 3-in 
piles were smaller than those from 30-in piles for high-frequency 
cetaceans, despite the broadband noise level from the 36-in pile being 
3 dB higher than that of 30-in pile. Close examination of the pile 
driving spectra revealed some unusual high decay rate in the 36-in pile 
driving sound above 2 kHz. This unusual decay was probably due to the 
specific sediment in the pile driving location. Therefore, the spectrum 
for the 30-in pile was used to model the 36-in pile and scaled up to 
the 177 dB broadband level.
    Transmission loss due to absorption was also incorporated based 
using the equation

TL(f) = 15log(R) + a(f) * R/1000

where TL(f) is frequency dependent transmission loss, and a(f) is 
frequency dependent transmission loss coefficient.

    Distances of ensonified area for different pile driving/removal 
activities for different marine mammal hearing groups is present in 
Table 5.

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.
    In most cases, marine mammal density data are from the U.S. Navy 
Marine Species Density Database (U.S. Navy 2015) except California sea 
lion and harbor porpoise. California sea lion density at Bremerton area 
is based on survey data of California sea lions at the Navy Shipyard at 
Bremerton from 2012-2016 (Navy 2017). Survey results indicate as many 
as 144 animals hauled out each day during this time period, with the 
majority of animals observed August through May and the greatest 
numbers observed in November. The average of the monthly maximum counts 
during the in-water work window provides an estimate of 69 sea lions 
per day. For harbor porpoise, because Washington Department of Fish and 
Wildlife has better local distribution data based on recent survey in 
the area, local animal abundance are used to calculate the take numbers 
(Evenson, 2016).

[[Page 16338]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16AP18.026

    A summary of marine mammal density and local occurrence used for 
take estimates is provided in Table 6.

Table 6--Marine Mammal Density and Local Occurrence in the WSDOT Project
                                  Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Density (#/
                         Species                              km\2\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale..............................................          0.0051
Humpback whale..........................................          0.0007
Minke whale.............................................         0.00003
Killer whale (West coast transient).....................           0.002
Long-beaked common dolphin..............................           0.002
Harbor porpoise.........................................            0.58
Dall's porpoise.........................................           0.048
California sea lion.....................................          * 0.03
Steller sea lion........................................            0.04
Harbor seal.............................................            1.22
Northern elephant seal..................................         0.00001
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This density is only used for Edmonds Ferry Terminal area. For animals
  at Bremerton Ferry Terminal, a daily sighting of 69 animals is used
  for take estimates.

Take Calculation and Estimation

    Here we describe how the information provided above is brought 
together to produce a quantitative take estimate. For all marine 
mammals except California sea lion at Bremerton Ferry Terminal area, 
takes were calculated as: Take = ensonified area x average animal 
abundance in the area x pile driving days and rounded up to the nearest 
integer. For California sea lion at Bremerton, take estimate is based 
on the average daily sighting of 69 animals within the area multiplied 
by the nine project days, which yield a total of 621 estimated takes.
    For calculated take number less than 10, such as northern elephant 
seals, transient killer whales, humpback whales, minke whales, and 
long-beaked common dolphins, takes numbers were adjusted to account for 
group encounter and the likelihood of encountering. Specifically, for 
northern elephant seal, take of 15 animals is estimated based on the 
likelihood of encountering this species during the project period. For 
transient killer whale, takes of 30 animals is estimated based on the 
group size and the likelihood of encountering in the area. For humpback 
and minke whales, takes of eight animals each are estimated based on 
the likelihood of encountering. For long-beaked common dolphin, take of 
50 animals is estimated based on the group size and the likelihood of 
encountering in the area.
    No Level A take is calculated using the aforementioned estimation 
method because of the small injury zones and relatively low average 
animal density in the area. Since the largest Level A distance is only 
35 m from the source for high-frequency cetaceans (harbor porpoise and 
Dall's porpoise), NMFS considers that WSDOT can effectively monitor 
such small zones to implement shutdown measures and avoid Level A 
takes. Therefore, no Level A take of marine mammal is anticipated for 
the dolphin replacement project at the Bremerton and Edmonds ferry 
terminals.
    A summary of estimated takes based on the above analysis is listed 
in Table 7.

[[Page 16339]]



  Table 7--Estimated Numbers of Marine Mammals That May Be Exposed to Received Noise Levels That Cause Level B
                                                   Harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Estimated
                             Species                               Level B take      Abundance      Percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale......................................................              10          20,990            0.05
Humpback whale..................................................               8           1,918            0.42
Minke whale.....................................................               8             636            2.17
Killer whale (West coast transient).............................              30             243           12.35
Killer whale (Southern resident)................................               0              81            0.00
Long-beaked common dolphin......................................              50         101,305            0.05
Harbor porpoise.................................................           1,087          11,233            9.72
Dall's porpoise.................................................              90          25,750            0.35
California sea lion.............................................           1,149         296,750            0.39
Steller sea lion................................................              75          71,562            0.11
Harbor seal.....................................................           2,286          11,036           20.71
Northern elephant seal..........................................              15         179,000            0.02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Mitigation

    In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, 
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such 
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on 
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to 
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on 
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain 
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS 
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to 
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic 
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such 
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse 
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 
216.104(a)(11)).
    In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to 
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and 
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we 
carefully consider two primary factors:
    (1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful 
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to 
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat. 
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being 
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the 
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented 
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as 
planned) the likelihood of effective implementation (probability 
implemented as planned); and
    (2) The practicability of the measures for applicant 
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on 
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity, 
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the 
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.

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, Level B Harassment Zones, and 
Exclusion Zones
    Before the commencement of in-water construction activities, which 
include vibratory pile driving and pile removal, WSDOT shall establish 
Level A harassment zones where received underwater SELcum 
could cause PTS (see above).
    WSDOT shall also establish Level B harassment zones where received 
underwater SPLs are higher than 120 dBrms re 1 [micro]Pa for 
non-impulsive noise sources (vibratory pile driving and pile removal).
    WSDOT shall establish exclusion zones within which marine mammals 
could be taken by Level A harassment. For Level A harassment zones that 
is less than 10 m from the source, a minimum of 10 m distance should be 
established as an exclusion zone.
    A summary of exclusion zones is provided in Table 8.

          Table 8--Exclusion Zones for Various Pile Driving Activities and Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Injury zone (m)
 Pile type, size & pile driving  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             method                 LF cetacean     MF cetacean     HF cetacean       Phocid          Otariid
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36'' indicate pile install (1                 10              10              25              10              10
 pile/day)......................
36'' indicate pile removal (1                 10              10              10              10              10
 pile/day)......................
36'' steel pile (existing                     25              10              35              10              10
 dolphin) removal (3 piles/day).
36'' steel pile (relocated                    25              10              35              10              10
 dolphin) install (3 piles/day).
30'' steel pile (relocated                    25              10              25              10              10
 dolphin) install (3 piles/day).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NMFS-approved protected species observers (PSO) shall conduct an 
initial 30-minute survey of the exclusion zones to ensure that no 
marine mammals are seen within the zones before pile driving and pile 
removal of a pile segment begins. If marine mammals are found within 
the exclusion zone, pile driving of the segment would be delayed until 
they move out of the area. If a marine mammal is seen above water and 
then dives below, the contractor would wait 15 minutes. If no marine 
mammals are seen by the observer in that time it can be assumed that 
the

[[Page 16340]]

animal has moved beyond the exclusion zone.
    If pile driving of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or more and a 
marine mammal is sighted within the designated exclusion zone prior to 
commencement of pile driving, the observer(s) must notify the pile 
driving operator (or other authorized individual) immediately and 
continue to monitor the exclusion zone. Operations may not resume until 
the marine mammal has exited the exclusion zone or 30 minutes have 
elapsed since the last sighting.
3. Shutdown Measures
    WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if a marine mammal is 
detected within an exclusion zone or is about to enter an exclusion 
zone listed in Table 8.
    Further, WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if the number of 
authorized takes for any particular species reaches the limit under the 
IHA (if issued) and if such marine mammals are sighted within the 
vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B harassment 
zone during in-water construction activities.
    Based on our evaluation of the required measures, NMFS has 
preliminarily determined that the prescribed mitigation measures 
provide the means effecting the least practicable impact on the 
affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular 
attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar 
significance.

Proposed Monitoring and Reporting

    In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of 
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, requirements pertaining to 
the monitoring