Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specific Activities; Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Pile Driving and Removal Activities During the Metlakatla Seaplane Facility Refurbishment Project, Metlakatla, Alaska, 43190-43204 [2021-16861]
Download as PDF
43190
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XB272]
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions;
General Provisions for Domestic
Fisheries; Application for Exempted
Fishing Permits
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
AGENCY:
The Assistant Regional
Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries,
Greater Atlantic Region, NMFS, has
made a preliminary determination that
an Exempted Fishing Permit application
submitted by the Coonamessett Farm
Foundation contains all of the required
information and warrants further
consideration. Regulations under the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
require publication of this notification
to provide interested parties the
opportunity to comment on applications
for proposed Exempted Fishing Permits.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 23, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written
comments by the following method:
• Email: nmfs.gar.efp@noaa.gov.
Include in the subject line ‘‘CFF
Seasonal Scallop Survey EFP.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shannah Jaburek, Fishery Management
Specialist; shannah.jaburek@noaa.gov,
(978) 281–9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Coonamessett Farm Foundation (CFF)
submitted a complete application for an
Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) to
conduct commercial fishing activities
that the Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery
Management Plan regulations would
otherwise restrict. This EFP would
exempt the participating vessels from:
Atlantic sea scallop days-at-sea (DAS)
allocations at 50 CFR 648.53(b); crew
size restrictions at § 648.51(c); observer
program requirements at § 648.11(g);
minimum mesh size restrictions at
§ 648.51(b)(2); minimum ring size
restrictions at § 648.51(b)(3); dredge
obstruction restriction at
§ 648.51(b)(4)(iii); Closed Area II
restrictions in § 648.59 and 648.60;
dredge or net obstructions at
§ 648.51(b)(4)(iii); size and possession
limits at § 648 subsections B and D
through O for biological sampling only,
and § 697.20 for lobster sampling and
tagging only.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
CFF applied for an EFP on April 5,
2021, to conduct a scallop survey in
Georges Bank. This EFP would allow
CFF to conduct the survey over four, 7day survey trips on commercial scallop
vessels from August 17, 2021, through
July 30, 2022, at 50 fixed stations. The
survey stations would be located in
Closed Area II Southeast, Closed Area II
Southwest, Closed Area II extension,
and the eastern edge of the Southern
Flank Scallop Management Simulator
areas. The survey stations were chosen
to provide data about scallop spawning,
scallop meat quality, and seasonal
patterns of habitat use by bycatch
species caught in the scallop fishery.
Participating vessels would use two,
15-foot (4.6 m) turtle deflector dredges
with 10-inch (25.4 cm) twine tops, 4inch (10.2 cm) ring bags, 7-row aprons,
and 2:1 twine top hanging ratios. One
dredge would have a 50-mm cover net
attached to catch juvenile scallops and
other bycatch species that escape from
normal scallop dredges. The dredge
with the cover net would be towed for
10 minutes at 4.8 knots (8.9 km/hr). The
dredge without the cover net would be
towed for 30 minutes at 4.8 knots (8.9
km/hr). Dredges would be fished
alternatively.
CFF researchers would be
participating vessels at all times and
would direct sampling activities.
Scallop catch would be sorted into
baskets and weighed. A subsample of
catch would be measured and have meat
quality and other biological metrics
recorded. Flatfish bycatch would be
weighed and measured for length, and
reproductive data would be recorded for
windowpane, winter, and yellowtail
flounder. Crabs, moon snails, whelks,
and other scallop predators would be
weighed and counted. Sea stars would
be sampled using the same protocols as
scallops. Lobsters would have biological
measurements taken and will be
assessed for dredge damage. Lobsters
would also be tagged in collaboration
with the Atlantic Offshore Lobstermen’s
Association. No catch will be landed for
sale.
If approved, the applicant may
request minor modifications and
extensions to the EFP throughout the
year. EFP modifications and extensions
may be granted without further notice if
they are deemed essential to facilitate
completion of the proposed research
and have minimal impacts that do not
change the scope or impact of the
initially approved EFP request. Any
fishing activity conducted outside the
scope of the exempted fishing activity
would be prohibited.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: August 2, 2021.
Jennifer M. Wallace,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2021–16787 Filed 8–5–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XB234]
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental
to Specific Activities; Taking of Marine
Mammals Incidental to Pile Driving and
Removal Activities During the
Metlakatla Seaplane Facility
Refurbishment Project, Metlakatla,
Alaska
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as
amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental
harassment authorization (IHA) to the
Alaska Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities (AKDOT&PF) to
incidentally harass, by Level B
harassment only, marine mammals
during pile driving/removal and downthe-hole drilling (DTH) activities for
maintenance improvements to the
existing Metlakatla Seaplane Facility
(MSF) in Southeast Alaska.
DATES: This Authorization is effective
for one year from issuance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephanie Egger, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427–8401.
Electronic copies of the application and
supporting documents, as well as a list
of the references cited in this document,
may be obtained online at: https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/
incidental-take-authorization-alaskadepartment-transportation-metlakatlaseaplane-facility. In case of problems
accessing these documents, or for
anyone who is unable to comment via
electronic mail, please call the contact
listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
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
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
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 definitions of all applicable
MMPA statutory terms cited above are
included in the relevant sections below.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Summary of Request
On August 10, 2020, NMFS received
a request from the AKDOT&PF for an
IHA to take marine mammals incidental
to pile driving/removal and DTH
activities during maintenance
improvements to the existing MSF in
Southeast Alaska. The application was
deemed adequate and complete on
November 23, 2020. The applicant also
provided an addendum to their
application on February 23, 2021 for the
addition of eight piles, some changes to
their shutdown zones, and minor
changes to their take estimates due to
the increase of in-water work days from
the eight additional piles. The
applicant’s request is for take of eight
species of marine mammals by Level B
harassment only. Neither the
AKDOT&PF nor NMFS expects serious
injury or mortality to result from this
activity and, therefore, an IHA is
appropriate.
Description of Planned Activity
The purpose of this project is to make
repairs to the MSF. The existing facility
has experienced deterioration in recent
years and AKDOT&PF has conducted
several repair projects. The facility is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
near the end of its useful life, and
replacement of all the existing float
structures is required to continue safe
operation in the future. The planned
project in Metlakatla is located
approximately 24 kilometers (km) (15
miles (mi)) south of Ketchikan, in
Southeast Alaska. Metlakatla, is on
Annette Island, in the Prince of WhalesHyder Census Area of Southeast Alaska.
The Metlakatla Seaplane Facility is
centrally located in the village of
Metlakatla on the south shore of Port
Chester.
The planned project includes pile
driving/removal and DTH over 2
months (approximately 26 working
days) beginning in August 2021. Pile
installation and removal will be
intermittent during this period,
depending on weather, construction and
mechanical delays, protected species
shutdowns, and other potential delays
and logistical constraints. Pile
installation will occur intermittently
during the work period, for durations of
minutes to hours at a time.
Approximately 18 days of pile
installation and 8 days of pile removal
will occur using vibratory and impact
pile driving and some DTH to stabilize
the piles. These are discussed in further
detail below. The total construction
duration accounts for the time required
to mobilize materials and resources and
construct the project.
Planned activities included as part of
the project with potential to affect
marine mammals include the noise
generated by vibratory removal of steel
pipe piles, vibratory and impact
installation of steel pipe piles, and DTH
to stabilize piles. Pile removal will be
conducted using a vibratory hammer.
Pile installation will be conducted using
both a vibratory and impact hammer
and DTH pile installation methods.
Piles will be advanced to refusal using
a vibratory hammer. After DTH pile
installation, the final approximate 3.048
m (10 ft) of driving will be conducted
using an impact hammer so that the
structural capacity of the pile
embedment can be verified. The pile
installation methods used will depend
on sediment depth and conditions at
each pile location. Pile installation and
removal will occur in waters
approximately 6–7 m (20–23 ft) in
depth.
The project will involve the removal
of 11 existing steel pipe piles (16-inch
(in) diameter) that support the existing
multiple-float structure. The multiplefloat timber structure, which covers
8,600 square ft, will also be removed. A
new 4,800-square-ft single-float timber
structure will be installed in the same
general location. Six 24-in diameter
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43191
steel pipe piles will be installed to act
as restraints for the new seaplane float.
In addition, 12 temporary 24-in steel
piles will be installed to support pile
installation and removed following
completion of construction.
DTH pile installation involves drilling
rock sockets into the bedrock to support
installation of the 6 permanent piles and
12 temporary piles. Rock sockets consist
of inserting the pile in a drilled hole
into the underlying bedrock after the
pile has been driven through the
overlying softer sediments to refusal by
vibratory or impact methods. The pile is
advanced farther into this drilled hole to
properly secure the bottom portion of
the pile into the rock. The depth of the
rock socket varies, but 3.048–4.572 m
(10–15 ft) is commonly required. The
diameter of the rock socket is slightly
larger than the pile being driven. Rock
sockets are constructed using a DTH
device with both rotary and percussiontype actions. Each device consists of a
drill bit that drills through the bedrock
using both rotary and pulse impact
mechanisms. This breaks up the rock to
allow removal of the fragments and
insertion of the pile. The pile is usually
advanced at the same time that drilling
occurs. Drill cuttings are expelled from
the top of the pile using compressed air.
It is estimated that drilling rock sockets
into the bedrock will take about 1–3
hours (hrs) per pile.
Tension anchors will be installed in
each of the six permanent piles. Tension
anchors are installed within piles that
are drilled into the bedrock below the
elevation of the pile tip after the pile has
been driven through the sediment layer
to refusal. A 6- or 8-in diameter steel
pipe casing will be inserted inside the
larger diameter production pile. A rock
drill will be inserted into the casing,
and a 6- to 8-in diameter hole will be
drilled into bedrock with rotary and
percussion drilling methods. The
drilling work is contained within the
steel pile casing and the steel pipe pile.
The typical depth of the drilled hole
varies, but 20–30 ft is common. Rock
fragments will be removed through the
top of the casing with compressed air.
A steel rod will then be grouted into the
drilled hole and affixed to the top of the
pile. The purpose of a tension anchor is
to secure the pile to the bedrock to
withstand uplift forces. It is estimated
that tension anchor installation will take
about 1–2 hrs per pile.
No concurrent pile driving is
anticipated for this project.
Please see Table 1 below for the
specific amount of time required to
install and remove piles.
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
43192
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
TABLE 1—PILE DRIVING AND REMOVAL ACTIVITIES
Number
of piles
Pile diameter and type
I
Rock
sockets
Tension
anchors
I
I
I
Impact
strikes per
pile
(duration
in
minutes)
Vibratory
duration
per pile
(minutes)
I
I
DTH pile
installation
(rock socket)
duration per
pile
(minutes)
I
DTH pile
installation
(tension
anchor)
duration per
pile
(minutes)
I
Total
duration of
activity
per pile
(hours)
Piles per
day
(range)
I
Total
days
I
Pile Installation
24-in Steel Plumb Piles
(Permanent) .....................
24-in Steel Batter Piles
(Permanent) .....................
24-in Steel Piles (Temporary) .............................
I
4
4
4
20 (15)
15
180
120
5.5
0.5 (0–1)
8
2
2
2
20 (15)
15
90
120
4
0.5 (0–1)
4
12
0
20 (15)
15
12
I
I
60
I
N/A
I
1.5
I
2 (1–3)
I
6
Pile Removal
16-in Steel Piles ..................
24-in Steel Piles (Temporary) .............................
Totals ...........................
I
11
N/A
N/A
12
N/A
N/A
29
I
18
Note: DTH = down-the-hole; N/A = not applicable.
I
A detailed description of the planned
MSF project is provided in the Federal
Register notice for the proposed IHA (86
FR 34203; June 29, 2021).
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS’ proposal to issue
and IHA to AKDOT&PF was published
in the Federal Register on June 29, 2021
(86 FR 34203). That notice described, in
detail, AKDOT&PF’s activity, the marine
mammal species that may be affected by
the activity, and the anticipated effects
on marine mammals. During the 30-day
public comment period, NMFS received
no public comments on this action.
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’ Stock
Assessment Reports (SARs; https://
6
N/A
30
N/A
I
N/A
N/A
30
I
N/A
N/A
N/A
I
N/A
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessment-reports) and
more general information about these
species (e.g., physical and behavioral
descriptions) may be found on NMFS’
website (https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 2 lists all species or stocks for
which take is expected and authorized
for this action, and summarizes
information related to the population or
stock, including regulatory status under
the MMPA and Endangered Species Act
(ESA) and potential biological removal
(PBR), where known. For taxonomy, we
follow Committee on Taxonomy (2020).
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’
SARs). While no mortality is anticipated
or authorized here, PBR and annual
serious injury and mortality from
anthropogenic sources are included here
N/A
I
N/A
I
0.5
3 (2–4)
0.5
3 (2–4)
N/A
I
N/A
4
4
I
26
as gross indicators of the status of the
species and other threats.
Marine mammal abundance estimates
presented in this document represent
the total number of individuals that
make up a given stock or the total
number estimated within a particular
study or survey area. NMFS’ 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’ U.S. Pacific and Alaska SARs
(Carretta et al., 2020; Muto et al., 2020).
All MMPA stock information presented
in Table 2 is the most recent available
at the time of publication and is
available in the 2019 SARs (Caretta et
al., 2020; Muto et al., 2020) and draft
2020 SARs (available online at:
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/draftmarine-mammal-stock-assessmentreports).
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL OCCURRENCE IN THE PROJECT AREA
Common name
Scientific name
Stock
I
ESA/
MMPA
status;
strategic
(Y/N) 1
I
Stock abundance
(CV, Nmin, most recent
abundance survey) 2
Annual
M/SI 3
PBR
I
I
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Order Cetartiodactyla—Cetacea—Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
Family Balaenopteridae
(rorquals):
Minke Whale ..................
Balaenoptera acutorostrata ..
Alaska ...................................
Humpback Whale ...........
Megaptera novaeangliae ......
Central N Pacific ..................
-, -, N
I
-, -, Y
N/A (see SAR, N/A, see
SAR).
10,103 (0.3, 7,891, 2006) ....
I
UND
I
83
0
I
26
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
Family Delphinidae:
Killer Whale ....................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Orcinus orca .........................
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Alaska Resident ...................
Northern Resident ................
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
-, -, N
-, -, N
2,347 (N/A, 2347, 2012) ......
302 (N/A, 302, 2018) ...........
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
24
2.2
1
0.2
43193
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
TABLE 2—MARINE MAMMAL OCCURRENCE IN THE PROJECT AREA—Continued
ESA/
MMPA
status;
strategic
(Y/N) 1
Stock abundance
(CV, Nmin, most recent
abundance survey) 2
Annual
M/SI 3
PBR
Common name
Scientific name
Stock
Pacific White-Sided Dolphin.
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Dall’s Porpoise ...............
Harbor Porpoise .............
Lagenorhynchus obliquidens
West Coast Transient ..........
N Pacific ...............................
-, -, N
-, -, N
349 (N/A, 349; 2018) ...........
26,880 (N/A, N/A, 1990) ......
3.5
UND
0.4
0
AK .........................................
Southeast Alaska Inland
waters.
-, -, N
-, -, Y
83,400 (0.097, N/A, 1991) ...
see SAR (see SAR, see
SAR, 2012).
UND
see SAR
38
34
2592
112
746
40
Phocoenoides dalli ...............
Phocoena phocoena ............
Order Carnivora—Superfamily Pinnipedia
Family Otariidae (eared seals
and sea lions):
Steller sea lion ...............
Eumetopias jubatus ..............
Eastern DPS ........................
T, D, Y
43,201 a (see SAR, 43,201,
2017).
Family Phocidae (earless
seals):
Harbor Seal ....................
Phoca vitulina .......................
Clarence Strait .....................
-, -, N
27,659 (see SAR, 24,854,
2015).
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
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: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessmentreports-region. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable [explain if this is the case].
3 These values, found in NMFS’ 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.
A detailed description of the of the
species likely to be affected by the
project, including brief introductions to
the species and relevant stocks as well
as available information regarding
population trends and threats, and
information regarding local occurrence,
were provided in the Federal Register
notice for the proposed IHA (86 FR
34203; June 29, 2021) since that time,
we are not aware of any changes in the
status of these species and stocks;
therefore, detailed descriptions are not
provided here. Please refer to that
Federal Register notice for these
descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS’
website (https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for
generalized species accounts.
standoff distance between the pile and
the animal; and the sound propagation
properties of the environment. With
both types, it is likely that the pile
driving could result in temporary, shortterm changes in an animal’s typical
behavioral patterns and/or avoidance of
the affected area. The Federal Register
notice for the proposed IHA (86 FR
34203; June 29, 2021) included a
discussion of the effects of
anthropogenic noise on marine
mammals, therefore that information is
not repeated here; please refer to the
Federal Register notice (86 FR 34203;
June 29, 2021).
Potential Effects of Specified Activities
on Marine Mammals and Their Habitat
The main impact issue associated
with the planned activity would be
temporarily elevated sound levels and
the associated direct effects on marine
mammals. The most likely impact to
marine mammal habitat occurs from
pile driving effects on likely marine
mammal prey (i.e., fish) near where the
piles are installed. Impacts to the
immediate substrate during installation
and removal of piles are anticipated, but
these would be limited to minor,
temporary suspension of sediments,
which could impact water quality and
visibility for a short amount of time, but
which would not be expected to have
any effects on individual marine
mammals. Impacts to substrate are
therefore not discussed further. These
Acoustic effects on marine mammals
during the specified activity can occur
from vibratory and impact pile driving
as well as during DTH of the piles. The
effects of underwater noise from the
AKDOT&PF’s planned activities have
the potential to result in Level B
behavioral harassment of marine
mammals in the vicinity of the action
area. The effects of pile driving on
marine mammals are dependent on
several factors, including the size, type,
and depth of the animal; the depth,
intensity, and duration of the pile
driving sound; the depth of the water
column; the substrate of the habitat; the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal
Habitat
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
potential effects are discussed in detail
in the Federal Register notice for the
proposed IHA (86 FR 34203; June 29,
2021) therefore that information is not
repeated here; please refer to that
Federal Register notice for that
information.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of
the number of incidental takes
authorization through this IHA, which
will inform both NMFS’ consideration
of ‘‘small numbers’’ and the negligible
impact determination.
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).
Take of marine mammals incidental
to the AKDOT&PF’s pile driving and
removal activities (as well as during
DTH) could occur as a result of Level B
harassment only. Below we describe
how the potential take is estimated. As
described previously, no mortality is
anticipated or authorized for this
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
43194
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
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 planned
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 permanent
threshold shift (PTS) of some degree
(equated to Level A harassment).
Level B Harassment—Though
significantly driven by received level,
the onset of behavioral disturbance from
anthropogenic noise exposure is also
informed to varying degrees by other
factors related to the source (e.g.,
frequency, predictability, duty cycle),
the environment (e.g., bathymetry), and
the receiving animals (hearing,
motivation, experience, demography,
behavioral context) and can be difficult
to predict (Southall et al., 2007, Ellison
et al., 2012). Based on what the
available science indicates and the
practical need to use a threshold based
on a factor that is both predictable and
measurable for most activities, NMFS
uses a generalized acoustic threshold
based on received level to estimate the
onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS
predicts that marine mammals are likely
to be behaviorally harassed in a manner
we consider Level B harassment when
exposed to underwater anthropogenic
noise above received levels of 120 dB
reference pressure micro Pascal (re 1
mPa (rms)) for continuous (e.g., vibratory
pile driving and DTH) and above 160 dB
re 1 mPa (rms) for impulsive sources
(e.g., impact pile driving). The
AKDOT&PF’s planned activity includes
the use of continuous (vibratory pile
driving, DTH) and impulsive (impact
pile driving) sources, and therefore the
120 and 160 dB re 1 mPa (rms) are
applicable.
Level A Harassment—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. The technical
guidance identifies the received levels,
or thresholds, above which individual
marine mammals are predicted to
experience changes in their hearing
sensitivity for all underwater
anthropogenic sound sources, and
reflects the best available science on the
potential for noise to affect auditory
sensitivity by:
D Dividing sound sources into two
groups (i.e., impulsive and nonimpulsive) based on their potential to
affect hearing sensitivity;
D Choosing metrics that best address
the impacts of noise on hearing
sensitivity, i.e., sound pressure level
(peak SPL) and sound exposure level
(SEL) (also accounts for duration of
exposure); and
D Dividing marine mammals into
hearing groups and developing auditory
weighting functions based on the
science supporting that not all marine
mammals hear and use sound in the
same manner.
These thresholds were developed by
compiling and synthesizing the best
available science, and are provided in
Table 3 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.
DTH pile installation includes drilling
(non-impulsive sound) and hammering
(impulsive sound) to penetrate rocky
substrates (Denes et al. 2016; Denes et
al. 2019; Reyff and Heyvaert 2019). DTH
pile installation was initially thought be
a primarily non-impulsive noise source.
However, Denes et al. (2019) concluded
from a study conducted in Virginia,
nearby the location for this project, that
DTH should be characterized as
impulsive based on Southall et al.
(2007), who stated that signals with a >3
dB difference in sound pressure level in
a 0.035-second window compared to a
1-second window can be considered
impulsive. Therefore, DTH pile
installation is treated as both an
impulsive and non-impulsive noise
source. In order to evaluate Level A
harassment, DTH pile installation
activities are evaluated according to the
impulsive criteria and using 160 dB
rms. Level B harassment isopleths are
determined by applying non-impulsive
criteria and using the 120 dB rms
threshold which is also used for
vibratory driving. This approach
ensures that the largest ranges to effect
for both Level A and Level B harassment
are accounted for in the take estimation
process.
TABLE 3—THRESHOLDS IDENTIFYING THE ONSET OF PERMANENT THRESHOLD SHIFT
[Auditory injury]
PTS onset acoustic thresholds *
(received level)
Hearing group
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Impulsive
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans ......................................
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans ......................................
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans .....................................
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater) .............................
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater) .............................
Cell
Cell
Cell
Cell
Cell
1:
3:
5:
7:
9:
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
Lpk,flat:
219
230
202
218
232
dB;
dB;
dB;
dB;
dB;
Non-impulsive
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB .........................
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB ........................
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB ........................
LE,PW,24h: 185 dB .......................
LE,OW,24h: 203 dB .......................
Cell
Cell
Cell
Cell
Cell
2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should
also be considered.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
43195
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
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.
Sound Propagation
Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease
in acoustic intensity as an acoustic
pressure wave propagates out from a
source. TL parameters vary with
frequency, temperature, sea conditions,
current, source and receiver depth,
water depth, water chemistry, and
bottom composition and topography.
The general formula for underwater TL
is:
TL = B * log10(R1/R2), where
B = transmission loss coefficient (assumed to
be 15)
R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from
the driven pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the
initial measurement.
This formula neglects loss due to
scattering and absorption, which is
assumed to be zero here. The degree to
which underwater sound propagates
away from a sound source is dependent
on a variety of factors, most notably the
water bathymetry and presence or
absence of reflective or absorptive
conditions including in-water structures
and sediments. Spherical spreading
occurs in a perfectly unobstructed (freefield) environment not limited by depth
or water surface, resulting in a 6 dB
reduction in sound level for each
doubling of distance from the source
(20*log(range)). Cylindrical spreading
occurs in an environment in which
sound propagation is bounded by the
water surface and sea bottom, resulting
in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level for
each doubling of distance from the
source (10*log(range)). As is common
practice in coastal waters, here we
assume practical spreading loss (4.5 dB
reduction in sound level for each
doubling of distance). Practical
spreading is a compromise that is often
used under conditions where water
depth increases as the receiver moves
away from the shoreline, resulting in an
expected propagation environment that
would lie between spherical and
cylindrical spreading loss conditions.
Practical spreading was used to
determine sound propagation for this
project.
Sound Source Levels
The intensity of pile driving sounds is
greatly influenced by factors such as the
type of piles, hammers, and the physical
environment in which the activity takes
place. There are source level
measurements available for certain pile
types and sizes from the similar
environments recorded from underwater
pile driving projects in Alaska that were
evaluated and used as proxy sound
source levels to determine reasonable
sound source levels likely result from
the AKDOT&PF’s pile driving and
removal activities (Table 4). Many
source levels used were more
conservative as the values were from
larger pile sizes.
TABLE 4—SOUND SOURCE LEVELS
Method and pile type
SSL at 10 meters
Literature source
Continuous (Vibratory Pile Driving and DTH)
16-in Steel Piles .............................................
24-in Steel Piles .............................................
24-in DTH b ....................................................
8-in DTH c ......................................................
dB rms
161
161
166
166
Navy 2012, 2015 ...........................................
Navy 2012, 2015 ...........................................
Denes et al. 2016 (Table 72) b ......................
NMFS c.
A, B, C, H.
C, D, E, H, I.
B, C, F, G.
Navy 2015 ......................................................
Denes et al. 2016 b.
Reyff 2020.
D, H, I.
Impulsive (Impact Pile Driving and DTH)
dB rms
dB SEL
24-in Steel Piles .............................................
24-in DTH b ....................................................
8-in DTH c ......................................................
193
........................
........................
181
154
144
Federal Register
sources a
dB Peak
210
........................
170
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
a Federal Register sources:
A: 84 FR 24490; May 28, 2019, City of Juneau Waterfront Improvement Project, Juneau, Alaska.
B: 85 FR 4278; January 24, 2020, Statter Harbor Improvement Project, Auke Bay, Alaska.
C: 85 FR 673; January 7, 2020, Tongass Narrows Ferry Berth Improvements, Ketchikan, Alaska.
D: 85 FR 19294; April 6, 2020, Port of Alaska’s Petroleum and Cement Terminal, Anchorage, Alaska.
E: 84 FR 56767; October 23, 2019, Auke Bay Ferry Terminal Modifications and Improvements Project, Juneau, Alaska.
F: 85 FR 18196; April 1, 2020, Gastineau Channel Historical Society Sentinel Island Moorage Float Project, Juneau, Alaska.
G: 85 FR 12523; March 3, 2020, Ward Cove Cruise Ship Dock Project, Juneau, Alaska.
H: 83 FR 29749; June 26, 2018, City Dock and Ferry Terminal, Tenakee Springs, Alaska.
I: 82 FR 48987; October 23, 2017, Sand Point City Dock Replacement Project, Sand Point, Alaska.
b DTH pile installation is treated as a continuous sound for Level B calculations and impulsive for Level A calculations.
c Tension anchor installation (8-in DTH) is currently treated as DTH pile installation.
Notes: DTH = down-the-hole pile installation; SSL = sound source = level; dB = decibel; rms = root mean square; SEL = sound exposure level.
Level A Harassment
In conjunction with the NMFS
Technical Guidance (2018), in
recognition of the fact that ensonified
area/volume could be more technically
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
43196
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
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 from impact and
vibratory pile driving and DTH), NMFS
User Spreadsheet (2020) predicts the
closest distance at which, if a marine
mammal remained at that distance the
whole duration of the activity, it would
not incur PTS. Inputs used in the User
Spreadsheet (Tables 5 and 6), and the
resulting isopleths are reported below
(Table 7).
TABLE 5—NMFS TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (2020) USER SPREADSHEET INPUT TO CALCULATE PTS ISOPLETHS FOR
VIBRATORY PILE DRIVING
User spreadsheet input—vibratory pile driving spreadsheet Tab A.1 vibratory pile driving used
24-in piles
temporary
(install/
removal)
16-in piles
(removal)
Source Level (RMS SPL) ............................................................................................................
Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) .............................................................................................
Number of piles within 24-hr period ............................................................................................
Duration to drive a single pile (min) ............................................................................................
Propagation (xLogR) ....................................................................................................................
Distance of source level measurement (meters) ........................................................................
161
2.5
4
30
15
10
24-in plumb/
batter piles
permanent
(install)
161
2.5
4
30
15
10
161
2.5
4
30
15
10
TABLE 6—NMFS TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (2020) USER SPREADSHEET INPUT TO CALCULATE PTS ISOPLETHS FOR IMPACT
PILE DRIVING
User spreadsheet input—impact pile driving spreadsheet tab E.1 impact pile driving used
24-in piles
(permanent)
Source Level (Single Strike/shot SEL) .........
Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz) ..............
Number of strikes per pile .............................
Minutes per pile .............................................
Number of piles per day ...............................
Propagation (xLogR) .....................................
Distance of source level measurement (meters) ............................................................
8-in pile
(DTH)
8-in pile
(DTH)
8-in pile
(DTH)
24-in pile
(DTH)
24-in pile
(DTH)
24-in pile
(DTH)
181
2
20
........................
3
15
144
2
54,000
60
1
15
144
2
108,000
120
1
15
144
2
162,000
180
1
15
154
2
54,000
60
1
15
154
2
81,000
90
1
15
154
2
162,000
180
1
15
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
TABLE 7—NMFS TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (2020) USER SPREADSHEET OUTPUTS TO CALCULATE LEVEL A HARASSMENT
PTS ISOPLETHS
User spreadsheet output
PTS isopleths (meters)
Level A harassment
Sound source level at
10 m
Activity
Lowfrequency
cetaceans
Midfrequency
cetaceans
Highfrequency
cetaceans
Phocid
Otariid
Vibratory Pile Driving/Removal
16-in steel pile removal ...................................
24-in steel pile temporary installation and removal.
24-in steel pile permanent ..............................
161 SPL .....................
161 SPL .....................
161 SPL .....................
10.8
10.8
I
10.8
1.0
1.0
I
1.0
16.0
16.0
I
16.0
6.6
6.6
I
6.6
0.5
0.5
I
0.5
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Impact Pile Driving
24-in steel permanent installation (3 piles a
day).
24-in steel permanent installation (2 piles a
day).
24-in steel permanent installation (1 piles a
day).
181 SEL/193 SPL ......
112.6
4.0
134.1
60.3
4.4
181 SEL/193 SPL ......
85.9
3.1
102.3
46.0
3.3
181 SEL/193 SPL ......
54.1
1.9
64.5
29.0
2.1
35.8
56.9
74.5
166.3
1.3
2.0
2.7
5.9
42.7
67.8
88.8
198.1
19.2
30.4
39.9
89.0
1.4
2.2
2.9
6.5
DTH
8-in steel (60 min) ...........................................
8-in steel (120 min) .........................................
8-in steel (180 min) .........................................
24-in steel (60 min) .........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
144
144
144
154
PO 00000
SEL/166
SEL/166
SEL/166
SEL/166
SPL
SPL
SPL
SPL
Frm 00038
......
......
......
......
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
43197
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
TABLE 7—NMFS TECHNICAL GUIDANCE (2020) USER SPREADSHEET OUTPUTS TO CALCULATE LEVEL A HARASSMENT
PTS ISOPLETHS—Continued
User spreadsheet output
PTS isopleths (meters)
Level A harassment
Sound source level at
10 m
Activity
24-in steel (90 min) .........................................
24-in steel (180 min) .......................................
Level B Harassment
Utilizing the practical spreading loss
model, the AKDOT&PF determined
underwater noise will fall below the
behavioral effects threshold of 120 dB
rms for marine mammals at the
distances shown in Table 8 for vibratory
154 SEL/166 SPL ......
154 SEL/166 SPL ......
Lowfrequency
cetaceans
Midfrequency
cetaceans
218.0
346.0
pile driving/removal, and DTH. With
these radial distances, the largest Level
B harassment zone calculated was for
DTH at 11,659 m. For calculating the
Level B harassment zone for impact
driving, the practical spreading loss
model was used with a behavioral
Highfrequency
cetaceans
7.8
12.3
Phocid
259.6
412.1
Otariid
116.6
185.2
8.5
13.5
threshold of 160 dB rms. The maximum
radial distance of the Level B
harassment zone for impact piling
equaled 1,585 m for 24-in piles. Table
8 below provides all Level B harassment
radial distances (m) during the
AKDOT&PF’s planned activities.
TABLE 8—RADIAL DISTANCES (METERS) TO RELEVANT BEHAVIORAL ISOPLETHS
Received level at 10 meters
(m)
Activity
Level B harassment zone
(m) *
Vibratory Pile Driving/Removal and DTH
16-in steel piles .......................................................................................
24-in steel piles .......................................................................................
8-in and 24-in DTH ..................................................................................
161 SPL .........................................
161 SPL .........................................
166 SPL .........................................
5,415 (calculated 5,412).
5,415 (calculated 5,412).
11,660 (calculated 11,659).
Impact Pile Driving
24-in steel piles .......................................................................................
181 SEL/193 SPL ..........................
1,585.
* Numbers rounded up to nearest 5 meters. These specific rounded distances are for monitoring purposes rather than take estimation.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take
Calculation and Estimation
In this section we provide the
information about the presence, density,
or group dynamics of marine mammals
that will inform the take calculations.
Potential exposures to impact pile
driving, vibratory pile driving/removal
and DTH noises for each acoustic
threshold were estimated using group
size estimates and local observational
data. As shown above, distances to
Level A harassment thresholds for
project activities are relatively small in
most cases and mitigation (i.e.,
shutdown zones) is expected to avoid
Level A harassment from these
activities. Accordingly, take by Level B
harassment only will be considered for
this action. Take by Level B harassment
are calculated differently for some
species based on monthly or daily
sightings data and average group sizes
within the action area using the best
available data.
Minke Whales
There are no density estimates of
minke whales available in the project
area. These whales are usually sighted
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
individually or in small groups of two
or three, but there are reports of loose
aggregations of hundreds of animals
(NMFS 2018). Dedicated surveys for
cetaceans in Southeast Alaska found
that minke whales were scattered
throughout inland waters from Glacier
Bay and Icy Strait to Clarence Strait
(Dahlheim et al. 2009). All sightings
were of single minke whales, except for
a single sighting of multiple minke
whales. Anecdotal observations suggest
that minke whales do not enter Port
Chester, and may be more rare in the
project area (L. Bethel, personal
communication, June 11, 2020 2020 as
cited in the application). Based on the
potential for one group of a group size
of three whales entering the Level B
harassment zone during the project,
similar to what is observed in Tongass
Narrows, NMFS authorizes, take of three
minke whales over the 4-month project
period by Level B harassment. No take
by Level A harassment is authorized or
anticipated to occur due to their rarer
occurrence in the project area. In
addition, the shutdown zones are larger
than all the calculated Level A
harassment isopleths for all pile
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
driving/removal and DTH activities for
cetaceans.
Humpback Whales
There are no density estimates for
humpback whales available in the
project area. Use of Nichols Passage and
Port Chester by humpback whales is
common but intermittent and
dependent on the presence of prey fish.
No systematic studies have documented
humpback whale abundance near
Metlakatla. Anecdotal information from
Metlakatla and Ketchikan suggest that
humpback whales’ utilization of the
area is intermittent year-round and local
mariners estimate that one to two
humpback whales may be present in the
Port Chester area on a daily basis during
summer months (L. Bethel, personal
communication, June 11, 2020 2020 as
cited in the application). This is
consistent with reports from Ketchikan,
which suggest that humpback whales
occur alone or in groups of two or three
individuals and abundance is highest in
August and September (84 FR 34134;
July 17, 2019). However, anecdotal
reports suggest that humpback whale
abundance is higher and occurrence is
more regular in Metlakatla. Therefore,
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
43198
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
NMFS authorizes two groups of two
whales, up to four individuals per day,
may be taken by Level B harassment for
a total of 104 humpback whales (4
whales per day * 26 days = 104
humpback whales).
Under the MMPA, humpback whales
are considered a single stock (Central
North Pacific); however, we have
divided them here to account for
distinct population segments (DPSs)
listed under the ESA. Using the stock
assessment from Muto et al. 2020 for the
Central North Pacific stock (10,103
whales) and calculations in Wade et al.
2016; 9,487 whales are expected to be
from the Hawaii DPS and 606 from the
Mexico DPS. Therefore, for purposes of
consultation under the ESA, we
anticipate that 7 whales of the total
takes would be individuals from the
Mexico DPS (104 × 0.061 = 6.3 rounded
to 7). No take by Level A harassment is
authorized or anticipated to occur due
to their large size and ability to be
visibly detected in the project area if an
animal should approach the Level A
harassment zone as well as the size of
the Level A harassment zones, which
are expected to be manageable for the
protected species observers (PSOs). The
calculated Level A isopleths for lowfrequency cetaceans are 113 m or less
with the exception of DTH of limited
duration of 24-in piles where they range
from 166.3–346.0 m. The shutdown
zones (Table 10) are larger for all
calculated Level A harassment isopleths
during all pile driving activities
(vibratory, impact and DTH) for all
cetaceans.
Killer Whales
There are no density estimates of
killer whales available in the project
area. Three distinct eco-types occur in
Southeast Alaska (resident, transient
and offshore whales; Ford et al., 1994;
Dahlheim et al., 1997, 2008). Dahlheim
et al. (2009) observed transient killer
whales within Lynn Canal, Icy Strait,
Stephens Passage, Frederick Sound, and
upper Chatham Strait. As determined
during a line-transect survey by
Dalheim et al. (2008), the greatest
number of transient killer whale
observed in Southeast Alaska occurred
in 1993 with 32 animals seen over 2
months for an average of 16 sightings
per month. Resident pods were also
observed in Icy Strait, Lynn Canal,
Stephens Passage, Frederick Sound and
upper Chatham Straight (Dalheim et al.
2008). Transient killer whales are often
found in long-term stable social units
(pods) of 1 to 16 whales. Average pod
sizes in Southeast Alaska were 6 in
spring, 5 in summer, and 4 in fall. Pod
sizes of transient whales are generally
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
smaller than those of resident social
groups. Resident killer whales occur in
pods ranging from 7 to 70 whales that
are seen in association with one another
more than 50 percent of the time
(Dahlheim et al. 2009; NMFS 2016b). In
Southeast Alaska, resident killer whale
mean pod size was approximately 21.5
in spring, 32.3 in summer, and 19.3 in
fall (Dahlheim et al. 2009). Killer whales
are observed occasionally during
summer throughout Nichols Passage,
but their presence in Port Chester is
unlikely. Anecdotal local information
suggests that killer whales are rarely
seen within the Port Chester area, but
may be present more frequently in
Nichols Passage and other areas around
Gravina Island (L. Bethel, personal
communication, June 11, 2020 2020 as
cited in the application). To be
conservative NMFS authorizes one
killer whale pod of up to 15 individuals
once during the project could be taken
by Level B harassment based on a pod
of 12 killer whales that may be present
each month similar to Tongass Narrows
near Ketchikan. Additionally, a recent
monitoring report for Tongass Narrows
reported 10 individuals sighted and 10
Level B harassment takes of killer
whales during May 2021. No take by
Level A harassment is authorized or
anticipated to occur to the ability to
visibly detect these large whales and the
small size of the Level A harassment
zones. In addition, the shutdown zones
are larger than all the calculated Level
A harassment isopleths for all pile
driving/removal and DTH activities for
cetaceans.
Pacific White-Sided Dolphin
There are no density estimates of
Pacific white-sided dolphins available
in the project area. Most observations of
Pacific white-sided dolphins occur off
the outer coast or in inland waterways
near entrances to the open ocean.
Pacific white-sided dolphins have been
observed in Alaska waters in groups
ranging from 20 to 164 animals, with the
sighting of 164 animals occurring in
Southeast Alaska near Dixon Entrance
to the south of Metlakatla (Muto et al.,
2018). In nearby Tongass Narrows,
NMFS estimated that one group of 92
Pacific white-sided dolphin (median
between 20 and 164) may occur over a
period of 1 year (85 FR 673; January 7,
2020). There are no records of this
species occurring in Port Chester, and it
is uncommon for individuals to occur in
the project area. Therefore, NMFS
authorizes one large group of 92
dolphins may be taken by Level B
harassment during the project. No take
by Level A harassment authorized or
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
anticipated as the Level A harassment
isopleths are so small.
Dall’s Porpoise
There are no density estimates of
Dall’s porpoise available in the project
area. Little information is available on
the abundance of Dall’s porpoise in the
inland waters of Southeast Alaska.
Dall’s porpoise are most abundant in
spring, observed with lower numbers in
the summer, and lowest numbers in fall.
Jefferson et al., 2019 presents
abundance estimates for Dall’s porpoise
in these waters and found the
abundance in summer (N = 2,680, CV =
19.6 percent), and lowest in fall (N =
1,637, CV = 23.3 percent). No systematic
studies of Dall’s porpoise abundance or
distribution have occurred in Port
Chester or Nichols Passage; however,
Dall’s porpoises have been consistently
observed in Lynn Canal, Stephens
Passage, upper Chatham Strait,
Frederick Sound, and Clarence Strait
(Dahlheim et al. 2009). The species is
generally found in waters in excess of
600 ft (183 m) deep, which do not occur
in Port Chester. If Dall’s porpoises occur
in the project area, they will likely be
present in March or April, given the
strong seasonal patterns observed in
nearby areas of Southeast Alaska
(Dahlheim et al. 2009). Dall’s porpoises
are seen once a month or less within
Port Chester and Nichols Passage in
groups of less than 10 animals (L.
Bethel, personal communication, June
11, 2020 as cited in the application).
Dall’s porpoises are not expected to
occur in Port Chester because the
shallow water habitat of the bay is
atypical of areas where Dall’s porpoises
usually occur. Therefore, NMFS
authorizes one group of Dall’s porpoise
(15 individuals) per month, similar to
what was estimated in nearby Tongass
Narrows, may be taken by Level B
harassment for a total of 30 Dall’s
porpoises during the 26 days of in-water
construction (2 months * 15 porpoises
per month = 30). No take by Level A
harassment is authorized or anticipated
to occur due to their rarer occurrence in
the project area and the unlikelihood
that they would enter the Level A
harassment zone and remain long
enough to incur PTS in the rare event
that they are encountered. No take by
Level A harassment is authorized or
anticipated to occur, as the calculated
isopleths for high-frequency cetaceans
are 134 m or less during all activities
except during DTH for 24-in piles of
limited duration where they are 198 m–
412 m. The shutdown zones (Table 10)
are larger for all calculated Level A
harassment isopleths during all pile
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
43199
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
driving activities (vibratory, impact and
DTH) for all cetaceans.
Harbor Porpoise
There are no density estimates of
harbor porpoise available in the project
area. Although there have been no
systematic studies or observations of
harbor porpoises specific to Port Chester
or Nichols Passage, there is potential for
them to occur within the project area.
Abundance data for harbor porpoises
in Southeast Alaska were collected
during 18 seasonal surveys spanning 22
years, from 1991 to 2012 (Dahlheim et
al. 2015). During that study, a total of 81
harbor porpoises were observed in the
southern inland waters of Southeast
Alaska, including Clarence Strait. The
average density estimate for all survey
years in Clarence Strait was 0.02 harbor
porpoises per square kilometer. There
does not appear to be any seasonal
variation in harbor porpoise density for
the inland waters of Southeast Alaska
(Dahlheim et al. 2015). Approximately
one to two groups of harbor porpoises
are observed each week in group sizes
of up to 10 animals around Driest Point,
located 5 km (3.1 mi) north of the
project location (L. Bethel, personal
communication, June 11, 2020 as cited
in the application). Therefore, NMFS
authorizes that 2 groups of 5 harbor
porpoises (average group size of local
sightings) per 5 days of in-water work
may be taken by Level B harassment.
Expressed in another way, this is an
average of 2 harbor porpoise per day of
in-water work. Therefore, we estimate
52 exposures over the course of the
project (26 days * 2 porpoises per day
= 52). No take by Level A harassment is
authorized or anticipated to occur, as
the calculated isopleths for highfrequency cetaceans are 134 m or less
during all activities except during DTH
for 24-in piles of limited duration where
they are 198 m–412 m. The shutdown
zones (Table 10) are larger for all
calculated Level A harassment isopleths
during all pile driving activities
(vibratory, impact and DTH) for all
cetaceans.
Harbor Seal
There are no density estimates of
harbor seals available in the project
area. Harbor seals are commonly sighted
in the waters of the inside passages
throughout Southeast Alaska. Surveys
in 2015 estimated 429 (95 percent
Confidence Interval [CI]: 102–1,203)
harbor seals on the northwest coast of
Annettte Island, between Metlakatla and
Walden Point. An additional 90 (95
percent CI: 18–292) were observed along
the southwest coast of Annette Island,
between Metlakatla and Tamgas Harbor
(NOAA 2019). The Alaska Fisheries
Science Center identifies three haulouts
in Port Chester (less than a mile from
the project area) and three additional
haulouts north of Driest Point (3.7 mi
from the project are). Abundance
estimates for these haulouts are not
available, but they are all denoted as
having had more than 50 harbor seals at
one point in time (NOAA 2020).
However, local biologists report only
small numbers (fewer than 10) of harbor
seals are regularly observed in Port
Chester. As many as 10 to 15 harbor
seals may utilize Sylburn Harbor, north
of Metlakatla across Driest Point (R.
Cook, personal communication, June 5,
2020 as cited in the application), as a
haulout location. Therefore, NMFS
authorizes 15 harbor seals may be taken
by Level B harassment each day, for a
total of 390 exposures (26 days * 15
seals per day = 390). No take by Level
A harassment is authorized or
anticipated to occur, as the calculated
isopleths are 60 m or less during all
activities except during DTH for 24-in
piles of limited duration where they are
89–186 m. In addition, the shutdown
zones (Table 10) are larger for all
calculated Level A harassment isopleths
during all pile driving activities
(vibratory, impact and DTH) for all
pinnipeds.
Steller Sea Lion
There are no density estimates of
Steller sea lions available in the project
area. Steller sea lions are common
within the project area; however,
systematic counts or surveys have not
been completed in the area directly
surrounding Metlakatla. Three haulouts
are located within 150 km (93 mi) of the
project area (Fritz et al. 2016a); the
nearest documented haulout is West
Rock, about 45 km (28 mi) south of
Metlakatla. West Rock had a count of
703 individuals during a June 2017
survey and 1,101 individuals during a
June 2019 survey (Sweeney et al. 2017,
2019). Aerial surveys occurred
intermittently between 1994 and 2015,
and averaged 982 adult Steller sea lions
(Fritz et al., 2016b). Anecdotal evidence
indicate that 3 to 4 Steller sea lions
utilize a buoy as a haulout near the
entrance of Port Chester, about 3.2 km
(2 mi) from the project location (L.
Bethel, personal communication, June
11, 2020 as cited in the application).
Steller sea lions are not known to
congregate near the cannery in
Metlakatla. Anecdotal evidence suggests
that the species assemblages and
abundance in Metlakatla are similar to
Tongass Narrows where 20 sea lions are
estimated each day during July through
September. A recent monitoring report
for Tongass Narrows reported 41
individual sightings of Steller sea lions
with 9 takes by Level B harassment in
May 2021. Therefore to be conservative,
NMFS authorizes two groups of 10
Steller sea lions (20 Steller sea lions)
may be taken by Level B harassment for
a total of 520 Steller sea lions (26 days
* 20 sea lions per day = 520). No take
by Level A harassment is authorized or
anticipated to occur as the largest Level
A isopleth calculated was 13.5 m during
DTH of 24-in piles and the remaining
isopleths were less than 10 m. In
addition, the shutdown zones (Table 10)
are larger for all calculated Level A
harassment isopleths during all pile
driving activities (vibratory, impact and
DTH) for all pinnipeds.
Table 9 below summarizes the
authorized take for all the species
described above as a percentage of stock
abundance.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
TABLE 9—TAKE ESTIMATES AS A PERCENTAGE OF STOCK ABUNDANCE
Species
Stock
(nEST)
Minke Whale ..................................
Humpback Whale ...........................
Killer Whale ....................................
Alaska (N/A) ...............................................................
Central North Pacific (10,103) ....................................
Alaska Resident (2,347) .............................................
Northern Resident (302) .............................................
West Coast Transient (349) .......................................
North Pacific (26,880) ................................................
Alaska (83,400) b ........................................................
Southeast Alaska (NA) ...............................................
Clarence Strait (27,659) .............................................
Pacific White-Sided Dolphin ...........
Dall’s Porpoise ...............................
Harbor Porpoise .............................
Harbor Seal ....................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Level B
harassment
Sfmt 4703
Percent of stock
12
104
15
92
30
52
390
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
N/A.
Less than 1 percent.
0.6.a
5.0.a
4.3.a
Less than 1 percent.
Less than 1 percent.
NA.
1.4.
06AUN1
43200
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
TABLE 9—TAKE ESTIMATES AS A PERCENTAGE OF STOCK ABUNDANCE—Continued
Species
Stock
(nEST)
Level B
harassment
Steller Sea Lion ..............................
Eastern U.S. (43,201) ................................................
Percent of stock
520
1.2.
a Take
estimates are weighted based on calculated percentages of population for each distinct stock, assuming animals present would follow
same probability of presence in project area.
b Jefferson et al. 2019 presents the first abundance estimates for Dall’s porpoise in the waters of Southeast Alaska with highest abundance recorded in spring (N = 5,381, CV = 25.4 percent), lower numbers in summer (N = 2,680, CV = 19.6 percent), and lowest in fall (N = 1,637, CV =
23.3 percent). However, NMFS currently recognizes a single stock of Dall’s porpoise in Alaskan waters and an estimate of 83,400 Dall’s porpoises is used by NMFS for the entire stock (Muto et al., 2020).
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.
start of construction activity subject to
this IHA, so that responsibilities,
communication procedures, monitoring
protocols, and operational procedures
are clearly understood. New personnel
joining during the project must be
trained prior to commencing work.
General
Shutdown Zones
The AKDOT&PF will follow
mitigation procedures as outlined in
their Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan
and as described below. In general, if
poor environmental conditions restrict
visibility full visibility of the shutdown
zone, pile driving installation and
removal as well as DTH would be
delayed.
For all pile driving/removal and DTH
activities, the AKDOT&PF will establish
a shutdown zone for a marine mammal
species that is greater than its
corresponding Level A harassment zone
(Table 10). The purpose of a shutdown
zone is generally to define an area
within which shutdown of the activity
would occur upon sighting of a marine
mammal (or in anticipation of an animal
entering the defined area). The
shutdown zones are larger than all the
calculated Level A harassment isopleths
for all pile driving/removal and DTH
activities for cetaceans and pinnipeds.
Training
The AKDOT&PF must ensure that
construction supervisors and crews, the
monitoring team, and relevant
AKDOT&PF staff are trained prior to the
Avoiding Direct Physical Interaction
The AKDOT&PF must avoid direct
physical interaction with marine
mammals during construction activity.
If a marine mammal comes within 10 m
of such activity, operations will cease
and vessels will reduce speed to the
minimum level required to maintain
steerage and safe working conditions, as
necessary to avoid direct physical
interaction.
TABLE 10—PILE DRIVING SHUTDOWN ZONES DURING PROJECT ACTIVITIES
Activity
Pile diameter
Shutdown distance
(meters)
Pile type or number of piles
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Cetaceans
Vibratory Installation/Removal ...................
DTH ............................................................
16- and 24-in ...........
24-in ........................
DTH ............................................................
Impact ........................................................
8-in ..........................
24-in ........................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Battered and Plumb ..................................
Temporary .................................................
Battered, Permanent .................................
Plumb, Permanent ....................................
Permanent .................................................
3 piles ........................................................
2 piles.
1 pile ..........................................................
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
50
200
260
415
100
135
100
Pinnipeds
50
200
120
200
50
100
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
Soft Start
The AKDOT&PF must use soft start
techniques when impact pile driving.
Soft start requires contractors to provide
an initial set of three strikes from the
hammer at reduced energy, followed by
a 30-second waiting period. Then two
subsequent reduced-energy strike sets
would occur. A soft start will be
implemented at the start of each day’s
impact pile driving and at any time
following cessation of impact pile
driving for a period of 30 minutes or
longer. Soft start is not required during
vibratory pile driving and removal
activities.
Based on our evaluation of the
applicant’s planned measures, NMFS
has determined that the planned
mitigation measures provide the means
of 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.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an
activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the
MMPA states that NMFS must set forth,
requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking.
The MMPA implementing regulations at
50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that
requests for authorizations must include
the suggested means of accomplishing
the necessary monitoring and reporting
that will result in increased knowledge
of the species and of the level of taking
or impacts on populations of marine
mammals that are expected to be
present in the action area. Effective
reporting is critical both to compliance
as well as ensuring that the most value
is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting
requirements prescribed by NMFS
should contribute to improved
understanding of one or more of the
following:
D Occurrence of marine mammal
species or stocks in the area in which
take is anticipated (e.g., presence,
abundance, distribution, density);
D 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);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
D Individual marine mammal
responses (behavioral or physiological)
to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or
cumulative), other stressors, or
cumulative impacts from multiple
stressors;
D How anticipated responses to
stressors impact either: (1) Long-term
fitness and survival of individual
marine mammals; or (2) populations,
species, or stocks;
D Effects on marine mammal habitat
(e.g., marine mammal prey species,
acoustic habitat, or other important
physical components of marine
mammal habitat); and
D Mitigation and monitoring
effectiveness.
Monitoring Zones
The AKDOT&PF will conduct
monitoring to include the area within
the Level B harassment presented in
Table 8. Monitoring will include all
areas where SPLs are equal to or exceed
120 dB rms (for vibratory pile driving/
removal and DTH) and 160 dB rms (for
impact pile driving). These zones
provide utility for monitoring
conducted for mitigation purposes (i.e.,
shutdown zone monitoring) by
establishing monitoring protocols for
areas adjacent to the shutdown zones.
Monitoring of the Level B harassment
zones enables observers to be aware of
and communicate the presence of
marine mammals in the project area, but
outside the shutdown zone, and thus
prepare for potential shutdowns of
activity.
Pre-Start Clearance Monitoring
Pre-start clearance monitoring must
be conducted during periods of
visibility sufficient for the lead PSO to
determine the shutdown zones clear of
marine mammals. Pile driving and DTH
may commence when the determination
is made.
Visual Monitoring
Monitoring must take place from 30
minutes (min) prior to initiation of pile
driving and DTH activity (i.e., pre-start
clearance monitoring) through 30 min
post-completion of pile driving and
DTH activity. If a marine mammal is
observed entering or within the
shutdown zones, pile driving and DTH
activity will be delayed or halted. If pile
driving or DTH is delayed or halted due
to the presence of a marine mammal, the
activity may not commence or resume
until either the animal has voluntarily
exited and been visually confirmed
beyond the shutdown zone or 15 min
have passed without re-detection of the
animal. Pile driving and DTH activity
will be halted upon observation of
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43201
either a species for which incidental
take is not authorized or a species for
which incidental take has been
authorized but the authorized number of
takes has been met, entering or within
the harassment zone.
PSO Monitoring Requirements and
Locations
The AKDOT&PF will establish
monitoring locations as described in the
Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan. PSOs
will be responsible for monitoring, the
shutdown zones, the Level B
harassment zones, and the pre-clearance
zones, as well as effectively
documenting Level B harassment take.
As described in more detail in the
Reporting section below, they will also
(1) document the frequency at which
marine mammals are present in the
project area, (2) document behavior and
group composition (3) record all
construction activities, and (4)
document observed reactions (changes
in behavior or movement) of marine
mammals during each sighting.
Observers will monitor for marine
mammals during all in-water pile
installation/removal and DTH
associated with the project. The
AKDOT&PF will monitor the project
area to the extent possible based on the
required number of PSOs, required
monitoring locations, and
environmental conditions. Monitoring
will be conducted by PSOs from land.
For all pile driving and DTH activities,
a minimum of one observer must be
assigned to each active pile driving and
DTH location to monitor the shutdown
zones. Two PSOs must be onsite during
all in-water activities and will monitor
from the best vantage point. Due to the
remote nature of the area, the PSOs will
meet with the future designated
Contractor and AKDOT&PF to
determine the most appropriate
observation location(s) for monitoring
during pile installation and removal.
These observers must record all
observations of marine mammals,
regardless of distance from the pile
being driven or during DTH.
In addition, PSOs will work in shifts
lasting no longer than 4 hrs with at least
a 1-hr break between shifts, and will not
perform duties as a PSO for more than
12 hrs in a 24-hr period (to reduce PSO
fatigue).
Monitoring of pile driving will be
conducted by qualified, NMFSapproved PSOs. The AKDOT&PF shall
adhere to the following conditions when
selecting PSOs:
D PSOs must be independent (i.e., not
construction personnel) and have no
other assigned tasks during monitoring
periods;
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
43202
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
D At least one PSO must have prior
experience performing the duties of a
PSO during construction activities
pursuant to a NMFS-issued incidental
take authorization;
D Other PSOs may substitute other
relevant experience, education (degree
in biological science or related field), or
training;
D Where a team of three PSOs are
required, a lead observer or monitoring
coordinator shall be designated. The
lead observer must have prior
experience performing the duties of a
PSO during construction activity
pursuant to a NMFS-issued incidental
take authorization; and
D PSOs must be approved by NMFS
prior to beginning any activity subject to
this IHA.
The AKDOT&PF will ensure that the
PSOs have the following additional
qualifications:
D Visual acuity in both eyes
(correction is permissible) sufficient for
discernment of moving targets at the
water’s surface with ability to estimate
target size and distance; use of
binoculars may be necessary to correctly
identify the target;
D Experience and ability to conduct
field observations and collect data
according to assigned protocols;
D Experience or training in the field
identification of marine mammals,
including the identification of
behaviors;
D Sufficient training, orientation, or
experience with the construction
operation to provide for personal safety
during observations;
D Writing skills sufficient to prepare a
report of observations including but not
limited to the number and species of
marine mammals observed; dates and
times when in-water construction
activities were conducted; dates, times,
and reason for implementation of
mitigation (or why mitigation was not
implemented when required); and
marine mammal behavior; and
D Ability to communicate orally, by
radio or in person, with project
personnel to provide real-time
information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
Final Report
The AKDOT&PF will submit a draft
report to NMFS on all monitoring
conducted under this IHA within 90
calendar days of the completion of
monitoring or 60 calendar days prior to
the requested issuance of any
subsequent IHA for construction activity
at the same location, whichever comes
first. A final report must be prepared
and submitted within 30 days following
resolution of any NMFS comments on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
the draft report. If no comments are
received from NMFS within 30 days of
receipt of the draft report, the report
shall be considered final. All draft and
final marine mammal monitoring
reports must be submitted to
PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov
and ITP.Egger@noaa.gov. The report
must contain the informational elements
described in the Marine Mammal
Monitoring Plan and, at minimum, must
include:
D Dates and times (begin and end) of
all marine mammal monitoring;
D Construction activities occurring
during each daily observation period,
including:
Æ How many and what type of piles
were driven and by what method (e.g.,
impact, vibratory, DTH);
Æ Total duration of driving time for
each pile (vibratory driving) and
number of strikes for each pile (impact
driving); and
Æ For DTH, duration of operation for
both impulsive and non-pulse
components.
D PSO locations during marine
mammal monitoring;
D Environmental conditions during
monitoring periods (at beginning and
end of PSO shift and whenever
conditions change significantly),
including Beaufort sea state and any
other relevant weather conditions
including cloud cover, fog, sun glare,
and overall visibility to the horizon, and
estimated observable distance;
D Upon observation of a marine
mammal, the following information:
Æ PSO who sighted the animal and
PSO location and activity at time of
sighting;
Æ Time of sighting;
Æ Identification of the animal (e.g.,
genus/species, lowest possible
taxonomic level, or unidentified), PSO
confidence in identification, and the
composition of the group if there is a
mix of species;
Æ Distance and bearing of each
marine mammal observed to the pile
being driven for each sighting (if pile
driving and DTH was occurring at time
of sighting);
Æ Estimated number of animals (min/
max/best);
Æ Estimated number of animals by
cohort (adults, juveniles, neonates,
group composition etc.;
Æ Animal’s closest point of approach
and estimated time spent within the
harassment zone; and
Æ Description of any marine mammal
behavioral observations (e.g., observed
behaviors such as feeding or traveling),
including an assessment of behavioral
responses to the activity (e.g., no
response or changes in behavioral state
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
such as ceasing feeding, changing
direction, flushing, or breaching).
D Detailed information about
implementation of any mitigation (e.g.,
shutdowns and delays), a description of
specific actions that ensued, and
resulting changes in behavior of the
animal, if any; and
D All PSO datasheets and/or raw
sightings data.
Reporting of Injured or Dead Marine
Mammals
In the event that personnel involved
in the construction activities discover
an injured or dead marine mammal, the
AKDOT&PF must report the incident to
NMFS Office of Protected Resources
(OPR) (PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@
noaa.gov), NMFS (301–427–8401) and
to the Alaska regional stranding network
(877–925–7773) as soon as feasible. If
the death or injury was clearly caused
by the specified activity, the
AKDOT&PF must immediately cease the
specified activities until NMFS OPR is
able to review the circumstances of the
incident and determine what, if any,
additional measures are appropriate to
ensure compliance with the terms of
this IHA. The AKDOT&PF will not
resume their activities until notified by
NMFS. The report must include the
following information:
D Time, date, and location (latitude/
longitude) of the first discovery (and
updated location information if known
and applicable);
D Species identification (if known) or
description of the animal(s) involved;
D Condition of the animal(s)
(including carcass condition if the
animal is dead);
D Observed behaviors of the
animal(s), if alive;
D If available, photographs or video
footage of the animal(s); and
D General circumstances under which
the animal was discovered.
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’’
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
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).
As stated in the mitigation section,
shutdown zones that are larger than the
Level A harassment zones will be
implemented, which, in combination
with the fact that the zones are small to
begin with, is expected to avoid the
likelihood of Level A harassment for
marine mammals species.
Exposures to elevated sound levels
produced during pile driving activities
may cause behavioral disturbance of
some individuals, but they are expected
to be mild and temporary. Effects on
individuals that are taken by Level B
harassment, as enumerated in the Take
Estimation section, on the basis of
reports in the literature as well as
monitoring from other similar activities,
will likely be limited to reactions such
as increased swimming speeds,
increased surfacing time, or decreased
foraging (if such activity were occurring)
(e.g., Thorson and Reyff, 2006; Lerma,
2014). Most likely, individuals will
simply move away from the sound
source and be temporarily displaced
from the areas of pile driving, although
even this reaction has been observed
primarily only in association with
impact pile driving. These reactions and
behavioral changes are expected to
subside quickly when the exposures
cease.
During all impact driving,
implementation of soft start procedures
and monitoring of established shutdown
zones will be required, significantly
reducing the possibility of injury. Given
sufficient notice through use of soft start
(for impact driving), marine mammals
are expected to move away from an
irritating sound source prior to it
becoming potentially injurious. In
addition, PSOs will be stationed within
the action area whenever pile driving/
removal and DTH activities are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
underway. Depending on the activity,
the AKDOT&PF will employ the use of
two PSOs to ensure all monitoring and
shutdown zones are properly observed.
The project would likely not
permanently impact any marine
mammal habitat since the project will
occur within the same footprint as
existing marine infrastructure. The
nearshore and intertidal habitat where
the project will occur is an area of
relatively high marine vessel traffic and
some local individuals would likely be
somewhat habituated to the level of
activity in the area, further reducing the
likelihood of more severe impacts. The
closest pinniped haulouts are used by
harbor seals and are less than a mile
from the project area; however, for the
reasons described immediately above
(including the nature of expected
responses and the duration of the
project) impacts to reproduction or
survival of individuals is not
anticipated, much less effects on the
species or stock. There are no other
biologically important areas for marine
mammals near the project area.
In addition, impacts to marine
mammal prey species are expected to be
minor and temporary. Overall, the area
impacted by the project is very small
compared to the available habitat
around Metlakatla. The most likely
impact to prey will be temporary
behavioral avoidance of the immediate
area. During pile driving/removal and
DTH activities, it is expected that fish
and marine mammals would
temporarily move to nearby locations
and return to the area following
cessation of in-water construction
activities. Therefore, indirect effects on
marine mammal prey during the
construction are not expected to be
substantial.
In summary and as described above,
the following factors primarily support
our determination that the impacts
resulting from this activity are not
expected to adversely affect the species
or stock through effects on annual rates
of recruitment or survival:
D No mortality is anticipated or
authorized;
D No take by Level A harassment is
expected or authorized;
D Anticipated incidents of Level B
harassment consist of, at worst,
temporary modifications in behavior;
D The required mitigation measures
(i.e., shutdown zones) are expected to be
effective in reducing the effects of the
specified activity;
D Minimal impacts to marine
mammal habitat/prey are expected;
D The action area is located and
within an active marine commercial
area, and;
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43203
D There are no known biologically
important areas in the vicinity of the
project, with the exception of nearby
harbor seal haulouts—however, as
described above, exposure to the work
conducted in the vicinity of the
haulouts is not expected to impact the
reproduction or survival of any
individual seals.
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
monitoring and mitigation measures,
NMFS finds that the total marine
mammal take from the planned activity
will have a negligible impact on all
affected marine mammal species or
stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers
of incidental take may be authorized
under Section 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. When the
predicted number of individuals to be
taken is fewer than one third of the
species or stock abundance, the take is
considered to be of small numbers.
Additionally, other qualitative factors
may be considered in the analysis, such
as the temporal or spatial scale of the
activities.
Take of six of the marine mammal
stocks authorized will comprise at most
approximately 1.4 percent or less of the
stock abundance. There are no official
stock abundances for harbor porpoise
and minke whales; however, as
discussed in greater detail in the
Description of Marine Mammals in the
Area of Specified Activities in the
Federal Register notice of the proposed
IHA (86 FR 34203; June 29, 2021), we
believe for the abundance information
that is available, the estimated takes are
likely small percentages of the stock
abundance. For harbor porpoise, the
abundance for the Southeast Alaska
stock is likely more represented by the
aerial surveys that were conducted as
these surveys had better coverage and
were corrected for observer bias. Based
on this data, the estimated take could
potentially be approximately 4 percent
of the stock abundance. However, this is
unlikely and the percentage of the stock
taken is likely lower as the take
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
43204
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 149 / Friday, August 6, 2021 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
estimates are conservative and the
project occurs in a small footprint
compared to the available habitat in
Southeast Alaska. For minke whales, in
the northern part of their range they are
believed to be migratory and so few
minke whales have been seen during
three offshore Gulf of Alaska surveys
that a population estimate could not be
determined. With only twelve
authorized takes for this species, the
percentage of take in relation to the
stock abundance is likely to be very
small.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of the planned activity (including
the mitigation and monitoring
measures) and the anticipated take of
marine mammals, NMFS finds that
small numbers of marine mammals will
be taken relative to the population size
of the affected species or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis
and Determination
In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must
find that the specified activity will not
have an ‘‘unmitigable adverse impact’’
on the subsistence uses of the affected
marine mammal species or stocks by
Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined
‘‘unmitigable adverse impact’’ in 50 CFR
216.103 as an impact resulting from the
specified activity: (1) That is likely to
reduce the availability of the species to
a level insufficient for a harvest to meet
subsistence needs by: (i) Causing the
marine mammals to abandon or avoid
hunting areas; (ii) Directly displacing
subsistence users; or (iii) Placing
physical barriers between the marine
mammals and the subsistence hunters;
and (2) That cannot be sufficiently
mitigated by other measures to increase
the availability of marine mammals to
allow subsistence needs to be met.
The project area does not spatially
overlap any known subsistence hunting.
The project area is a developed area
with regular marine vessel traffic.
Nonetheless, the AKDOT&PF provided
advanced public notice of construction
activities to reduce construction impacts
on local residents, adjacent businesses,
and other users of Port Chester and
nearby areas. This included notification
to nearby Alaska Native tribes that may
have members who hunt marine
mammals for subsistence. Currently, the
Metlakatla Indian Community does not
authorize the harvest of marine
mammals for subsistence use (R. Cook,
personal communication, June 5, 2020
as cited in the application).
The planned project is not likely to
adversely impact the availability of any
marine mammal species or stocks that
are commonly used for subsistence
purposes or to impact subsistence
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:29 Aug 05, 2021
Jkt 253001
harvest of marine mammals in the
region because construction activities
are localized and temporary and
mitigation measures will be
implemented to minimize disturbance
of marine mammals in the project area.
Accordingly, NMFS has determined that
there will not be an unmitigable adverse
impact on the availability of any marine
mammals for taking for subsistence uses
from the AKDOT&PF’s planned
activities.
Endangered Species Act
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
whenever we propose to authorize take
for endangered or threatened species, in
this case with the Alaska Regional
Office (AKRO).
NMFS is authorizing take of the
Central North Pacific stock of humpback
whales, including individuals from the
Mexico DPS of humpback whales,
which are listed under the ESA. The
Permit and Conservation Division
completed a Section 7 consultation with
the AKRO for the issuance of this IHA.
The AKRO’s biological opinion states
that the action is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of the Mexico
DPS of humpback whales.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations,
NMFS authorizes an IHA to the
AKDOT&PF for conducting for the
planned pile driving and removal
activities as well as DTH during
construction of the Metlakatla Seaplane
Facility Refurbishment Project,
Metlakatla, Alaska for one year,
beginning August 2021, provided the
previously mentioned mitigation,
monitoring, and reporting requirements
are incorporated.
Dated: August 3, 2021.
Catherine Marzin,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2021–16861 Filed 8–5–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XB270]
Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental
To Specified Activities; Taking Marine
Mammals Incidental to Elkhorn Slough
Tidal Marsh Restoration Project, Phase
III in Monterey County, California
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; proposed issuance of an
incidental harassment authorization;
request for comments.
AGENCY:
NMFS has received a request
from the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife (CDFW) for authorization
to take marine mammals incidental to
the Elkhorn slough Tidal Marsh
Restoration Project (Phase III) in
Monterey County, CA. which includes
the excavation and movement of soil
with heavy machinery for marsh
restoration. NMFS is requesting
comments on its proposal to issue an
incidental harassment authorization
(IHA) to incidentally take marine
mammals during the specified activities.
NMFS is also requesting comments on
a possible one-time, one-year renewal
that could be issued under certain
circumstances and if all requirements
are met, as described in Request for
Public Comments at the end of this
notice. NMFS will consider public
comments prior to making any final
decision on the issuance of the
requested MMPA authorizations and
agency responses will be summarized in
the final notice of our decision.
DATES: Comments and information must
be received no later than September 7,
2021.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be
addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief,
Permits and Conservation Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service. Written
comments should be submitted via
email to ITP.Corcoran@noaa.gov.
Instructions: NMFS is not responsible
for comments sent by any other method,
to any other address or individual, or
received after the end of the comment
period. Comments, including all
attachments, must not exceed a 25megabyte file size. Attachments to
comments will be accepted in Microsoft
Word or Excel or Adobe PDF file
formats only. All comments received are
a part of the public record and will
generally be posted online at https://
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\06AUN1.SGM
06AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 149 (Friday, August 6, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43190-43204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16861]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XB234]
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specific Activities;
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Pile Driving and Removal
Activities During the Metlakatla Seaplane Facility Refurbishment
Project, Metlakatla, Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the regulations implementing the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given
that NMFS has issued an incidental harassment authorization (IHA) to
the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities
(AKDOT&PF) to incidentally harass, by Level B harassment only, marine
mammals during pile driving/removal and down-the-hole drilling (DTH)
activities for maintenance improvements to the existing Metlakatla
Seaplane Facility (MSF) in Southeast Alaska.
DATES: This Authorization is effective for one year from issuance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Egger, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401. Electronic copies of the application
and supporting documents, as well as a list of the references cited in
this document, may be obtained online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-alaska-department-transportation-metlakatla-seaplane-facility. In case of
problems accessing these documents, or for anyone who is unable to
comment via electronic mail, 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
[[Page 43191]]
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 definitions
of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the
relevant sections below.
Summary of Request
On August 10, 2020, NMFS received a request from the AKDOT&PF for
an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to pile driving/removal and
DTH activities during maintenance improvements to the existing MSF in
Southeast Alaska. The application was deemed adequate and complete on
November 23, 2020. The applicant also provided an addendum to their
application on February 23, 2021 for the addition of eight piles, some
changes to their shutdown zones, and minor changes to their take
estimates due to the increase of in-water work days from the eight
additional piles. The applicant's request is for take of eight species
of marine mammals by Level B harassment only. Neither the AKDOT&PF nor
NMFS expects serious injury or mortality to result from this activity
and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.
Description of Planned Activity
The purpose of this project is to make repairs to the MSF. The
existing facility has experienced deterioration in recent years and
AKDOT&PF has conducted several repair projects. The facility is near
the end of its useful life, and replacement of all the existing float
structures is required to continue safe operation in the future. The
planned project in Metlakatla is located approximately 24 kilometers
(km) (15 miles (mi)) south of Ketchikan, in Southeast Alaska.
Metlakatla, is on Annette Island, in the Prince of Whales-Hyder Census
Area of Southeast Alaska. The Metlakatla Seaplane Facility is centrally
located in the village of Metlakatla on the south shore of Port
Chester.
The planned project includes pile driving/removal and DTH over 2
months (approximately 26 working days) beginning in August 2021. Pile
installation and removal will be intermittent during this period,
depending on weather, construction and mechanical delays, protected
species shutdowns, and other potential delays and logistical
constraints. Pile installation will occur intermittently during the
work period, for durations of minutes to hours at a time. Approximately
18 days of pile installation and 8 days of pile removal will occur
using vibratory and impact pile driving and some DTH to stabilize the
piles. These are discussed in further detail below. The total
construction duration accounts for the time required to mobilize
materials and resources and construct the project.
Planned activities included as part of the project with potential
to affect marine mammals include the noise generated by vibratory
removal of steel pipe piles, vibratory and impact installation of steel
pipe piles, and DTH to stabilize piles. Pile removal will be conducted
using a vibratory hammer. Pile installation will be conducted using
both a vibratory and impact hammer and DTH pile installation methods.
Piles will be advanced to refusal using a vibratory hammer. After DTH
pile installation, the final approximate 3.048 m (10 ft) of driving
will be conducted using an impact hammer so that the structural
capacity of the pile embedment can be verified. The pile installation
methods used will depend on sediment depth and conditions at each pile
location. Pile installation and removal will occur in waters
approximately 6-7 m (20-23 ft) in depth.
The project will involve the removal of 11 existing steel pipe
piles (16-inch (in) diameter) that support the existing multiple-float
structure. The multiple-float timber structure, which covers 8,600
square ft, will also be removed. A new 4,800-square-ft single-float
timber structure will be installed in the same general location. Six
24-in diameter steel pipe piles will be installed to act as restraints
for the new seaplane float. In addition, 12 temporary 24-in steel piles
will be installed to support pile installation and removed following
completion of construction.
DTH pile installation involves drilling rock sockets into the
bedrock to support installation of the 6 permanent piles and 12
temporary piles. Rock sockets consist of inserting the pile in a
drilled hole into the underlying bedrock after the pile has been driven
through the overlying softer sediments to refusal by vibratory or
impact methods. The pile is advanced farther into this drilled hole to
properly secure the bottom portion of the pile into the rock. The depth
of the rock socket varies, but 3.048-4.572 m (10-15 ft) is commonly
required. The diameter of the rock socket is slightly larger than the
pile being driven. Rock sockets are constructed using a DTH device with
both rotary and percussion-type actions. Each device consists of a
drill bit that drills through the bedrock using both rotary and pulse
impact mechanisms. This breaks up the rock to allow removal of the
fragments and insertion of the pile. The pile is usually advanced at
the same time that drilling occurs. Drill cuttings are expelled from
the top of the pile using compressed air. It is estimated that drilling
rock sockets into the bedrock will take about 1-3 hours (hrs) per pile.
Tension anchors will be installed in each of the six permanent
piles. Tension anchors are installed within piles that are drilled into
the bedrock below the elevation of the pile tip after the pile has been
driven through the sediment layer to refusal. A 6- or 8-in diameter
steel pipe casing will be inserted inside the larger diameter
production pile. A rock drill will be inserted into the casing, and a
6- to 8-in diameter hole will be drilled into bedrock with rotary and
percussion drilling methods. The drilling work is contained within the
steel pile casing and the steel pipe pile. The typical depth of the
drilled hole varies, but 20-30 ft is common. Rock fragments will be
removed through the top of the casing with compressed air. A steel rod
will then be grouted into the drilled hole and affixed to the top of
the pile. The purpose of a tension anchor is to secure the pile to the
bedrock to withstand uplift forces. It is estimated that tension anchor
installation will take about 1-2 hrs per pile.
No concurrent pile driving is anticipated for this project.
Please see Table 1 below for the specific amount of time required
to install and remove piles.
[[Page 43192]]
Table 1--Pile Driving and Removal Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact DTH pile
strikes Vibratory DTH pile installation Total
Number of Rock Tension per pile duration installation (tension duration of Piles per Total
Pile diameter and type piles sockets anchors (duration per pile (rock socket) anchor) activity day days
in (minutes) duration per duration per per pile (range)
minutes) pile (minutes) pile (minutes) (hours)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile Installation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-in Steel Plumb Piles 4 4 4 20 (15) 15 180 120 5.5 0.5 (0-1) 8
(Permanent).................
24-in Steel Batter Piles 2 2 2 20 (15) 15 90 120 4 0.5 (0-1) 4
(Permanent).................
24-in Steel Piles (Temporary) 12 12 0 20 (15) 15 60 N/A 1.5 2 (1-3) 6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pile Removal
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16-in Steel Piles............ 11 N/A N/A N/A 30 N/A N/A 0.5 3 (2-4) 4
24-in Steel Piles (Temporary) 12 N/A N/A N/A 30 N/A N/A 0.5 3 (2-4) 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals................... 29 18 6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 26
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: DTH = down-the-hole; N/A = not applicable.
A detailed description of the planned MSF project is provided in
the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (86 FR 34203; June 29,
2021).
Comments and Responses
A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue and IHA to AKDOT&PF was
published in the Federal Register on June 29, 2021 (86 FR 34203). That
notice described, in detail, AKDOT&PF's activity, the marine mammal
species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated
effects on marine mammals. During the 30-day public comment period,
NMFS received no public comments on this action.
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' Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports) and more general information about these
species (e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on
NMFS' website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species).
Table 2 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and
authorized for this action, and summarizes information related to the
population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and
Endangered Species Act (ESA) and potential biological removal (PBR),
where known. For taxonomy, we follow Committee on Taxonomy (2020). 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' 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 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' 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' U.S. Pacific and Alaska SARs (Carretta et al., 2020; Muto et al.,
2020). All MMPA stock information presented in Table 2 is the most
recent available at the time of publication and is available in the
2019 SARs (Caretta et al., 2020; Muto et al., 2020) and draft 2020 SARs
(available online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports).
Table 2--Marine Mammal Occurrence in the Project Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESA/ MMPA status; Stock abundance (CV,
Common name Scientific name Stock strategic (Y/N) Nmin, most recent PBR Annual M/SI
\1\ abundance survey) \2\ \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Cetartiodactyla--Cetacea--Superfamily Mysticeti (baleen whales)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Balaenopteridae (rorquals):
Minke Whale.................... Balaenoptera Alaska................ -, -, N N/A (see SAR, N/A, see UND 0
acutorostrata. SAR).
Humpback Whale................. Megaptera novaeangliae Central N Pacific..... -, -, Y 10,103 (0.3, 7,891, 83 26
2006).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Superfamily Odontoceti (toothed whales, dolphins, and porpoises)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Delphinidae:
Killer Whale................... Orcinus orca.......... Alaska Resident....... -, -, N 2,347 (N/A, 2347, 24 1
2012).
Northern Resident..... -, -, N 302 (N/A, 302, 2018).. 2.2 0.2
[[Page 43193]]
West Coast Transient.. -, -, N 349 (N/A, 349; 2018).. 3.5 0.4
Pacific White-Sided Dolphin.... Lagenorhynchus N Pacific............. -, -, N 26,880 (N/A, N/A, UND 0
obliquidens. 1990).
Family Phocoenidae (porpoises):
Dall's Porpoise................ Phocoenoides dalli.... AK.................... -, -, N 83,400 (0.097, N/A, UND 38
1991).
Harbor Porpoise................ Phocoena phocoena..... Southeast Alaska -, -, Y see SAR (see SAR, see see SAR 34
Inland waters. SAR, 2012).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order Carnivora--Superfamily Pinnipedia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Family Otariidae (eared seals and
sea lions):
Steller sea lion............... Eumetopias jubatus.... Eastern DPS........... T, D, Y 43,201 a (see SAR, 2592 112
43,201, 2017).
Family Phocidae (earless seals):
Harbor Seal.................... Phoca vitulina........ Clarence Strait....... -, -, N 27,659 (see SAR, 746 40
24,854, 2015).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports-region. CV is coefficient of variation; Nmin is the minimum estimate of stock abundance. In some cases, CV is not applicable
[explain if this is the case].
\3\ These values, found in NMFS' 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.
A detailed description of the of the species likely to be affected
by the project, including brief introductions to the species and
relevant stocks as well as available information regarding population
trends and threats, and information regarding local occurrence, were
provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (86 FR
34203; June 29, 2021) since that time, we are not aware of any changes
in the status of these species and stocks; therefore, detailed
descriptions are not provided here. Please refer to that Federal
Register notice for these descriptions. Please also refer to NMFS'
website (https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) for generalized
species accounts.
Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and Their
Habitat
Acoustic effects on marine mammals during the specified activity
can occur from vibratory and impact pile driving as well as during DTH
of the piles. The effects of underwater noise from the AKDOT&PF's
planned activities have the potential to result in Level B behavioral
harassment of marine mammals in the vicinity of the action area. The
effects of pile driving on marine mammals are dependent on several
factors, including the size, type, and depth of the animal; the depth,
intensity, and duration of the pile driving sound; the depth of the
water column; the substrate of the habitat; the standoff distance
between the pile and the animal; and the sound propagation properties
of the environment. With both types, it is likely that the pile driving
could result in temporary, short-term changes in an animal's typical
behavioral patterns and/or avoidance of the affected area. The Federal
Register notice for the proposed IHA (86 FR 34203; June 29, 2021)
included a discussion of the effects of anthropogenic noise on marine
mammals, therefore that information is not repeated here; please refer
to the Federal Register notice (86 FR 34203; June 29, 2021).
Anticipated Effects on Marine Mammal Habitat
The main impact issue associated with the planned activity would be
temporarily elevated sound levels and the associated direct effects on
marine mammals. The most likely impact to marine mammal habitat occurs
from pile driving effects on likely marine mammal prey (i.e., fish)
near where the piles are installed. Impacts to the immediate substrate
during installation and removal of piles are anticipated, but these
would be limited to minor, temporary suspension of sediments, which
could impact water quality and visibility for a short amount of time,
but which would not be expected to have any effects on individual
marine mammals. Impacts to substrate are therefore not discussed
further. These potential effects are discussed in detail in the Federal
Register notice for the proposed IHA (86 FR 34203; June 29, 2021)
therefore that information is not repeated here; please refer to that
Federal Register notice for that information.
Estimated Take
This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes
authorization through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS'
consideration of ``small numbers'' and the negligible impact
determination.
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).
Take of marine mammals incidental to the AKDOT&PF's pile driving
and removal activities (as well as during DTH) could occur as a result
of Level B harassment only. Below we describe how the potential take is
estimated. As described previously, no mortality is anticipated or
authorized for this
[[Page 43194]]
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 planned 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
permanent threshold shift (PTS) of some degree (equated to Level A
harassment).
Level B Harassment--Though significantly driven by received level,
the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure
is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the
source (e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment
(e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation,
experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to
predict (Southall et al., 2007, Ellison et al., 2012). Based on what
the available science indicates and the practical need to use a
threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for
most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on
received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS
predicts that marine mammals are likely to be behaviorally harassed in
a manner we consider Level B harassment when exposed to underwater
anthropogenic noise above received levels of 120 dB reference pressure
micro Pascal (re 1 [mu]Pa (rms)) for continuous (e.g., vibratory pile
driving and DTH) and above 160 dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) for impulsive
sources (e.g., impact pile driving). The AKDOT&PF's planned activity
includes the use of continuous (vibratory pile driving, DTH) and
impulsive (impact pile driving) sources, and therefore the 120 and 160
dB re 1 [mu]Pa (rms) are applicable.
Level A Harassment--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. The
technical guidance identifies the received levels, or thresholds, above
which individual marine mammals are predicted to experience changes in
their hearing sensitivity for all underwater anthropogenic sound
sources, and reflects the best available science on the potential for
noise to affect auditory sensitivity by:
[ssquf] Dividing sound sources into two groups (i.e., impulsive and
non-impulsive) based on their potential to affect hearing sensitivity;
[ssquf] Choosing metrics that best address the impacts of noise on
hearing sensitivity, i.e., sound pressure level (peak SPL) and sound
exposure level (SEL) (also accounts for duration of exposure); and
[ssquf] Dividing marine mammals into hearing groups and developing
auditory weighting functions based on the science supporting that not
all marine mammals hear and use sound in the same manner.
These thresholds were developed by compiling and synthesizing the
best available science, and are provided in Table 3 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.
DTH pile installation includes drilling (non-impulsive sound) and
hammering (impulsive sound) to penetrate rocky substrates (Denes et al.
2016; Denes et al. 2019; Reyff and Heyvaert 2019). DTH pile
installation was initially thought be a primarily non-impulsive noise
source. However, Denes et al. (2019) concluded from a study conducted
in Virginia, nearby the location for this project, that DTH should be
characterized as impulsive based on Southall et al. (2007), who stated
that signals with a >3 dB difference in sound pressure level in a
0.035-second window compared to a 1-second window can be considered
impulsive. Therefore, DTH pile installation is treated as both an
impulsive and non-impulsive noise source. In order to evaluate Level A
harassment, DTH pile installation activities are evaluated according to
the impulsive criteria and using 160 dB rms. Level B harassment
isopleths are determined by applying non-impulsive criteria and using
the 120 dB rms threshold which is also used for vibratory driving. This
approach ensures that the largest ranges to effect for both Level A and
Level B harassment are accounted for in the take estimation process.
Table 3--Thresholds Identifying the Onset of Permanent Threshold Shift
[Auditory injury]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PTS onset acoustic thresholds * (received level)
Hearing group ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive Non-impulsive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low-Frequency (LF) Cetaceans........... Cell 1: Lpk,flat: 219 dB; Cell 2: LE,LF,24h: 199 dB.
LE,LF,24h: 183 dB.
Mid-Frequency (MF) Cetaceans........... Cell 3: Lpk,flat: 230 dB; Cell 4: LE,MF,24h: 198 dB.
LE,MF,24h: 185 dB.
High-Frequency (HF) Cetaceans.......... Cell 5: Lpk,flat: 202 dB; Cell 6: LE,HF,24h: 173 dB.
LE,HF,24h: 155 dB.
Phocid Pinnipeds (PW) (Underwater)..... Cell 7: Lpk,flat: 218 dB; Cell 8: LE,PW,24h: 201 dB.
LE,PW,24h: 185 dB.
Otariid Pinnipeds (OW) (Underwater).... Cell 9: Lpk,flat: 232 dB; Cell 10: LE,OW,24h: 219 dB.
LE,OW,24h: 203 dB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual metric acoustic thresholds for impulsive sounds: Use whichever results in the largest isopleth for
calculating PTS onset. If a non-impulsive sound has the potential of exceeding the peak sound pressure level
thresholds associated with impulsive sounds, these thresholds should also be considered.
[[Page 43195]]
Note: Peak sound pressure (Lpk) has a reference value of 1 [micro]Pa, and cumulative sound exposure level (LE)
has a reference value of 1[micro]Pa\2\s. 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.
Sound Propagation
Transmission loss (TL) is the decrease in acoustic intensity as an
acoustic pressure wave propagates out from a source. TL parameters vary
with frequency, temperature, sea conditions, current, source and
receiver depth, water depth, water chemistry, and bottom composition
and topography. The general formula for underwater TL is:
TL = B * log10(R1/R2), where
B = transmission loss coefficient (assumed to be 15)
R1 = the distance of the modeled SPL from the driven
pile, and
R2 = the distance from the driven pile of the initial
measurement.
This formula neglects loss due to scattering and absorption, which
is assumed to be zero here. The degree to which underwater sound
propagates away from a sound source is dependent on a variety of
factors, most notably the water bathymetry and presence or absence of
reflective or absorptive conditions including in-water structures and
sediments. Spherical spreading occurs in a perfectly unobstructed
(free-field) environment not limited by depth or water surface,
resulting in a 6 dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of
distance from the source (20*log(range)). Cylindrical spreading occurs
in an environment in which sound propagation is bounded by the water
surface and sea bottom, resulting in a reduction of 3 dB in sound level
for each doubling of distance from the source (10*log(range)). As is
common practice in coastal waters, here we assume practical spreading
loss (4.5 dB reduction in sound level for each doubling of distance).
Practical spreading is a compromise that is often used under conditions
where water depth increases as the receiver moves away from the
shoreline, resulting in an expected propagation environment that would
lie between spherical and cylindrical spreading loss conditions.
Practical spreading was used to determine sound propagation for this
project.
Sound Source Levels
The intensity of pile driving sounds is greatly influenced by
factors such as the type of piles, hammers, and the physical
environment in which the activity takes place. There are source level
measurements available for certain pile types and sizes from the
similar environments recorded from underwater pile driving projects in
Alaska that were evaluated and used as proxy sound source levels to
determine reasonable sound source levels likely result from the
AKDOT&PF's pile driving and removal activities (Table 4). Many source
levels used were more conservative as the values were from larger pile
sizes.
Table 4--Sound Source Levels
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Method and pile type SSL at 10 meters Literature source Federal Register sources \a\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continuous (Vibratory Pile Driving and dB rms
DTH).
16-in Steel Piles........................ 161 Navy 2012, 2015............ A, B, C, H.
24-in Steel Piles........................ 161 Navy 2012, 2015............ C, D, E, H, I.
24-in DTH \b\............................ 166 Denes et al. 2016 (Table B, C, F, G.
72) \b\.
8-in DTH \c\............................. 166 NMFS \c\...................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impulsive (Impact Pile Driving and DTH) dB rms dB SEL dB Peak
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-in Steel Piles........................ 193 181 210 Navy 2015.................. D, H, I.
24-in DTH \b\............................ .............. 154 .............. Denes et al. 2016 \b\......
8-in DTH \c\............................. .............. 144 170 Reyff 2020.................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Federal Register sources:
A: 84 FR 24490; May 28, 2019, City of Juneau Waterfront Improvement Project, Juneau, Alaska.
B: 85 FR 4278; January 24, 2020, Statter Harbor Improvement Project, Auke Bay, Alaska.
C: 85 FR 673; January 7, 2020, Tongass Narrows Ferry Berth Improvements, Ketchikan, Alaska.
D: 85 FR 19294; April 6, 2020, Port of Alaska's Petroleum and Cement Terminal, Anchorage, Alaska.
E: 84 FR 56767; October 23, 2019, Auke Bay Ferry Terminal Modifications and Improvements Project, Juneau, Alaska.
F: 85 FR 18196; April 1, 2020, Gastineau Channel Historical Society Sentinel Island Moorage Float Project, Juneau, Alaska.
G: 85 FR 12523; March 3, 2020, Ward Cove Cruise Ship Dock Project, Juneau, Alaska.
H: 83 FR 29749; June 26, 2018, City Dock and Ferry Terminal, Tenakee Springs, Alaska.
I: 82 FR 48987; October 23, 2017, Sand Point City Dock Replacement Project, Sand Point, Alaska.
\b\ DTH pile installation is treated as a continuous sound for Level B calculations and impulsive for Level A calculations.
\c\ Tension anchor installation (8-in DTH) is currently treated as DTH pile installation.
Notes: DTH = down-the-hole pile installation; SSL = sound source = level; dB = decibel; rms = root mean square; SEL = sound exposure level.
Level A Harassment
In conjunction with the NMFS Technical Guidance (2018), 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
[[Page 43196]]
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 from
impact and vibratory pile driving and DTH), NMFS User Spreadsheet
(2020) predicts the closest distance at which, if a marine mammal
remained at that distance the whole duration of the activity, it would
not incur PTS. Inputs used in the User Spreadsheet (Tables 5 and 6),
and the resulting isopleths are reported below (Table 7).
Table 5--NMFS Technical Guidance (2020) User Spreadsheet Input To Calculate PTS Isopleths for Vibratory Pile
Driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User spreadsheet input--vibratory pile driving spreadsheet Tab A.1 vibratory pile driving used
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-in piles 24-in plumb/
16-in piles temporary batter piles
(removal) (install/ permanent
removal) (install)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Level (RMS SPL).......................................... 161 161 161
Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz)............................... 2.5 2.5 2.5
Number of piles within 24-hr period............................. 4 4 4
Duration to drive a single pile (min)........................... 30 30 30
Propagation (xLogR)............................................. 15 15 15
Distance of source level measurement (meters)................... 10 10 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--NMFS Technical Guidance (2020) User Spreadsheet Input To Calculate PTS Isopleths for Impact Pile Driving
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User spreadsheet input--impact pile driving spreadsheet tab E.1 impact pile driving used
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-in piles 8-in pile 8-in pile 8-in pile 24-in pile 24-in pile 24-in pile
(permanent) (DTH) (DTH) (DTH) (DTH) (DTH) (DTH)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Level (Single Strike/shot SEL)... 181 144 144 144 154 154 154
Weighting Factor Adjustment (kHz)....... 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Number of strikes per pile.............. 20 54,000 108,000 162,000 54,000 81,000 162,000
Minutes per pile........................ .............. 60 120 180 60 90 180
Number of piles per day................. 3 1 1 1 1 1 1
Propagation (xLogR)..................... 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
Distance of source level measurement 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
(meters)...............................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 7--NMFS Technical Guidance (2020) User Spreadsheet Outputs To Calculate Level A Harassment PTS Isopleths
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
User spreadsheet output PTS isopleths (meters)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level A harassment
----------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Sound source Low- Mid- High-
level at 10 m frequency frequency frequency Phocid Otariid
cetaceans cetaceans cetaceans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Pile Driving/Removal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16-in steel pile removal..... 161 SPL......... 10.8 1.0 16.0 6.6 0.5
24-in steel pile temporary 161 SPL......... 10.8 1.0 16.0 6.6 0.5
installation and removal.
24-in steel pile permanent... 161 SPL......... 10.8 1.0 16.0 6.6 0.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Pile Driving
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-in steel permanent 181 SEL/193 SPL. 112.6 4.0 134.1 60.3 4.4
installation (3 piles a day).
24-in steel permanent 181 SEL/193 SPL. 85.9 3.1 102.3 46.0 3.3
installation (2 piles a day).
24-in steel permanent 181 SEL/193 SPL. 54.1 1.9 64.5 29.0 2.1
installation (1 piles a day).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTH
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8-in steel (60 min).......... 144 SEL/166 SPL. 35.8 1.3 42.7 19.2 1.4
8-in steel (120 min)......... 144 SEL/166 SPL. 56.9 2.0 67.8 30.4 2.2
8-in steel (180 min)......... 144 SEL/166 SPL. 74.5 2.7 88.8 39.9 2.9
24-in steel (60 min)......... 154 SEL/166 SPL. 166.3 5.9 198.1 89.0 6.5
[[Page 43197]]
24-in steel (90 min)......... 154 SEL/166 SPL. 218.0 7.8 259.6 116.6 8.5
24-in steel (180 min)........ 154 SEL/166 SPL. 346.0 12.3 412.1 185.2 13.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B Harassment
Utilizing the practical spreading loss model, the AKDOT&PF
determined underwater noise will fall below the behavioral effects
threshold of 120 dB rms for marine mammals at the distances shown in
Table 8 for vibratory pile driving/removal, and DTH. With these radial
distances, the largest Level B harassment zone calculated was for DTH
at 11,659 m. For calculating the Level B harassment zone for impact
driving, the practical spreading loss model was used with a behavioral
threshold of 160 dB rms. The maximum radial distance of the Level B
harassment zone for impact piling equaled 1,585 m for 24-in piles.
Table 8 below provides all Level B harassment radial distances (m)
during the AKDOT&PF's planned activities.
Table 8--Radial Distances (Meters) to Relevant Behavioral Isopleths
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received level at Level B harassment
Activity 10 meters (m) zone (m) *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Pile Driving/Removal and DTH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
16-in steel piles............... 161 SPL........... 5,415 (calculated
5,412).
24-in steel piles............... 161 SPL........... 5,415 (calculated
5,412).
8-in and 24-in DTH.............. 166 SPL........... 11,660 (calculated
11,659).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Pile Driving
------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-in steel piles............... 181 SEL/193 SPL... 1,585.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Numbers rounded up to nearest 5 meters. These specific rounded
distances are for monitoring purposes rather than take estimation.
Marine Mammal Occurrence and Take Calculation and Estimation
In this section we provide the information about the presence,
density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that will inform the take
calculations. Potential exposures to impact pile driving, vibratory
pile driving/removal and DTH noises for each acoustic threshold were
estimated using group size estimates and local observational data. As
shown above, distances to Level A harassment thresholds for project
activities are relatively small in most cases and mitigation (i.e.,
shutdown zones) is expected to avoid Level A harassment from these
activities. Accordingly, take by Level B harassment only will be
considered for this action. Take by Level B harassment are calculated
differently for some species based on monthly or daily sightings data
and average group sizes within the action area using the best available
data.
Minke Whales
There are no density estimates of minke whales available in the
project area. These whales are usually sighted individually or in small
groups of two or three, but there are reports of loose aggregations of
hundreds of animals (NMFS 2018). Dedicated surveys for cetaceans in
Southeast Alaska found that minke whales were scattered throughout
inland waters from Glacier Bay and Icy Strait to Clarence Strait
(Dahlheim et al. 2009). All sightings were of single minke whales,
except for a single sighting of multiple minke whales. Anecdotal
observations suggest that minke whales do not enter Port Chester, and
may be more rare in the project area (L. Bethel, personal
communication, June 11, 2020 2020 as cited in the application). Based
on the potential for one group of a group size of three whales entering
the Level B harassment zone during the project, similar to what is
observed in Tongass Narrows, NMFS authorizes, take of three minke
whales over the 4-month project period by Level B harassment. No take
by Level A harassment is authorized or anticipated to occur due to
their rarer occurrence in the project area. In addition, the shutdown
zones are larger than all the calculated Level A harassment isopleths
for all pile driving/removal and DTH activities for cetaceans.
Humpback Whales
There are no density estimates for humpback whales available in the
project area. Use of Nichols Passage and Port Chester by humpback
whales is common but intermittent and dependent on the presence of prey
fish. No systematic studies have documented humpback whale abundance
near Metlakatla. Anecdotal information from Metlakatla and Ketchikan
suggest that humpback whales' utilization of the area is intermittent
year-round and local mariners estimate that one to two humpback whales
may be present in the Port Chester area on a daily basis during summer
months (L. Bethel, personal communication, June 11, 2020 2020 as cited
in the application). This is consistent with reports from Ketchikan,
which suggest that humpback whales occur alone or in groups of two or
three individuals and abundance is highest in August and September (84
FR 34134; July 17, 2019). However, anecdotal reports suggest that
humpback whale abundance is higher and occurrence is more regular in
Metlakatla. Therefore,
[[Page 43198]]
NMFS authorizes two groups of two whales, up to four individuals per
day, may be taken by Level B harassment for a total of 104 humpback
whales (4 whales per day * 26 days = 104 humpback whales).
Under the MMPA, humpback whales are considered a single stock
(Central North Pacific); however, we have divided them here to account
for distinct population segments (DPSs) listed under the ESA. Using the
stock assessment from Muto et al. 2020 for the Central North Pacific
stock (10,103 whales) and calculations in Wade et al. 2016; 9,487
whales are expected to be from the Hawaii DPS and 606 from the Mexico
DPS. Therefore, for purposes of consultation under the ESA, we
anticipate that 7 whales of the total takes would be individuals from
the Mexico DPS (104 x 0.061 = 6.3 rounded to 7). No take by Level A
harassment is authorized or anticipated to occur due to their large
size and ability to be visibly detected in the project area if an
animal should approach the Level A harassment zone as well as the size
of the Level A harassment zones, which are expected to be manageable
for the protected species observers (PSOs). The calculated Level A
isopleths for low-frequency cetaceans are 113 m or less with the
exception of DTH of limited duration of 24-in piles where they range
from 166.3-346.0 m. The shutdown zones (Table 10) are larger for all
calculated Level A harassment isopleths during all pile driving
activities (vibratory, impact and DTH) for all cetaceans.
Killer Whales
There are no density estimates of killer whales available in the
project area. Three distinct eco-types occur in Southeast Alaska
(resident, transient and offshore whales; Ford et al., 1994; Dahlheim
et al., 1997, 2008). Dahlheim et al. (2009) observed transient killer
whales within Lynn Canal, Icy Strait, Stephens Passage, Frederick
Sound, and upper Chatham Strait. As determined during a line-transect
survey by Dalheim et al. (2008), the greatest number of transient
killer whale observed in Southeast Alaska occurred in 1993 with 32
animals seen over 2 months for an average of 16 sightings per month.
Resident pods were also observed in Icy Strait, Lynn Canal, Stephens
Passage, Frederick Sound and upper Chatham Straight (Dalheim et al.
2008). Transient killer whales are often found in long-term stable
social units (pods) of 1 to 16 whales. Average pod sizes in Southeast
Alaska were 6 in spring, 5 in summer, and 4 in fall. Pod sizes of
transient whales are generally smaller than those of resident social
groups. Resident killer whales occur in pods ranging from 7 to 70
whales that are seen in association with one another more than 50
percent of the time (Dahlheim et al. 2009; NMFS 2016b). In Southeast
Alaska, resident killer whale mean pod size was approximately 21.5 in
spring, 32.3 in summer, and 19.3 in fall (Dahlheim et al. 2009). Killer
whales are observed occasionally during summer throughout Nichols
Passage, but their presence in Port Chester is unlikely. Anecdotal
local information suggests that killer whales are rarely seen within
the Port Chester area, but may be present more frequently in Nichols
Passage and other areas around Gravina Island (L. Bethel, personal
communication, June 11, 2020 2020 as cited in the application). To be
conservative NMFS authorizes one killer whale pod of up to 15
individuals once during the project could be taken by Level B
harassment based on a pod of 12 killer whales that may be present each
month similar to Tongass Narrows near Ketchikan. Additionally, a recent
monitoring report for Tongass Narrows reported 10 individuals sighted
and 10 Level B harassment takes of killer whales during May 2021. No
take by Level A harassment is authorized or anticipated to occur to the
ability to visibly detect these large whales and the small size of the
Level A harassment zones. In addition, the shutdown zones are larger
than all the calculated Level A harassment isopleths for all pile
driving/removal and DTH activities for cetaceans.
Pacific White-Sided Dolphin
There are no density estimates of Pacific white-sided dolphins
available in the project area. Most observations of Pacific white-sided
dolphins occur off the outer coast or in inland waterways near
entrances to the open ocean. Pacific white-sided dolphins have been
observed in Alaska waters in groups ranging from 20 to 164 animals,
with the sighting of 164 animals occurring in Southeast Alaska near
Dixon Entrance to the south of Metlakatla (Muto et al., 2018). In
nearby Tongass Narrows, NMFS estimated that one group of 92 Pacific
white-sided dolphin (median between 20 and 164) may occur over a period
of 1 year (85 FR 673; January 7, 2020). There are no records of this
species occurring in Port Chester, and it is uncommon for individuals
to occur in the project area. Therefore, NMFS authorizes one large
group of 92 dolphins may be taken by Level B harassment during the
project. No take by Level A harassment authorized or anticipated as the
Level A harassment isopleths are so small.
Dall's Porpoise
There are no density estimates of Dall's porpoise available in the
project area. Little information is available on the abundance of
Dall's porpoise in the inland waters of Southeast Alaska. Dall's
porpoise are most abundant in spring, observed with lower numbers in
the summer, and lowest numbers in fall. Jefferson et al., 2019 presents
abundance estimates for Dall's porpoise in these waters and found the
abundance in summer (N = 2,680, CV = 19.6 percent), and lowest in fall
(N = 1,637, CV = 23.3 percent). No systematic studies of Dall's
porpoise abundance or distribution have occurred in Port Chester or
Nichols Passage; however, Dall's porpoises have been consistently
observed in Lynn Canal, Stephens Passage, upper Chatham Strait,
Frederick Sound, and Clarence Strait (Dahlheim et al. 2009). The
species is generally found in waters in excess of 600 ft (183 m) deep,
which do not occur in Port Chester. If Dall's porpoises occur in the
project area, they will likely be present in March or April, given the
strong seasonal patterns observed in nearby areas of Southeast Alaska
(Dahlheim et al. 2009). Dall's porpoises are seen once a month or less
within Port Chester and Nichols Passage in groups of less than 10
animals (L. Bethel, personal communication, June 11, 2020 as cited in
the application).
Dall's porpoises are not expected to occur in Port Chester because
the shallow water habitat of the bay is atypical of areas where Dall's
porpoises usually occur. Therefore, NMFS authorizes one group of Dall's
porpoise (15 individuals) per month, similar to what was estimated in
nearby Tongass Narrows, may be taken by Level B harassment for a total
of 30 Dall's porpoises during the 26 days of in-water construction (2
months * 15 porpoises per month = 30). No take by Level A harassment is
authorized or anticipated to occur due to their rarer occurrence in the
project area and the unlikelihood that they would enter the Level A
harassment zone and remain long enough to incur PTS in the rare event
that they are encountered. No take by Level A harassment is authorized
or anticipated to occur, as the calculated isopleths for high-frequency
cetaceans are 134 m or less during all activities except during DTH for
24-in piles of limited duration where they are 198 m-412 m. The
shutdown zones (Table 10) are larger for all calculated Level A
harassment isopleths during all pile
[[Page 43199]]
driving activities (vibratory, impact and DTH) for all cetaceans.
Harbor Porpoise
There are no density estimates of harbor porpoise available in the
project area. Although there have been no systematic studies or
observations of harbor porpoises specific to Port Chester or Nichols
Passage, there is potential for them to occur within the project area.
Abundance data for harbor porpoises in Southeast Alaska were
collected during 18 seasonal surveys spanning 22 years, from 1991 to
2012 (Dahlheim et al. 2015). During that study, a total of 81 harbor
porpoises were observed in the southern inland waters of Southeast
Alaska, including Clarence Strait. The average density estimate for all
survey years in Clarence Strait was 0.02 harbor porpoises per square
kilometer. There does not appear to be any seasonal variation in harbor
porpoise density for the inland waters of Southeast Alaska (Dahlheim et
al. 2015). Approximately one to two groups of harbor porpoises are
observed each week in group sizes of up to 10 animals around Driest
Point, located 5 km (3.1 mi) north of the project location (L. Bethel,
personal communication, June 11, 2020 as cited in the application).
Therefore, NMFS authorizes that 2 groups of 5 harbor porpoises (average
group size of local sightings) per 5 days of in-water work may be taken
by Level B harassment. Expressed in another way, this is an average of
2 harbor porpoise per day of in-water work. Therefore, we estimate 52
exposures over the course of the project (26 days * 2 porpoises per day
= 52). No take by Level A harassment is authorized or anticipated to
occur, as the calculated isopleths for high-frequency cetaceans are 134
m or less during all activities except during DTH for 24-in piles of
limited duration where they are 198 m-412 m. The shutdown zones (Table
10) are larger for all calculated Level A harassment isopleths during
all pile driving activities (vibratory, impact and DTH) for all
cetaceans.
Harbor Seal
There are no density estimates of harbor seals available in the
project area. Harbor seals are commonly sighted in the waters of the
inside passages throughout Southeast Alaska. Surveys in 2015 estimated
429 (95 percent Confidence Interval [CI]: 102-1,203) harbor seals on
the northwest coast of Annettte Island, between Metlakatla and Walden
Point. An additional 90 (95 percent CI: 18-292) were observed along the
southwest coast of Annette Island, between Metlakatla and Tamgas Harbor
(NOAA 2019). The Alaska Fisheries Science Center identifies three
haulouts in Port Chester (less than a mile from the project area) and
three additional haulouts north of Driest Point (3.7 mi from the
project are). Abundance estimates for these haulouts are not available,
but they are all denoted as having had more than 50 harbor seals at one
point in time (NOAA 2020). However, local biologists report only small
numbers (fewer than 10) of harbor seals are regularly observed in Port
Chester. As many as 10 to 15 harbor seals may utilize Sylburn Harbor,
north of Metlakatla across Driest Point (R. Cook, personal
communication, June 5, 2020 as cited in the application), as a haulout
location. Therefore, NMFS authorizes 15 harbor seals may be taken by
Level B harassment each day, for a total of 390 exposures (26 days * 15
seals per day = 390). No take by Level A harassment is authorized or
anticipated to occur, as the calculated isopleths are 60 m or less
during all activities except during DTH for 24-in piles of limited
duration where they are 89-186 m. In addition, the shutdown zones
(Table 10) are larger for all calculated Level A harassment isopleths
during all pile driving activities (vibratory, impact and DTH) for all
pinnipeds.
Steller Sea Lion
There are no density estimates of Steller sea lions available in
the project area. Steller sea lions are common within the project area;
however, systematic counts or surveys have not been completed in the
area directly surrounding Metlakatla. Three haulouts are located within
150 km (93 mi) of the project area (Fritz et al. 2016a); the nearest
documented haulout is West Rock, about 45 km (28 mi) south of
Metlakatla. West Rock had a count of 703 individuals during a June 2017
survey and 1,101 individuals during a June 2019 survey (Sweeney et al.
2017, 2019). Aerial surveys occurred intermittently between 1994 and
2015, and averaged 982 adult Steller sea lions (Fritz et al., 2016b).
Anecdotal evidence indicate that 3 to 4 Steller sea lions utilize a
buoy as a haulout near the entrance of Port Chester, about 3.2 km (2
mi) from the project location (L. Bethel, personal communication, June
11, 2020 as cited in the application). Steller sea lions are not known
to congregate near the cannery in Metlakatla. Anecdotal evidence
suggests that the species assemblages and abundance in Metlakatla are
similar to Tongass Narrows where 20 sea lions are estimated each day
during July through September. A recent monitoring report for Tongass
Narrows reported 41 individual sightings of Steller sea lions with 9
takes by Level B harassment in May 2021. Therefore to be conservative,
NMFS authorizes two groups of 10 Steller sea lions (20 Steller sea
lions) may be taken by Level B harassment for a total of 520 Steller
sea lions (26 days * 20 sea lions per day = 520). No take by Level A
harassment is authorized or anticipated to occur as the largest Level A
isopleth calculated was 13.5 m during DTH of 24-in piles and the
remaining isopleths were less than 10 m. In addition, the shutdown
zones (Table 10) are larger for all calculated Level A harassment
isopleths during all pile driving activities (vibratory, impact and
DTH) for all pinnipeds.
Table 9 below summarizes the authorized take for all the species
described above as a percentage of stock abundance.
Table 9--Take Estimates as a Percentage of Stock Abundance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level B
Species Stock (nEST) harassment Percent of stock
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minke Whale............................. Alaska (N/A).............. 12 N/A.
Humpback Whale.......................... Central North Pacific 104 Less than 1 percent.
(10,103).
Killer Whale............................ Alaska Resident (2,347)... 15 0.6.a
Northern Resident (302)... 5.0.a
West Coast Transient (349) 4.3.a
Pacific White-Sided Dolphin............. North Pacific (26,880).... 92 Less than 1 percent.
Dall's Porpoise......................... Alaska (83,400) b......... 30 Less than 1 percent.
Harbor Porpoise......................... Southeast Alaska (NA)..... 52 NA.
Harbor Seal............................. Clarence Strait (27,659).. 390 1.4.
[[Page 43200]]
Steller Sea Lion........................ Eastern U.S. (43,201)..... 520 1.2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Take estimates are weighted based on calculated percentages of population for each distinct stock, assuming
animals present would follow same probability of presence in project area.
b Jefferson et al. 2019 presents the first abundance estimates for Dall's porpoise in the waters of Southeast
Alaska with highest abundance recorded in spring (N = 5,381, CV = 25.4 percent), lower numbers in summer (N =
2,680, CV = 19.6 percent), and lowest in fall (N = 1,637, CV = 23.3 percent). However, NMFS currently
recognizes a single stock of Dall's porpoise in Alaskan waters and an estimate of 83,400 Dall's porpoises is
used by NMFS for the entire stock (Muto et al., 2020).
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.
General
The AKDOT&PF will follow mitigation procedures as outlined in their
Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan and as described below. In general, if
poor environmental conditions restrict visibility full visibility of
the shutdown zone, pile driving installation and removal as well as DTH
would be delayed.
Training
The AKDOT&PF must ensure that construction supervisors and crews,
the monitoring team, and relevant AKDOT&PF staff are trained prior to
the start of construction activity subject to this IHA, so that
responsibilities, communication procedures, monitoring protocols, and
operational procedures are clearly understood. New personnel joining
during the project must be trained prior to commencing work.
Avoiding Direct Physical Interaction
The AKDOT&PF must avoid direct physical interaction with marine
mammals during construction activity. If a marine mammal comes within
10 m of such activity, operations will cease and vessels will reduce
speed to the minimum level required to maintain steerage and safe
working conditions, as necessary to avoid direct physical interaction.
Shutdown Zones
For all pile driving/removal and DTH activities, the AKDOT&PF will
establish a shutdown zone for a marine mammal species that is greater
than its corresponding Level A harassment zone (Table 10). The purpose
of a shutdown zone is generally to define an area within which shutdown
of the activity would occur upon sighting of a marine mammal (or in
anticipation of an animal entering the defined area). The shutdown
zones are larger than all the calculated Level A harassment isopleths
for all pile driving/removal and DTH activities for cetaceans and
pinnipeds.
Table 10--Pile Driving Shutdown Zones During Project Activities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shutdown distance (meters)
Activity Pile diameter Pile type or number -------------------------------
of piles Cetaceans Pinnipeds
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vibratory Installation/Removal.... 16- and 24-in........ Battered and Plumb... 50 50
DTH............................... 24-in................ Temporary............ 200 200
Battered, Permanent.. 260 120
Plumb, Permanent..... 415 200
DTH............................... 8-in................. Permanent............ 100 50
Impact............................ 24-in................ 3 piles.............. 135 100
2 piles..............
1 pile............... 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 43201]]
Soft Start
The AKDOT&PF must use soft start techniques when impact pile
driving. Soft start requires contractors to provide an initial set of
three strikes from the hammer at reduced energy, followed by a 30-
second waiting period. Then two subsequent reduced-energy strike sets
would occur. A soft start will be implemented at the start of each
day's impact pile driving and at any time following cessation of impact
pile driving for a period of 30 minutes or longer. Soft start is not
required during vibratory pile driving and removal activities.
Based on our evaluation of the applicant's planned measures, NMFS
has determined that the planned mitigation measures provide the means
of effecting the least practicable impact on the affected species or
stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries,
mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.
Monitoring and Reporting
In order to issue an IHA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of
the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth, requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 216.104(a)(13) indicate that requests for
authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the
necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased
knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on
populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the
action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well
as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required
monitoring.
Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should
contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:
[ssquf] Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area
in which take is anticipated (e.g., presence, abundance, distribution,
density);
[ssquf] 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);
[ssquf] Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or
physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative),
other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;
[ssquf] How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1)
Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2)
populations, species, or stocks;
[ssquf] Effects on marine mammal habitat (e.g., marine mammal prey
species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of
marine mammal habitat); and
[ssquf] Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.
Monitoring Zones
The AKDOT&PF will conduct monitoring to include the area within the
Level B harassment presented in Table 8. Monitoring will include all
areas where SPLs are equal to or exceed 120 dB rms (for vibratory pile
driving/removal and DTH) and 160 dB rms (for impact pile driving).
These zones provide utility for monitoring conducted for mitigation
purposes (i.e., shutdown zone monitoring) by establishing monitoring
protocols for areas adjacent to the shutdown zones. Monitoring of the
Level B harassment zones enables observers to be aware of and
communicate the presence of marine mammals in the project area, but
outside the shutdown zone, and thus prepare for potential shutdowns of
activity.
Pre-Start Clearance Monitoring
Pre-start clearance monitoring must be conducted during periods of
visibility sufficient for the lead PSO to determine the shutdown zones
clear of marine mammals. Pile driving and DTH may commence when the
determination is made.
Visual Monitoring
Monitoring must take place from 30 minutes (min) prior to
initiation of pile driving and DTH activity (i.e., pre-start clearance
monitoring) through 30 min post-completion of pile driving and DTH
activity. If a marine mammal is observed entering or within the
shutdown zones, pile driving and DTH activity will be delayed or
halted. If pile driving or DTH is delayed or halted due to the presence
of a marine mammal, the activity may not commence or resume until
either the animal has voluntarily exited and been visually confirmed
beyond the shutdown zone or 15 min have passed without re-detection of
the animal. Pile driving and DTH activity will be halted upon
observation of either a species for which incidental take is not
authorized or a species for which incidental take has been authorized
but the authorized number of takes has been met, entering or within the
harassment zone.
PSO Monitoring Requirements and Locations
The AKDOT&PF will establish monitoring locations as described in
the Marine Mammal Monitoring Plan. PSOs will be responsible for
monitoring, the shutdown zones, the Level B harassment zones, and the
pre-clearance zones, as well as effectively documenting Level B
harassment take. As described in more detail in the Reporting section
below, they will also (1) document the frequency at which marine
mammals are present in the project area, (2) document behavior and
group composition (3) record all construction activities, and (4)
document observed reactions (changes in behavior or movement) of marine
mammals during each sighting. Observers will monitor for marine mammals
during all in-water pile installation/removal and DTH associated with
the project. The AKDOT&PF will monitor the project area to the extent
possible based on the required number of PSOs, required monitoring
locations, and environmental conditions. Monitoring will be conducted
by PSOs from land. For all pile driving and DTH activities, a minimum
of one observer must be assigned to each active pile driving and DTH
location to monitor the shutdown zones. Two PSOs must be onsite during
all in-water activities and will monitor from the best vantage point.
Due to the remote nature of the area, the PSOs will meet with the
future designated Contractor and AKDOT&PF to determine the most
appropriate observation location(s) for monitoring during pile
installation and removal. These observers must record all observations
of marine mammals, regardless of distance from the pile being driven or
during DTH.
In addition, PSOs will work in shifts lasting no longer than 4 hrs
with at least a 1-hr break between shifts, and will not perform duties
as a PSO for more than 12 hrs in a 24[hyphen]hr period (to reduce PSO
fatigue).
Monitoring of pile driving will be conducted by qualified, NMFS-
approved PSOs. The AKDOT&PF shall adhere to the following conditions
when selecting PSOs:
[ssquf] PSOs must be independent (i.e., not construction personnel)
and have no other assigned tasks during monitoring periods;
[[Page 43202]]
[ssquf] At least one PSO must have prior experience performing the
duties of a PSO during construction activities pursuant to a NMFS-
issued incidental take authorization;
[ssquf] Other PSOs may substitute other relevant experience,
education (degree in biological science or related field), or training;
[ssquf] Where a team of three PSOs are required, a lead observer or
monitoring coordinator shall be designated. The lead observer must have
prior experience performing the duties of a PSO during construction
activity pursuant to a NMFS-issued incidental take authorization; and
[ssquf] PSOs must be approved by NMFS prior to beginning any
activity subject to this IHA.
The AKDOT&PF will ensure that the PSOs have the following
additional qualifications:
[ssquf] Visual acuity in both eyes (correction is permissible)
sufficient for discernment of moving targets at the water's surface
with ability to estimate target size and distance; use of binoculars
may be necessary to correctly identify the target;
[ssquf] Experience and ability to conduct field observations and
collect data according to assigned protocols;
[ssquf] Experience or training in the field identification of
marine mammals, including the identification of behaviors;
[ssquf] Sufficient training, orientation, or experience with the
construction operation to provide for personal safety during
observations;
[ssquf] Writing skills sufficient to prepare a report of
observations including but not limited to the number and species of
marine mammals observed; dates and times when in-water construction
activities were conducted; dates, times, and reason for implementation
of mitigation (or why mitigation was not implemented when required);
and marine mammal behavior; and
[ssquf] Ability to communicate orally, by radio or in person, with
project personnel to provide real-time information on marine mammals
observed in the area as necessary.
Final Report
The AKDOT&PF will submit a draft report to NMFS on all monitoring
conducted under this IHA within 90 calendar days of the completion of
monitoring or 60 calendar days prior to the requested issuance of any
subsequent IHA for construction activity at the same location,
whichever comes first. A final report must be prepared and submitted
within 30 days following resolution of any NMFS comments on the draft
report. If no comments are received from NMFS within 30 days of receipt
of the draft report, the report shall be considered final. All draft
and final marine mammal monitoring reports must be submitted to
[email protected] and [email protected]. The report
must contain the informational elements described in the Marine Mammal
Monitoring Plan and, at minimum, must include:
[ssquf] Dates and times (begin and end) of all marine mammal
monitoring;
[ssquf] Construction activities occurring during each daily
observation period, including:
[cir] How many and what type of piles were driven and by what
method (e.g., impact, vibratory, DTH);
[cir] Total duration of driving time for each pile (vibratory
driving) and number of strikes for each pile (impact driving); and
[cir] For DTH, duration of operation for both impulsive and non-
pulse components.
[ssquf] PSO locations during marine mammal monitoring;
[ssquf] Environmental conditions during monitoring periods (at
beginning and end of PSO shift and whenever conditions change
significantly), including Beaufort sea state and any other relevant
weather conditions including cloud cover, fog, sun glare, and overall
visibility to the horizon, and estimated observable distance;
[ssquf] Upon observation of a marine mammal, the following
information:
[cir] PSO who sighted the animal and PSO location and activity at
time of sighting;
[cir] Time of sighting;
[cir] Identification of the animal (e.g., genus/species, lowest
possible taxonomic level, or unidentified), PSO confidence in
identification, and the composition of the group if there is a mix of
species;
[cir] Distance and bearing of each marine mammal observed to the
pile being driven for each sighting (if pile driving and DTH was
occurring at time of sighting);
[cir] Estimated number of animals (min/max/best);
[cir] Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, juveniles,
neonates, group composition etc.;
[cir] Animal's closest point of approach and estimated time spent
within the harassment zone; and
[cir] Description of any marine mammal behavioral observations
(e.g., observed behaviors such as feeding or traveling), including an
assessment of behavioral responses to the activity (e.g., no response
or changes in behavioral state such as ceasing feeding, changing
direction, flushing, or breaching).
[ssquf] Detailed information about implementation of any mitigation
(e.g., shutdowns and delays), a description of specific actions that
ensued, and resulting changes in behavior of the animal, if any; and
[ssquf] All PSO datasheets and/or raw sightings data.
Reporting of Injured or Dead Marine Mammals
In the event that personnel involved in the construction activities
discover an injured or dead marine mammal, the AKDOT&PF must report the
incident to NMFS Office of Protected Resources (OPR)
([email protected]), NMFS (301-427-8401) and to the
Alaska regional stranding network (877-925-7773) as soon as feasible.
If the death or injury was clearly caused by the specified activity,
the AKDOT&PF must immediately cease the specified activities until NMFS
OPR is able to review the circumstances of the incident and determine
what, if any, additional measures are appropriate to ensure compliance
with the terms of this IHA. The AKDOT&PF will not resume their
activities until notified by NMFS. The report must include the
following information:
[ssquf] Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first
discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);
[ssquf] Species identification (if known) or description of the
animal(s) involved;
[ssquf] Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if
the animal is dead);
[ssquf] Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;
[ssquf] If available, photographs or video footage of the
animal(s); and
[ssquf] General circumstances under which the animal was
discovered.
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''
[[Page 43203]]
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).
As stated in the mitigation section, shutdown zones that are larger
than the Level A harassment zones will be implemented, which, in
combination with the fact that the zones are small to begin with, is
expected to avoid the likelihood of Level A harassment for marine
mammals species.
Exposures to elevated sound levels produced during pile driving
activities may cause behavioral disturbance of some individuals, but
they are expected to be mild and temporary. Effects on individuals that
are taken by Level B harassment, as enumerated in the Take Estimation
section, on the basis of reports in the literature as well as
monitoring from other similar activities, will likely be limited to
reactions such as increased swimming speeds, increased surfacing time,
or decreased foraging (if such activity were occurring) (e.g., Thorson
and Reyff, 2006; Lerma, 2014). Most likely, individuals will simply
move away from the sound source and be temporarily displaced from the
areas of pile driving, although even this reaction has been observed
primarily only in association with impact pile driving. These reactions
and behavioral changes are expected to subside quickly when the
exposures cease.
During all impact driving, implementation of soft start procedures
and monitoring of established shutdown zones will be required,
significantly reducing the possibility of injury. Given sufficient
notice through use of soft start (for impact driving), marine mammals
are expected to move away from an irritating sound source prior to it
becoming potentially injurious. In addition, PSOs will be stationed
within the action area whenever pile driving/removal and DTH activities
are underway. Depending on the activity, the AKDOT&PF will employ the
use of two PSOs to ensure all monitoring and shutdown zones are
properly observed.
The project would likely not permanently impact any marine mammal
habitat since the project will occur within the same footprint as
existing marine infrastructure. The nearshore and intertidal habitat
where the project will occur is an area of relatively high marine
vessel traffic and some local individuals would likely be somewhat
habituated to the level of activity in the area, further reducing the
likelihood of more severe impacts. The closest pinniped haulouts are
used by harbor seals and are less than a mile from the project area;
however, for the reasons described immediately above (including the
nature of expected responses and the duration of the project) impacts
to reproduction or survival of individuals is not anticipated, much
less effects on the species or stock. There are no other biologically
important areas for marine mammals near the project area.
In addition, impacts to marine mammal prey species are expected to
be minor and temporary. Overall, the area impacted by the project is
very small compared to the available habitat around Metlakatla. The
most likely impact to prey will be temporary behavioral avoidance of
the immediate area. During pile driving/removal and DTH activities, it
is expected that fish and marine mammals would temporarily move to
nearby locations and return to the area following cessation of in-water
construction activities. Therefore, indirect effects on marine mammal
prey during the construction are not expected to be substantial.
In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily
support our determination that the impacts resulting from this activity
are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through
effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:
[ssquf] No mortality is anticipated or authorized;
[ssquf] No take by Level A harassment is expected or authorized;
[ssquf] Anticipated incidents of Level B harassment consist of, at
worst, temporary modifications in behavior;
[ssquf] The required mitigation measures (i.e., shutdown zones) are
expected to be effective in reducing the effects of the specified
activity;
[ssquf] Minimal impacts to marine mammal habitat/prey are expected;
[ssquf] The action area is located and within an active marine
commercial area, and;
[ssquf] There are no known biologically important areas in the
vicinity of the project, with the exception of nearby harbor seal
haulouts--however, as described above, exposure to the work conducted
in the vicinity of the haulouts is not expected to impact the
reproduction or survival of any individual seals.
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 monitoring and mitigation
measures, NMFS finds that the total marine mammal take from the planned
activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal
species or stocks.
Small Numbers
As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be
authorized under Section 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. When the predicted number of individuals to
be taken is fewer than one third of the species or stock abundance, the
take is considered to be of small numbers. Additionally, other
qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the
temporal or spatial scale of the activities.
Take of six of the marine mammal stocks authorized will comprise at
most approximately 1.4 percent or less of the stock abundance. There
are no official stock abundances for harbor porpoise and minke whales;
however, as discussed in greater detail in the Description of Marine
Mammals in the Area of Specified Activities in the Federal Register
notice of the proposed IHA (86 FR 34203; June 29, 2021), we believe for
the abundance information that is available, the estimated takes are
likely small percentages of the stock abundance. For harbor porpoise,
the abundance for the Southeast Alaska stock is likely more represented
by the aerial surveys that were conducted as these surveys had better
coverage and were corrected for observer bias. Based on this data, the
estimated take could potentially be approximately 4 percent of the
stock abundance. However, this is unlikely and the percentage of the
stock taken is likely lower as the take
[[Page 43204]]
estimates are conservative and the project occurs in a small footprint
compared to the available habitat in Southeast Alaska. For minke
whales, in the northern part of their range they are believed to be
migratory and so few minke whales have been seen during three offshore
Gulf of Alaska surveys that a population estimate could not be
determined. With only twelve authorized takes for this species, the
percentage of take in relation to the stock abundance is likely to be
very small.
Based on the analysis contained herein of the planned activity
(including the mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated
take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals
will be taken relative to the population size of the affected species
or stocks.
Unmitigable Adverse Impact Analysis and Determination
In order to issue an IHA, NMFS must find that the specified
activity will not have an ``unmitigable adverse impact'' on the
subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal species or stocks by
Alaskan Natives. NMFS has defined ``unmitigable adverse impact'' in 50
CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity: (1)
That is likely to reduce the availability of the species to a level
insufficient for a harvest to meet subsistence needs by: (i) Causing
the marine mammals to abandon or avoid hunting areas; (ii) Directly
displacing subsistence users; or (iii) Placing physical barriers
between the marine mammals and the subsistence hunters; and (2) That
cannot be sufficiently mitigated by other measures to increase the
availability of marine mammals to allow subsistence needs to be met.
The project area does not spatially overlap any known subsistence
hunting. The project area is a developed area with regular marine
vessel traffic. Nonetheless, the AKDOT&PF provided advanced public
notice of construction activities to reduce construction impacts on
local residents, adjacent businesses, and other users of Port Chester
and nearby areas. This included notification to nearby Alaska Native
tribes that may have members who hunt marine mammals for subsistence.
Currently, the Metlakatla Indian Community does not authorize the
harvest of marine mammals for subsistence use (R. Cook, personal
communication, June 5, 2020 as cited in the application).
The planned project is not likely to adversely impact the
availability of any marine mammal species or stocks that are commonly
used for subsistence purposes or to impact subsistence harvest of
marine mammals in the region because construction activities are
localized and temporary and mitigation measures will be implemented to
minimize disturbance of marine mammals in the project area.
Accordingly, NMFS has determined that there will not be an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of any marine mammals for taking for
subsistence uses from the AKDOT&PF's planned activities.
Endangered Species Act
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 whenever we propose to authorize take for
endangered or threatened species, in this case with the Alaska Regional
Office (AKRO).
NMFS is authorizing take of the Central North Pacific stock of
humpback whales, including individuals from the Mexico DPS of humpback
whales, which are listed under the ESA. The Permit and Conservation
Division completed a Section 7 consultation with the AKRO for the
issuance of this IHA. The AKRO's biological opinion states that the
action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the
Mexico DPS of humpback whales.
Authorization
As a result of these determinations, NMFS authorizes an IHA to the
AKDOT&PF for conducting for the planned pile driving and removal
activities as well as DTH during construction of the Metlakatla
Seaplane Facility Refurbishment Project, Metlakatla, Alaska for one
year, beginning August 2021, provided the previously mentioned
mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: August 3, 2021.
Catherine Marzin,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-16861 Filed 8-5-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P