Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Chevron Richmond Refinery Long Wharf Maintenance and Efficiency Project in San Francisco Bay, California, 27548-27564 [2018-12629]

Download as PDF 27548 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648–XG067 Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Chevron Richmond Refinery Long Wharf Maintenance and Efficiency Project in San Francisco Bay, California National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization. AGENCY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as amended, notification is hereby given that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to Chevron to incidentally take, by Level A and/or Level B harassment, seven species of marine mammals during the Long Wharf Maintenance and Efficiency Project (WMEP) in San Francisco Bay, California. SUMMARY: This Authorization is applicable from June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019. DATES: Rob Pauline, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401. Electronic copies of the application and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in this document, may be obtained online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these documents, please call the contact listed above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Background amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon request, the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 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). Summary of Request On February 1, 2018, NMFS received a request from Chevron for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving and pile removal associated with the WMEP in San Francisco Bay, PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 California. Chevron’s request is for take of seven species by Level A and Level B harassment. Neither Chevron nor NMFS expects serious injury or mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. NMFS has issued an IHA to Chevron authorizing the take of seven species by Level A and Level B harassment. Pile driving and removal will take 28 days and will be timed to occur within the work windows developed for Endangered Species Act (ESA)—listed fish species (June 1 through November 30). The IHA is effective from June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019. This IHA would cover one year of a larger project for which Chevron intends to request additional take authorizations for subsequent facets of the project. Description of Planned Activity Chevron’s Richmond Refinery Long Wharf (Long Wharf) located in San Francisco Bay, is the largest marine oil terminal in California. The Long Wharf has existed in its current location since the early 1900s (Figure 1–1 in Application). The existing configuration of these systems have limitations to accepting more modern, fuel efficient vessels with shorter parallel mid-body hulls and in some cases do not meet current Marine Oil Terminal Engineering and Maintenance Standards (MOTEMS). The purpose of the planned WMEP is to comply with current MOTEMS requirements and to improve safety and efficiency at the Long Wharf. The planned project will involve modifications at four berths (Berths 1, 2, 3, and 4). Modifications to the Long Wharf include replacing gangways and cranes, adding new mooring hooks and standoff fenders, adding new dolphins and catwalks, and modifying the fire water system at Berths 1, 2, 3 and/or 4, as well as the seismic retrofit to the Berth 4 loading platform. The type and numbers of piles to be installed, as well as those that will be removed during the 2018–2022 period are summarized in Table 1. E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 27549 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices The combined modifications to Berths 1 to 4 would require the installation of 141 new concrete piles to support new and replacement equipment and their associated structures. The Berth 4 loading platform would add eight, 60inch diameter steel piles as part of the seismic retrofit. The project would also add four clusters of 13 composite piles each (52 total) as markers and protection of the new batter (driven at an angle) piles on the east side of the Berth 4 retrofit. The project would remove 106 existing timber piles, three existing 22-inch and two existing 24-inch concrete piles. A total of 12 temporary piles would also be installed and removed during the seismic retrofit of Berth 4. Note that the proposed IHA will only cover pile driving and removal that will occur during the 2018 work season, as provided in Table 2. TABLE 2—PILE DRIVING SUMMARY FOR 2018 WORK SEASON amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Pile driver type 36-inch steel template pile ......................................................................... Concrete pile removal ................................................................................ 24-inch concrete ........................................................................................ 14-inch H pile installation (for temporary fenders) .................................... Timber pile removal ................................................................................... Vibratory .......................................... Vibratory .......................................... Impact .............................................. Vibratory/Impact * ............................ Vibratory .......................................... 8 5 8 36 53 Number of driving days 2 1 8 12 5 * A vibratory driver will be preferentially used for installation of the temporary H piles. In the event that the pile hits a buried obstruction and can no longer be advanced with a vibratory driver, and impact hammer may be used. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 EN13JN18.000</GPH> Number of piles Pile type 27550 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices These actions could produce underwater sound at levels that could result in the injury or behavioral harassment of marine mammal species. A detailed description of Chevron’s planned project is provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (83 FR 18802; April 30, 2018). Since that time, no changes have been made to the planned project activities. Therefore, a detailed description is not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for the description of the specific activity. Comments and Responses A notice of NMFS’s proposal to issue an IHA to Chevron was published in the Federal Register on April 30, 2018 (83 FR 18802). That notice described, in detail, Chevron’s activity, the marine mammal species that may be affected by the activity, the anticipated effects on marine mammals and their habitat, proposed amount and manner of take, and proposed mitigation, monitoring and reporting measures. During the 30day public comment period, NMFS received one comment letter from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission); the Commission’s recommendations and our responses are provided here, and the comments have been posted online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ incidental/construction.htm. Comment: The Commission commented that the method NMFS used to estimate the numbers of takes during the proposed activities, which summed fractions of takes for each species across project days, does not account for and negates the intent of NMFS’ 24-hour reset policy. The Commission also recommends that NMFS develop and share guidance on this issue. Response: NMFS will share the guidance with the Commission following the completion of internal review and looks forward to discussing the issue with them in the future. Comment: The Commission requested clarification of certain issues associated with NMFS’s notice that one-year renewals could be issued in certain limited circumstances and expressed concern that the process would bypass the public notice and comment requirements. The Commission also suggested that NMFS should discuss the possibility of renewals through a more general route, such as a rulemaking, instead of notice in a specific authorization. The Commission further recommended that if NMFS did not pursue a more general route, that the agency provide the Commission and the public with a legal analysis supporting our conclusion that this process is consistent with the requirements of section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA. Response: The process of issuing a renewal IHA does not bypass the public notice and comment requirements of the MMPA. The notice of the proposed IHA expressly notifies the public that under certain, limited conditions an applicant could seek a renewal IHA for an additional year. The notice describes the conditions under which such a renewal request could be considered and expressly seeks public comment in the event such a renewal is sought. Importantly, such renewals would be limited to where the activities are identical or nearly identical to those analyzed in the proposed IHA, monitoring does not indicate impacts that were not previously analyzed and authorized, and the mitigation and monitoring requirements remain the same, all of which allow the public to comment on the appropriateness and effects of a renewal at the same time the public provides comments on the initial IHA. NMFS has, however, modified the language for future proposed IHAs to clarify that all IHAs, including renewal IHAs, are valid for no more than one year and that the agency would consider only one renewal for a project at this time. In addition, notice of issuance or denial of a renewal IHA would be published in the Federal Register, as are all IHAs. Last, NMFS will publish on our website a description of the renewal process before any renewal is issued utilizing the new process. Comment: The Commission recommended that NMFS review more thoroughly both the applications prior to deeming them complete and its notices prior to submitting them for publication in the Federal Register and that NMFS better evaluate the proposed exclusion/shut-down zones that are to be implemented for each proposed incidental take authorization. Response: NMFS thanks the Commission for its recommendation. Comment: The Commission expressed concern about what they assert is the lack of adequate time to provide public comments as well as the abbreviated timeframes during which NMFS is able to address public comments. The Commission recommended that NMFS ensure that it publishes and finalizes proposed incidental harassment authorizations sufficiently before the planned start date of the proposed activities to ensure full consideration is given to all comments received. Response: NMFS provided the required 30-day notice for public comment, and has adequately considered all public comments received in making the necessary findings. Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species. Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be found in NMFS’s Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/) and more general information about these species (e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS’s website. We provided a description of the specified activity in our Federal Register notice announcing the proposed authorization (83 FR 18802; April 30, 2018). Please refer to that document; we provide only a summary table here (Table 3). TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT AREA amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Common name Scientific name ESA/ MMPA status; Strategic (Y/N) 1 Stock Stock abundance (CV, Nmin, most recent abundance survey) 2 Annual M/SI 3 PBR Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales) Family Eschrichtiidae Gray whale ........................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 Eschrichtius robustus .......... 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Eastern North Pacific ........... Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 -/-; (N) ...... Sfmt 4703 20,990 (0.05, 20,125, 2011) E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 624 132 27551 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMALS POTENTIALLY PRESENT IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT AREA—Continued Common name Scientific name ESA/ MMPA status; Strategic (Y/N) 1 Stock abundance (CV, Nmin, most recent abundance survey) 2 -/-;(N) ........ 453 (0.06, 346, 2011) .......... 2.7 ≥2.0 9,886 (0.51, 6,625, 2011) .... 66 0 296,750 (-, 153,337, 2011) .. 14,050 (-, 7,524, 2013) ........ 9,200 451 389 1.8 30,968 (-,27,348, 2012) ....... 179,000 (-, 81,368, 2010) .... 1,641 4,882 43 8.8 Stock Annual M/SI 3 PBR Family Balaenidae Family Delphinidae Bottlenose dolphin ............... Tursiops truncatus ............... California Coastal ................ Family Phocoenidae (porpoises) Harbor porpoise ................... Phocoena phocoena ............ San Francisco-Russian River Stock. -/-;(N) ........ Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions) California sea lion ................ Northern fur seal .................. Zalophus californianus ......... Callorhinus ursinus .............. Eastern U.S. stock ............... California stock .................... -/-;(N) ........ -/-;(N) ........ Family Phocidae (earless seals) Pacific harbor seal ............... Northern elephant seal ........ Phoca vitulina ...................... Mirounga angustirostris ....... California stock .................... California Breeding stock .... -/-;(N) ........ -/-;(N) ........ amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock. 2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For certain stocks of pinnipeds, abundance estimates are based upon observations of animals (often pups) ashore multiplied by some correction factor derived from knowledge of the species’ (or similar species’) life history to arrive at a best abundance estimate; therefore, there is no associated CV. In these cases, the minimum abundance may represent actual counts of all animals ashore. 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. Note that while humpback whales and Guadalupe fur seals have been observed in the Bay, their typical temporal and/or spatial occurrence is such that take is not expected to occur, and they are not discussed further beyond the explanation provided here. Humpback whales are rare, though well-publicized, visitors to the interior of San Francisco Bay. A humpback whale journeyed through the Bay and up the Sacramento River in 1985 and reentered the Bay in the fall of 1990, stranding on mudflats near Candlestick Park (Fimrite 2005). In May 2007, a humpback whale mother and calf spent just over two weeks in San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento River before finding their way back out to sea. Although it is possible that a humpback whale will enter the Bay and find its way into the project area during construction activities, their occurrence is unlikely. Guadalupe fur seals occasionally range into the waters of Northern California and the Pacific Northwest. The Farallon Islands (off central California) and Channel Islands (off southern California) are used as haulouts during these movements (Simon 2016). Juvenile Guadalupe fur seals occasionally strand in the vicinity of San Francisco, especially during El ˜ Nino events. Most strandings along the California coast are animals younger VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 than two years old, with evidence of malnutrition (NMFS 2017c). In the rare event that a Guadalupe fur seal is detected within the Level A or Level B harassment zones, work will cease until the animal has left the area. Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat We provided a description of the anticipated effects of the specified activity on marine mammals in our Federal Register notice announcing the proposed authorization (83 FR 18802; April 30, 2018). Please refer to that document for our detailed analysis; we provide only summary information here. The introduction of anthropogenic noise into the aquatic environment from pile driving and removal is the primary means by which marine mammals may be harassed from Chevron’s specified activity. The effects of pile driving noise on marine mammals are dependent on several factors, including, but not limited to, sound type (e.g., impulsive vs. non-impulsive), the species, age and sex class (e.g., adult male vs. mom with calf), duration of exposure, the distance between the pile and the animal, received levels, behavior at time of exposure, and previous history with exposure (Southall et al., 2007, Wartzok et al., 2004). Animals exposed to natural PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 or anthropogenic sound may experience physical and behavioral effects, ranging in magnitude from none to severe (Southall et al., 2007). In general, exposure to pile driving noise has the potential to result in auditory threshold shifts (permanent threshold shift (PTS) and temporary threshold shift (TTS)) and behavioral reactions (e.g., avoidance, temporary cessation of foraging and vocalizing, changes in dive behavior). No new permanent impacts to habitats used by marine mammals would result from the project. Some short-term impacts to prey availability (e.g., fish) and minor impacts to the immediate substrate may occur as a result of increased turbidity from pile installation and removal but the effects are expected to be temporary and minimal. Estimated Take This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS’ consideration of small numbers and the negligible impact determination. Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ‘‘harassment’’ as any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 27552 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 (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 primarily be by Level B harassment, as use of the acoustic source (i.e., pile driving) has the potential to result in disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals. There is also some potential for auditory injury (Level A harassment) to result, primarily for high frequency species and a single phocid species due to larger predicted auditory injury zones. Auditory injury is unlikely to occur for low-frequency, midfrequency species, or pinniped groups, with the exception of harbor seals. The mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to minimize the severity of such taking to the extent practicable. As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated. Described in the most basic way, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the number of days of activities. Below, we describe these components in more detail and present the authorized take estimate. Acoustic Thresholds Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of some degree (equated to Level A harassment). Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources—Though significantly driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2012). 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 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 received levels of 120 decibel (dB) re 1 micro pascal (mPa) root mean square (rms) for continuous (e.g. vibratory piledriving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific sonar) sources. For in-air sounds, NMFS predicts that pinnipeds exposed above received levels of 100 dB re 20 mPa (rms) and harbor seals exposed above 90 dB re 20 mPa (rms) will be behaviorally harassed. Chevron’s planned activity includes the use of continuous (vibratory driving) and impulsive (impact driving) sources, and therefore the 120 and160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) are applicable. Level A harassment for non-explosive sources—NMFS’ Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Technical Guidance, 2016) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or nonimpulsive). The applicant’s planned activity includes the use of impulsive (impact driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory driving) sources. These thresholds are provided in Table 4. The references, analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are described in NMFS 2016 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: https:// www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/ guidelines.htm. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Ensonified Area Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the acoustic thresholds. Pile driving will generate underwater noise that potentially could result in disturbance to marine mammals swimming by the project area. Transmission loss (TL) underwater is the decrease in acoustic intensity as an acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source until the source becomes indistinguishable from ambient sound. TL parameters vary with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current, source and receiver depth, water depth, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 water chemistry, and bottom composition and topography. A standard sound propagation model, the Practical Spreading Loss model, was used to estimate the range from pile driving activity to various expected SPLs at potential project structures. This model follows a geometric propagation loss based on the distance from the driven pile, resulting in a 4.5 dB reduction in level for each doubling of distance from the source. In this model, the SPL at some distance away from the source (e.g., driven pile) is governed by a measured source level, minus the TL of the energy as it dissipates with distance. The TL equation is: TL = 15log10(R1/R2) Where: PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 TL is the transmission loss in dB, R1 is the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven pile, and R2 is the distance from the driven pile of the initial measurement. The degree to which underwater noise propagates away from a noise source is dependent on a variety of factors, most notably by the water bathymetry and presence or absence of reflective or absorptive conditions including the sea surface and sediment type. The TL model described above was used to calculate the expected noise propagation from both impact and vibratory pile driving, using representative source levels to estimate the zone of influence (ZOI) or area exceeding specified noise criteria. E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 EN13JN18.001</GPH> BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 27553 27554 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices Source Levels Sound source levels from the Chevron site were not available. Therefore, literature values published for projects similar to the Chevron project were used to estimate source levels that could potentially be produced. Results are shown in Table 5. Modifications at the four berths require the placement of new 24-inch diameter square concrete piles. Approximately one to two of these piles would be installed in one workday, using impact driving methods. Based on measured blow counts for 24-inch concrete piles driven at the Long Wharf Berth 4 in 2011, installation for each pile could require up to approximately 300 blows and 1.5 second per blow average over a duration of approximately 20 minutes per pile, with 40 minutes of pile driving time per day if two piles are installed. To estimate the noise effects of the 24-inch square concrete piles, the general values provided by Caltrans (2015a) are shown in Table 5. To estimate the noise effects of impact driving of 14-inch steel H piles, the values provided by Caltrans were also utilized. These source values are 208 dB peak, 187 rms, and 177 dB SEL (single strike). Based on these levels, impact driving of the 14-inch steel H piles is expected to produce underwater sound exceeded the Level B 160 dB RMS threshold over a distance of 631 meters. During construction, temporary fendering would be installed at Berth 2 which will be supported by 36 steel 14inch steel H piles. It is estimated that each pile could be driven in five (5) minutes. Two (2) to four (4) piles would be installed in any single workday for a total of approximately 12 days of installation. For the purposes of calculating the distance to Level A thresholds, four piles per day is assumed. The piles would be removed after the permanent fenders are in place. A vibratory hammer would be used to vibrate the piles to facilitate pulling them from the mud. The best match for estimated source levels is the Port of Anchorage pile driving test project. During vibratory pile driving associated with the Anchorage project, peak noise levels ranged from 165 to 175 dB, and the RMS ranged between 152 and 168 dB, both measured at approximately 15 meters (50 ft) (Caltrans 2015a). The source levels for vibratory installation of 36-inch temporary steel piles were from the Explosive Handling Wharf–2 (EHW–2) project located at the Naval Base Kitsap in Bangor, Washington as stated in Caltrans (2015a). During vibratory pile driving measured peak noise levels were approximately 180 dB, and the RMS was approximately 169 dB at a 10 meter (33ft) distance. These temporary piles would require a drive time per pile of approximately 10 minutes. Up to four (4) of these piles could be installed in any single workday for a total of 40 minutes. The most applicable source values for wooden pile removal were derived from measurements taken at the Port Townsend dolphin pile removal in Washington. During vibratory pile extraction associated with this project, which occurred under similar circumstances, measured peak noise levels were approximately 164 dB, and the RMS was approximately 150 dB (WSDOT 2011). Applicable sound values for the removal of concrete piles could not be located, but they are expected to be similar to the levels produced by wooden piles described above, as they are similarly sized, nonmetallic, and will be removed using the same methods. During construction, 106 16-inch timber piles, and seven 18 to 24-inch square concrete piles would be removed. Up to twelve of these piles could be extracted in one workday. Extraction time needed for each pile may vary greatly, but could require approximately 400 seconds (approximately 7 minutes). TABLE 5—THE SOUND LEVELS (dB PEAK, dB RMS, AND dB SSEL) EXPECTED TO BE GENERATED BY EACH HAMMER AND PILE TYPE Type of pile Hammer type 24-inch sq. concrete ................................................................ 14-inch Temporary steel H-pile ............................................... 14-inch Temporary steel H-pile ............................................... 36-inch Steel Pipe ................................................................... Wood and concrete pile extraction .......................................... Estimated pressure level (dB peak) Impact ..................................... Impact ..................................... Vibratory ................................. Vibratory ................................. Vibratory ................................. 188 208 180 180 164 Estimated pressure level (dB RMS) 176 1 187 2 168 169 3 150 Estimated single strike sound exposure level (dB SEL) 166 177 ........................ ........................ ........................ 1 SL was based on an assumed 10–dB difference between the SELs-s and SPLrms SLs. The SPLrmsSL was not reported in Caltrans. at 14 m. 3 Measured at 16 m. amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 2 Measured When NMFS Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in recognition of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more technically challenging to predict because of the duration component in the new thresholds, NMFS developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools to help predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 typically going to be overestimates of some degree, which will result in some degree of overestimate of Level A take. However, these tools offer the best way to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D modeling methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways to quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address the output where appropriate. For stationary sources NMFS User Spreadsheet predicts the closest distance at which, if a marine mammal remained at that distance the whole duration of the PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 activity, it would not incur PTS. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet, and the resulting isopleths are reported below. Table 6 shows the inputs that were used in the User Spreadsheet to determine cumulative PTS Thresholds. Table 7 shows the Level A Isopleths as determined utilizing inputs from Table 6. Level B isopleths for impact and vibratory driving and extraction are shown in Table 8. E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 27555 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices TABLE 6—INPUTS FOR USER SPREADSHEET E.1: Impact pile driving (stationary source: impulsive, intermittent) Spreadsheet tab used Pile Type and Hammer Type ................... Source Level ............................................. Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) .......... Number of strikes in 1 h OR number of strikes per pile. Activity Duration (h) within 24-h period OR number of piles per day. Propagation (xLogR) ................................. Distance of source level measurement (meters). E.1: Impact pile driving (stationary source: impulsive, intermittent) A: Stationary source: nonimpulsive, continuous A: Stationary source: nonimpulsive, continuous A: Stationary source: nonimpulsive, continuous 24-inch sq. concrete piles. 166 (Single strike/shot SEL). 2 ................................. 300 ............................. 14-inch Steel H-pile ... 14-inch Steel H-pile ... 36-in steel .................. 177 (Single strike/shot SEL). 2 ................................. 200 ............................. 168 RMS ................... 169 RMS ................... Wood concrete pile extraction. 150 RMS. 2.5 .............................. NA .............................. 2.5 .............................. NA .............................. 2.5. NA. 2 piles ........................ 4 piles ........................ 0.333 .......................... 0.6667 ........................ 1.333. 15 ............................... 10 ............................... 15 ............................... 10 ............................... 15 ............................... 14 ............................... 15 ............................... 10 ............................... 15. 16. TABLE 7—RADIAL DISTANCES TO LEVEL A ISOPLETH DURING IMPACT AND VIBRATORY DRIVING Distance in meters (feet) Project element requiring pile installation Low-frequency cetaceans Mid-frequency cetaceans Highfrequency cetaceans Phocid pinnipeds Otariid pinnipeds Impact Driving 24-inch square concrete (1–2 per day) ............................... 14-inch steel H pile (4 per day ............................................ 52 (171) 343 (1,124) 2 (6) 12 (40) 62 (204) 408 (1,339) 28 (92) 183 (602) 2 (7) 13 (44) 20 (66) 26 (86) 4 (13) 8 (26) 11 (35) 2 (6) 1 (3) 1 (2) <1 (3) Vibratory Driving/Extraction 14-inch steel H pile (4 per day) ........................................... 36-inch steel pipe pile (4 per day) ....................................... Wood and concrete pile extraction (12 per day) ................. 13 (46) 18 (58) 2 (5) 1 (3) 2 (6) <1 (3) TABLE 8—RADIAL DISTANCES TO LEVEL B ISOPLETHS DURING IMPACT AND VIBRATORY DRIVING Distance to threshold in meters (feet) Pile type Impact Driving (160 dB threshold) 24-inch square concrete .............................................................................................................................................................. 14-inch steel H pile ...................................................................................................................................................................... 117 (382) 631 (2,070) Vibratory Driving/Extraction (120 dB threshold) 14-inch steel H pile ...................................................................................................................................................................... 36-inch steel pipe pile .................................................................................................................................................................. Wood and concrete pile extraction .............................................................................................................................................. amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 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. San Francisco Bay has five known harbor seal haulout sites that include Alcatraz Island, Castro Rocks, Yerba Buena Island, Newark Slough, and Mowry Slough. Yerba Buena Island, Alcatraz and Castro Rocks are within or near the areas within ensonified Level B zones. Castro Rocks is the largest harbor seal haulout site in the northern part of San Francisco Bay and is the second largest pupping site in the Bay (Green et VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 al. 2002). The pupping season is from March to June in San Francisco Bay. During the molting season (typically June-July and coincides with the period when piles will be driven) as many as approximately 130 harbor seals on average have been observed using Castro Rocks as a haulout. Harbor seals are more likely to be hauled out in the late afternoon and evening, and are more likely to be in the water during the morning and early afternoon (Green et al. 2002). However, during the molting season, harbor seals spend more time hauled out and tend to enter the water later in the evening. During molting, PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 22,188 (72,795) 18,478 (60,609) 1,600 (5,249) harbor seals can stay onshore resting for an average of 12 hours per day during the molt compared to around 7 hours per day outside of the pupping/molting seasons (NPS 2014). Tidal stage is a major controlling factor of haulout usage at Castro Rocks with more seals present during low tides than high tide periods since it is completely underwater at high tide twice per day (Green et al. 2002). Additionally, the number of seals hauled out at Castro Rocks also varies with the time of day, with proportionally more animals hauled out during the nighttime hours (Green et al. 2002). Therefore, the number of harbor E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 27556 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices seals in the water around Castro Rocks will vary throughout the work period. However, it is likely that all seals hauled out at the site will be exposed to project related underwater noise at some point each day. The number of harbor seals located at Castro Rocks is based on the highest mean plus the standard error of harbor seals observed at Castro Rocks during recent annual surveys conducted by the National Park Service (NPS) (Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and 2017), resulting in a value of 176 seals. The same NPS survey determined that harbor seal population in the Central Bay at Alcatraz and Yerba Buena Island is approximately 167 seals (Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and 2017). California sea lions haul out primarily on floating docks at Pier 39 in the Fisherman’s Wharf area of the San Francisco Marina, approximately 12.5 kilometer (km) (7.8 miles (mi)) southwest of the project area. Based on counts done in 1997 and 1998, the number of California sea lions that haul out at Pier 39 fluctuates with the highest occurrences in August and the lowest in June. In addition to the Pier 39 haulout, California sea lions haul out on buoys and similar structures throughout the Bay. They are seen swimming off mainly the San Francisco and Marin shorelines within the Bay but may occasionally enter the project area to forage. Over the monitoring period for the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge RSRB, monitors sighted at least 90 California sea lions in the North Bay and at least 57 in the Central Bay (Caltrans 2012). During monitoring for the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (SFOBB) Project in the central Bay, 69 California sea lions were observed in the vicinity of the bridge over a 17-year period from 2000–2017 (Caltrans 2018), and from these observations, an estimated density of 0.161 animals per square kilometer (km2) is derived (Caltrans 2018). A small but growing population of harbor porpoises utilizes San Francisco Bay. Harbor porpoises are typically spotted in the vicinity of Angel Island and the Golden Gate (6 and 12 km southwest respectively) with lesser numbers sighted in the vicinity of Alcatraz and around Treasure Island (Keener 2011). Porpoises but may utilize other areas in the Central Bay in low numbers, including the planned project area. However, harbor porpoise are naturally inclined to remain near the shoreline areas and downstream of large landmasses as they are constantly foraging. For this reason, the project area would present a less than likely area to observe harbor porpoise as they would either need to traverse the perimeter of the Bay to arrive there, or VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 would have to swim through the open Bay. Both scenarios are possible, but would represent uncommon behavior. Based on monitoring conducted for the SFOBB project, between 2000–2017 an in-water density of 0.031 animals per km2 estimated by Caltrans for this species. However, porpoise occurrence increased significantly in 2017 resulting in a 2017 only density of 0.167 animals per km2 (Caltrans 2018). Small numbers of northern elephant seals haul out or strand on coastline within the Central Bay. Monitoring of marine mammals in the vicinity of the SFOBB has been ongoing for 15 years; from those data, Caltrans has produced an estimated at-sea density for northern elephant seal of 0.06 animal per km2 (Caltrans, 2015b). Most sightings of northern elephant seal in San Francisco Bay occur in spring or early summer, and are less likely to occur during the periods of in-water work for this project. As a result, densities during pile driving for the planned action would be much lower. The incidence of northern fur seal in San Francisco Bay depends largely on oceanic conditions, with animals more ˜ likely to strand during El Nino events. ˜ The likelihood of El Nino conditions occurring in 2018 is currently low, with ˜ La Nina or neutral conditions expected to develop (NOAA, 2018). The range of the bottlenose dolphin has expanded northward along the Pacific Coast since the 1982–1983 El ˜ Nino (Carretta et al. 2013, Wells and Baldridge 1990). They now occur as far north as the San Francisco Bay region and have been observed along the coast in Half Moon Bay, San Mateo, Ocean Beach in San Francisco, and Rodeo Beach in Marin County. Observations indicate that bottlenose dolphin occasionally enter San Francisco Bay, sometimes foraging for fish in Fort Point Cove, just east of the Golden Gate Bridge (Golden Gate Cetacean Research 2014). Transient individuals of this species occasionally enter San Francisco Bay, but observations indicate that they usually remain in proximity to the Golden Gate near the mouth of the Bay. Beginning in 2015, two individuals have been observed frequently in the vicinity of Oyster Point, located south of San Francisco (GGCR, 2018; Perlman, 2017). Bottlenose dolphins are being observed in San Francisco bay more frequently in recent years. Groups with an average size of five animals have been observed entering the Bay in the vicinity of Yerba Buena Island at a rate of once per week. They usually are observed over two week spans and then depart for an extended period of time (NMFS, 2017). PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Gray whales occasionally enter the Bay during their northward migration period, and are most often sighted in the Bay between February and May. Most venture only about 2 to 3 km (about 1– 2 mi) past the Golden Gate, but gray whales have occasionally been sighted as far north as San Pablo Bay. Pile driving is not expected to occur during this time, and gray whales are not likely to be present at other times of year. Take Calculation and Estimation Here we describe how the information provided above is brought together to produce a quantitative take estimate. The following assumptions are made when estimating potential incidences of take: • All marine mammal individuals potentially available are assumed to be present within the relevant area, and thus incidentally taken; • An individual can only be taken once during a 24-h period; • Exposures to sound levels at or above the relevant thresholds equate to take, as defined by the MMPA. Limited density data is available for marine mammal species in San Francisco Bay. Estimates here are determined using data taken during marine mammal monitoring associated with RSRB retrofit project, the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge replacement project, and other marine mammal observations for San Francisco Bay. For Pacific harbor seal, data was also derived from recent annual surveys of haulouts in the Bay conducted by the National Park Service (Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and 2017). Pacific Harbor Seal As noted above, take estimates are based on the highest mean plus the standard error of harbor seals observed by NPS at Castro Rocks which equals 176 animals (Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and 2017). Castro Rocks is inundated with water twice/day during the high tides. So during every work day (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.) the entire haulout will be in the water twice per day. Of these 176 seals, the proportion that may enter the areas over which the Level B harassment thresholds may be exceeded are estimated as follows: • Impact driving of 24-inch concrete piles at all Berths: It is assumed that 10 percent of the animals that enter the water from Castro Rocks will enter the small Level B zones associated with this pile type as shown in Figure 6–1 in the application. Thus, it is estimated that up to 17.6 individuals per day could be exposed (176/10 = 17.6) by entering the Level B harassment zone to the south of Castro Rocks; E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 27557 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices • Impact driving of 14-inch steel H piles: Impact driving would only occur in the event that a pile encounters an obstruction such as an old timber pile beneath the mud line, which is unlikely to occur. These piles will be preferentially driven with a vibratory driver. Therefore, Level B take for this activity is based on installation using vibratory driver. Level A take is based on installation using impact driving. For the purposes of calculating Level A take, as a proportion of Level B take, it is assumed that approximately 25 percent of the 176 harbor seals using Castro Rocks could approach and be subject to Level B harassment due to the limited amount of time impact driving is expected to occur as well as the size and location of the Level B isopleth (Figure 6–2 in application). Therefore, it is assumed that up to 44 individuals per day could be exposed when this activity is being conducted; • Vibratory driving and removal of the 36-inch steel pipe piles at Berth 4: Isopleths for this vibratory driving encompass Castro Rocks, therefore it is assumed that all of the estimated 176 animals in the water, could be exposed when these piles are being driven at Berth 4; • Vibratory driving/extraction of the 14-inch H piles at Berth 2: Isopleths for this vibratory driving encompass Castro Rocks, therefore is assumed that all of the 176 animals in the water could be exposed when this activity is being conducted at Berth 2; and • Vibratory removal of timber and concrete piles at Berths 1, 2 and 4: Isopleths for this vibratory removal encompass Castro Rocks, therefore it is assumed that all of the estimated 176 animals in the water could be exposed during these activities. In order to account for other individuals that may be foraging in the more distant part of the Level B harassment zone, additional take of harbor seal has been estimated based on other harbor seal populations in the Central Bay. Using the same data set (Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and 2017) that was used for Castro Rocks, a population for the Central Bay of 167 harbor seals was established based on other Central Bay haulouts at Alcatraz and Yerba Buena Island. The area of the Central Bay (bound by the Golden Gate, Richmond Bridge, SFOBB, and adjoining coastline) is approximately 134 km2, resulting in a harbor seal density of 1.25 animals per km2. The population that hauls out at Castro Rocks is not included in this density estimate because of the proximity of the haulout site to the project and potential take of those harbor seals has been estimated separately using the methods described above. The estimated take based on the Central Bay density is added to the take estimated for the Castro Rocks population, as provided in Table 9 below. Also provided in Table 9 is the estimated Level A take for impact driving of the steel 14-inch H piles, which has been estimated by taking Level B take and multiplying it by the ratio of the Level A zone area to the Level B zone area. Level A take is not requested for vibratory driving. TABLE 9—DAILY LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ESTIMATE FOR PACIFIC HARBOR SEAL Level B zone (km2) Pile type Level A zone, minus exclusion zone (km2) Estimated Level B take per day bay 1 Central (1.25 per km2) Estimated Level A take per day— total Project vicinity Harbor seal— total 238.39 220.55 8.92 176 176 176 414.39 396.55 184.92 NA NA NA * 1.7 0.05 * 44 17.6 45.7 17.65 3.36 0 Vibratory Driving 14-inch steel H pile .................................. 36-inch steel pile ...................................... Timber/Concrete Pile Removal ................ 190.55 176.44 7.14 NA NA NA Impact Driving 14-inch steel H pile .................................. 24-inch concrete pile ................................ 1.36 0.04 0.10 0 * Only displayed to provide the calculation of Level A take. Level B take authorized for vibratory driving would cover any Level B take from occasional impact driving. For impact pile driving of the 14-inch steel H piles, the PTS Zone is large enough to warrant a smaller exclusion zone and the authorization of some Level A harassment for harbor seal so that pile driving can be completed on schedule. A 35 meter shutdown zone (smaller than the Level A Zone) for this species would be established, but individuals that place themselves in the Level A zone but outside of the shutdown zone may experience Level A harassment, if they reside in that area for a long enough duration. California Sea Lion The estimated California seal lion density of 0.16 animals per km2 previously described was used to calculate potential Level B exposures as shown in Table 10. amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 TABLE 10—DAILY LEVEL B HARASSMENT EXPOSURE ESTIMATE FOR CALIFORNIA SEA LION Level B zone (km2) Pile type Level B take estimate (based on Central Bay density of 0.16 animals per km2 ) Vibratory Driving 14-inch steel H pile .................................................................................................................................................. 36-inch steel pile ...................................................................................................................................................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 190.55 176.44 30.48 28.23 27558 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices TABLE 10—DAILY LEVEL B HARASSMENT EXPOSURE ESTIMATE FOR CALIFORNIA SEA LION—Continued Level B zone (km2) Pile type Timber/Concrete Pile Removal ................................................................................................................................ Level B take estimate (based on Central Bay density of 0.16 animals per km2 ) 7.14 1.14 * NA * NA Impact Driving 14-inch steel H pile .................................................................................................................................................. 24-inch concrete pile ............................................................................................................................................... 0.04 .......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.01. * Level B take authorized for vibratory driving would cover any Level B take from occasional impact driving. Harbor Porpoise Based on monitoring conducted for the SFOBB project described previously, an in-water density of 0.17 animals per km2 was estimated by Caltrans for this species (NMFS 2017b). Using this inwater density and the areas of potential harassment, take is estimated for harbor porpoise as provided in Table 11. Also provided in Table 11 is the estimated Level A take for impact driving, which has been estimated by taking Level B take and multiplying it by the ratio of the Level A zone area to the Level B zone area. A single harbor porpoise could be exposed to Level A harassment during impact driving or 14-inch steel H-piles as shown in Table 11. NMFS, however, conservatively proposes to authorize Level A take of four animals which is the average group size. TABLE 11—DAILY LEVEL A AND LEVEL B HARASSMENT ESTIMATE FOR PACIFIC HARBOR PORPOISE Level A zone, minus exclusion zone (km2) Level B estimate Central Bay in-water—0.17 per km2 190.55 176.44 7.14 ........................ ........................ ........................ 32.39 29.99 1.21 NA NA NA 1.36 0.04 * 0.32 0 * 0.23 0.01 0.05 0 Level B zone (km2) Pile type Estimated Level A take per day Vibratory Driving 14-inch steel H pile .......................................................................................... 36-inch steel pile .............................................................................................. Timber/Concrete Pile Removal ........................................................................ Impact Driving 14-inch steel H pile .......................................................................................... 24-inch concrete pile ....................................................................................... * Only displayed to provide the calculation of Level A take. Level B take authorized for vibratory driving would cover any Level B take from occasional impact driving. For impact pile driving of the 14-inch H piles, the Level A Zone is large enough to warrant the authorization of some Level A. A 250 meter shutdown zone for this species would be established, but individuals that place themselves in the Level A zone but outside of the shut-down zone may experience Level A harassment, if they reside in that area for a long enough duration. amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Northern Elephant Seal Monitoring of marine mammals in the vicinity of the SFOBB produced an estimated density for northern elephant seal of 0.06 animal per km2 (Caltrans, 2015b). Most sightings of northern elephant seal in San Francisco Bay occur in spring or early summer, and are less likely to occur during the periods VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 of in-water work for this project. As a result, densities during pile driving for the planned action would be much lower. It is possible that a lone northern elephant seal may enter the Level B harassment area once per day during pile driving, for a total of 28 takes. Level A harassment of this species is not expected to occur and is not authorized by NMFS. Northern Fur Seal As noted previously, the incidence of northern fur seal in San Francisco Bay depends largely on oceanic conditions, with animals more likely to strand ˜ during El Nino events. The likelihood of ˜ El Nino conditions occurring in 2018 is ˜ currently low, with La Nina or neutral conditions expected to develop (NOAA, 2018). Given the low probability that fur PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 seals would enter into the Bay and project area in 2018, Chevron has conservatively requested and NMFS has authorized10 fur seals takes by Level B harassment. Level A harassment of this species is not anticipated or authorized by NMFS. Bottlenose Dolphin When this species is present in San Francisco Bay, it is more typically found close to the Golden Gate. Recently, beginning in 2015, two individuals have been observed frequently in the vicinity of Oyster Point (GGCR, 2016; GGCR 2017; Perlman, 2017). The average reported group size for bottlenose dolphins is five. Reports show that a group normally comes into San Francisco Bay near Yerba Buena Island once per week for approximately 2-week E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 27559 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices stints and then leaves the Bay (NMFS, 2017b). Chevron assumed groups of five individuals may enter San Francisco Bay and the ensonified area three times during separate two-week spans. Therefore, groups of 5 animals would potentially be exposed at a rate of once per week over six weeks, resulting in up to 30 Level B exposures. As such, NMFS authorizes the take by Level B harassment of 30 bottlenose dolphins. Although a small Level A zone for midfrequency cetaceans is estimated during impact driving, marine mammal monitoring of the shutdown would ensure that take by Level A harassment does not occur. Gray Whale Gray whales are the only whale species that travels far into San Level B harassment. No Level A take is authorized. Tables 12 and 13 summarize the estimate of Level B and Level A harassment, respectively, for each species by pile driving activity for the 2018 construction season. For harbor seals, sea lions, harbor porpoise and elephant seals, the Level B harassment estimates are based on the number of individuals assumed to be exposed per day, the number of days of pile driving expected based on an average installation rate. The Level A harassment estimates are derived from the Level B harassment estimates by taking the Level B harassment total and multiplying it by the fractional ratio of the area of the Level A zone to the Level B zone. Francisco bay with any regularity. They occasionally enter the Bay during their northward migration period, and are most often sighted in the Bay between February and May. Most venture only about 2 to 3 km (about 1–2 mi) past the Golden Gate, but gray whales have occasionally been sighted as far north as San Pablo Bay. Pile driving is not anticipated to occur during the February through May timeframe and gray whales are not likely to be present at other times of year. In the very unlikely event that a gray whale or pair of gray whales makes its way close to the project area while pile driving activities are under way, Chevron has requested take by Level B harassment of up to two (2) gray whales per year. NMFS agrees and has authorized the take of 2 gray whales by TABLE 12—TOTAL ESTIMATED TAKE BY LEVEL B HARASSMENT BY SPECIES AND PILE TYPE Number of driving days Number of piles Species Pile type Pile driver type 36-inch steel template pile **. Concrete pile removal ........ 24-inch concrete ................ 14-inch H pile installation .. Timber pile removal ........... Vibratory ................ 8 2 793.1 56.46 59.98 NA 2 NA NA Vibratory ............... Impact ................... Impact/Vibratory .... Vibratory ............... 5 8 36 53 1 8 12 5 184.92 141.2 4,972.68 924.6 1.14 0.08 365.76 5.7 1.21 0.08 388.68 6.05 NA NA NA NA 1 8 12 5 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ............................... ................ ................ 7,017 429 456 2 28 10 30 Total Take by Species (2018). Harbor seal CA sea lion Harbor porpoise Gray whale * N. elephant seal N. fur seal * Bottlenose dolphin * * Take is not calculated by activity type for these species, only a total is given. ** Only the installation of the template piles will occur in 2018. Take associated with their removal will be requested in a subsequent IHA. *** These piles will be preferentially driven with a vibratory driver, which would have a larger Level B zone than installation with an impact driver. Thus, Level B take for this species is based on installation using vibratory driver, and not an impact driver. TABLE 13—AUTHORIZED TAKE BY LEVEL A HARASSMENT Number of driving days Harbor seal Harbor porpoise Pile type Pile driver type 36-inch steel template pile .............................. Concrete pile removal ..................................... 24-inch concrete ............................................. 14-inch H pile installation ................................ Timber pile removal ........................................ Vibratory ......................................................... Vibratory ......................................................... Impact ............................................................. Impact/Vibratory ............................................. Vibratory ......................................................... 2 1 8 12 5 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 *4 0 Total Take ................................................ ......................................................................... ........................ 40 4 * Harbor porpoise takes were increased to 4 to account for average group size. Table 14 provides a summary of authorized Level A and Level B takes as well as the percentage of a stock authorized for take. TABLE 14—AUTHORIZED TAKE AND PERCENTAGE OF STOCK OR POPULATION amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Species Stock Authorized Level A takes Harbor seal ..................................................... California sea lion ........................................... Harbor porpoise .............................................. Northern elephant seal ................................... Gray whale ...................................................... Northern fur seal ............................................. Bottlenose Dolphin .......................................... California ........................................................ Eastern U.S. ................................................... San Francisco—Russian River ...................... California Breeding ......................................... Eastern North Pacific ..................................... California ........................................................ California Coastal ........................................... 40 ........................ 4 ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 Authorized Level B takes 6,977 429 451 28 2 10 30 Percent population 22.6% <0.01 4.5 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 6.6 27560 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices 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. amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat The following measures would apply to Chevron’s mitigation requirements: • Seasonal Restriction—To minimize impacts to listed fish species, piledriving activities would occur between June 1 and November 30; • Daylight Construction Period— Work would occur only during daylight hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) when visual marine mammal monitoring can be conducted; • Establishment of Shutdown Zone— For all pile driving and removal activities, Chevron will establish a shutdown zone. The purpose of a VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 shutdown zone is generally to define an area within which shutdown of activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in anticipation of an animal entering the defined area). A shutdown zone will be established which will include all or a portion of the area where underwater SPLs are expected to reach or exceed the cumulative SEL thresholds for Level A harassment as provided in Table 7. The shutdown isopleths for pinnipeds (harbor seals, California sea lion, Northern elephant seal, northern fur seal) and midfrequency cetaceans (bottlenose dolphins) will be set at 15 meters during vibratory driving. A 30 meter shutdown zone during vibratory driving will be established for low-frequency cetaceans (gray whale) and high-frequency cetaceans (harbor porpoise). During impact driving the shutdown zones will be set at 250 meters for high-frequency cetaceans (harbor porpoise), 350 meters for low-frequency cetaceans (gray whales), and 35 meters for pinnipeds (harbor seal, California sea lion, Northern elephant seal, northern fur seal) and mid-frequency cetaceans (bottlenose dolphin); • 10-Meter Shutdown Zone—During the in-water operation of heavy machinery (e.g., barge movements), a 10-m shutdown zone for all marine mammals will be implemented. If a marine mammal comes within 10 m, operations shall cease and vessels shall reduce speed to the minimum level required to maintain steerage and safe working conditions; • Establishment of Monitoring Zones for Level A and Level B—Chevron will establish and monitor Level A harassment zones during impact driving for harbor seal extending to 183 meters and harbor seals and extending to 408 m for harbor porpoises. These are areas beyond the shutdown zone in which animals could be exposed to sound levels that could result in PTS. Chevron will also establish and monitor Level B harassment zones which are areas where SPLs are equal to or exceed the 160 dB rms threshold for impact driving and the 120 dB rms threshold during vibratory driving and extraction. Monitoring zones provide utility for observing by establishing monitoring protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown zones. Monitoring zones enable observers to be aware of and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the project area outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for a potential cease of activity should the animal enter the shutdown zone. The Level B zones are depicted in Table 11. As shown, the largest Level B zone is equal to 190.55 km2, making it PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 impossible for Protected Species Observers (PSOs) to view the entire harassment area. Due to this, Level B exposures will be recorded and extrapolated based upon the number of observed take and the percentage of the Level B zone that was not visible; • Soft Start—The use of a soft-start procedure are believed to provide additional protection to marine mammals by providing warning and/or giving marine mammals a chance to leave the area prior to the hammer operating at full capacity. Chevron shall use soft start techniques when impact pile driving. Soft start requires contractors to provide an initial set of strikes at reduced energy, followed by a thirty-second waiting period, then two subsequent reduced energy strike sets; • Pile Caps/Cushions—Chevron will employ the use of pile caps or cushions as sound attenuation devices to reduce impacts from sound exposure during impact pile driving; • Pre-Activity Monitoring—Preactivity monitoring shall take place from 30 minutes prior to initiation of pile driving activity and post-activity monitoring shall continue through 30 minutes post-completion of pile driving activity. Pile driving may commence at the end of the 30-minute pre-activity monitoring period, provided observers have determined that the shutdown zone is clear of marine mammals, which includes delaying start of pile driving activities if a marine mammal is sighted in the zone, as described below; • If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone during activities or pre-activity monitoring, all pile driving activities at that location shall be halted or delayed, respectively. If pile driving is halted or delayed due to the presence of a marine mammal, the activity may not resume or commence until either the animal has voluntarily left and been visually confirmed beyond the shutdown zone and 15 minutes have passed without re-detection of the animal. Pile driving activities include the time to install or remove a single pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of the pile driving equipment is no more than thirty minutes; and • Non-authorized Take Prohibited—If a species for which authorization has not been granted or a species for which authorization has been granted but the authorized takes are met, is observed approaching or within the monitoring zone, pile driving and removal activities must shut down immediately using delay and shut-down procedures. Activities must not resume until the animal has been confirmed to have left E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices the area or an observation time period of 15 minutes has elapsed. Based on our evaluation of the applicant’s planned measures, as well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has determined that the required mitigation measures provide the means effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance. Monitoring and Reporting amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring. Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following: • Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, density); • Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment (e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas); • Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors; • How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) populations, species, or stocks; • Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey species, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 27561 (3) Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the construction operation to provide for personal safety during observations; (4) Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations including but Visual Monitoring not limited to the number and species The following visual monitoring of marine mammals observed; dates and measures are required as part of the times when in-water construction issued IHA. activities were conducted; dates, times, • One day of biological monitoring and reason for implementation of would occur within one week before the mitigation (or why mitigation was not project’s start date to establish baseline implemented when required); and observations; marine mammal behavior; and • Monitoring distances, in accordance (5) Ability to communicate orally, by with the identified shutdown, Level A, radio or in person, with project and Level B zones, will be determined personnel to provide real-time by using a range finder, scope, handinformation on marine mammals held global positioning system (GPS) observed in the area as necessary. device or landmarks with known A draft marine mammal monitoring distances from the monitoring positions; report would be submitted to NMFS • Monitoring locations will be within 90 days after the completion of established at locations offering best pile driving and removal activities. It views of the monitoring zone; will include an overall description of • Monitoring will be continuous work completed, a narrative regarding unless the contractor takes a break marine mammal sightings, and longer than 2 hours from active pile associated marine mammal observation driving, in which case, monitoring will data sheets. Specifically, the report must be required 30 minutes prior to include: restarting pile installation; • Date and time that monitored • For in-water pile driving, under activity begins or ends; conditions of fog or poor visibility that • Construction activities occurring might obscure the presence of a marine during each observation period; mammal within the shutdown zone, the • Deviation from initial proposal in pile in progress will be completed and pile numbers, pile types, average then pile driving suspended until driving times, etc. visibility conditions improve; • Weather parameters (e.g., percent • At least two PSOs will be actively scanning the monitoring zone during all cover, visibility); • Water conditions (e.g., sea state, pile driving activities; tide state); • Monitoring of pile driving shall be • For each marine mammal sighting conducted by qualified PSOs (see the following must be recorded: below), who shall have no other (1) Species, numbers, and, if possible, assigned tasks during monitoring sex and age class of marine mammals; periods. Chevron shall adhere to the (2) Description of any observable following conditions when selecting marine mammal behavior patterns, observers: including bearing and direction of travel (1) Independent PSOs shall be used and distance from pile driving activity; (i.e., not construction personnel); (3) Location and distance from pile (2) At least one PSO must have prior driving activities to marine mammals experience working as a marine and distance from the marine mammals mammal observer during construction to the observation point; and activities; (4) Estimated amount of time that the (3) Other PSOs may substitute animals remained in the Level B zone. education (degree in biological science • Description of implementation of or related field) or training for mitigation measures within each experience; and (4) Chevron shall submit PSO CVs for monitoring period (e.g., shutdown or delay); approval by NMFS; • Other human activity in the area. • Chevron will ensure that observers • A summary of the following must have the following additional be included in the report. qualifications: (1) Total number of individuals of (1) Ability to conduct field each species detected within the Level observations and collect data according A and Level B Zones, and estimated to assigned protocols; take extrapolated across entire Level B (2) Experience or training in the field zone; and identification of marine mammals, (2) Daily average number of including the identification of individuals of each species behaviors; acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of marine mammal habitat); and • Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness. PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 27562 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices (differentiated by month as appropriate) detected within the Level B Zone, and estimated take extrapolated across entire Level B zone. If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft final report will constitute the final report. If comments are received, a final report addressing NMFS comments must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of comments. In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the IHA (if issued), such as an injury, serious injury or mortality, Chevron would immediately cease the specified activities and report the incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator. The report would include the following information: • Description of the incident; • Environmental conditions (e.g., Beaufort sea state, visibility); • Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24 hours preceding the incident; • Species identification or description of the animal(s) involved; • Fate of the animal(s); and • Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if equipment is available). Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS would work with Chevron to determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Chevron would not be able to resume their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or telephone. In the event that Chevron 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 (e.g., in less than a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph), Chevron would immediately report the incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator. The report would include the same information identified in the paragraph above. Activities would be able to continue while NMFS reviews the circumstances of the incident. NMFS would work with Chevron to determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate. In the event that Chevron discovers an injured or dead marine mammal and the lead PSO determines that the injury or death is not associated with or related VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 to the activities authorized in the IHA (e.g., previously wounded animal, carcass with moderate to advanced decomposition, or scavenger damage), Chevron would report the incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator within 24 hours of the discovery. Chevron would provide photographs or video footage (if available) or other documentation of the stranded animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding Network. Hydroacoustic Monitoring Sound Source Verification (SSV) testing of would be conducted under this IHA. The purpose of the planned acoustic monitoring plan is to collect underwater sound-level information at both near and distant locations during vibratory pile extraction and installation and impact pile installation. The plan provides a protocol for hydroacoustic measurements during pile driving operations. Acoustic monitoring would be conducted on a minimum of two of each pile type. Since little data exist for source levels associated with installation of 24-inch square concrete piles (including data on single strike sound exposure level metrics) Chevron would conduct in-situ measurements during installation of eight piles. The SSV testing would be conducted by an acoustical firm with prior experience conducting SSV testing. Final results would be sent to NMFS. Findings may be used to establish Level A and Level B isopleths during impact and vibratory driving. Any alterations to the shutdown or harassment zones based on testing data must be approved by NMFS. The Hydroacoustic Monitoring Plan is contained on the following NMFS website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ national/marine-mammal-protection/ incidental-take-authorizationsconstruction-activities. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’ through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location, migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS’s implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels). Pile driving and extraction associated with Chevron’s WMEP project as outlined previously have the potential to injure, disturb or displace marine mammals. Specifically, the specified activities may result in Level B harassment (behavioral disturbance) for seven marine mammal species authorized for take from underwater sound generated during pile driving operations. Level A harassment in the form of PTS may also occur to limited numbers of two species. No serious injuries or mortalities are anticipated to occur as a result of Chevron’s pile driving activities. A limited number of animals (40 harbor seals and 4 harbor porpoises) could experience Level A harassment in the form of PTS if they stay within the Level A harassment zone during impact driving of 24-inch steel H-piles. Installation of these piles would occur over eight days and impact driving will not be the primary method of installation. The piles will mainly be installed using only vibratory driving. Impact driving will be used only if the vibrated pile encounters an obstruction such as an old sunken pile. It is unlikely that this would occur for all four piles projected to be installed each driving day. An assumption of four piles per day was used to calculate Level A zone sizes. If four piles did require impact installation on a single day it is unlikely that the same individual marine mammal would be within the relatively small Level A zone during the installation of every pile. In most instances impact driving will not be required at all. Furthermore, the degree of injury is expected to be mild and is not likely to affect the reproduction or E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices survival of the individual animals. It is expected that, if hearing impairments occurs, most likely the affected animal would lose a few dB in its hearing sensitivity, which in most cases is not likely to affect its survival and recruitment. The Level B takes that are anticipated and authorized are expected to be limited to short-term behavioral harassment. Marine mammals present near the action area and taken by Level B harassment would most likely show overt brief disturbance (e.g., startle reaction) and avoidance of the area from elevated noise level during pile driving. Repeated exposures of individuals to levels of sound that may cause Level B harassment are unlikely to significantly disrupt foraging behavior. Thus, even repeated Level B harassment of some small subset of the overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant realized decrease in fitness for the affected individuals, and thus would not result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. The project is not expected to have significant adverse effects on affected marine mammal habitat. The activities may cause fish to leave the area temporarily. This could impact 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 affected habitat, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences. The likelihood that marine mammals will be detected by trained observers is high under the environmental conditions described for the project. The employment of the soft-start mitigation measure would also allow marine mammals in or near the shutdown and Level A zone zones to move away from the impact driving sound source. Therefore, the mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to reduce the potential for injury and reduce the amount and intensity of behavioral harassment. Furthermore, the pile driving activities analyzed here are similar to, or less impactful than, numerous construction activities conducted in similar locations which have taken place with no reported injuries or mortality to marine mammals, and no known long-term adverse consequences from behavioral harassment. 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival: • No mortality is anticipated or authorized; • Anticipated incidences of Level A harassment would be in the form of a small degree of PTS to a limited number of animals; • Anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist of, at worst, temporary modifications in behavior; • The relatively short and intermittent duration of in-water construction activities; • The small percentage of the stock that may be affected by project activities (<22.8 percent for all stocks); and • Efficacy of mitigation measures is expected to minimize the likelihood and severity of the level of harassment. Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the required monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the planned activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal stocks or species. Small Numbers As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be authorized under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of the activities. Table 14 depicts the number of animals that could be exposed to Level A and Level B harassment from work associated with Chevron’s project. The analysis provided indicates that authorized takes account for no more than 22.6 percent of the populations of the stocks that could be affected. These are small numbers of marine mammals relative to the sizes of the affected stocks. Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned (including the required mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 27563 be taken relative to the population size of the affected species or stocks. Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes. National Environmental Policy Act To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216–6A, NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an incidental harassment authorization) with respect to potential impacts on the human environment. This action is consistent with categories of activities identified in Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental harassment authorizations with no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216–6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined that the issuance of the IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review. Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. No incidental take of ESA-listed species is authorized or expected to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this action. Authorization NMFS has issued an IHA to Chevron to take seven species of marine mammal incidental to pile driving and removal activities at Chevron’s Long Wharf from June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019 provided the previously mentioned E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1 27564 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Notices mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Dated: June 7, 2018. Elaine T. Saiz, Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. 2018–12629 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am] Global Positioning System Directorate (GPSD), Department of the Air Force. ACTION: Meeting notice. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Notice of Availability of Software and Documentation for Licensing Department of the Air Force, Department of Defense. AGENCY: Availability of Mi-Std-1553B decoder software and documentation for licensing. ACTION: Pursuant to the provisions of Section 801 of Public Law 113–66 (2014 National Defense Authorization Act) as extended by Section 818 of Public Law 114–328; the Department of the Air Force announces the availability of MilStd-1553B decoder software and related documentation for decoding the interaction of bus controllers (BC) and remote terminals (RT) using field programmable gate array (FPGA) implementation technology. SUMMARY: Licensing interests should be sent to: Air Force Research Laboratory, Sensors Directorate, AFRL/ RYO, 2241 Avionics, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433; Facsimile: (937) 656– 4676. ADDRESSES: Air Force Research Laboratory, Sensors Directorate, AFRL/RYO, 2241 Avionics, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433; Facsimile: (937) 656–4676. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The MilStd-1553B decoder is written in the VHDL programming language and is vendor agnostic. This software is useful for implementation in technologies that need to passively collect, monitor or process existing Mil-Std-1553B bus interactions in real-time. amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 [FR Doc. 2018–12716 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001–10–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:01 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 This notice informs the public that the Global Positioning Systems (GPS) Directorate will host the 2018 Public Interface Control Working Group and Open Public Forum on September 12, 2018 for the following NAVSTAR GPS public documents: IS–GPS–200 (Navigation User Interfaces), IS–GPS– 705 (User Segment L5 Interfaces), IS– GPS–800 (User Segment L1C Interface), ICD–GPS–240 (NAVSTAR GPS Control Segment to User Support Community Interfaces), and ICD–GPS–870 (NAVSTAR GPS Control Segment to User Support Community Interfaces). Additional logistical details can be found below. DATES: 0830–1600 PST, 12 September 2018. SUMMARY: Department of the Air Force Henry Williams, Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer. 2018 Public Interface Control Working Group and Forum for the Navstar Gps Public Documents AGENCY: BILLING CODE 3510–22–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Department of the Air Force TASC/Engility, 100 N Sepulveda Blvd., El Segundo, CA 90245, The Great Room; Dial In: 310–653–2663 Meeting ID: 8337375 Password: 123456. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1Lt Michael Telcide (310–653–4191) or Mr. Daniel Godwin (310–653–3163); SMCGPER@us.af.mil. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of this meeting is to update the public on GPS public document revisions and collect issues/comments for analysis and possible integration into future GPS public document revisions. All outstanding comments on the GPS public documents will be considered along with the comments received at this year’s open forum in the next revision cycle. The 2018 Interface Control Working Group and Open Forum are open to the general public. For those who would like to attend and participate, we request that you register no later than August 30, 2018. Please send the registration information to SMCGPER@us.af.mil, providing your name, organization, telephone number, email address, and country of citizenship. Comments will be collected, catalogued, and discussed as potential inclusions to the version following the current release. If accepted, these changes will be processed through the formal directorate change process for IS–GPS–200, IS–GPS–705, IS–GPS–800, ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 ICD–GPS–240, and ICD–GPS–870. All comments must be submitted in a Comments Resolution Matrix. This form along with current versions of the documents and the official meeting notice are posted at: https:// www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/meetings/ 2018/. Please submit comments to the SMC/ GPS Requirements (SMC/GPER) mailbox at SMCGPER@us.af.mil by August 24, 2018. Special topics may also be considered for the Public Open Forum. If you wish to present a special topic, please submit any materials to SMC/GPER no later than August 1, 2018. For more information, please contact 1Lt Michael Telcide at 310–653– 4191 or Mr. Daniel Godwin at 310–653– 3640. Henry Williams, Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. 2018–12715 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001–10–P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Applications for New Awards; FullService Community Schools Program Office of Innovation and Improvement, Department of Education. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice inviting applications for fiscal year (FY) 2018 for the Full-Service Community Schools (FSCS) program, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number 84.215J. DATES: Applications Available: June 13, 2018. Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply: June 28, 2018. Date of Pre-Application Webinar: June 20, 2018. For information about the preapplication webinar, visit the FSCS website at: https://innovation.ed.gov/ what-we-do/parental-options/fullservice-community-schools-programfscs/applicant-info-and-eligibility/. Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: July 13, 2018. ADDRESSES: For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003) and available at www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/ pdf/2018-02558.pdf. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Johnson Armstrong, U.S. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\13JNN1.SGM 13JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27548-27564]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12629]

[[Page 27548]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XG067

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to the Chevron Richmond Refinery Long
Wharf Maintenance and Efficiency Project in San Francisco Bay,
California

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

ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
Chevron to incidentally take, by Level A and/or Level B harassment,
seven species of marine mammals during the Long Wharf Maintenance and
Efficiency Project (WMEP) in San Francisco Bay, California.

DATES: This Authorization is applicable from June 1, 2018 through May
31, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rob Pauline, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in
this document, may be obtained online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm. In case of problems accessing these
documents, please call the contact listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce (as delegated to NMFS) to allow, upon
request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers
of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity
(other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region
if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if
the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public for review.
An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS
finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where
relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings
are set forth.
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as 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).

Summary of Request

On February 1, 2018, NMFS received a request from Chevron for an
IHA to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving and pile removal
associated with the WMEP in San Francisco Bay, California. Chevron's
request is for take of seven species by Level A and Level B harassment.
Neither Chevron nor NMFS expects serious injury or mortality to result
from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
NMFS has issued an IHA to Chevron authorizing the take of seven
species by Level A and Level B harassment. Pile driving and removal
will take 28 days and will be timed to occur within the work windows
developed for Endangered Species Act (ESA)--listed fish species (June 1
through November 30). The IHA is effective from June 1, 2018 through
May 31, 2019. This IHA would cover one year of a larger project for
which Chevron intends to request additional take authorizations for
subsequent facets of the project.

Description of Planned Activity

Chevron's Richmond Refinery Long Wharf (Long Wharf) located in San
Francisco Bay, is the largest marine oil terminal in California. The
Long Wharf has existed in its current location since the early 1900s
(Figure 1-1 in Application). The existing configuration of these
systems have limitations to accepting more modern, fuel efficient
vessels with shorter parallel mid-body hulls and in some cases do not
meet current Marine Oil Terminal Engineering and Maintenance Standards
(MOTEMS). The purpose of the planned WMEP is to comply with current
MOTEMS requirements and to improve safety and efficiency at the Long
Wharf. The planned project will involve modifications at four berths
(Berths 1, 2, 3, and 4). Modifications to the Long Wharf include
replacing gangways and cranes, adding new mooring hooks and standoff
fenders, adding new dolphins and catwalks, and modifying the fire water
system at Berths 1, 2, 3 and/or 4, as well as the seismic retrofit to
the Berth 4 loading platform. The type and numbers of piles to be
installed, as well as those that will be removed during the 2018-2022
period are summarized in Table 1.

[[Page 27549]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN13JN18.000

The combined modifications to Berths 1 to 4 would require the
installation of 141 new concrete piles to support new and replacement
equipment and their associated structures. The Berth 4 loading platform
would add eight, 60-inch diameter steel piles as part of the seismic
retrofit. The project would also add four clusters of 13 composite
piles each (52 total) as markers and protection of the new batter
(driven at an angle) piles on the east side of the Berth 4 retrofit.
The project would remove 106 existing timber piles, three existing
22[hyphen]inch and two existing 24[hyphen]inch concrete piles. A total
of 12 temporary piles would also be installed and removed during the
seismic retrofit of Berth 4.
Note that the proposed IHA will only cover pile driving and removal
that will occur during the 2018 work season, as provided in Table 2.

Table 2--Pile Driving Summary for 2018 Work Season
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of
Pile type Pile driver type piles driving days
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36-inch steel template pile................... Vibratory....................... 8 2
Concrete pile removal......................... Vibratory....................... 5 1
24-inch concrete.............................. Impact.......................... 8 8
14-inch H pile installation (for temporary Vibratory/Impact *.............. 36 12
fenders).
Timber pile removal........................... Vibratory....................... 53 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* A vibratory driver will be preferentially used for installation of the temporary H piles. In the event that
the pile hits a buried obstruction and can no longer be advanced with a vibratory driver, and impact hammer
may be used.

[[Page 27550]]

These actions could produce underwater sound at levels that could
result in the injury or behavioral harassment of marine mammal species.
A detailed description of Chevron's planned project is provided in the
Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (83 FR 18802; April 30,
2018). Since that time, no changes have been made to the planned
project activities. Therefore, a detailed description is not provided
here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for the description
of the specific activity.

Comments and Responses

A notice of NMFS's proposal to issue an IHA to Chevron was
published in the Federal Register on April 30, 2018 (83 FR 18802). That
notice described, in detail, Chevron's activity, the marine mammal
species that may be affected by the activity, the anticipated effects
on marine mammals and their habitat, proposed amount and manner of
take, and proposed mitigation, monitoring and reporting measures.
During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS received one comment
letter from the Marine Mammal Commission (Commission); the Commission's
recommendations and our responses are provided here, and the comments
have been posted online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental/construction.htm.
Comment: The Commission commented that the method NMFS used to
estimate the numbers of takes during the proposed activities, which
summed fractions of takes for each species across project days, does
not account for and negates the intent of NMFS' 24-hour reset policy.
The Commission also recommends that NMFS develop and share guidance on
this issue.
Response: NMFS will share the guidance with the Commission
following the completion of internal review and looks forward to
discussing the issue with them in the future.
Comment: The Commission requested clarification of certain issues
associated with NMFS's notice that one-year renewals could be issued in
certain limited circumstances and expressed concern that the process
would bypass the public notice and comment requirements. The Commission
also suggested that NMFS should discuss the possibility of renewals
through a more general route, such as a rulemaking, instead of notice
in a specific authorization. The Commission further recommended that if
NMFS did not pursue a more general route, that the agency provide the
Commission and the public with a legal analysis supporting our
conclusion that this process is consistent with the requirements of
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA.
Response: The process of issuing a renewal IHA does not bypass the
public notice and comment requirements of the MMPA. The notice of the
proposed IHA expressly notifies the public that under certain, limited
conditions an applicant could seek a renewal IHA for an additional
year. The notice describes the conditions under which such a renewal
request could be considered and expressly seeks public comment in the
event such a renewal is sought. Importantly, such renewals would be
limited to where the activities are identical or nearly identical to
those analyzed in the proposed IHA, monitoring does not indicate
impacts that were not previously analyzed and authorized, and the
mitigation and monitoring requirements remain the same, all of which
allow the public to comment on the appropriateness and effects of a
renewal at the same time the public provides comments on the initial
IHA. NMFS has, however, modified the language for future proposed IHAs
to clarify that all IHAs, including renewal IHAs, are valid for no more
than one year and that the agency would consider only one renewal for a
project at this time. In addition, notice of issuance or denial of a
renewal IHA would be published in the Federal Register, as are all
IHAs. Last, NMFS will publish on our website a description of the
renewal process before any renewal is issued utilizing the new process.
Comment: The Commission recommended that NMFS review more
thoroughly both the applications prior to deeming them complete and its
notices prior to submitting them for publication in the Federal
Register and that NMFS better evaluate the proposed exclusion/shut-down
zones that are to be implemented for each proposed incidental take
authorization.
Response: NMFS thanks the Commission for its recommendation.
Comment: The Commission expressed concern about what they assert is
the lack of adequate time to provide public comments as well as the
abbreviated timeframes during which NMFS is able to address public
comments. The Commission recommended that NMFS ensure that it publishes
and finalizes proposed incidental harassment authorizations
sufficiently before the planned start date of the proposed activities
to ensure full consideration is given to all comments received.
Response: NMFS provided the required 30-day notice for public
comment, and has adequately considered all public comments received in
making the necessary findings.

Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities

Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information
regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and
behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species.
Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be
found in NMFS's Stock Assessment Reports (SAR; www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/) and more general information about these species (e.g., physical
and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's website. We
provided a description of the specified activity in our Federal
Register notice announcing the proposed authorization (83 FR 18802;
April 30, 2018). Please refer to that document; we provide only a
summary table here (Table 3).

Table 3--Marine Mammals Potentially Present in the Vicinity of the Project Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock Strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/SI
\1\ abundance survey) \2\ \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale......................... Eschrichtius robustus. Eastern North Pacific. -/-; (N).......... 20,990 (0.05, 20,125, 624 132
2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 27551]]

Family Balaenidae
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bottlenose dolphin................. Tursiops truncatus.... California Coastal.... -/-;(N)........... 453 (0.06, 346, 2011) 2.7 [gteqt]2.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor porpoise.................... Phocoena phocoena..... San Francisco-Russian -/-;(N)........... 9,886 (0.51, 6,625, 66 0
River Stock. 2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and sea lions)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
California sea lion................ Zalophus californianus Eastern U.S. stock.... -/-;(N)........... 296,750 (-, 153,337, 9,200 389
2011).
Northern fur seal.................. Callorhinus ursinus... California stock...... -/-;(N)........... 14,050 (-, 7,524, 451 1.8
2013).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Phocidae (earless seals)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific harbor seal................ Phoca vitulina........ California stock...... -/-;(N)........... 30,968 (-,27,348, 1,641 43
2012).
Northern elephant seal............. Mirounga California Breeding -/-;(N)........... 179,000 (-, 81,368, 4,882 8.8
angustirostris. stock. 2010).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed
under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality
exceeds PBR or which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed
under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of
stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable. For certain stocks of pinnipeds, abundance estimates are based upon observations of animals
(often pups) ashore multiplied by some correction factor derived from knowledge of the species' (or similar species') life history to arrive at a best
abundance estimate; therefore, there is no associated CV. In these cases, the minimum abundance may represent actual counts of all animals ashore.
\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.

Note that while humpback whales and Guadalupe fur seals have been
observed in the Bay, their typical temporal and/or spatial occurrence
is such that take is not expected to occur, and they are not discussed
further beyond the explanation provided here.
Humpback whales are rare, though well-publicized, visitors to the
interior of San Francisco Bay. A humpback whale journeyed through the
Bay and up the Sacramento River in 1985 and re-entered the Bay in the
fall of 1990, stranding on mudflats near Candlestick Park (Fimrite
2005). In May 2007, a humpback whale mother and calf spent just over
two weeks in San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento River before finding
their way back out to sea. Although it is possible that a humpback
whale will enter the Bay and find its way into the project area during
construction activities, their occurrence is unlikely. Guadalupe fur
seals occasionally range into the waters of Northern California and the
Pacific Northwest. The Farallon Islands (off central California) and
Channel Islands (off southern California) are used as haulouts during
these movements (Simon 2016). Juvenile Guadalupe fur seals occasionally
strand in the vicinity of San Francisco, especially during El
Ni[ntilde]o events. Most strandings along the California coast are
animals younger than two years old, with evidence of malnutrition (NMFS
2017c). In the rare event that a Guadalupe fur seal is detected within
the Level A or Level B harassment zones, work will cease until the
animal has left the area.

Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat

We provided a description of the anticipated effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals in our Federal Register notice
announcing the proposed authorization (83 FR 18802; April 30, 2018).
Please refer to that document for our detailed analysis; we provide
only summary information here.
The introduction of anthropogenic noise into the aquatic
environment from pile driving and removal is the primary means by which
marine mammals may be harassed from Chevron's specified activity. The
effects of pile driving noise on marine mammals are dependent on
several factors, including, but not limited to, sound type (e.g.,
impulsive vs. non-impulsive), the species, age and sex class (e.g.,
adult male vs. mom with calf), duration of exposure, the distance
between the pile and the animal, received levels, behavior at time of
exposure, and previous history with exposure (Southall et al., 2007,
Wartzok et al., 2004). Animals exposed to natural or anthropogenic
sound may experience physical and behavioral effects, ranging in
magnitude from none to severe (Southall et al., 2007). In general,
exposure to pile driving noise has the potential to result in auditory
threshold shifts (permanent threshold shift (PTS) and temporary
threshold shift (TTS)) and behavioral reactions (e.g., avoidance,
temporary cessation of foraging and vocalizing, changes in dive
behavior). No new permanent impacts to habitats used by marine mammals
would result from the project. Some short-term impacts to prey
availability (e.g., fish) and minor impacts to the immediate substrate
may occur as a result of increased turbidity from pile installation and
removal but the effects are expected to be temporary and minimal.

Estimated Take

This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorized through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration
of small numbers and the negligible impact determination.
Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these
activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent
here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines ``harassment'' as any act of
pursuit, torment, or annoyance which

[[Page 27552]]

(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 primarily be by Level B harassment, as use
of the acoustic source (i.e., pile driving) has the potential to result
in disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals.
There is also some potential for auditory injury (Level A harassment)
to result, primarily for high frequency species and a single phocid
species due to larger predicted auditory injury zones. Auditory injury
is unlikely to occur for low-frequency, mid-frequency species, or
pinniped groups, with the exception of harbor seals. The mitigation and
monitoring measures are expected to minimize the severity of such
taking to the extent practicable.
As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or authorized
for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.
Described in the most basic way, we estimate take by considering:
(1) Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available
science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur
some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of
water that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the
density or occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas;
and, (4) and the number of days of activities. Below, we describe these
components in more detail and present the authorized take estimate.

Acoustic Thresholds

Using the best available science, NMFS has developed acoustic
thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above
which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be
behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS
of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment for non-explosive sources--Though significantly
driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from
anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by
other factors related to the source (e.g., frequency, predictability,
duty cycle), the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving
animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral
context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007,
Ellison et al., 2012). 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 decibel (dB) re 1 micro pascal ([mu]Pa) root
mean square (rms) for continuous (e.g. vibratory pile-driving,
drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for non-explosive
impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent (e.g., scientific
sonar) sources. For in-air sounds, NMFS predicts that pinnipeds exposed
above received levels of 100 dB re 20 [mu]Pa (rms) and harbor seals
exposed above 90 dB re 20 [mu]Pa (rms) will be behaviorally harassed.
Chevron's planned activity includes the use of continuous
(vibratory driving) and impulsive (impact driving) sources, and
therefore the 120 and160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) are applicable.
Level A harassment for non-explosive sources--NMFS' Technical
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (Technical Guidance, 2016) identifies dual criteria to
assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine
mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to
noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive).
The applicant's planned activity includes the use of impulsive (impact
driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory driving) sources.
These thresholds are provided in Table 4. The references, analysis,
and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are described
in NMFS 2016 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/acoustics/guidelines.htm.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

[[Page 27553]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN13JN18.001

BILLING CODE 3510-22-C

Ensonified Area

Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds.
Pile driving will generate underwater noise that potentially could
result in disturbance to marine mammals swimming by the project area.
Transmission loss (TL) underwater is the decrease in acoustic intensity
as an acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source until the
source becomes indistinguishable from ambient sound. TL parameters vary
with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current, source and
receiver depth, water depth, water chemistry, and bottom composition
and topography. A standard sound propagation model, the Practical
Spreading Loss model, was used to estimate the range from pile driving
activity to various expected SPLs at potential project structures. This
model follows a geometric propagation loss based on the distance from
the driven pile, resulting in a 4.5 dB reduction in level for each
doubling of distance from the source. In this model, the SPL at some
distance away from the source (e.g., driven pile) is governed by a
measured source level, minus the TL of the energy as it dissipates with
distance. The TL equation is:
TL = 15log10(R1/R2)

Where:

TL is the transmission loss in dB,
R1 is the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven
pile, and
R2 is the distance from the driven pile of the initial
measurement.

The degree to which underwater noise propagates away from a noise
source is dependent on a variety of factors, most notably by the water
bathymetry and presence or absence of reflective or absorptive
conditions including the sea surface and sediment type. The TL model
described above was used to calculate the expected noise propagation
from both impact and vibratory pile driving, using representative
source levels to estimate the zone of influence (ZOI) or area exceeding
specified noise criteria.

[[Page 27554]]

Source Levels

Sound source levels from the Chevron site were not available.
Therefore, literature values published for projects similar to the
Chevron project were used to estimate source levels that could
potentially be produced. Results are shown in Table 5.
Modifications at the four berths require the placement of new 24-
inch diameter square concrete piles. Approximately one to two of these
piles would be installed in one workday, using impact driving methods.
Based on measured blow counts for 24-inch concrete piles driven at the
Long Wharf Berth 4 in 2011, installation for each pile could require up
to approximately 300 blows and 1.5 second per blow average over a
duration of approximately 20 minutes per pile, with 40 minutes of pile
driving time per day if two piles are installed. To estimate the noise
effects of the 24-inch square concrete piles, the general values
provided by Caltrans (2015a) are shown in Table 5.
To estimate the noise effects of impact driving of 14-inch steel H
piles, the values provided by Caltrans were also utilized. These source
values are 208 dB peak, 187 rms, and 177 dB SEL (single strike). Based
on these levels, impact driving of the 14-inch steel H piles is
expected to produce underwater sound exceeded the Level B 160 dB RMS
threshold over a distance of 631 meters.
During construction, temporary fendering would be installed at
Berth 2 which will be supported by 36 steel 14-inch steel H piles. It
is estimated that each pile could be driven in five (5) minutes. Two
(2) to four (4) piles would be installed in any single workday for a
total of approximately 12 days of installation. For the purposes of
calculating the distance to Level A thresholds, four piles per day is
assumed. The piles would be removed after the permanent fenders are in
place. A vibratory hammer would be used to vibrate the piles to
facilitate pulling them from the mud. The best match for estimated
source levels is the Port of Anchorage pile driving test project.
During vibratory pile driving associated with the Anchorage project,
peak noise levels ranged from 165 to 175 dB, and the RMS ranged between
152 and 168 dB, both measured at approximately 15 meters (50 ft)
(Caltrans 2015a).
The source levels for vibratory installation of 36-inch temporary
steel piles were from the Explosive Handling Wharf-2 (EHW-2) project
located at the Naval Base Kitsap in Bangor, Washington as stated in
Caltrans (2015a). During vibratory pile driving measured peak noise
levels were approximately 180 dB, and the RMS was approximately 169 dB
at a 10 meter (33ft) distance. These temporary piles would require a
drive time per pile of approximately 10 minutes. Up to four (4) of
these piles could be installed in any single workday for a total of 40
minutes.
The most applicable source values for wooden pile removal were
derived from measurements taken at the Port Townsend dolphin pile
removal in Washington. During vibratory pile extraction associated with
this project, which occurred under similar circumstances, measured peak
noise levels were approximately 164 dB, and the RMS was approximately
150 dB (WSDOT 2011). Applicable sound values for the removal of
concrete piles could not be located, but they are expected to be
similar to the levels produced by wooden piles described above, as they
are similarly sized, non-metallic, and will be removed using the same
methods.
During construction, 106 16-inch timber piles, and seven 18 to 24-
inch square concrete piles would be removed. Up to twelve of these
piles could be extracted in one workday. Extraction time needed for
each pile may vary greatly, but could require approximately 400 seconds
(approximately 7 minutes).

Table 5--The Sound Levels (dB Peak, dB RMS, and dB sSEL) Expected to be Generated by Each Hammer and Pile Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated
Estimated Estimated single strike
Type of pile Hammer type pressure level pressure level sound exposure
(dB peak) (dB RMS) level (dB SEL)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-inch sq. concrete.................. Impact.................. 188 176 166
14-inch Temporary steel H-pile........ Impact.................. 208 \1\ 187 177
14-inch Temporary steel H-pile........ Vibratory............... 180 \2\ 168 ..............
36-inch Steel Pipe.................... Vibratory............... 180 169 ..............
Wood and concrete pile extraction..... Vibratory............... 164 \3\ 150 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SL was based on an assumed 10-dB difference between the SELs-s and SPLrms SLs. The SPLrmsSL was not reported
in Caltrans.
\2\ Measured at 14 m.
\3\ Measured at 16 m.

When NMFS Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in recognition
of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more technically
challenging to predict because of the duration component in the new
thresholds, NMFS developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools to
help predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with
marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that
because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for
these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going
to be overestimates of some degree, which will result in some degree of
overestimate of Level A take. However, these tools offer the best way
to predict appropriate isopleths when more sophisticated 3D modeling
methods are not available, and NMFS continues to develop ways to
quantitatively refine these tools, and will qualitatively address the
output where appropriate. For stationary sources NMFS User Spreadsheet
predicts the closest distance at which, if a marine mammal remained at
that distance the whole duration of the activity, it would not incur
PTS. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet, and the resulting isopleths
are reported below.
Table 6 shows the inputs that were used in the User Spreadsheet to
determine cumulative PTS Thresholds. Table 7 shows the Level A
Isopleths as determined utilizing inputs from Table 6. Level B
isopleths for impact and vibratory driving and extraction are shown in
Table 8.

[[Page 27555]]

Table 6--Inputs for User Spreadsheet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E.1: Impact pile E.1: Impact pile
driving (stationary driving (stationary A: Stationary source: A: Stationary source: A: Stationary source:
Spreadsheet tab used source: impulsive, source: impulsive, non- impulsive, non- impulsive, non- impulsive,
intermittent) intermittent) continuous continuous continuous
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile Type and Hammer Type.......... 24-inch sq. concrete 14-inch Steel H-pile.. 14-inch Steel H-pile. 36-in steel.......... Wood concrete pile
piles. extraction.
Source Level....................... 166 (Single strike/ 177 (Single strike/ 168 RMS.............. 169 RMS.............. 150 RMS.
shot SEL). shot SEL).
Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz).. 2..................... 2..................... 2.5.................. 2.5.................. 2.5.
Number of strikes in 1 h OR number 300................... 200................... NA................... NA................... NA.
of strikes per pile.
Activity Duration (h) within 24-h 2 piles............... 4 piles............... 0.333................ 0.6667............... 1.333.
period OR number of piles per day.
Propagation (xLogR)................ 15.................... 15.................... 15................... 15................... 15.
Distance of source level 10.................... 10.................... 14................... 10................... 16.
measurement (meters).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 7--Radial Distances to Level A Isopleth During Impact and Vibratory Driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance in meters (feet)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project element requiring pile High-
installation Low-frequency Mid-frequency frequency Phocid Otariid
cetaceans cetaceans cetaceans pinnipeds pinnipeds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-inch square concrete (1-2 per 52 (171) 2 (6) 62 (204) 28 (92) 2 (7)
day)...........................
14-inch steel H pile (4 per day. 343 (1,124) 12 (40) 408 (1,339) 183 (602) 13 (44)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Driving/Extraction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch steel H pile (4 per day) 13 (46) 1 (3) 20 (66) 8 (26) 1 (3)
36-inch steel pipe pile (4 per 18 (58) 2 (6) 26 (86) 11 (35) 1 (2)
day)...........................
Wood and concrete pile 2 (5) <1 (3) 4 (13) 2 (6) <1 (3)
extraction (12 per day)........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 8--Radial Distances to Level B Isopleths During Impact and
Vibratory Driving
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance to
Pile type threshold in
meters (feet)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Driving (160 dB threshold)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
24[dash]inch square concrete........................ 117 (382)
14-inch steel H pile................................ 631 (2,070)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Driving/Extraction (120 dB threshold)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch steel H pile................................ 22,188 (72,795)
36-inch steel pipe pile............................. 18,478 (60,609)
Wood and concrete pile extraction................... 1,600 (5,249)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
San Francisco Bay has five known harbor seal haulout sites that
include Alcatraz Island, Castro Rocks, Yerba Buena Island, Newark
Slough, and Mowry Slough. Yerba Buena Island, Alcatraz and Castro Rocks
are within or near the areas within ensonified Level B zones. Castro
Rocks is the largest harbor seal haulout site in the northern part of
San Francisco Bay and is the second largest pupping site in the Bay
(Green et al. 2002). The pupping season is from March to June in San
Francisco Bay. During the molting season (typically June-July and
coincides with the period when piles will be driven) as many as
approximately 130 harbor seals on average have been observed using
Castro Rocks as a haulout. Harbor seals are more likely to be hauled
out in the late afternoon and evening, and are more likely to be in the
water during the morning and early afternoon (Green et al. 2002).
However, during the molting season, harbor seals spend more time hauled
out and tend to enter the water later in the evening. During molting,
harbor seals can stay onshore resting for an average of 12 hours per
day during the molt compared to around 7 hours per day outside of the
pupping/molting seasons (NPS 2014). Tidal stage is a major controlling
factor of haulout usage at Castro Rocks with more seals present during
low tides than high tide periods since it is completely underwater at
high tide twice per day (Green et al. 2002). Additionally, the number
of seals hauled out at Castro Rocks also varies with the time of day,
with proportionally more animals hauled out during the nighttime hours
(Green et al. 2002). Therefore, the number of harbor

[[Page 27556]]

seals in the water around Castro Rocks will vary throughout the work
period. However, it is likely that all seals hauled out at the site
will be exposed to project related underwater noise at some point each
day. The number of harbor seals located at Castro Rocks is based on the
highest mean plus the standard error of harbor seals observed at Castro
Rocks during recent annual surveys conducted by the National Park
Service (NPS) (Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and 2017), resulting
in a value of 176 seals. The same NPS survey determined that harbor
seal population in the Central Bay at Alcatraz and Yerba Buena Island
is approximately 167 seals (Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and
2017).
California sea lions haul out primarily on floating docks at Pier
39 in the Fisherman's Wharf area of the San Francisco Marina,
approximately 12.5 kilometer (km) (7.8 miles (mi)) southwest of the
project area. Based on counts done in 1997 and 1998, the number of
California sea lions that haul out at Pier 39 fluctuates with the
highest occurrences in August and the lowest in June. In addition to
the Pier 39 haulout, California sea lions haul out on buoys and similar
structures throughout the Bay. They are seen swimming off mainly the
San Francisco and Marin shorelines within the Bay but may occasionally
enter the project area to forage. Over the monitoring period for the
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge RSRB, monitors sighted at least 90
California sea lions in the North Bay and at least 57 in the Central
Bay (Caltrans 2012). During monitoring for the San Francisco-Oakland
Bay Bridge (SFOBB) Project in the central Bay, 69 California sea lions
were observed in the vicinity of the bridge over a 17-year period from
2000-2017 (Caltrans 2018), and from these observations, an estimated
density of 0.161 animals per square kilometer (km\2\) is derived
(Caltrans 2018).
A small but growing population of harbor porpoises utilizes San
Francisco Bay. Harbor porpoises are typically spotted in the vicinity
of Angel Island and the Golden Gate (6 and 12 km southwest
respectively) with lesser numbers sighted in the vicinity of Alcatraz
and around Treasure Island (Keener 2011). Porpoises but may utilize
other areas in the Central Bay in low numbers, including the planned
project area. However, harbor porpoise are naturally inclined to remain
near the shoreline areas and downstream of large landmasses as they are
constantly foraging. For this reason, the project area would present a
less than likely area to observe harbor porpoise as they would either
need to traverse the perimeter of the Bay to arrive there, or would
have to swim through the open Bay. Both scenarios are possible, but
would represent uncommon behavior. Based on monitoring conducted for
the SFOBB project, between 2000-2017 an in-water density of 0.031
animals per km\2\ estimated by Caltrans for this species. However,
porpoise occurrence increased significantly in 2017 resulting in a 2017
only density of 0.167 animals per km\2\ (Caltrans 2018).
Small numbers of northern elephant seals haul out or strand on
coastline within the Central Bay. Monitoring of marine mammals in the
vicinity of the SFOBB has been ongoing for 15 years; from those data,
Caltrans has produced an estimated at-sea density for northern elephant
seal of 0.06 animal per km\2\ (Caltrans, 2015b). Most sightings of
northern elephant seal in San Francisco Bay occur in spring or early
summer, and are less likely to occur during the periods of in-water
work for this project. As a result, densities during pile driving for
the planned action would be much lower.
The incidence of northern fur seal in San Francisco Bay depends
largely on oceanic conditions, with animals more likely to strand
during El Ni[ntilde]o events. The likelihood of El Ni[ntilde]o
conditions occurring in 2018 is currently low, with La Ni[ntilde]a or
neutral conditions expected to develop (NOAA, 2018).
The range of the bottlenose dolphin has expanded northward along
the Pacific Coast since the 1982-1983 El Ni[ntilde]o (Carretta et al.
2013, Wells and Baldridge 1990). They now occur as far north as the San
Francisco Bay region and have been observed along the coast in Half
Moon Bay, San Mateo, Ocean Beach in San Francisco, and Rodeo Beach in
Marin County. Observations indicate that bottlenose dolphin
occasionally enter San Francisco Bay, sometimes foraging for fish in
Fort Point Cove, just east of the Golden Gate Bridge (Golden Gate
Cetacean Research 2014). Transient individuals of this species
occasionally enter San Francisco Bay, but observations indicate that
they usually remain in proximity to the Golden Gate near the mouth of
the Bay. Beginning in 2015, two individuals have been observed
frequently in the vicinity of Oyster Point, located south of San
Francisco (GGCR, 2018; Perlman, 2017). Bottlenose dolphins are being
observed in San Francisco bay more frequently in recent years. Groups
with an average size of five animals have been observed entering the
Bay in the vicinity of Yerba Buena Island at a rate of once per week.
They usually are observed over two week spans and then depart for an
extended period of time (NMFS, 2017).
Gray whales occasionally enter the Bay during their northward
migration period, and are most often sighted in the Bay between
February and May. Most venture only about 2 to 3 km (about 1-2 mi) past
the Golden Gate, but gray whales have occasionally been sighted as far
north as San Pablo Bay. Pile driving is not expected to occur during
this time, and gray whales are not likely to be present at other times
of year.

Take Calculation and Estimation

Here we describe how the information provided above is brought
together to produce a quantitative take estimate.
The following assumptions are made when estimating potential
incidences of take:
All marine mammal individuals potentially available are
assumed to be present within the relevant area, and thus incidentally
taken;
An individual can only be taken once during a 24-h period;
Exposures to sound levels at or above the relevant
thresholds equate to take, as defined by the MMPA.
Limited density data is available for marine mammal species in San
Francisco Bay. Estimates here are determined using data taken during
marine mammal monitoring associated with RSRB retrofit project, the San
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge replacement project, and other marine
mammal observations for San Francisco Bay. For Pacific harbor seal,
data was also derived from recent annual surveys of haulouts in the Bay
conducted by the National Park Service (Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013,
2015, and 2017).

Pacific Harbor Seal

As noted above, take estimates are based on the highest mean plus
the standard error of harbor seals observed by NPS at Castro Rocks
which equals 176 animals (Codde, S. and S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and
2017). Castro Rocks is inundated with water twice/day during the high
tides. So during every work day (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.) the entire haulout
will be in the water twice per day. Of these 176 seals, the proportion
that may enter the areas over which the Level B harassment thresholds
may be exceeded are estimated as follows:
Impact driving of 24-inch concrete piles at all Berths: It
is assumed that 10 percent of the animals that enter the water from
Castro Rocks will enter the small Level B zones associated with this
pile type as shown in Figure 6-1 in the application. Thus, it is
estimated that up to 17.6 individuals per day could be exposed (176/10
= 17.6) by entering the Level B harassment zone to the south of Castro
Rocks;

[[Page 27557]]

Impact driving of 14-inch steel H piles: Impact driving
would only occur in the event that a pile encounters an obstruction
such as an old timber pile beneath the mud line, which is unlikely to
occur. These piles will be preferentially driven with a vibratory
driver. Therefore, Level B take for this activity is based on
installation using vibratory driver. Level A take is based on
installation using impact driving. For the purposes of calculating
Level A take, as a proportion of Level B take, it is assumed that
approximately 25 percent of the 176 harbor seals using Castro Rocks
could approach and be subject to Level B harassment due to the limited
amount of time impact driving is expected to occur as well as the size
and location of the Level B isopleth (Figure 6-2 in application).
Therefore, it is assumed that up to 44 individuals per day could be
exposed when this activity is being conducted;
Vibratory driving and removal of the 36-inch steel pipe
piles at Berth 4: Isopleths for this vibratory driving encompass Castro
Rocks, therefore it is assumed that all of the estimated 176 animals in
the water, could be exposed when these piles are being driven at Berth
4;
Vibratory driving/extraction of the 14-inch H piles at
Berth 2: Isopleths for this vibratory driving encompass Castro Rocks,
therefore is assumed that all of the 176 animals in the water could be
exposed when this activity is being conducted at Berth 2; and
Vibratory removal of timber and concrete piles at Berths
1, 2 and 4: Isopleths for this vibratory removal encompass Castro
Rocks, therefore it is assumed that all of the estimated 176 animals in
the water could be exposed during these activities.
In order to account for other individuals that may be foraging in
the more distant part of the Level B harassment zone, additional take
of harbor seal has been estimated based on other harbor seal
populations in the Central Bay. Using the same data set (Codde, S. and
S. Allen. 2013, 2015, and 2017) that was used for Castro Rocks, a
population for the Central Bay of 167 harbor seals was established
based on other Central Bay haulouts at Alcatraz and Yerba Buena Island.
The area of the Central Bay (bound by the Golden Gate, Richmond Bridge,
SFOBB, and adjoining coastline) is approximately 134 km\2\, resulting
in a harbor seal density of 1.25 animals per km\2\. The population that
hauls out at Castro Rocks is not included in this density estimate
because of the proximity of the haulout site to the project and
potential take of those harbor seals has been estimated separately
using the methods described above. The estimated take based on the
Central Bay density is added to the take estimated for the Castro Rocks
population, as provided in Table 9 below. Also provided in Table 9 is
the estimated Level A take for impact driving of the steel 14-inch H
piles, which has been estimated by taking Level B take and multiplying
it by the ratio of the Level A zone area to the Level B zone area.
Level A take is not requested for vibratory driving.

Table 9--Daily Level A and Level B Harassment Estimate for Pacific Harbor Seal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Level B take per day
Level A zone, ------------------------------------------------ Estimated
Pile type Level B zone minus Central bay Level A take
(km\2\) exclusion zone \1\ (1.25 per Project Harbor seal-- per day--
(km\2\) km\2\) vicinity total total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Driving
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch steel H pile.................................... 190.55 NA 238.39 176 414.39 NA
36-inch steel pile...................................... 176.44 NA 220.55 176 396.55 NA
Timber/Concrete Pile Removal............................ 7.14 NA 8.92 176 184.92 NA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Driving
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch steel H pile.................................... 1.36 0.10 * 1.7 * 44 45.7 3.36
24-inch concrete pile................................... 0.04 0 0.05 17.6 17.65 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Only displayed to provide the calculation of Level A take. Level B take authorized for vibratory driving would cover any Level B take from occasional
impact driving.

For impact pile driving of the 14-inch steel H piles, the PTS Zone
is large enough to warrant a smaller exclusion zone and the
authorization of some Level A harassment for harbor seal so that pile
driving can be completed on schedule. A 35 meter shutdown zone (smaller
than the Level A Zone) for this species would be established, but
individuals that place themselves in the Level A zone but outside of
the shut-down zone may experience Level A harassment, if they reside in
that area for a long enough duration.

California Sea Lion

The estimated California seal lion density of 0.16 animals per
km\2\ previously described was used to calculate potential Level B
exposures as shown in Table 10.

Table 10--Daily Level B Harassment Exposure Estimate for California Sea
Lion
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B take
estimate
(based on
Pile type Level B zone Central Bay
(km\2\) density of
0.16 animals
per km\2\ )
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Driving
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch steel H pile.................... 190.55 30.48
36-inch steel pile...................... 176.44 28.23

[[Page 27558]]

Timber/Concrete Pile Removal............ 7.14 1.14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Driving
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch steel H pile.................... * NA * NA
24-inch concrete pile...................
0.04....................................
0.01....................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Level B take authorized for vibratory driving would cover any Level B
take from occasional impact driving.

Harbor Porpoise

Based on monitoring conducted for the SFOBB project described
previously, an in-water density of 0.17 animals per km\2\ was estimated
by Caltrans for this species (NMFS 2017b). Using this in-water density
and the areas of potential harassment, take is estimated for harbor
porpoise as provided in Table 11. Also provided in Table 11 is the
estimated Level A take for impact driving, which has been estimated by
taking Level B take and multiplying it by the ratio of the Level A zone
area to the Level B zone area. A single harbor porpoise could be
exposed to Level A harassment during impact driving or 14-inch steel H-
piles as shown in Table 11. NMFS, however, conservatively proposes to
authorize Level A take of four animals which is the average group size.

Table 11--Daily Level A and Level B Harassment Estimate for Pacific Harbor Porpoise
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B
Level A zone, estimate Estimated
Pile type Level B zone minus Central Bay in- Level A take
(km\2\) exclusion zone water--0.17 per day
(km\2\) per km\2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch steel H pile............................ 190.55 .............. 32.39 NA
36-inch steel pile.............................. 176.44 .............. 29.99 NA
Timber/Concrete Pile Removal.................... 7.14 .............. 1.21 NA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14-inch steel H pile............................ 1.36 * 0.32 * 0.23 0.05
24-inch concrete pile........................... 0.04 0 0.01 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Only displayed to provide the calculation of Level A take. Level B take authorized for vibratory driving would
cover any Level B take from occasional impact driving.

For impact pile driving of the 14-inch H piles, the Level A Zone is
large enough to warrant the authorization of some Level A. A 250 meter
shutdown zone for this species would be established, but individuals
that place themselves in the Level A zone but outside of the shut-down
zone may experience Level A harassment, if they reside in that area for
a long enough duration.

Northern Elephant Seal

Monitoring of marine mammals in the vicinity of the SFOBB produced
an estimated density for northern elephant seal of 0.06 animal per
km\2\ (Caltrans, 2015b). Most sightings of northern elephant seal in
San Francisco Bay occur in spring or early summer, and are less likely
to occur during the periods of in-water work for this project. As a
result, densities during pile driving for the planned action would be
much lower. It is possible that a lone northern elephant seal may enter
the Level B harassment area once per day during pile driving, for a
total of 28 takes. Level A harassment of this species is not expected
to occur and is not authorized by NMFS.

Northern Fur Seal

As noted previously, the incidence of northern fur seal in San
Francisco Bay depends largely on oceanic conditions, with animals more
likely to strand during El Ni[ntilde]o events. The likelihood of El
Ni[ntilde]o conditions occurring in 2018 is currently low, with La
Ni[ntilde]a or neutral conditions expected to develop (NOAA, 2018).
Given the low probability that fur seals would enter into the Bay and
project area in 2018, Chevron has conservatively requested and NMFS has
authorized10 fur seals takes by Level B harassment. Level A harassment
of this species is not anticipated or authorized by NMFS.

Bottlenose Dolphin

When this species is present in San Francisco Bay, it is more
typically found close to the Golden Gate. Recently, beginning in 2015,
two individuals have been observed frequently in the vicinity of Oyster
Point (GGCR, 2016; GGCR 2017; Perlman, 2017). The average reported
group size for bottlenose dolphins is five. Reports show that a group
normally comes into San Francisco Bay near Yerba Buena Island once per
week for approximately 2-week

[[Page 27559]]

stints and then leaves the Bay (NMFS, 2017b). Chevron assumed groups of
five individuals may enter San Francisco Bay and the ensonified area
three times during separate two-week spans. Therefore, groups of 5
animals would potentially be exposed at a rate of once per week over
six weeks, resulting in up to 30 Level B exposures. As such, NMFS
authorizes the take by Level B harassment of 30 bottlenose dolphins.
Although a small Level A zone for mid-frequency cetaceans is estimated
during impact driving, marine mammal monitoring of the shutdown would
ensure that take by Level A harassment does not occur.

Gray Whale

Gray whales are the only whale species that travels far into San
Francisco bay with any regularity. They occasionally enter the Bay
during their northward migration period, and are most often sighted in
the Bay between February and May. Most venture only about 2 to 3 km
(about 1-2 mi) past the Golden Gate, but gray whales have occasionally
been sighted as far north as San Pablo Bay. Pile driving is not
anticipated to occur during the February through May timeframe and gray
whales are not likely to be present at other times of year. In the very
unlikely event that a gray whale or pair of gray whales makes its way
close to the project area while pile driving activities are under way,
Chevron has requested take by Level B harassment of up to two (2) gray
whales per year. NMFS agrees and has authorized the take of 2 gray
whales by Level B harassment. No Level A take is authorized.
Tables 12 and 13 summarize the estimate of Level B and Level A
harassment, respectively, for each species by pile driving activity for
the 2018 construction season. For harbor seals, sea lions, harbor
porpoise and elephant seals, the Level B harassment estimates are based
on the number of individuals assumed to be exposed per day, the number
of days of pile driving expected based on an average installation rate.
The Level A harassment estimates are derived from the Level B
harassment estimates by taking the Level B harassment total and
multiplying it by the fractional ratio of the area of the Level A zone
to the Level B zone.

Table 12--Total Estimated Take by Level B Harassment by Species and Pile Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species
Number of Number of --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile type Pile driver type piles driving Harbor CA sea Harbor Gray N. elephant N. fur Bottlenose
days seal lion porpoise whale * seal seal * dolphin *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36-inch steel template pile ** Vibratory........ 8 2 793.1 56.46 59.98 NA 2 NA NA
Concrete pile removal......... Vibratory........ 5 1 184.92 1.14 1.21 NA 1 NA NA
24-inch concrete.............. Impact........... 8 8 141.2 0.08 0.08 NA 8 NA NA
14-inch H pile installation... Impact/Vibratory. 36 12 4,972.68 365.76 388.68 NA 12 NA NA
Timber pile removal........... Vibratory........ 53 5 924.6 5.7 6.05 NA 5 NA NA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Take by Species ................. ......... ......... 7,017 429 456 2 28 10 30
(2018).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Take is not calculated by activity type for these species, only a total is given.
** Only the installation of the template piles will occur in 2018. Take associated with their removal will be requested in a subsequent IHA.
*** These piles will be preferentially driven with a vibratory driver, which would have a larger Level B zone than installation with an impact driver.
Thus, Level B take for this species is based on installation using vibratory driver, and not an impact driver.

Table 13--Authorized Take by Level A Harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Harbor
Pile type Pile driver type driving days Harbor seal porpoise
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
36-inch steel template pile........... Vibratory............... 2 0 0
Concrete pile removal................. Vibratory............... 1 0 0
24-inch concrete...................... Impact.................. 8 0 0
14-inch H pile installation........... Impact/Vibratory........ 12 40 * 4
Timber pile removal................... Vibratory............... 5 0 0
-----------------------------------------------
Total Take........................ ........................ .............. 40 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Harbor porpoise takes were increased to 4 to account for average group size.

Table 14 provides a summary of authorized Level A and Level B takes
as well as the percentage of a stock authorized for take.

Table 14--Authorized Take and Percentage of Stock or Population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authorized Authorized Percent
Species Stock Level A takes Level B takes population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harbor seal........................... California.............. 40 6,977 22.6%
California sea lion................... Eastern U.S............. .............. 429 <0.01
Harbor porpoise....................... San Francisco--Russian 4 451 4.5
River.
Northern elephant seal................ California Breeding..... .............. 28 <0.01
Gray whale............................ Eastern North Pacific... .............. 2 <0.01
Northern fur seal..................... California.............. .............. 10 <0.01
Bottlenose Dolphin.................... California Coastal...... .............. 30 6.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 27560]]

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.

Mitigation for Marine Mammals and Their Habitat

The following measures would apply to Chevron's mitigation
requirements:
Seasonal Restriction--To minimize impacts to listed fish
species, pile-driving activities would occur between June 1 and
November 30;
Daylight Construction Period--Work would occur only during
daylight hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) when visual marine mammal
monitoring can be conducted;
Establishment of Shutdown Zone--For all pile driving and
removal activities, Chevron will establish a shutdown zone. The purpose
of a shutdown zone is generally to define an area within which shutdown
of activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in
anticipation of an animal entering the defined area). A shutdown zone
will be established which will include all or a portion of the area
where underwater SPLs are expected to reach or exceed the cumulative
SEL thresholds for Level A harassment as provided in Table 7. The
shutdown isopleths for pinnipeds (harbor seals, California sea lion,
Northern elephant seal, northern fur seal) and mid-frequency cetaceans
(bottlenose dolphins) will be set at 15 meters during vibratory
driving. A 30 meter shutdown zone during vibratory driving will be
established for low-frequency cetaceans (gray whale) and high-frequency
cetaceans (harbor porpoise). During impact driving the shutdown zones
will be set at 250 meters for high-frequency cetaceans (harbor
porpoise), 350 meters for low-frequency cetaceans (gray whales), and 35
meters for pinnipeds (harbor seal, California sea lion, Northern
elephant seal, northern fur seal) and mid-frequency cetaceans
(bottlenose dolphin);
10-Meter Shutdown Zone--During the in-water operation of
heavy machinery (e.g., barge movements), a 10-m shutdown zone for all
marine mammals will be implemented. If a marine mammal comes within 10
m, operations shall cease and vessels shall reduce speed to the minimum
level required to maintain steerage and safe working conditions;
Establishment of Monitoring Zones for Level A and Level
B--Chevron will establish and monitor Level A harassment zones during
impact driving for harbor seal extending to 183 meters and harbor seals
and extending to 408 m for harbor porpoises. These are areas beyond the
shutdown zone in which animals could be exposed to sound levels that
could result in PTS. Chevron will also establish and monitor Level B
harassment zones which are areas where SPLs are equal to or exceed the
160 dB rms threshold for impact driving and the 120 dB rms threshold
during vibratory driving and extraction. Monitoring zones provide
utility for observing by establishing monitoring protocols for areas
adjacent to the shutdown zones. Monitoring zones enable observers to be
aware of and communicate the presence of marine mammals in the project
area outside the shutdown zone and thus prepare for a potential cease
of activity should the animal enter the shutdown zone. The Level B
zones are depicted in Table 11. As shown, the largest Level B zone is
equal to 190.55 km\2\, making it impossible for Protected Species
Observers (PSOs) to view the entire harassment area. Due to this, Level
B exposures will be recorded and extrapolated based upon the number of
observed take and the percentage of the Level B zone that was not
visible;
Soft Start--The use of a soft-start procedure are believed
to provide additional protection to marine mammals by providing warning
and/or giving marine mammals a chance to leave the area prior to the
hammer operating at full capacity. Chevron shall use soft start
techniques when impact pile driving. Soft start requires contractors to
provide an initial set of strikes at reduced energy, followed by a
thirty-second waiting period, then two subsequent reduced energy strike
sets;
Pile Caps/Cushions--Chevron will employ the use of pile
caps or cushions as sound attenuation devices to reduce impacts from
sound exposure during impact pile driving;
Pre-Activity Monitoring--Pre-activity monitoring shall
take place from 30 minutes prior to initiation of pile driving activity
and post-activity monitoring shall continue through 30 minutes post-
completion of pile driving activity. Pile driving may commence at the
end of the 30-minute pre-activity monitoring period, provided observers
have determined that the shutdown zone is clear of marine mammals,
which includes delaying start of pile driving activities if a marine
mammal is sighted in the zone, as described below;
If a marine mammal approaches or enters the shutdown zone
during activities or pre-activity monitoring, all pile driving
activities at that location shall be halted or delayed, respectively.
If pile driving is halted or delayed due to the presence of a marine
mammal, the activity may not resume or commence until either the animal
has voluntarily left and been visually confirmed beyond the shutdown
zone and 15 minutes have passed without re-detection of the animal.
Pile driving activities include the time to install or remove a single
pile or series of piles, as long as the time elapsed between uses of
the pile driving equipment is no more than thirty minutes; and
Non-authorized Take Prohibited--If a species for which
authorization has not been granted or a species for which authorization
has been granted but the authorized takes are met, is observed
approaching or within the monitoring zone, pile driving and removal
activities must shut down immediately using delay and shut-down
procedures. Activities must not resume until the animal has been
confirmed to have left

[[Page 27561]]

the area or an observation time period of 15 minutes has elapsed.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's planned measures, as
well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has determined that the
required mitigation measures provide the means effecting the least
practicable impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat,
paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance.

Monitoring and Reporting

In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well
as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:

Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density);
Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure
to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or
chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment
(e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2)
affected species (e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence
of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or
behavioral context of exposure (e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);
Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks;
Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat); and
Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

Visual Monitoring

The following visual monitoring measures are required as part of
the issued IHA.
One day of biological monitoring would occur within one
week before the project's start date to establish baseline
observations;
Monitoring distances, in accordance with the identified
shutdown, Level A, and Level B zones, will be determined by using a
range finder, scope, hand-held global positioning system (GPS) device
or landmarks with known distances from the monitoring positions;
Monitoring locations will be established at locations
offering best views of the monitoring zone;
Monitoring will be continuous unless the contractor takes
a break longer than 2 hours from active pile driving, in which case,
monitoring will be required 30 minutes prior to restarting pile
installation;
For in-water pile driving, under conditions of fog or poor
visibility that might obscure the presence of a marine mammal within
the shutdown zone, the pile in progress will be completed and then pile
driving suspended until visibility conditions improve;
At least two PSOs will be actively scanning the monitoring
zone during all pile driving activities;
Monitoring of pile driving shall be conducted by qualified
PSOs (see below), who shall have no other assigned tasks during
monitoring periods. Chevron shall adhere to the following conditions
when selecting observers:
(1) Independent PSOs shall be used (i.e., not construction
personnel);
(2) At least one PSO must have prior experience working as a marine
mammal observer during construction activities;
(3) Other PSOs may substitute education (degree in biological
science or related field) or training for experience; and
(4) Chevron shall submit PSO CVs for approval by NMFS;
Chevron will ensure that observers have the following
additional qualifications:
(1) Ability to conduct field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols;
(2) Experience or training in the field identification of marine
mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
(3) Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
(4) Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of observations
including but not limited to the number and species of marine mammals
observed; dates and times when in-water construction activities were
conducted; dates, times, and reason for implementation of mitigation
(or why mitigation was not implemented when required); and marine
mammal behavior; and
(5) Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
A draft marine mammal monitoring report would be submitted to NMFS
within 90 days after the completion of pile driving and removal
activities. It will include an overall description of work completed, a
narrative regarding marine mammal sightings, and associated marine
mammal observation data sheets. Specifically, the report must include:

Date and time that monitored activity begins or ends;
Construction activities occurring during each observation
period;
Deviation from initial proposal in pile numbers, pile
types, average driving times, etc.
Weather parameters (e.g., percent cover, visibility);
Water conditions (e.g., sea state, tide state);
For each marine mammal sighting the following must be
recorded:
(1) Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of marine
mammals;
(2) Description of any observable marine mammal behavior patterns,
including bearing and direction of travel and distance from pile
driving activity;
(3) Location and distance from pile driving activities to marine
mammals and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
and
(4) Estimated amount of time that the animals remained in the Level
B zone.
Description of implementation of mitigation measures
within each monitoring period (e.g., shutdown or delay);
Other human activity in the area.
A summary of the following must be included in the report.
(1) Total number of individuals of each species detected within the
Level A and Level B Zones, and estimated take extrapolated across
entire Level B zone; and
(2) Daily average number of individuals of each species

[[Page 27562]]

(differentiated by month as appropriate) detected within the Level B
Zone, and estimated take extrapolated across entire Level B zone.
If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days, the draft
final report will constitute the final report. If comments are
received, a final report addressing NMFS comments must be submitted
within 30 days after receipt of comments.
In the unanticipated event that the specified activity clearly
causes the take of a marine mammal in a manner prohibited by the IHA
(if issued), such as an injury, serious injury or mortality, Chevron
would immediately cease the specified activities and report the
incident to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office
of Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinator. The report would include the following information:
Description of the incident;
Environmental conditions (e.g., Beaufort sea state,
visibility);
Description of all marine mammal observations in the 24
hours preceding the incident;
Species identification or description of the animal(s)
involved;
Fate of the animal(s); and
Photographs or video footage of the animal(s) (if
equipment is available).
Activities would not resume until NMFS is able to review the
circumstances of the prohibited take. NMFS would work with Chevron to
determine what is necessary to minimize the likelihood of further
prohibited take and ensure MMPA compliance. Chevron would not be able
to resume their activities until notified by NMFS via letter, email, or
telephone.
In the event that Chevron 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 (e.g., in less than
a moderate state of decomposition as described in the next paragraph),
Chevron would immediately report the incident to the Chief of the
Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,
and the West Coast Regional Stranding Coordinator. The report would
include the same information identified in the paragraph above.
Activities would be able to continue while NMFS reviews the
circumstances of the incident. NMFS would work with Chevron to
determine whether modifications in the activities are appropriate.
In the event that Chevron 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), Chevron would report the incident
to the Chief of the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, and the West Coast Regional Stranding
Coordinator within 24 hours of the discovery. Chevron would provide
photographs or video footage (if available) or other documentation of
the stranded animal sighting to NMFS and the Marine Mammal Stranding
Network.

Hydroacoustic Monitoring

Sound Source Verification (SSV) testing of would be conducted under
this IHA. The purpose of the planned acoustic monitoring plan is to
collect underwater sound-level information at both near and distant
locations during vibratory pile extraction and installation and impact
pile installation. The plan provides a protocol for hydroacoustic
measurements during pile driving operations. Acoustic monitoring would
be conducted on a minimum of two of each pile type. Since little data
exist for source levels associated with installation of 24-inch square
concrete piles (including data on single strike sound exposure level
metrics) Chevron would conduct in-situ measurements during installation
of eight piles. The SSV testing would be conducted by an acoustical
firm with prior experience conducting SSV testing. Final results would
be sent to NMFS. Findings may be used to establish Level A and Level B
isopleths during impact and vibratory driving. Any alterations to the
shutdown or harassment zones based on testing data must be approved by
NMFS. The Hydroacoustic Monitoring Plan is contained on the following
NMFS website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/incidental-take-authorizations-construction-activities.

Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination

NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
Pile driving and extraction associated with Chevron's WMEP project
as outlined previously have the potential to injure, disturb or
displace marine mammals. Specifically, the specified activities may
result in Level B harassment (behavioral disturbance) for seven marine
mammal species authorized for take from underwater sound generated
during pile driving operations. Level A harassment in the form of PTS
may also occur to limited numbers of two species. No serious injuries
or mortalities are anticipated to occur as a result of Chevron's pile
driving activities.
A limited number of animals (40 harbor seals and 4 harbor
porpoises) could experience Level A harassment in the form of PTS if
they stay within the Level A harassment zone during impact driving of
24-inch steel H-piles. Installation of these piles would occur over
eight days and impact driving will not be the primary method of
installation. The piles will mainly be installed using only vibratory
driving. Impact driving will be used only if the vibrated pile
encounters an obstruction such as an old sunken pile. It is unlikely
that this would occur for all four piles projected to be installed each
driving day. An assumption of four piles per day was used to calculate
Level A zone sizes. If four piles did require impact installation on a
single day it is unlikely that the same individual marine mammal would
be within the relatively small Level A zone during the installation of
every pile. In most instances impact driving will not be required at
all. Furthermore, the degree of injury is expected to be mild and is
not likely to affect the reproduction or

[[Page 27563]]

survival of the individual animals. It is expected that, if hearing
impairments occurs, most likely the affected animal would lose a few dB
in its hearing sensitivity, which in most cases is not likely to affect
its survival and recruitment.
The Level B takes that are anticipated and authorized are expected
to be limited to short-term behavioral harassment. Marine mammals
present near the action area and taken by Level B harassment would most
likely show overt brief disturbance (e.g., startle reaction) and
avoidance of the area from elevated noise level during pile driving.
Repeated exposures of individuals to levels of sound that may cause
Level B harassment are unlikely to significantly disrupt foraging
behavior. Thus, even repeated Level B harassment of some small subset
of the overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant realized
decrease in fitness for the affected individuals, and thus would not
result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole.
The project is not expected to have significant adverse effects on
affected marine mammal habitat. The activities may cause fish to leave
the area temporarily. This could impact 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 affected habitat, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not
expected to cause significant or long-term negative consequences.
The likelihood that marine mammals will be detected by trained
observers is high under the environmental conditions described for the
project. The employment of the soft-start mitigation measure would also
allow marine mammals in or near the shutdown and Level A zone zones to
move away from the impact driving sound source. Therefore, the
mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to reduce the potential
for injury and reduce the amount and intensity of behavioral
harassment. Furthermore, the pile driving activities analyzed here are
similar to, or less impactful than, numerous construction activities
conducted in similar locations which have taken place with no reported
injuries or mortality to marine mammals, and no known long-term adverse
consequences from behavioral harassment.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity
are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
No mortality is anticipated or authorized;
Anticipated incidences of Level A harassment would be in
the form of a small degree of PTS to a limited number of animals;
Anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist of, at
worst, temporary modifications in behavior;
The relatively short and intermittent duration of in-water
construction activities;
The small percentage of the stock that may be affected by
project activities (<22.8 percent for all stocks); and
Efficacy of mitigation measures is expected to minimize
the likelihood and severity of the level of harassment.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the required monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from
the planned activity will have a negligible impact on all affected
marine mammal stocks or species.

Small Numbers

As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for specified
activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not
define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated numbers are
available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most
appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in
our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small
numbers of marine mammals. Additionally, other qualitative factors may
be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of
the activities.
Table 14 depicts the number of animals that could be exposed to
Level A and Level B harassment from work associated with Chevron's
project. The analysis provided indicates that authorized takes account
for no more than 22.6 percent of the populations of the stocks that
could be affected. These are small numbers of marine mammals relative
to the sizes of the affected stocks.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned (including
the required mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated
take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals
will be taken relative to the population size of the affected species
or stocks.

Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination

There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine
mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has
determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would
not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such
species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.

National Environmental Policy Act

To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA;
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A,
NMFS must review our proposed action (i.e., the issuance of an
incidental harassment authorization) with respect to potential impacts
on the human environment.
This action is consistent with categories of activities identified
in Categorical Exclusion B4 (incidental harassment authorizations with
no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of the Companion Manual for
NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or
cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality
of the human environment and for which we have not identified any
extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical
exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has determined that the issuance of the
IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) requires that each Federal agency insure that any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated
critical habitat.
No incidental take of ESA-listed species is authorized or expected
to result from this activity. Therefore, NMFS has determined that
formal consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not required for this
action.

Authorization

NMFS has issued an IHA to Chevron to take seven species of marine
mammal incidental to pile driving and removal activities at Chevron's
Long Wharf from June 1, 2018 through May 31, 2019 provided the
previously mentioned

[[Page 27564]]

mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.

Dated: June 7, 2018.
Elaine T. Saiz,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-12629 Filed 6-12-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.