Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock in Seattle, Washington, 36581-36591 [2019-15970]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / Notices
and U.S. Customs purposes only. The written
description of the scope is dispositive.
Appendix II
List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope Comments
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Injury Test
VI. Application of the CVD Law to Imports
From China
VII. Diversification of China’s Economy
VIII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and
Adverse Inferences
IX. Subsidies Valuation
X. Benchmarks and Discount Rates
XI. Analysis of Programs
XII. ITC Notification
XIII. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2019–16036 Filed 7–26–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
RIN 0648–PR–A001
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to
Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock in
Seattle, Washington
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 we have issued an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to the
Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) to take small
numbers of marine mammals, by
harassment, incidental to the Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock in
Seattle, Washington.
DATES: This authorization is effective
from August 1, 2019, through July 31,
2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
Electronic copies of the application and
supporting documents, as well as the
issued IHA, 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:
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Jkt 247001
Background
The MMPA prohibits the ‘‘take’’ of
marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. 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
incidental take authorization may be
provided to the public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings
shall be granted if NMFS finds that the
taking will have a negligible impact on
the species or stock(s) and will not have
an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for
taking for subsistence uses (where
relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe
the permissible methods of taking and
other ‘‘means of effecting the least
practicable adverse impact’’ on the
affected species or stocks and their
habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of
similar significance, and on the
availability of such species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses
(referred to in shorthand as
‘‘mitigation’’); and requirements
pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring
and reporting of such takings are set
forth.
The NDAA (Pub. L. 108–136)
removed the ‘‘small numbers’’ and
‘‘specified geographical region’’
limitations indicated above and
amended the definition of ‘‘harassment’’
as it applies to a ‘‘military readiness
activity.’’ The definitions of all
applicable MMPA statutory terms cited
above are included in the relevant
sections below.
Summary of Request
On February 7, 2019, WSDOT
submitted a request to NMFS requesting
an IHA for the possible harassment of
small numbers of marine mammal
species incidental to Seattle Multimodal
Project at Colman Dock in Seattle,
Washington, from August 1, 2019 to July
31, 2020. After receiving the revised
project description and the revised IHA
application, NMFS determined that the
IHA application is adequate and
complete on May 8, 2018. NMFS is
proposing to authorize the take by Level
A and Level B harassments of the
following marine mammal species:
Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina); northern
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36581
elephant seal (Mirounga angustirostris);
California sea lion (Zalophus
californianus); Steller sea lion
(Eumetopias jubatus); killer whale
(Orcinus orca); long-beaked common
dolphin (Delphinus capensis),
bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus),
gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus),
humpback whale (Megaptera
novaeangliae), minke whale
(Balaenoptera acutorostrata); harbor
porpoise (Phocoena phocoena); and
Dall’s porpoise (P. dalli). Neither
WSDOT nor NMFS expect mortality to
result from this activity and, therefore,
an IHA is appropriate.
This IHA covers one year of a larger
project for which WSDOT obtained
prior IHAs (82 FR 21579; July 7, 2017;
83 FR 35226; July 25, 2018) and intends
to request take authorization for
subsequent facets of the project. The
larger 5-year project involves
reconfiguring the Colman Dock of the
Seattle Ferry Terminal while
maintaining the same vehicle holding
capacity as current conditions. WSDOT
complied with all the requirements (e.g.,
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of
the previous IHA and information
regarding their monitoring results may
be found in the Estimated Take section.
Description of the Proposed Activity
Overview
The purpose of the Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock is to
preserve the transportation function of
an aging, deteriorating and seismically
deficient facility to continue providing
safe and reliable service. The project
will also address existing safety
concerns related to conflicts between
vehicles and pedestrian traffic and
operational inefficiencies.
Dates and Duration
Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water
work timing restrictions to protect ESAlisted salmonids, planned WSDOT inwater construction is limited each year
to July 16 through February 15. In-water
pile driving work will be conducted in
daylight hours only. It is expected that
a total of 146 pile driving days will be
needed for the 2019/2020 construction
work.
Specific Geographic Region
The Seattle Ferry Terminal at Colman
Dock, serving State Route 519, is located
on the downtown Seattle waterfront, in
King County, Washington. The terminal
services vessels from the Bainbridge
Island and Bremerton routes, and is the
most heavily used terminal in the
Washington State Ferry system. The
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
36582
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / Notices
Seattle terminal is located in Section 6,
Township 24 North, Range 4 East, and
is adjacent to Elliott Bay, tributary to
Puget Sound (Figure 1–2 of the IHA
application). Land use in the area is
highly urban, and includes business,
industrial, the Port of Seattle container
loading facility, residential, the Pioneer
Square Historic District and local parks.
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
The project will reconfigure the
Colman Dock while maintaining
approximately the same vehicle holding
capacity as current conditions. The
construction began in August 2017. In
the 2017–2018 season, the construction
activities were focused on the South
Trestle, Terminal Building Foundation,
and the temporary and permanent
Passenger Offloading Facility. In the
2018–2019 season, the construction
activities were focused on the North
Trestle, and Slip 3 bridge seat, overhead
loading, wingwall, and inner dolphin.
In the 2019–2020 season, WSDOT
plans to work on Slip 2 bridge seat,
Center Trestle, Slip 2 wingwall
extension, and Slips 2 and 3 inner
dolphins. Both impact pile driving and
vibratory pile driving and pile removal
would be conducted. A total of 58 days
are estimated for pile driving and 88
days for pile removal.
In-water construction activities
include:
D Permanently install 36-inch (in)
steel piles with a vibratory hammer, and
then proof with an impact hammer for
the last 5–10 feet;
D Permanently install 24-in steel piles
with a vibratory hammer;
D Removal of various piles with a
vibratory hammer; and
D Install and removal of 24-in steel
piles with a vibratory hammer.
A list of pile driving and removal
activities is provided in Table 1.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF IN-WATER PILE DRIVING ACTIVITIES
Total
number piles
Number
piles/day
Method
Pile type and size
Work days
Vibratory drive * ...............................................
Vibratory drive .................................................
Vibratory drive ** .............................................
Impact drive (proof) ** .....................................
Vibratory removal ............................................
Vibratory removal ............................................
Vibratory removal ............................................
Vibratory removal ............................................
Vibratory removal * ..........................................
Vibratory removal ............................................
Steel pipe (temp), 24-in .................................
Steel pipe, 24-in .............................................
Steel pipe, 36-in .............................................
Steel pipe, 36-in .............................................
Timber, 14-in ..................................................
Steel pipe, 12-in .............................................
Steel H, 14-in .................................................
Steel pipe, 18-in .............................................
Steel pipe (temp), 24-in .................................
Steel pipe, 36-in .............................................
148
2
148
148
1,046
108
19
15
148
3
8
2
8
8
20
11
10
10
8
1
19
1
19
19
52
10
2
2
19
3
Total .........................................................
.........................................................................
1,489
........................
146
* Same 24-in steel pipe piles.
** Same 36-in steel pipe piles.
Mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
measures are described in detail later in
this document (please see Mitigation
and Monitoring and Reporting).
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS’ proposal to issue
an IHA was published in the Federal
Register on June 4, 2019 (84 FR 25757).
During the 30-day public comment
period, NMFS received a comment letter
from the Marine Mammal Commission
(Commission). Specific comments and
responses are provided below.
Comment 1: Commission
recommends that NMFS refrain from
using the proposed renewal process for
WSDOT’s authorization. The renewal
process should be used sparingly and
selectively, by limiting its use only to
those proposed incidental harassment
authorizations that are expected to have
the lowest levels of impacts to marine
mammals and that require the least
complex analyses. Notices for other
types of activities should not even
include the possibility that a renewal
might be issued using the proposed
foreshortened 15-day comment period.
If NMFS intends to use the renewal
process frequently or for authorizations
that require a more complex review or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Jkt 247001
for which much new information has
been generated (e.g., multiple or
extensive monitoring reports), the
Commission recommends that NMFS
provide the Commission and other
reviewers the full 30-day comment
opportunity set forth in section
101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of the MMPA
Response: There was a mistake in the
notice of the proposed IHA that NMFS
may issue a second 1-year IHA without
additional notice. The correct procedure
is that NMFS may issue a second 1-year
IHA with a 15-day public comment
period. The conditions that meet the
renewal are the same as described in the
Federal Register notice (84 FR 25757;
June 4, 2019) for the proposed IHA.
Separately, NMFS has responded to the
same comment from the Commission
previously and we refer the reader to
our response, included in the FR notice
announcing NMFS issuance of an IHA
for the (84 FR 31032, June 28, 2019).
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
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
affected species. Additional information
regarding population trends and threats
may be found in NMFS’s Stock
Assessment Reports (SARs; https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments) and more
general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral
descriptions) may be found on NMFS’s
website (https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 2 lists all species with expected
potential for occurrence in lower Puget
Sound area and summarizes information
related to the population or stock,
including regulatory status under the
MMPA and ESA and potential
biological removal (PBR), where known.
For taxonomy, we follow Committee on
Taxonomy (2016). PBR is defined by the
MMPA as the maximum number of
animals, not including natural
mortalities, that may be removed from a
marine mammal stock while allowing
that stock to reach or maintain its
optimum sustainable population (as
described in NMFS’s SARs). While no
mortality is anticipated or authorized
here, PBR and annual serious injury and
mortality from anthropogenic sources
are included here as gross indicators of
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
36583
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / Notices
the status of the species and other
threats.
Marine mammal abundance estimates
presented in this document represent
the total number of individuals that
make up a given stock or the total
number estimated within a particular
study or survey area. NMFS’s stock
abundance estimates for most species
represent the total estimate of
individuals within the geographic area,
if known, that comprises that stock. For
some species, this geographic area may
extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed
stocks in this region are assessed in
NMFS’s 2018 U.S. Pacific Draft Marine
Mammal SARs (Carretta et al., 2019).
All values presented in Table 2 are the
most recent available at the time of
publication and are available in the
2017 SARs (Carretta et al., 2018); and
draft 2018 SARs (available online at:
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
national/marine-mammal-protection/
draft-marine-mammal-stockassessment-reports).
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMALS WITH POTENTIAL PRESENCE WITHIN THE PROPOSED PROJECT AREA
Common name
Scientific name
ESA/
MMPA
status;
strategic
(Y/N) 1
Stock
Stock
abundance
(CV, Nmin,
most recent
abundance
survey) 2
PBR
Annual
M/SI 3
Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
Family Eschrichtiidae:
Gray whale ................................
Family Balaenopteridae:
Humpback whale .......................
Minke whale ..............................
Family Delphinidae:
Killer whale ................................
Eschrichtius robustus .......................
Eastern North Pacific .......................
N
26,960
801
138
Megaptera novaneagliae .................
Balaenoptera acutorostrata ..............
California/Oregon/Washington .........
California/Oregon/Washington .........
Y
N
2,900
636
16.7
3.5
>38.6
>1.3
Orcinus orca .....................................
Eastern N Pacific Southern resident
West coast transient ........................
California ..........................................
California/Oregon/Washington
offshore.
Y
N
N
N
77
243
101,305
1,924
0.13
2.4
657
198
0
0
>35.4
>0.84
Washington inland waters ................
California/Oregon/Washington .........
N
N
11,233
25,750
66
172
7.2
0.3
Long-beaked common dolphin ..
Bottlenose dolphin .....................
Delphinus capensis ..........................
Tursiops truncatus ...........................
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Harbor porpoise .........................
Dall’s porpoise ...........................
Phocoena phocoena ........................
P. dali ...............................................
Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
California sea lion ......................
Steller sea lion ...........................
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor seal ................................
Northern elephant seal ..............
Zalophus californianus .....................
Eumetopias jubatus .........................
U.S ...................................................
Eastern U.S ......................................
N
N
257,606
41,267
14,011
2,498
>319
108
Phoca vitulina ...................................
Mirounga angustirostris ....................
Washington northern inland waters
California breeding ...........................
N
N
4 11,036
1,641
4,882
43
8.8
179,000
1 Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-) indicates that the species is not listed under the
ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or
which is determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or stock listed under the ESA is automatically
designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
2 NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of variation; N
min is the minimum estimate of stock
abundance.
3 These values, found in NMFS’s SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated
mortality due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
4 Harbor seal estimate is based on data that are 8 years old, but this is the best available information for use here (Jefferies et al., 2003; Carretta et al., 2017).
All species that could potentially
occur in the proposed action area are
included in Table 2. More detailed
descriptions of marine mammals in the
WSDOT’s Seattle Multimodal Project at
Colman Dock project area is provided in
the Federal Register notice for the
proposed IHA (84 FR 25757; June 4,
2019). Therefore, it is not repeated here.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory
modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to
anthropogenic sound can have
deleterious effects. To appropriately
assess the potential effects of exposure
to sound, it is necessary to understand
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Jkt 247001
the frequency ranges marine mammals
are able to hear. Current data indicate
that not all marine mammal species
have equal hearing capabilities (e.g.,
Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and
Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008).
To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007)
recommended that marine mammals be
divided into functional hearing groups
based on directly measured or estimated
hearing ranges on the basis of available
behavioral response data, audiograms
derived using auditory evoked potential
techniques, anatomical modeling, and
other data. Note that no direct
measurements of hearing ability have
been successfully completed for
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
mysticetes (i.e., low-frequency
cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018)
described generalized hearing ranges for
these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen
based on the approximately 65 decibel
(dB) threshold from the normalized
composite audiograms, with the
exception for lower limits for lowfrequency cetaceans where the lower
bound was deemed to be biologically
implausible and the lower bound from
Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine
mammal hearing groups and their
associated hearing ranges are provided
in Table 3.
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
36584
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / Notices
TABLE 3—MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS
[NMFS, 2018]
Hearing group
Generalized hearing range *
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales) ...................................................................................................
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, beaked whales, bottlenose whales) .........................
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, river dolphins, cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals) .................................................................................................
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur seals) ............................................................................
7 Hz to 35 kHz.
150 Hz to 160 kHz.
275 Hz to 160 kHz.
50 Hz to 86 kHz.
60 Hz to 39 kHz.
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all species within the group), where individual species’
hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen based on ∼65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram,
with the exception for lower limits for LF cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing
group was modified from Southall et al.
(2007) on the basis of data indicating
that phocid species have consistently
demonstrated an extended frequency
range of hearing compared to otariids,
especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemila¨ et al., 2006; Kastelein et al.,
2009; Reichmuth and Holt, 2013).
For more detail concerning these
groups and associated frequency ranges,
please see NMFS (2018) for a review of
available information. Twelve marine
mammal species (eight cetacean and
four pinniped (two otariid and two
phocid) species) have the reasonable
potential to co-occur with the proposed
construction activities. Please refer to
Table 2. Of the cetacean species that
may be present, three are classified as
low-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all
mysticete species), three are classified
as mid-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all
delphinid species and the sperm whale),
and two are classified as high-frequency
cetaceans (i.e., harbor and Dall’s
porpoises).
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Potential Effects of Specified Activities
on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
This section includes a summary and
discussion of the ways that components
of the specified activity may impact
marine mammals and their habitat. The
Estimated Take section later in this
document includes a quantitative
analysis of the number of individuals
that are expected to be taken by this
activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis
and Determination section considers the
content of this section, the Estimated
Take section, and the Mitigation section,
to draw conclusions regarding the likely
impacts of these activities on the
reproductive success or survivorship of
individuals and how those impacts on
individuals are likely to impact marine
mammal species or stocks.
Potential impacts to marine mammals
from the WSDOT’s Seattle Multimodal
Project at Colman Dock are from noise
generated during in-water pile driving
activities. Detailed analysis of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Jkt 247001
impacts is provided in the Federal
Register notice for the proposed IHA (84
FR 25757; June 4, 2019). Therefore, it is
not repeated here.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of
the number of incidental takes proposed
for authorization 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 (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 noise
generated from in-water 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 cetacean species and
phocids because predicted auditory
injury zones are larger than for midfrequency species and otariids, and
because these species are much smaller
than mysticetes, thus they present
challenges in implementing monitoring
and mitigation measures. Auditory
injury is unlikely to occur for low- and
mid-frequency cetacean species and
otariids. The proposed 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 proposed to be
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
authorized for this activity. Below we
describe how the take is estimated.
Generally speaking, 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. We note that while these
basic factors can contribute to a basic
calculation to provide an initial
prediction of takes, additional
information that can qualitatively
inform take estimates is also sometimes
available (e.g., previous monitoring
results or average group size). Below, we
describe the factors considered here in
more detail and present the proposed
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,
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
36585
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / Notices
NMFS uses a generalized acoustic
threshold based on received level to
estimate the onset of behavioral
harassment. NMFS predicts that marine
mammals are likely to be behaviorally
harassed in a manner we consider Level
B harassment when exposed to
underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 120 dB re 1 mPa (rms)
for continuous (e.g., vibratory piledriving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1
mPa (rms) for non-explosive impulsive
(e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent
(e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
WSDOT’s activity includes the use
vibratory hammer, which generates non-
impulse noises, and impact hammer,
which generates impulse noises.
Therefore, the 120 and 160 dB re 1 mPa
(rms) are applicable.
Level A harassment for non-explosive
sources—NMFS’ Technical Guidance
for Assessing the Effects of
Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0)
(Technical Guidance, 2018) 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). WSDOT’s proposed activity
includes the use of impulsive (impact
pile driving) and non-impulsive
(vibratory pile driving and pile removal)
sources.
These thresholds are provided in the
table below. The references, analysis,
and methodology used in the
development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS 2018 Technical
Guidance, which may be accessed at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/
national/marine-mammal-protection/
marine-mammal-acoustic-technicalguidance.
TABLE 4—CURRENT ACOUSTIC EXPOSURE CRITERIA FOR NON-EXPLOSIVE SOUND UNDERWATER
PTS onset thresholds
Behavioral thresholds
Hearing group
Impulsive
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans .........
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ........
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans .......
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater)
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater)
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
219
230
202
218
232
dB;
dB;
dB;
dB;
dB;
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB .............
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB .............
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB .............
LE,PW,24h: 185 dB ............
LE,OW,24h: 203 dB ............
Non-impulsive
Impulsive
Non-impulsive
LE,LF,24h: 199 dB
LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
Lrms,flat: 160 dB ...
Lrms,flat: 120 dB.
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should
also be considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 μPa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1μPa2s.
In this Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure
is defined by ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ‘‘flat’’ is being
included to indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated
with cumulative sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF
cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds) and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level
thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways (i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for
action proponents to indicate the conditions under which these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and
environmental parameters of the activity
that will feed into identifying the area
ensonified above the acoustic
thresholds, which include source levels
and transmission loss coefficient.
Source Levels
The source level for vibratory pile
driving and removal of the 18- and 24in steel pile is based on vibratory pile
driving of the 30-in steel pile at Port
Townsend. The unweighted SPLrms
source level at 10 m from the pile is 174
dB re 1 re 1 mPa.
The source level for vibratory pile
driving of the 36-in steel piles is based
on vibratory test pile driving of 36-in
steel piles at Port Townsend in 2010.
Recordings of vibratory pile driving
were made at a distance of 10 m from
the pile. The results show that the
unweighted SPLrms for vibratory pile
driving of 36-in steel pile was 177 dB re
1 mPa.
The source level for impact pile
driving of the 36-in steel pile is based
on the sound source verification (SSV)
measurements at Colman Dock in 2018.
The source levels reported are: 174 dB
re 1 mPa2-s for SELss, 188 dB re 1 mPa
for SPLrms, and 206 dB re 1 mPa for
SPLpk. These levels were recorded with
the use of bubble curtains for noise
attenuation. Since WSDOT plans to use
bubble curtain for all impact pile
driving, NMFS considers these
measurements are appropriate for
impact zone calculation.
The source level for vibratory pile
removal of 14-in timber pile is based
measurements conducted at the Port
Townsend Ferry Terminal during
vibratory removal of a 12-in timber pile
by WSDOT. The recorded source level
is 152 dBrms re 1 mPa at 16 m from the
pile, with an adjusted source level of
155 dBrms re 1 mPa at 10 m.
The source levels for vibratory pile
removal of 12-in steel and 14-in steel H
piles are based on vibratory pile driving
of 12-in steel pipe pile measured by
CALTRANS. The unweighted source
level is 155 dBrms re 1 mPa at 10 m.
A summary of source levels is
presented in Table 5.
TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF SOURCE LEVELS FOR THE SEATTLE MULTIMODAL PROJECT AT COLMAN
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
[Year 3]
Method
Pile type/size
(inch)
Vibratory driving/removal ................................
Vibratory driving/removal ................................
Impact pile driving (proof) ...............................
Vibratory removal ............................................
Vibratory removal ............................................
Steel, 18- and 24-in .......................................
Steel, 36-in .....................................................
Steel, 36-in .....................................................
Timber, 14-in ..................................................
Steel, 12-in .....................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
SEL, dB re
1 μPa2-s
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
174
177
174
155
155
29JYN1
SPLrms, dB
re 1 μPa
174
177
188
155
155
SPLpk, dB
re 1 μPa
........................
........................
206
........................
........................
36586
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / Notices
TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF SOURCE LEVELS FOR THE SEATTLE MULTIMODAL PROJECT AT COLMAN—Continued
[Year 3]
Method
Pile type/size
(inch)
Vibratory removal ............................................
Steel H, 14-in .................................................
These source levels are used to
compute the Level A injury zones and
to estimate the Level B harassment
zones.
Estimating Harassment Zones
All distances to the Level B
harassment zone except for 18-, 24-, and
36-in vibratory pile driving are based on
the above source levels applying
practical spreading loss, i.e., 15 * log(R),
where R is the distance from the pile to
where Level B harassment levels are.
For vibratory pile driving and pile
removal, the Level B harassment level is
120 dB re 1 mPa; for impact pile driving,
the Level B harassment level is 160 dB
re 1 mPa.
For Level B harassment ensonified
areas for vibratory pile driving and
removal of the 18-in, 24-in, and 36-in
steel piles, the distance is based on
measurements conducted during the
year 1 Seattle multimodal project at
Colman. The result showed that pile
driving noise of two 36-in steel piles
being concurrently driven was no longer
detectable at a range of 5.4 miles (8.69
SEL, dB re
1 μPa2-s
km). Therefore, the distance of 8,690 m
is selected as the Level B harassment
distance for vibratory pile driving and
removal of the 18-in, 24-in, and 36-in
steel piles.
For Level A harassment zones, since
the peak source levels for both pile
driving are below the injury thresholds,
cumulative SEL were used to do the
calculations using the NMFS acoustic
guidance (NMFS 2018).
When the NMFS Technical Guidance
(2016) was published, in recognition of
the fact that ensonified area/volume
could be more technically challenging
to predict because of the duration
component in the new thresholds, we
developed a User Spreadsheet that
includes tools to help predict a simple
isopleth that can be used in conjunction
with marine mammal density or
occurrence to help predict takes. We
note that because of some of the
assumptions included in the methods
used for these tools, we anticipate that
isopleths produced are typically going
to be overestimates of some degree,
SPLrms, dB
re 1 μPa
155
155
SPLpk, dB
re 1 μPa
........................
which may result in some degree of
overestimate of Level A harassment
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 (such as in-water pile driving),
NMFS User Spreadsheet predicts the
closest distance at which, if a marine
mammal remained at that distance the
whole duration of the activity, it would
not incur PTS. When calculate Level A
harassment distances using NMFS’ User
Spreadsheet, input parameters pile
driving or removal duration (for
vibratory hammer) or number of strikes
(for impact hammer) of each pile and
the number of piles installed or
removed per day.
Distances of ensonified area for
different pile driving/removal activities
for different marine mammal hearing
groups is present in Table 6.
TABLE 6—DISTANCES TO HARASSMENT ZONES AND AREA
Injury zone (m)/area
(km2)
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Pile type, size & pile
driving method
Lowfrequency
cetacean
Vibratory drive/removal, 24-in steel
piles, 8 piles/day, 20 min/pile .............
Vibratory drive 24-in steel pile, 2 piles/
day, 20 min/pile ..................................
Vibratory drive 36-in steel pile, 8 piles/
day, 20 min/pile ..................................
Impact drive (proof) 36-in steel pile, 8
piles/day, 200 strikes/pile ...................
Vibratory remove 14-in timber pile, 20
piles/day, 15 min/pile ..........................
Vibratory remove 12-in steel pile, 11
piles/day, 20 min/pile ..........................
Vibratory remove 14-in steel H pile, 10
piles/day, 20 min/pile ..........................
Vibratory removal 18-in steel pile, 10
piles/day, 20 min/pile ..........................
Vibratory removal 36-in steel pile, 1
pile/day, 20 min/pile ...........................
Jkt 247001
Phocid
Otariid
Level B ZOI
(m)/area
(km2)
8.6/0.000
143.0/0.064
58.8/0.011
4.1/0.000
8,690/74.291
38.3/0.005
3.4/0.000
56.7/0.010
23.3/0.002
1.6/0.000
8,690/74.291
153.3/0.074
13.6/0.001
226.6/0.161
93.2/0.027
6.5/0.000
8,690/74.291
343.2/0.370
12.2/0.000
408.7/0.524
183.6/0.106
13.4/0.000
736/1.701
8.0/0.000
0.7/0.000
11.8/0.000
4.8/0.000
0.3/0.000
2,154/14.854
6.5/0.000
0.6/0.000
9.6/0.000
3.9/0.000
0.3/0.000
2,154/14.854
6.1/0.000
0.5/0.000
9.0/0.000
3.7/0.000
0.3/0.000
2,154/14.854
112.1/0.039
9.9/0.000
165.8/0.086
68.1/0.015
4.8/0.000
8,690/74.291
38.3/0.005
3.4/0.000
56.6/0.010
23.3/0.002
1.6/0.000
8,690/74.291
In this section we provide the
information about the presence, density,
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Highfrequency
cetacean
96.7/0.029
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take
Estimates
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Midfrequency
cetacean
or group dynamics of marine mammals
that will inform the take calculations.
Marine mammal takes are calculated
based on its likelihood to be present in
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the Seattle Multimodal project at
Colman Dock. For species that are
frequently occurring in the project area,
such as harbor seal, California sea lion,
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
36587
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / Notices
Steller sea lion, and harbor porpoise,
take calculation are based on marine
mammal monitoring during the 2017/
2018 season Seattle Multimodal project
at Colman Dock when observation data
are available, then adjusted to account
for possible missed observations.
For marine mammals that do not
frequently occur in the Seattle
Multimodal project area while density
information is available, density data
from the U.S. Navy Marine Species
Density Report were used for take
calculation. These species are gray
whale, humpback whale, minke whale,
killer whale (west coast transient), Dall’s
porpoise, and northern elephant seal.
For bottlenose dolphin and longbeaked common dolphin, no density
estimate is available. Therefore, take
numbers for these two species are based
on prior anecdotal observations and
strandings in the action area.
A summary of marine mammal
abundance and density is provided in
Table 7.
TABLE 7—MARINE MAMMAL ABUNDANCE AND/OR DENSITY USED FOR TAKE CALCULATION
[Numbers in parenthesis indicate adjustments made to account for possible missed observations]
Species
Abundance based on
observation at
WSDOT Seattle
Multimodal project
(animals/day)
Navy Marine Species
Density Report
(animals/km2)
Humpback whale .........................................................................................................................
Minke whale .................................................................................................................................
Gray whale ...................................................................................................................................
Killer whale (west coast transient) ...............................................................................................
Harbor porpoise ...........................................................................................................................
Dall’s porpoise .............................................................................................................................
Harbor seal ..................................................................................................................................
Northern elephant seal ................................................................................................................
California sea lion ........................................................................................................................
Steller sea lion .............................................................................................................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
3
......................................
8 (11)
......................................
18
0.6 (1.2)
0.0007
0.00003
0.00051
0.002
......................................
0.048
......................................
0.00001
......................................
......................................
For marine mammals with
observation data during WSDOT’s 2017/
2018 Seattle Multimodal project, take
numbers were calculated as:
Total Take = animal abundance × pile
driving days
To determine the portion of total take
that would result from Level A
harassment, the proportion of Level A
and Level B harassment was used to
apportion the total takes. Furthermore,
an additional 20 takes of harbor seals by
Level A harassment is added to account
for the higher numbers historically
sighted during monitoring and the
smaller shutdown zones (see below).
For marine mammals that were not
observed during the 2017/2018 season
but with known densities in the general
area (i.e., gray, humpback, and minke
whales and Dall’s porpoise), take
numbers were calculated as:
Take = ensonified area (Level A or Level
B) × animal density × pile driving
days
For long-beaked common dolphin and
bottlenose dolphin, an average of 7
animals per group is determined based
on sighting data from Cascadia Research
(CRC 2012, 2017). Assuming that an
average of one group could be
encountered per month in the project
area, a total of 49 takes of each species
is assessed for the duration of 7 months
in-water work window.
For calculated take number less than
15, such as northern elephant seals,
transient killer whales, humpback
whales, gray whales, and minke whales,
Level B take numbers were adjusted to
account for group size and the
likelihood of encountering. Specifically,
for northern elephant seal, take of 15
animals is estimated based on the
likelihood of encountering this species
during the project period. For transient
killer whale, take of 30 animals is
estimated based on the group size and
the likelihood of encountering in the
area. For gray, humpback, and minke
whale, 30, 30, and 10 animals each area
estimated, respectively.
WSDOT will implement strict
monitoring and mitigation measures and
to suspend pile driving activities when
SRKWs are detected in the vicinity of
the action to avoid takes of this
population.
A summary of marine mammal take
numbers is provided in Table 8.
TABLE 8—ESTIMATED TAKE NUMBERS
Estimated
Level A take
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Species
Gray whale .......................................................................................................
Humpback whale .............................................................................................
Minke whale .....................................................................................................
Killer whale, transient ......................................................................................
Harbor porpoise ...............................................................................................
Dall’s porpoise .................................................................................................
Long-beaked common dolphin ........................................................................
Bottlenose dolphin ...........................................................................................
California sea lion ............................................................................................
Steller sea lion .................................................................................................
Pacific harbor seal ...........................................................................................
Northern elephant seal ....................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Estimated
Level B take
0
0
0
0
103
64
0
0
0
0
114
0
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
30
30
10
30
335
208
49
49
2,628
175
1,492
15
29JYN1
Estimated
total take
30
30
10
30
438
272
49
49
2,628
175
1,606
15
Percent
population
0.11
1.03
1.57
12.35
3.90
1.06
0.05
2.55
1.02
0.42
14.55
0.01
36588
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / 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, and, in the case
of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of
implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness
activity.
Specific mitigation measures are
proposed as follows.
1. Time Restriction.
Work will occur only during daylight
hours, when visual monitoring of
marine mammals can be conducted.
2. Establishing and Monitoring Level
A, Level B Harassment Zones, and
Shutdown Zones.
WSDOT shall establish shutdown
zones that encompass the distances
within which marine mammals could be
taken by Level A harassment (see Table
7 above) except for harbor seal. For
Level A harassment zones that is less
than 10 m from the source, a minimum
of 10 m distance should be established
as a shutdown zone. For harbor seal, a
maximum of 60 m shutdown zone
would be implemented if the actual
Level A harassment zone exceeds 60 m.
This is because there are a few
habituated harbor seals that repeated
occur within the larger Level A zone,
which makes implementing a shutdown
zone larger than 60 m infeasible.
A summary of exclusion zones is
provided in Table 9.
TABLE 9—SHUTDOWN ZONES FOR VARIOUS PILE DRIVING ACTIVITIES AND MARINE MAMMAL HEARING GROUPS
Shutdown zone
(m)
Pile type, size & pile driving method
Lowfrequency
cetacean
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Vibratory drive/removal, 24-in steel piles, 8 piles/day .........
Vibratory drive 24-in steel pile, 2 piles/day; or vibratory removal 36-in steel pile, 1 pile/day .....................................
Vibratory drive 36-in steel pile, 8 piles/day .........................
Impact drive (proof) 36-in steel pile, 8 piles/day .................
Vibratory remove 14-in timber pile, 20 piles/day; or vibratory removal 12-in steel pile, 11 piles/day; or vibratory
removal 14-in steel pile, 10 piles/day ..............................
Vibratory removal 18-in steel pile, 10 piles/day, 20 min/pile
WSDOT shall also establish a Zone of
Influence (ZOI) based on the Level B
harassment zones for take monitoring
where received underwater SPLs are
higher than 160 dBrms re 1 mPa for
impulsive noise sources (impact pile
driving) and 120 dBrms re 1 mPa for nonimpulsive noise sources (vibratory pile
driving and pile removal).
NMFS-approved protected species
observers (PSO) shall conduct an initial
30-minute survey of the exclusion zones
to ensure that no marine mammals are
seen within the zones before pile
driving and pile removal of a pile
segment begins. If marine mammals are
found within the exclusion zone, pile
driving of the segment would be
delayed until they move out of the area.
If a marine mammal is seen above water
and then dives below, the contractor
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Jkt 247001
Midfrequency
cetacean
Highfrequency
cetacean
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Otariid
100
10
150
60
10
40
160
350
10
15
15
60
230
410
25
60
60
10
10
15
10
120
10
10
15
170
10
60
10
10
would wait 15 minutes. If no marine
mammals are seen by the observer in
that time it can be assumed that the
animal has moved beyond the exclusion
zone.
If pile driving of a segment ceases for
30 minutes or more and a marine
mammal is sighted within the
designated exclusion zone prior to
commencement of pile driving, the
observer(s) must notify the pile driving
operator (or other authorized
individual) immediately and continue
to monitor the exclusion zone.
Operations may not resume until the
marine mammal has exited the
exclusion zone or 30 minutes have
elapsed since the last sighting.
3. Soft-start.
A ‘‘soft-start’’ technique is intended to
allow marine mammals to vacate the
PO 00000
Phocid
Sfmt 4703
area before the impact pile driver
reaches full power. Whenever there has
been downtime of 30 minutes or more
without impact pile driving, the
contractor will initiate the driving with
ramp-up procedures described below.
Soft start for impact hammers requires
contractors to provide an initial set of
three strikes from the impact hammer at
40 percent energy, followed by a
1-minute waiting period, then two
subsequent three-strike sets. Each day,
WSDOT will use the soft-start technique
at the beginning of impact pile driving,
or if pile driving has ceased for more
than 30 minutes.
4. Shutdown Measures.
WSDOT shall implement shutdown
measures if a marine mammal is
detected within an exclusion zone or is
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / Notices
about to enter an exclusion zone listed
in Tables 8.
WSDOT shall also implement
shutdown measures if SRKWs are
sighted within the vicinity of the project
area and are approaching the Level B
harassment zone during in-water
construction activities.
If a killer whale approaches the Level
B harassment zone during pile driving
or removal, and it is unknown whether
it is a SRKW or a transient killer whale,
it shall be assumed to be a SRKW and
WSDOT shall implement the shutdown
measure.
If a SRKW or an unidentified killer
whale enters the Level B harassment
zone undetected, in-water pile driving
or pile removal shall be suspended until
the whale exits the Level B harassment
zone to avoid further level B
harassment.
Further, WSDOT shall implement
shutdown measures if the number of
authorized takes for any particular
species reaches the limit under the IHA
and if such marine mammals are sighted
within the vicinity of the project area
and are approaching the Level B
harassment zone during in-water
construction activities.
5. Coordination with Local Marine
Mammal Research Network.
Prior to the start of pile driving for the
day, the Orca Network and/or Center for
Whale Research will be contacted by
WSDOT to find out the location of the
nearest marine mammal sightings. The
Orca Sightings Network consists of a list
of over 600 (and growing) residents,
scientists, and government agency
personnel in the United States and
Canada. Sightings are called or emailed
into the Orca Network and immediately
distributed to other sighting networks
including: The NMFS Northwest
Fisheries Science Center, the Center for
Whale Research, Cascadia Research, the
Whale Museum Hotline and the British
Columbia Sightings Network.
Sightings information collected by the
Orca Network includes detection by
hydrophone. The SeaSound Remote
Sensing Network is a system of
interconnected hydrophones installed
in the marine environment of Haro
Strait (west side of San Juan Island) to
study orca communication, in-water
noise, bottom fish ecology and local
climatic conditions. A hydrophone at
the Port Townsend Marine Science
Center measures average in-water sound
levels and automatically detects
unusual sounds. These passive acoustic
devices allow researchers to hear when
different marine mammals come into
the region. This acoustic network,
combined with the volunteer
(incidental) visual sighting network
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Jkt 247001
allows researchers to document
presence and location of various marine
mammal species.
With this level of coordination in the
region of activity, WSDOT will be able
to get real-time information on the
presence or absence of whales before
starting any pile driving.
Based on our evaluation of the
required measures, NMFS has
preliminarily determined that the
prescribed mitigation measures provide
the means effecting the least practicable
impact on the affected species or stocks
and their habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds,
and areas of similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an
activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth
requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking.
The MMPA implementing regulations at
50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that
requests for authorizations must include
the suggested means of accomplishing
the necessary monitoring and reporting
that will result in increased knowledge
of the species and of the level of taking
or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be
present in the proposed action area.
Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the
most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting
requirements prescribed by NMFS
should contribute to improved
understanding of one or more of the
following:
• Occurrence of marine mammal
species or stocks in the area in which
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
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36589
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.
Monitoring Measures
WSDOT shall employ NMFSapproved PSOs to conduct marine
mammal monitoring for its dolphin
relocation project at Bremerton and
Edmonds ferry terminals. The purposes
of marine mammal monitoring are to
implement mitigation measures and
learn more about impacts to marine
mammals from WSDOT’s construction
activities. The PSOs will observe and
collect data on marine mammals in and
around the project area for 30 minutes
before, during, and for 30 minutes after
all pile removal and pile installation
work. NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet
the following requirements:
1. Independent observers (i.e., not
construction personnel) are required;
2. At least one observer must have
prior experience working as an observer;
3. Other observers may substitute
education (undergraduate degree in
biological science or related field) or
training for experience;
4. Where a team of three or more
observers are required, one observer
should be designated as lead observer or
monitoring coordinator. The lead
observer must have prior experience
working as an observer; and
5. NMFS will require submission and
approval of observer CVs.
Monitoring of marine mammals
around the construction site shall be
conducted using high-quality binoculars
(e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power). Due to the
different sizes of ZOI from different pile
types, three different ZOIs and different
monitoring protocols corresponding to a
specific pile type will be established.
• For Level B harassment zones with
radii less than 1,000 m, 3 PSOs will be
monitoring from land;
• For Level B harassment zones with
radii larger than 1,000 m but smaller
than 2,500 m, 4 PSOs will be monitoring
from land; and
• For Level B harassment zones with
radii larger than 2,500 m, 4 PSOs will
be monitoring from land with an
additional 1 PSO monitoring from a
ferry.
6. PSOs shall collect the following
information during marine mammal
monitoring:
• Date and time that monitored
activity begins and ends for each day
conducted (monitoring period);
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
36590
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / Notices
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
• Construction activities occurring
during each daily observation period,
including how many and what type of
piles driven;
• Deviation from initial proposal in
pile numbers, pile types, average
driving times, etc.;
• Weather parameters in each
monitoring period (e.g., wind speed,
percent cloud cover, visibility);
• Water conditions in each
monitoring period (e.g., sea state, tide
state);
• For each marine mammal sighting:
Æ Species, numbers, and, if possible,
sex and age class of marine mammals;
Æ Description of any observable
marine mammal behavior patterns,
including bearing and direction of travel
and distance from pile driving activity;
Æ Location and distance from pile
driving activities to marine mammals
and distance from the marine mammals
to the observation point; and
Æ 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
within each monitoring period.
To verify the required monitoring
distance, the exclusion zones and Level
B harassment zones will be determined
by using a range finder or hand-held
global positioning system device.
Reporting Measures
WSDOT is required to submit a draft
monitoring report within 90 days after
completion of the construction work or
the expiration of the IHA, whichever
comes earlier. In the case if WSDOT
intends to renew the IHA in a
subsequent year, a monitoring report
should be submitted 60 days before the
expiration of the current IHA. This
report would detail the monitoring
protocol, summarize the data recorded
during monitoring, and estimate the
number of marine mammals that may
have been harassed, extrapolated from
marine mammals observed within the
harassment zones that can be
monitored. NMFS would have an
opportunity to provide comments on the
report, and if NMFS has comments,
WSDOT would address the comments
and submit a final report to NMFS
within 30 days.
In addition, NMFS requires WSDOT
to notify NMFS’ Office of Protected
Resources and NMFS’ West Coast
Stranding Coordinator within 48 hours
of sighting an injured or dead marine
mammal in the construction site.
WSDOT shall provide NMFS and the
Stranding Network with the species or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Jkt 247001
description of the animal(s), the
condition of the animal(s) (including
carcass condition, if the animal is dead),
location, time of first discovery,
observed behaviors (if alive), and photo
or video (if available).
In the event that WSDOT finds an
injured or dead marine mammal that is
not in the construction area, WSDOT
would report the same information as
listed above to NMFS as soon as
operationally feasible.
Negligible Impact Analysis and
Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact
as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the
species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival
(50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact
finding is based on the lack of likely
adverse effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival (i.e., populationlevel effects). An estimate of the number
of takes alone is not enough information
on which to base an impact
determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of
marine mammals that might be ‘‘taken’’
through harassment, NMFS considers
other factors, such as the likely nature
of any responses (e.g., intensity,
duration), the context of any responses
(e.g., critical reproductive time or
location, migration), as well as effects
on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the
number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this
information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989
preamble for NMFS’s implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29,
1989), the impacts from other past and
ongoing anthropogenic activities are
incorporated into this analysis via their
impacts on the environmental baseline
(e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status
of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing
sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, this introductory
discussion of our analyses applies to all
the species listed in Table 8, given that
the anticipated effects of WSDOT’s
Seattle Multimodal at Colman Dock
project involving pile driving and pile
removal on marine mammals are
expected to be relatively similar in
nature. There is no information about
the nature or severity of the impacts, or
the size, status, or structure of any
species or stock that would lead to a
different analysis by species for this
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
activity, or else species-specific factors
would be identified and analyzed.
Although some marine mammals
could experience, and are authorized for
Level A harassment in the form of PTS
if they stay within the Level A
harassment zone during the entire pile
driving for the day (114 harbor seals,
103 harbor porpoises, and 64 Dall’s
porpoise), the degree of injury is
expected to be mild and is not likely to
affect the reproduction or survival of the
individual animals. It is expected that,
if hearing impairments occurs, most
likely the affected animal would lose a
few dB in its hearing sensitivity, which
in most cases is not likely to affect its
survival and recruitment. Hearing
impairment that occur for these
individual animals would be limited to
the dominant frequency of the noise
sources, i.e., in the low-frequency region
below 2 kHz. Therefore, the degree of
PTS is not likely to affect the
echolocation performance of the two
porpoise species, which use frequencies
mostly above 100 kHz. Nevertheless, for
all marine mammal species, it is known
that in general animals avoid areas
where sound levels could cause hearing
impairment. Nonetheless, we evaluate
the estimated take in this negligible
impact analysis.
For these species except harbor seal,
harbor porpoise and Dall’s porpoise,
takes that are anticipated and
authorized are expected to be limited to
short-term Level B harassment
(behavioral and TTS). Marine mammals
present in the vicinity of the action area
and taken by Level B harassment would
most likely show overt brief disturbance
(startle reaction) and avoidance of the
area from elevated noise levels during
pile driving and pile removal and the
implosion noise. A few marine
mammals could experience TTS if they
occur within the Level B TTS zone.
However, as discussed earlier in this
document, TTS is a temporary loss of
hearing sensitivity when exposed to
loud sound, and the hearing threshold
is expected to recover completely
within minutes to hours.
Portions of the SRKW range is within
the proposed action area. In addition,
the entire Puget Sound is designated as
the SRKW critical habitat under the
ESA. However, WSDOT would be
required to implement strict mitigation
measures to suspend pile driving or pile
removal activities when this stock is
detected in the vicinity of the project
area. We anticipate that take of SRKW
would be avoided. There are no other
known important areas for other marine
mammals, such as feeding or pupping,
areas.
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2019 / Notices
The project also is not expected to
have significant adverse effects on
affected marine mammals’ habitat, as
analyzed in detail in the ‘‘Anticipated
Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat’’
subsection. There is no ESA designated
critical habitat in the vicinity of the
Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman
Dock area. The project activities would
not permanently modify existing marine
mammal habitat. The activities may kill
some fish and cause other fish to leave
the area temporarily, thus impacting
marine mammals’ foraging
opportunities in a limited portion of the
foraging range. However, because of the
short duration of the activities and the
relatively small area of the habitat that
may be affected, the impacts to marine
mammal habitat are not expected to
cause significant or long-term negative
consequences. Therefore, given the
consideration of potential impacts to
marine mammal prey species and their
physical environment, WSDOT’s
proposed construction activity at
Colman Dock would not adversely affect
marine mammal habitat.
In summary and as described above,
the following factors primarily support
our preliminary 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:
• Injury—only a relatively small
number of marine mammals (of three
stocks) would experience Level A
harassment in the form of mild PTS,
which is expected to be of small degree;
• Behavioral disturbance—eleven
species/stocks of marine mammals
would experience behavioral
disturbance and TTS from the WSDOT’s
Seattle Colman Dock project. However,
as discussed earlier, the area to be
affected is small and the duration of the
project is short. In addition, the nature
of the take would involve mild
behavioral modification; and
• Although portion of the SWKR
critical habitat is within the project area,
strict mitigation measures such as
implementing shutdown measures and
suspending pile driving are expected to
avoid take of SRKW, and impacts to
prey species and the habitat itself are
expected to be minimal. No other
important habitat for marine mammals
exist in the vicinity of the project area.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals
and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the
proposed monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS finds that the total
marine mammal take from the proposed
activity will have a negligible impact on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:54 Jul 26, 2019
Jkt 247001
all affected marine mammal species or
stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers
of incidental take may be authorized
under Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (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.
The estimated takes are below 15
percent of the population for all marine
mammals (Table 8).
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and
monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals,
NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals will be
taken relative to the population size of
the affected species or stocks.
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
proposed 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
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36591
authorizes, funds, or carries out is not
likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any endangered or
threatened species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
designated critical habitat. To ensure
ESA compliance for the issuance of
IHAs, NMFS consults internally, in this
case with NMFS’ West Coast Region
Protected Resources Division Office,
whenever we propose to authorize take
for endangered or threatened species.
The California-Oregon-Washington
stock of humpback whale and the
Southern Resident stock of killer whale
are the only marine mammal species
listed under the ESA that could occur in
the vicinity of WSDOT’s proposed
construction projects. NMFS worked
with WSDOT to implement shutdown
measures in the IHA that will avoid
takes of Southern Resident killer whale.
NMFS is proposing to authorize take of
California/Oregon/Washington stock of
humpback whale.
The effects of this proposed Federal
action were adequately analyzed in
NMFS’ Reinitiation of Endangered
Species Act (ESA) Section 7(a)(2)
Consultation (Humpback Whales) for
the Seattle Multimodal Terminal at
Colman Dock Project, King County,
Washington in October 2018, which
concluded that the take NMFS proposes
to authorize through this IHA would not
jeopardize the continued existence of
any endangered or threatened species or
destroy or adversely modify any
designated critical habitat.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations,
NMFS has issued an IHA to the WSDOT
to conduct Seattle Multimodal Project at
Colman Dock in Seattle, Washington,
between August 1, 2019, and July 31,
2020, provided the previously
prescribed mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: July 23, 2019.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–15970 Filed 7–26–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL
PROTECTION
[Docket No. CFPB–2018–0040]
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request
Bureau of Consumer Financial
Protection.
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 145 (Monday, July 29, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36581-36591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15970]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
RIN 0648-PR-A001
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Seattle Multimodal Project at
Colman Dock in Seattle, Washington
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 we have issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to the
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to take small
numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to the Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock in Seattle, Washington.
DATES: This authorization is effective from August 1, 2019, through
July 31, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Guan, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
and supporting documents, as well as the issued IHA, 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
The MMPA prohibits the ``take'' of marine mammals, with certain
exceptions. 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 incidental take authorization may be provided to the public
for review.
Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or
stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses
(where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods
of taking and other ``means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact'' on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying
particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance, and on the availability of such species or stocks for
taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as
``mitigation''); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation,
monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth.
The NDAA (Pub. L. 108-136) removed the ``small numbers'' and
``specified geographical region'' limitations indicated above and
amended the definition of ``harassment'' as it applies to a ``military
readiness activity.'' The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory
terms cited above are included in the relevant sections below.
Summary of Request
On February 7, 2019, WSDOT submitted a request to NMFS requesting
an IHA for the possible harassment of small numbers of marine mammal
species incidental to Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock in
Seattle, Washington, from August 1, 2019 to July 31, 2020. After
receiving the revised project description and the revised IHA
application, NMFS determined that the IHA application is adequate and
complete on May 8, 2018. NMFS is proposing to authorize the take by
Level A and Level B harassments of the following marine mammal species:
Harbor seal (Phoca vitulina); northern elephant seal (Mirounga
angustirostris); California sea lion (Zalophus californianus); Steller
sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus); killer whale (Orcinus orca); long-beaked
common dolphin (Delphinus capensis), bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops
truncatus), gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus), humpback whale
(Megaptera novaeangliae), minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata);
harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena); and Dall's porpoise (P. dalli).
Neither WSDOT nor NMFS expect mortality to result from this activity
and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
This IHA covers one year of a larger project for which WSDOT
obtained prior IHAs (82 FR 21579; July 7, 2017; 83 FR 35226; July 25,
2018) and intends to request take authorization for subsequent facets
of the project. The larger 5-year project involves reconfiguring the
Colman Dock of the Seattle Ferry Terminal while maintaining the same
vehicle holding capacity as current conditions. WSDOT complied with all
the requirements (e.g., mitigation, monitoring, and reporting) of the
previous IHA and information regarding their monitoring results may be
found in the Estimated Take section.
Description of the Proposed Activity
Overview
The purpose of the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock is to
preserve the transportation function of an aging, deteriorating and
seismically deficient facility to continue providing safe and reliable
service. The project will also address existing safety concerns related
to conflicts between vehicles and pedestrian traffic and operational
inefficiencies.
Dates and Duration
Due to NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in-water
work timing restrictions to protect ESA-listed salmonids, planned WSDOT
in-water construction is limited each year to July 16 through February
15. In-water pile driving work will be conducted in daylight hours
only. It is expected that a total of 146 pile driving days will be
needed for the 2019/2020 construction work.
Specific Geographic Region
The Seattle Ferry Terminal at Colman Dock, serving State Route 519,
is located on the downtown Seattle waterfront, in King County,
Washington. The terminal services vessels from the Bainbridge Island
and Bremerton routes, and is the most heavily used terminal in the
Washington State Ferry system. The
[[Page 36582]]
Seattle terminal is located in Section 6, Township 24 North, Range 4
East, and is adjacent to Elliott Bay, tributary to Puget Sound (Figure
1-2 of the IHA application). Land use in the area is highly urban, and
includes business, industrial, the Port of Seattle container loading
facility, residential, the Pioneer Square Historic District and local
parks.
Detailed Description of Specific Activity
The project will reconfigure the Colman Dock while maintaining
approximately the same vehicle holding capacity as current conditions.
The construction began in August 2017. In the 2017-2018 season, the
construction activities were focused on the South Trestle, Terminal
Building Foundation, and the temporary and permanent Passenger
Offloading Facility. In the 2018-2019 season, the construction
activities were focused on the North Trestle, and Slip 3 bridge seat,
overhead loading, wingwall, and inner dolphin.
In the 2019-2020 season, WSDOT plans to work on Slip 2 bridge seat,
Center Trestle, Slip 2 wingwall extension, and Slips 2 and 3 inner
dolphins. Both impact pile driving and vibratory pile driving and pile
removal would be conducted. A total of 58 days are estimated for pile
driving and 88 days for pile removal.
In-water construction activities include:
[ssquf] Permanently install 36-inch (in) steel piles with a
vibratory hammer, and then proof with an impact hammer for the last 5-
10 feet;
[ssquf] Permanently install 24-in steel piles with a vibratory
hammer;
[ssquf] Removal of various piles with a vibratory hammer; and
[ssquf] Install and removal of 24-in steel piles with a vibratory
hammer.
A list of pile driving and removal activities is provided in Table
1.
Table 1--Summary of In-Water Pile Driving Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total number Number piles/
Method Pile type and size piles day Work days
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory drive *..................... Steel pipe (temp), 24-in 148 8 19
Vibratory drive....................... Steel pipe, 24-in....... 2 2 1
Vibratory drive **.................... Steel pipe, 36-in....... 148 8 19
Impact drive (proof) **............... Steel pipe, 36-in....... 148 8 19
Vibratory removal..................... Timber, 14-in........... 1,046 20 52
Vibratory removal..................... Steel pipe, 12-in....... 108 11 10
Vibratory removal..................... Steel H, 14-in.......... 19 10 2
Vibratory removal..................... Steel pipe, 18-in....... 15 10 2
Vibratory removal *................... Steel pipe (temp), 24-in 148 8 19
Vibratory removal..................... Steel pipe, 36-in....... 3 1 3
-----------------------------------------------
Total............................. ........................ 1,489 .............. 146
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Same 24-in steel pipe piles.
** Same 36-in steel pipe piles.
Mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in
detail later in this document (please see Mitigation and Monitoring and
Reporting).
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA was published in the
Federal Register on June 4, 2019 (84 FR 25757). During the 30-day
public comment period, NMFS received a comment letter from the Marine
Mammal Commission (Commission). Specific comments and responses are
provided below.
Comment 1: Commission recommends that NMFS refrain from using the
proposed renewal process for WSDOT's authorization. The renewal process
should be used sparingly and selectively, by limiting its use only to
those proposed incidental harassment authorizations that are expected
to have the lowest levels of impacts to marine mammals and that require
the least complex analyses. Notices for other types of activities
should not even include the possibility that a renewal might be issued
using the proposed foreshortened 15-day comment period. If NMFS intends
to use the renewal process frequently or for authorizations that
require a more complex review or for which much new information has
been generated (e.g., multiple or extensive monitoring reports), the
Commission recommends that NMFS provide the Commission and other
reviewers the full 30-day comment opportunity set forth in section
101(a)(5)(D)(iii) of the MMPA
Response: There was a mistake in the notice of the proposed IHA
that NMFS may issue a second 1-year IHA without additional notice. The
correct procedure is that NMFS may issue a second 1-year IHA with a 15-
day public comment period. The conditions that meet the renewal are the
same as described in the Federal Register notice (84 FR 25757; June 4,
2019) for the proposed IHA. Separately, NMFS has responded to the same
comment from the Commission previously and we refer the reader to our
response, included in the FR notice announcing NMFS issuance of an IHA
for the (84 FR 31032, June 28, 2019).
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 (SARs; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments) and more general information about these species
(e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS's
website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 2 lists all species with expected potential for occurrence in
lower Puget Sound area and summarizes information related to the
population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and ESA
and potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we
follow Committee on Taxonomy (2016). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the
maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may
be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to
reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population (as described in
NMFS's SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or authorized here, PBR
and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are
included here as gross indicators of
[[Page 36583]]
the status of the species and other threats.
Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document
represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or
the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area.
NMFS's stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total
estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that
comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend
beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in
NMFS's 2018 U.S. Pacific Draft Marine Mammal SARs (Carretta et al.,
2019). All values presented in Table 2 are the most recent available at
the time of publication and are available in the 2017 SARs (Carretta et
al., 2018); and draft 2018 SARs (available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).
Table 2--Marine Mammals With Potential Presence Within the Proposed Project Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stock
abundance
ESA/ MMPA (CV, Nmin,
Common name Scientific name Stock status; most recent PBR Annual M/
strategic abundance SI \3\
(Y/N) \1\ survey) \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Eschrichtiidae:
Gray whale............... Eschrichtius Eastern North N 26,960 801 138
robustus. Pacific.
Family Balaenopteridae:
Humpback whale........... Megaptera California/ Y 2,900 16.7 >38.6
novaneagliae. Oregon/
Washington.
Minke whale.............. Balaenoptera California/ N 636 3.5 >1.3
acutorostrata. Oregon/
Washington.
Family Delphinidae:
Killer whale............. Orcinus orca.... Eastern N Y 77 0.13 0
Pacific N 243 2.4 0
Southern
resident.
West coast
transient.
Long-beaked common Delphinus California...... N 101,305 657 >35.4
dolphin. capensis.
Bottlenose dolphin....... Tursiops California/ N 1,924 198 >0.84
truncatus. Oregon/
Washington
offshore.
Family Phocoenidae
(porpoises):
Harbor porpoise.......... Phocoena Washington N 11,233 66 7.2
phocoena. inland waters.
Dall's porpoise.......... P. dali......... California/ N 25,750 172 0.3
Oregon/
Washington.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals
and sea lions):
California sea lion...... Zalophus U.S............. N 257,606 14,011 >319
californianus.
Steller sea lion......... Eumetopias Eastern U.S..... N 41,267 2,498 108
jubatus.
Family Phocidae (earless
seals):
Harbor seal.............. Phoca vitulina.. Washington N \4\ 11,036 1,641 43
northern inland
waters.
Northern elephant seal... Mirounga California N 179,000 4,882 8.8
angustirostris. breeding.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Endangered Species Act (ESA) status: Endangered (E), Threatened (T)/MMPA status: Depleted (D). A dash (-)
indicates that the species is not listed under the ESA or designated as depleted under the MMPA. Under the
MMPA, a strategic stock is one for which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds PBR or which is
determined to be declining and likely to be listed under the ESA within the foreseeable future. Any species or
stock listed under the ESA is automatically designated under the MMPA as depleted and as a strategic stock.
\2\ NMFS marine mammal stock assessment reports online at: www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/. CV is coefficient of
variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance.
\3\ These values, found in NMFS's SARs, represent annual levels of human-caused mortality plus serious injury
from all sources combined (e.g., commercial fisheries, ship strike). Annual M/SI often cannot be determined
precisely and is in some cases presented as a minimum value or range. A CV associated with estimated mortality
due to commercial fisheries is presented in some cases.
\4\ Harbor seal estimate is based on data that are 8 years old, but this is the best available information for
use here (Jefferies et al., 2003; Carretta et al., 2017).
All species that could potentially occur in the proposed action
area are included in Table 2. More detailed descriptions of marine
mammals in the WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock
project area is provided in the Federal Register notice for the
proposed IHA (84 FR 25757; June 4, 2019). Therefore, it is not repeated
here.
Mammal Hearing
Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals
underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious
effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to
sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine
mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine
mammal species have equal hearing capabilities (e.g., Richardson et
al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect
this, Southall et al. (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided
into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or estimated
hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response data,
audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques,
anatomical modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements
of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes
(i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described
generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups.
Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65
decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with
the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the
lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower
bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing
groups and their associated hearing ranges are provided in Table 3.
[[Page 36584]]
Table 3--Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
[NMFS, 2018]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hearing group Generalized hearing range *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-frequency (LF) cetaceans (baleen whales)........... 7 Hz to 35 kHz.
Mid-frequency (MF) cetaceans (dolphins, toothed whales, 150 Hz to 160 kHz.
beaked whales, bottlenose whales).
High-frequency (HF) cetaceans (true porpoises, Kogia, 275 Hz to 160 kHz.
river dolphins, cephalorhynchid, Lagenorhynchus
cruciger & L. australis).
Phocid pinnipeds (PW) (underwater) (true seals)........ 50 Hz to 86 kHz.
Otariid pinnipeds (OW) (underwater) (sea lions and fur 60 Hz to 39 kHz.
seals).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents the generalized hearing range for the entire group as a composite (i.e., all species within the
group), where individual species' hearing ranges are typically not as broad. Generalized hearing range chosen
based on ~65 dB threshold from normalized composite audiogram, with the exception for lower limits for LF
cetaceans (Southall et al. 2007) and PW pinniped (approximation).
The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et
al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have
consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing
compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range
(Hemil[auml] et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009; Reichmuth and Holt,
2013).
For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency
ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information.
Twelve marine mammal species (eight cetacean and four pinniped (two
otariid and two phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-
occur with the proposed construction activities. Please refer to Table
2. Of the cetacean species that may be present, three are classified as
low-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all mysticete species), three are
classified as mid-frequency cetaceans (i.e., all delphinid species and
the sperm whale), and two are classified as high-frequency cetaceans
(i.e., harbor and Dall's porpoises).
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that
components of the specified activity may impact marine mammals and
their habitat. The Estimated Take section later in this document
includes a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are
expected to be taken by this activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis
and Determination section considers the content of this section, the
Estimated Take section, and the Mitigation section, to draw conclusions
regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the reproductive
success or survivorship of individuals and how those impacts on
individuals are likely to impact marine mammal species or stocks.
Potential impacts to marine mammals from the WSDOT's Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock are from noise generated during in-
water pile driving activities. Detailed analysis of the impacts is
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (84 FR
25757; June 4, 2019). Therefore, it is not repeated here.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
proposed for authorization 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 (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 noise
generated from in-water 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 cetacean species and phocids
because predicted auditory injury zones are larger than for mid-
frequency species and otariids, and because these species are much
smaller than mysticetes, thus they present challenges in implementing
monitoring and mitigation measures. Auditory injury is unlikely to
occur for low- and mid-frequency cetacean species and otariids. The
proposed 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 proposed to
be authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take is
estimated.
Generally speaking, 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. We note that while these basic
factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial
prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively
inform take estimates is also sometimes available (e.g., previous
monitoring results or average group size). Below, we describe the
factors considered here in more detail and present the proposed 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,
[[Page 36585]]
NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to
estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine
mammals are likely to be behaviorally harassed in a manner we consider
Level B harassment when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above
received levels of 120 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for continuous (e.g.,
vibratory pile-driving, drilling) and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)
for non-explosive impulsive (e.g., seismic airguns) or intermittent
(e.g., scientific sonar) sources.
WSDOT's activity includes the use vibratory hammer, which generates
non-impulse noises, and impact hammer, which generates impulse noises.
Therefore, the 120 and 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) are applicable.
Level A harassment for non-explosive sources--NMFS' Technical
Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine
Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) (Technical Guidance, 2018) 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). WSDOT's proposed activity includes the
use of impulsive (impact pile driving) and non-impulsive (vibratory
pile driving and pile removal) sources.
These thresholds are provided in the table below. The references,
analysis, and methodology used in the development of the thresholds are
described in NMFS 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.
Table 4--Current Acoustic Exposure Criteria for Non-Explosive Sound Underwater
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset thresholds Behavioral thresholds
Hearing group -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive Impulsive Non-impulsive
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans.. Lpk,flat: 219 dB; LE,LF,24h: 183 dB................. LE,LF,24h: 199 Lrms,flat: 160 dB...... Lrms,flat: 120 dB.
dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans.. Lpk,flat: 230 dB; LE,MF,24h: 185 dB................. LE,MF,24h: 198
dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans. Lpk,flat: 202 dB; LE,HF,24h: 155 dB................. LE,HF,24h: 173
dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) Lpk,flat: 218 dB; LE,PW,24h: 185 dB................. LE,PW,24h: 201
(Underwater). dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) Lpk,flat: 232 dB; LE,OW,24h: 203 dB................. LE,OW,24h: 219
(Underwater). dB.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive
sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be
considered.
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [mu]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE) has a reference value of 1[mu]Pa2s. In this
Table, thresholds are abbreviated to reflect American National Standards Institute standards (ANSI 2013). However, peak sound pressure is defined by
ANSI as incorporating frequency weighting, which is not the intent for this Technical Guidance. Hence, the subscript ``flat'' is being included to
indicate peak sound pressure should be flat weighted or unweighted within the generalized hearing range. The subscript associated with cumulative
sound exposure level thresholds indicates the designated marine mammal auditory weighting function (LF, MF, and HF cetaceans, and PW and OW pinnipeds)
and that the recommended accumulation period is 24 hours. The cumulative sound exposure level thresholds could be exceeded in a multitude of ways
(i.e., varying exposure levels and durations, duty cycle). When possible, it is valuable for action proponents to indicate the conditions under which
these acoustic thresholds will be exceeded.
Ensonified Area
Here, we describe operational and environmental parameters of the
activity that will feed into identifying the area ensonified above the
acoustic thresholds, which include source levels and transmission loss
coefficient.
Source Levels
The source level for vibratory pile driving and removal of the 18-
and 24-in steel pile is based on vibratory pile driving of the 30-in
steel pile at Port Townsend. The unweighted SPLrms source
level at 10 m from the pile is 174 dB re 1 re 1 [micro]Pa.
The source level for vibratory pile driving of the 36-in steel
piles is based on vibratory test pile driving of 36-in steel piles at
Port Townsend in 2010. Recordings of vibratory pile driving were made
at a distance of 10 m from the pile. The results show that the
unweighted SPLrms for vibratory pile driving of 36-in steel
pile was 177 dB re 1 [micro]Pa.
The source level for impact pile driving of the 36-in steel pile is
based on the sound source verification (SSV) measurements at Colman
Dock in 2018. The source levels reported are: 174 dB re 1 [micro]Pa\2\-
s for SELss, 188 dB re 1 [micro]Pa for SPLrms,
and 206 dB re 1 [micro]Pa for SPLpk. These levels were
recorded with the use of bubble curtains for noise attenuation. Since
WSDOT plans to use bubble curtain for all impact pile driving, NMFS
considers these measurements are appropriate for impact zone
calculation.
The source level for vibratory pile removal of 14-in timber pile is
based measurements conducted at the Port Townsend Ferry Terminal during
vibratory removal of a 12-in timber pile by WSDOT. The recorded source
level is 152 dBrms re 1 [micro]Pa at 16 m from the pile,
with an adjusted source level of 155 dBrms re 1 [micro]Pa at
10 m.
The source levels for vibratory pile removal of 12-in steel and 14-
in steel H piles are based on vibratory pile driving of 12-in steel
pipe pile measured by CALTRANS. The unweighted source level is 155
dBrms re 1 [micro]Pa at 10 m.
A summary of source levels is presented in Table 5.
Table 5--Summary of Source Levels for the Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman
[Year 3]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPLrms, dB re
Method Pile type/size (inch) SEL, dB re 1 1 [micro]Pa SPLpk, dB re
[micro]Pa\2\-s 1 [micro]Pa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory driving/removal............. Steel, 18- and 24-in.... 174 174 ..............
Vibratory driving/removal............. Steel, 36-in............ 177 177 ..............
Impact pile driving (proof)........... Steel, 36-in............ 174 188 206
Vibratory removal..................... Timber, 14-in........... 155 155 ..............
Vibratory removal..................... Steel, 12-in............ 155 155 ..............
[[Page 36586]]
Vibratory removal..................... Steel H, 14-in.......... 155 155 ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These source levels are used to compute the Level A injury zones
and to estimate the Level B harassment zones.
Estimating Harassment Zones
All distances to the Level B harassment zone except for 18-, 24-,
and 36-in vibratory pile driving are based on the above source levels
applying practical spreading loss, i.e., 15 * log(R), where R is the
distance from the pile to where Level B harassment levels are. For
vibratory pile driving and pile removal, the Level B harassment level
is 120 dB re 1 [micro]Pa; for impact pile driving, the Level B
harassment level is 160 dB re 1 [micro]Pa.
For Level B harassment ensonified areas for vibratory pile driving
and removal of the 18-in, 24-in, and 36-in steel piles, the distance is
based on measurements conducted during the year 1 Seattle multimodal
project at Colman. The result showed that pile driving noise of two 36-
in steel piles being concurrently driven was no longer detectable at a
range of 5.4 miles (8.69 km). Therefore, the distance of 8,690 m is
selected as the Level B harassment distance for vibratory pile driving
and removal of the 18-in, 24-in, and 36-in steel piles.
For Level A harassment zones, since the peak source levels for both
pile driving are below the injury thresholds, cumulative SEL were used
to do the calculations using the NMFS acoustic guidance (NMFS 2018).
When the NMFS Technical Guidance (2016) was published, in
recognition of the fact that ensonified area/volume could be more
technically challenging to predict because of the duration component in
the new thresholds, we developed a User Spreadsheet that includes tools
to help predict a simple isopleth that can be used in conjunction with
marine mammal density or occurrence to help predict takes. We note that
because of some of the assumptions included in the methods used for
these tools, we anticipate that isopleths produced are typically going
to be overestimates of some degree, which may result in some degree of
overestimate of Level A harassment 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 (such as in-water
pile driving), NMFS User Spreadsheet predicts the closest distance at
which, if a marine mammal remained at that distance the whole duration
of the activity, it would not incur PTS. When calculate Level A
harassment distances using NMFS' User Spreadsheet, input parameters
pile driving or removal duration (for vibratory hammer) or number of
strikes (for impact hammer) of each pile and the number of piles
installed or removed per day.
Distances of ensonified area for different pile driving/removal
activities for different marine mammal hearing groups is present in
Table 6.
Table 6--Distances to Harassment Zones and Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Injury zone (m)/area (km\2\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile type, size & pile driving method High- Level B ZOI (m)/
Low- frequency Mid- frequency frequency Phocid Otariid area (km\2\)
cetacean cetacean cetacean
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory drive/removal, 24-in steel piles, 8 piles/ 96.7/0.029 8.6/0.000 143.0/0.064 58.8/0.011 4.1/0.000 8,690/74.291
day, 20 min/pile......................................
Vibratory drive 24-in steel pile, 2 piles/day, 20 min/ 38.3/0.005 3.4/0.000 56.7/0.010 23.3/0.002 1.6/0.000 8,690/74.291
pile..................................................
Vibratory drive 36-in steel pile, 8 piles/day, 20 min/ 153.3/0.074 13.6/0.001 226.6/0.161 93.2/0.027 6.5/0.000 8,690/74.291
pile..................................................
Impact drive (proof) 36-in steel pile, 8 piles/day, 200 343.2/0.370 12.2/0.000 408.7/0.524 183.6/0.106 13.4/0.000 736/1.701
strikes/pile..........................................
Vibratory remove 14-in timber pile, 20 piles/day, 15 8.0/0.000 0.7/0.000 11.8/0.000 4.8/0.000 0.3/0.000 2,154/14.854
min/pile..............................................
Vibratory remove 12-in steel pile, 11 piles/day, 20 min/ 6.5/0.000 0.6/0.000 9.6/0.000 3.9/0.000 0.3/0.000 2,154/14.854
pile..................................................
Vibratory remove 14-in steel H pile, 10 piles/day, 20 6.1/0.000 0.5/0.000 9.0/0.000 3.7/0.000 0.3/0.000 2,154/14.854
min/pile..............................................
Vibratory removal 18-in steel pile, 10 piles/day, 20 112.1/0.039 9.9/0.000 165.8/0.086 68.1/0.015 4.8/0.000 8,690/74.291
min/pile..............................................
Vibratory removal 36-in steel pile, 1 pile/day, 20 min/ 38.3/0.005 3.4/0.000 56.6/0.010 23.3/0.002 1.6/0.000 8,690/74.291
pile..................................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Estimates
In this section we provide the information about the presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take
calculations.
Marine mammal takes are calculated based on its likelihood to be
present in the Seattle Multimodal project at Colman Dock. For species
that are frequently occurring in the project area, such as harbor seal,
California sea lion,
[[Page 36587]]
Steller sea lion, and harbor porpoise, take calculation are based on
marine mammal monitoring during the 2017/2018 season Seattle Multimodal
project at Colman Dock when observation data are available, then
adjusted to account for possible missed observations.
For marine mammals that do not frequently occur in the Seattle
Multimodal project area while density information is available, density
data from the U.S. Navy Marine Species Density Report were used for
take calculation. These species are gray whale, humpback whale, minke
whale, killer whale (west coast transient), Dall's porpoise, and
northern elephant seal.
For bottlenose dolphin and long-beaked common dolphin, no density
estimate is available. Therefore, take numbers for these two species
are based on prior anecdotal observations and strandings in the action
area.
A summary of marine mammal abundance and density is provided in
Table 7.
Table 7--Marine Mammal Abundance and/or Density Used for Take Calculation
[Numbers in parenthesis indicate adjustments made to account for possible missed observations]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abundance based on
observation at WSDOT Navy Marine Species
Species Seattle Multimodal Density Report
project (animals/day) (animals/km\2\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Humpback whale.................................................... ..................... 0.0007
Minke whale....................................................... ..................... 0.00003
Gray whale........................................................ ..................... 0.00051
Killer whale (west coast transient)............................... ..................... 0.002
Harbor porpoise................................................... 3 .....................
Dall's porpoise................................................... ..................... 0.048
Harbor seal....................................................... 8 (11) .....................
Northern elephant seal............................................ ..................... 0.00001
California sea lion............................................... 18 .....................
Steller sea lion.................................................. 0.6 (1.2) .....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For marine mammals with observation data during WSDOT's 2017/2018
Seattle Multimodal project, take numbers were calculated as:
Total Take = animal abundance x pile driving days
To determine the portion of total take that would result from Level
A harassment, the proportion of Level A and Level B harassment was used
to apportion the total takes. Furthermore, an additional 20 takes of
harbor seals by Level A harassment is added to account for the higher
numbers historically sighted during monitoring and the smaller shutdown
zones (see below).
For marine mammals that were not observed during the 2017/2018
season but with known densities in the general area (i.e., gray,
humpback, and minke whales and Dall's porpoise), take numbers were
calculated as:
Take = ensonified area (Level A or Level B) x animal density x pile
driving days
For long-beaked common dolphin and bottlenose dolphin, an average
of 7 animals per group is determined based on sighting data from
Cascadia Research (CRC 2012, 2017). Assuming that an average of one
group could be encountered per month in the project area, a total of 49
takes of each species is assessed for the duration of 7 months in-water
work window.
For calculated take number less than 15, such as northern elephant
seals, transient killer whales, humpback whales, gray whales, and minke
whales, Level B take numbers were adjusted to account for group size
and the likelihood of encountering. Specifically, for northern elephant
seal, take of 15 animals is estimated based on the likelihood of
encountering this species during the project period. For transient
killer whale, take of 30 animals is estimated based on the group size
and the likelihood of encountering in the area. For gray, humpback, and
minke whale, 30, 30, and 10 animals each area estimated, respectively.
WSDOT will implement strict monitoring and mitigation measures and
to suspend pile driving activities when SRKWs are detected in the
vicinity of the action to avoid takes of this population.
A summary of marine mammal take numbers is provided in Table 8.
Table 8--Estimated Take Numbers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated Estimated Percent
Species Level A take Level B take total take population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray whale...................................... 0 30 30 0.11
Humpback whale.................................. 0 30 30 1.03
Minke whale..................................... 0 10 10 1.57
Killer whale, transient......................... 0 30 30 12.35
Harbor porpoise................................. 103 335 438 3.90
Dall's porpoise................................. 64 208 272 1.06
Long-beaked common dolphin...................... 0 49 49 0.05
Bottlenose dolphin.............................. 0 49 49 2.55
California sea lion............................. 0 2,628 2,628 1.02
Steller sea lion................................ 0 175 175 0.42
Pacific harbor seal............................. 114 1,492 1,606 14.55
Northern elephant seal.......................... 0 15 15 0.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 36588]]
Mitigation
In order to issue an IHA under Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such
activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on
such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to
rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on
the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain
subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS
regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to
include information about the availability and feasibility (economic
and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting such
activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse
impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR
216.104(a)(11)).
In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to
ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and
their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we
carefully consider two primary factors:
(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful
implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to
marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat.
This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being
mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the
likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented
(probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as
planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability
implemented as planned), and;
(2) the practicability of the measures for applicant
implementation, which may consider such things as cost, impact on
operations, and, in the case of a military readiness activity,
personnel safety, practicality of implementation, and impact on the
effectiveness of the military readiness activity.
Specific mitigation measures are proposed as follows.
1. Time Restriction.
Work will occur only during daylight hours, when visual monitoring
of marine mammals can be conducted.
2. Establishing and Monitoring Level A, Level B Harassment Zones,
and Shutdown Zones.
WSDOT shall establish shutdown zones that encompass the distances
within which marine mammals could be taken by Level A harassment (see
Table 7 above) except for harbor seal. For Level A harassment zones
that is less than 10 m from the source, a minimum of 10 m distance
should be established as a shutdown zone. For harbor seal, a maximum of
60 m shutdown zone would be implemented if the actual Level A
harassment zone exceeds 60 m. This is because there are a few
habituated harbor seals that repeated occur within the larger Level A
zone, which makes implementing a shutdown zone larger than 60 m
infeasible.
A summary of exclusion zones is provided in Table 9.
Table 9--Shutdown Zones for Various Pile Driving Activities and Marine Mammal Hearing Groups
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shutdown zone (m)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile type, size & pile driving High-
method Low- frequency Mid- frequency frequency Phocid Otariid
cetacean cetacean cetacean
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory drive/removal, 24-in 100 10 150 60 10
steel piles, 8 piles/day.......
Vibratory drive 24-in steel 40 10 60 25 10
pile, 2 piles/day; or vibratory
removal 36-in steel pile, 1
pile/day.......................
Vibratory drive 36-in steel 160 15 230 60 10
pile, 8 piles/day..............
Impact drive (proof) 36-in steel 350 15 410 60 15
pile, 8 piles/day..............
Vibratory remove 14-in timber 10 10 15 10 10
pile, 20 piles/day; or
vibratory removal 12-in steel
pile, 11 piles/day; or
vibratory removal 14-in steel
pile, 10 piles/day.............
Vibratory removal 18-in steel 120 10 170 60 10
pile, 10 piles/day, 20 min/pile
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WSDOT shall also establish a Zone of Influence (ZOI) based on the
Level B harassment zones for take monitoring where received underwater
SPLs are higher than 160 dBrms re 1 [micro]Pa for impulsive
noise sources (impact pile driving) and 120 dBrms re 1
[micro]Pa for non-impulsive noise sources (vibratory pile driving and
pile removal).
NMFS-approved protected species observers (PSO) shall conduct an
initial 30-minute survey of the exclusion zones to ensure that no
marine mammals are seen within the zones before pile driving and pile
removal of a pile segment begins. If marine mammals are found within
the exclusion zone, pile driving of the segment would be delayed until
they move out of the area. If a marine mammal is seen above water and
then dives below, the contractor would wait 15 minutes. If no marine
mammals are seen by the observer in that time it can be assumed that
the animal has moved beyond the exclusion zone.
If pile driving of a segment ceases for 30 minutes or more and a
marine mammal is sighted within the designated exclusion zone prior to
commencement of pile driving, the observer(s) must notify the pile
driving operator (or other authorized individual) immediately and
continue to monitor the exclusion zone. Operations may not resume until
the marine mammal has exited the exclusion zone or 30 minutes have
elapsed since the last sighting.
3. Soft-start.
A ``soft-start'' technique is intended to allow marine mammals to
vacate the area before the impact pile driver reaches full power.
Whenever there has been downtime of 30 minutes or more without impact
pile driving, the contractor will initiate the driving with ramp-up
procedures described below.
Soft start for impact hammers requires contractors to provide an
initial set of three strikes from the impact hammer at 40 percent
energy, followed by a 1-minute waiting period, then two subsequent
three-strike sets. Each day, WSDOT will use the soft-start technique at
the beginning of impact pile driving, or if pile driving has ceased for
more than 30 minutes.
4. Shutdown Measures.
WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if a marine mammal is
detected within an exclusion zone or is
[[Page 36589]]
about to enter an exclusion zone listed in Tables 8.
WSDOT shall also implement shutdown measures if SRKWs are sighted
within the vicinity of the project area and are approaching the Level B
harassment zone during in-water construction activities.
If a killer whale approaches the Level B harassment zone during
pile driving or removal, and it is unknown whether it is a SRKW or a
transient killer whale, it shall be assumed to be a SRKW and WSDOT
shall implement the shutdown measure.
If a SRKW or an unidentified killer whale enters the Level B
harassment zone undetected, in-water pile driving or pile removal shall
be suspended until the whale exits the Level B harassment zone to avoid
further level B harassment.
Further, WSDOT shall implement shutdown measures if the number of
authorized takes for any particular species reaches the limit under the
IHA and if such marine mammals are sighted within the vicinity of the
project area and are approaching the Level B harassment zone during in-
water construction activities.
5. Coordination with Local Marine Mammal Research Network.
Prior to the start of pile driving for the day, the Orca Network
and/or Center for Whale Research will be contacted by WSDOT to find out
the location of the nearest marine mammal sightings. The Orca Sightings
Network consists of a list of over 600 (and growing) residents,
scientists, and government agency personnel in the United States and
Canada. Sightings are called or emailed into the Orca Network and
immediately distributed to other sighting networks including: The NMFS
Northwest Fisheries Science Center, the Center for Whale Research,
Cascadia Research, the Whale Museum Hotline and the British Columbia
Sightings Network.
Sightings information collected by the Orca Network includes
detection by hydrophone. The SeaSound Remote Sensing Network is a
system of interconnected hydrophones installed in the marine
environment of Haro Strait (west side of San Juan Island) to study orca
communication, in-water noise, bottom fish ecology and local climatic
conditions. A hydrophone at the Port Townsend Marine Science Center
measures average in-water sound levels and automatically detects
unusual sounds. These passive acoustic devices allow researchers to
hear when different marine mammals come into the region. This acoustic
network, combined with the volunteer (incidental) visual sighting
network allows researchers to document presence and location of various
marine mammal species.
With this level of coordination in the region of activity, WSDOT
will be able to get real-time information on the presence or absence of
whales before starting any pile driving.
Based on our evaluation of the required measures, NMFS has
preliminarily determined that the prescribed mitigation measures
provide the means effecting the least practicable impact on the
affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular
attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar
significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical both to
compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the
required monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which 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.
Monitoring Measures
WSDOT shall employ NMFS-approved PSOs to conduct marine mammal
monitoring for its dolphin relocation project at Bremerton and Edmonds
ferry terminals. The purposes of marine mammal monitoring are to
implement mitigation measures and learn more about impacts to marine
mammals from WSDOT's construction activities. The PSOs will observe and
collect data on marine mammals in and around the project area for 30
minutes before, during, and for 30 minutes after all pile removal and
pile installation work. NMFS-approved PSOs shall meet the following
requirements:
1. Independent observers (i.e., not construction personnel) are
required;
2. At least one observer must have prior experience working as an
observer;
3. Other observers may substitute education (undergraduate degree
in biological science or related field) or training for experience;
4. Where a team of three or more observers are required, one
observer should be designated as lead observer or monitoring
coordinator. The lead observer must have prior experience working as an
observer; and
5. NMFS will require submission and approval of observer CVs.
Monitoring of marine mammals around the construction site shall be
conducted using high-quality binoculars (e.g., Zeiss, 10 x 42 power).
Due to the different sizes of ZOI from different pile types, three
different ZOIs and different monitoring protocols corresponding to a
specific pile type will be established.
For Level B harassment zones with radii less than 1,000 m,
3 PSOs will be monitoring from land;
For Level B harassment zones with radii larger than 1,000
m but smaller than 2,500 m, 4 PSOs will be monitoring from land; and
For Level B harassment zones with radii larger than 2,500
m, 4 PSOs will be monitoring from land with an additional 1 PSO
monitoring from a ferry.
6. PSOs shall collect the following information during marine
mammal monitoring:
Date and time that monitored activity begins and ends for
each day conducted (monitoring period);
[[Page 36590]]
Construction activities occurring during each daily
observation period, including how many and what type of piles driven;
Deviation from initial proposal in pile numbers, pile
types, average driving times, etc.;
Weather parameters in each monitoring period (e.g., wind
speed, percent cloud cover, visibility);
Water conditions in each monitoring period (e.g., sea
state, tide state);
For each marine mammal sighting:
[cir] Species, numbers, and, if possible, sex and age class of
marine mammals;
[cir] Description of any observable marine mammal behavior
patterns, including bearing and direction of travel and distance from
pile driving activity;
[cir] Location and distance from pile driving activities to marine
mammals and distance from the marine mammals to the observation point;
and
[cir] 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 within each monitoring
period.
To verify the required monitoring distance, the exclusion zones and
Level B harassment zones will be determined by using a range finder or
hand-held global positioning system device.
Reporting Measures
WSDOT is required to submit a draft monitoring report within 90
days after completion of the construction work or the expiration of the
IHA, whichever comes earlier. In the case if WSDOT intends to renew the
IHA in a subsequent year, a monitoring report should be submitted 60
days before the expiration of the current IHA. This report would detail
the monitoring protocol, summarize the data recorded during monitoring,
and estimate the number of marine mammals that may have been harassed,
extrapolated from marine mammals observed within the harassment zones
that can be monitored. NMFS would have an opportunity to provide
comments on the report, and if NMFS has comments, WSDOT would address
the comments and submit a final report to NMFS within 30 days.
In addition, NMFS requires WSDOT to notify NMFS' Office of
Protected Resources and NMFS' West Coast Stranding Coordinator within
48 hours of sighting an injured or dead marine mammal in the
construction site. WSDOT shall provide NMFS and the Stranding Network
with the species or description of the animal(s), the condition of the
animal(s) (including carcass condition, if the animal is dead),
location, time of first discovery, observed behaviors (if alive), and
photo or video (if available).
In the event that WSDOT finds an injured or dead marine mammal that
is not in the construction area, WSDOT would report the same
information as listed above to NMFS as soon as operationally feasible.
Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination
NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the
specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not
reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A
negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (i.e., population-
level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough
information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to
considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be
``taken'' through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the
likely nature of any responses (e.g., intensity, duration), the context
of any responses (e.g., critical reproductive time or location,
migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness
of the mitigation. We also assess the number, intensity, and context of
estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population
status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing
regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other
past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this
analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline (e.g., as
reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and
growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or
ambient noise levels).
To avoid repetition, this introductory discussion of our analyses
applies to all the species listed in Table 8, given that the
anticipated effects of WSDOT's Seattle Multimodal at Colman Dock
project involving pile driving and pile removal on marine mammals are
expected to be relatively similar in nature. There is no information
about the nature or severity of the impacts, or the size, status, or
structure of any species or stock that would lead to a different
analysis by species for this activity, or else species-specific factors
would be identified and analyzed.
Although some marine mammals could experience, and are authorized
for Level A harassment in the form of PTS if they stay within the Level
A harassment zone during the entire pile driving for the day (114
harbor seals, 103 harbor porpoises, and 64 Dall's porpoise), the degree
of injury is expected to be mild and is not likely to affect the
reproduction or survival of the individual animals. It is expected
that, if hearing impairments occurs, most likely the affected animal
would lose a few dB in its hearing sensitivity, which in most cases is
not likely to affect its survival and recruitment. Hearing impairment
that occur for these individual animals would be limited to the
dominant frequency of the noise sources, i.e., in the low-frequency
region below 2 kHz. Therefore, the degree of PTS is not likely to
affect the echolocation performance of the two porpoise species, which
use frequencies mostly above 100 kHz. Nevertheless, for all marine
mammal species, it is known that in general animals avoid areas where
sound levels could cause hearing impairment. Nonetheless, we evaluate
the estimated take in this negligible impact analysis.
For these species except harbor seal, harbor porpoise and Dall's
porpoise, takes that are anticipated and authorized are expected to be
limited to short-term Level B harassment (behavioral and TTS). Marine
mammals present in the vicinity of the action area and taken by Level B
harassment would most likely show overt brief disturbance (startle
reaction) and avoidance of the area from elevated noise levels during
pile driving and pile removal and the implosion noise. A few marine
mammals could experience TTS if they occur within the Level B TTS zone.
However, as discussed earlier in this document, TTS is a temporary loss
of hearing sensitivity when exposed to loud sound, and the hearing
threshold is expected to recover completely within minutes to hours.
Portions of the SRKW range is within the proposed action area. In
addition, the entire Puget Sound is designated as the SRKW critical
habitat under the ESA. However, WSDOT would be required to implement
strict mitigation measures to suspend pile driving or pile removal
activities when this stock is detected in the vicinity of the project
area. We anticipate that take of SRKW would be avoided. There are no
other known important areas for other marine mammals, such as feeding
or pupping, areas.
[[Page 36591]]
The project also is not expected to have significant adverse
effects on affected marine mammals' habitat, as analyzed in detail in
the ``Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat'' subsection. There
is no ESA designated critical habitat in the vicinity of the Seattle
Multimodal Project at Colman Dock area. The project activities would
not permanently modify existing marine mammal habitat. The activities
may kill some fish and cause other fish to leave the area temporarily,
thus impacting marine mammals' foraging opportunities in a limited
portion of the foraging range. However, because of the short duration
of the activities and the relatively small area of the habitat that may
be affected, the impacts to marine mammal habitat are not expected to
cause significant or long-term negative consequences. Therefore, given
the consideration of potential impacts to marine mammal prey species
and their physical environment, WSDOT's proposed construction activity
at Colman Dock would not adversely affect marine mammal habitat.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our preliminary 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:
Injury--only a relatively small number of marine mammals
(of three stocks) would experience Level A harassment in the form of
mild PTS, which is expected to be of small degree;
Behavioral disturbance--eleven species/stocks of marine
mammals would experience behavioral disturbance and TTS from the
WSDOT's Seattle Colman Dock project. However, as discussed earlier, the
area to be affected is small and the duration of the project is short.
In addition, the nature of the take would involve mild behavioral
modification; and
Although portion of the SWKR critical habitat is within
the project area, strict mitigation measures such as implementing
shutdown measures and suspending pile driving are expected to avoid
take of SRKW, and impacts to prey species and the habitat itself are
expected to be minimal. No other important habitat for marine mammals
exist in the vicinity of the project area.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the
specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into
consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and
mitigation measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from
the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected
marine mammal species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (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.
The estimated takes are below 15 percent of the population for all
marine mammals (Table 8).
Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity
(including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the
anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small
numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size
of the affected species or stocks.
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
proposed 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. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs,
NMFS consults internally, in this case with NMFS' West Coast Region
Protected Resources Division Office, whenever we propose to authorize
take for endangered or threatened species.
The California-Oregon-Washington stock of humpback whale and the
Southern Resident stock of killer whale are the only marine mammal
species listed under the ESA that could occur in the vicinity of
WSDOT's proposed construction projects. NMFS worked with WSDOT to
implement shutdown measures in the IHA that will avoid takes of
Southern Resident killer whale. NMFS is proposing to authorize take of
California/Oregon/Washington stock of humpback whale.
The effects of this proposed Federal action were adequately
analyzed in NMFS' Reinitiation of Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section
7(a)(2) Consultation (Humpback Whales) for the Seattle Multimodal
Terminal at Colman Dock Project, King County, Washington in October
2018, which concluded that the take NMFS proposes to authorize through
this IHA would not jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered
or threatened species or destroy or adversely modify any designated
critical habitat.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, NMFS has issued an IHA to the
WSDOT to conduct Seattle Multimodal Project at Colman Dock in Seattle,
Washington, between August 1, 2019, and July 31, 2020, provided the
previously prescribed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting
requirements are incorporated.
Dated: July 23, 2019.
Donna S. Wieting,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-15970 Filed 7-26-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P